Avodah Mailing List

Volume 33: Number 66

Thu, 23 Apr 2015

• 1. hidur (Eli Turkel)
• 2. Re: elu v-elu (Zev Sero)
• 3. Re: Avodah: Kilyaim for Sale !? (D)
• 4. Re: elu v-elu (Micha Berger)
• 5. The Chilul Hashem of Disrespecting Non-Jews (Prof. Levine)
• 6. Re: The Chilul Hashem of Disrespecting Non-Jews (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: The Legacy of RSRH, Zt'L (Ben Waxman)
• 8. Re: Avodah: Kilyaim for Sale !? (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: Avodah: Kilyaim for Sale !? (Simon Montagu)
• 10. Briskers not wearing Tzitzis outside on shabbos (Joel Schnur)
• 11. Re: The Chilul Hashem of Disrespecting Non-Jews (Prof. Levine)
• 12. Re: Briskers not wearing Tzitzis outside on shabbos (Harry Maryles)
• 13. Re: The Legacy of RSRH, Zt'L (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer)
• 14. Re: Briskers not wearing Tzitzis outside on shabbos (Micha Berger)
• 15. Re: Briskers not wearing Tzitzis outside on shabbos (Allan Engel)

<<There is a famois R Chaim that if one can use both etgrogim then one
should
: first use the beautiful but *might* be pasul since if one uses  the
: minimally kosher one then one has accomplished the mitzvah and there is no
: reason to choose a second one.

This presumes you can afford both, or have access to a friend who will
give you a matanah al menas lehachzir of whichever you aren't buying. The
post you're replying to is "if one is forced to choose".

My own dilemma. Say I earmark $X (Y NIS, in your case) to spend on
my esrog. And say the price of a definitely kosher (or at least, just
as sure to be kosher) but not very hadar esrog is half that or less.
Should I buy myself a mehudar, or should I buy two esrogim and give the
other to someone hitting on hard times? Shouldn't the asei (tzedaqah,
dei machsero) trump a "mere" hidur mitzvah (esrog)? And yet, we know
many great rabbanim who didn't follow this calculus. What am I missing? >>

As usual R Chaim is asking a theoretical question - he was not a posek
In fact I once heard from RYBS that in fact almost all etrogim are kosher
bidieved.
In Israel one can get a mehudar set for about 100 shekel ($25)

see
http://www.dafyomi.co.il/nazir/halachah/nz-hl-002.htm

2. Bava Kama 9a (R. Zeira citing Rav Huna): One must spend up to a third
for Mitzvos.

3. Question: What does this mean?

i. Suggestion: One must spend a third of his wealth to fulfil a Mitzvah.

ii. Rejection: It is unreasonable that if he encounters three (expensive)
Mitzvos, he must exhaust all his wealth!

4. Answer (R. Zeira): One must spend an extra third to beautify a Mitzvah.


Shulchan Aruch (ibid.): Some say that if he finds two Esrogim to buy, and
one of them is nicer than the other, he should buy the nicer one if the
price difference is no more than a third of the other.

i. Source (Beis Yosef DH Kaneh): Rashi (Bava Kama 9b DH b'Hidur) says that
if one found two Sifrei Torah to buy, he should add a third of the price to
buy the nicer one.

ii. Kaf ha'Chayim (17): It seems that neither opinion requires one who
bought an Esrog bigger than an egg to exchange it for a nicer one. However,
the Rosh, Gra and Taz obligate doing so. The Magen Avraham says that
perhaps the Shulchan Aruch holds like the Rosh.

iii. Kaf ha'Chayim (18): One must add a third from an Esrog that one could
bless on without Safek. Hidur depends on what people in the area consider
nice.

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150422/e9c9f5fb/attachment-0001.htm>

On 04/22/2015 04:40 AM, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
>
> 2) pluralism - there are many truths and one can't decide

>
> R Michael Avraham points out that pluraism is self-contradictory. According to that viewpoint one legitimate viewpoint is monism !

Not true.  There are many truths, but not an infinite number.  Or, as my
father says, there are 70 panim latorah, but there are also 70 achor.
Strict monism, which rejects the gemara's statement that "eilu va'eilu DACh",
is by definition wrong.


> Question: Can you offer someone food that you think is kosher but he
> doesn't accept the kashrut
> Answer:
> Monism - no problem as you are right and he is wrong
> Pluralism - assur since his opinion is acceptable

It depends whether his concern is legitimate.  If there is a legitimate
opinion or minhag that forbids or refrains from whatever it is, or if he
has a legitimate private chumra, then there is no question that it is assur
to be machshil him.  But if he is acting out of pure amhoratzus, then one
needn't pander to it.

-- 
Zev Sero               I have a right to stand on my own defence, if you
z...@sero.name          intend to commit felony...if a robber meets me in
                        the street and commands me to surrender my purse,
                        I have a right to kill him without asking questions
                                               -- John Adams

On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 17:54, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote:
> What would be the kilayim status of this combo?
> http://www.territorialseed.com/product/gra
> fted-tomtato-ketchup-n-fries/new_for_spring_2015

Though potato and tomato are from the same family, it is clear from mesechte 
Kilayim, fruit [or animals] that look different are treated as 2 different 
species.
Hence, though the spuds and tomatoes would be permitted to eat - as with any 
grafted fruit - it would be ossur for a Yid to grow
Dovid Rubin

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 08:09:18AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
: On 04/22/2015 04:40 AM, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: >2) pluralism - there are many truths and one can't decide
: 
: >R Michael Avraham points out that pluraism is
:> self-contradictory. According to that viewpoint one legitimate viewpoint
:> is monism !

: Not true.  There are many truths, but not an infinite number.  Or, as my
: father says, there are 70 panim latorah, but there are also 70 achor.

I think RMA is referring to a paradox I've mentioned here once.

While in principle, it's possible for a halachic pluralist to not include
any halachic monist positions in his spectrum of eilu va'eilu, I do not
know of a halachic pluralist who rules out the Rambam.

Or a less absolute case of the same paradox: MO Jews will turn to chareidi
gedolim for pesaqim despite those gedoim not believing that MO is within
eilu va'eilu. So it would seem that to the MO Jew asking the she'eilah,
the variant of chareidism that says MO is not within eilu va'eilu, is
(in the MO Jew's opinion) itself within EvE!

: Strict monism, which rejects the gemara's statement that "eilu va'eilu DACh",
: is by definition wrong.

Or, understand it in terms of following HQBH's word, as opposed to being
right. As per the Rambam or RMF, for example.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 18th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about
Fax: (270) 514-1507                             balance?

 From http://tinyurl.com/kb4v525

This idea connects with something that has bothered me for some time: 
the wanton, unprovoked use of disparaging, racist comments among our 
youth. Over the years I have either heard directly or been made aware 
of many such comments by students. When I asked why they had 
expressed themselves in this manner, they could offer no meaningful response.

All I could glean was that they were apparently parroting similar 
remarks they had heard elsewhere, without having given much thought 
to their words. Many of these students had few if any relationships 
or even interactions with individuals from the groups they were mocking.

See the above URL for the entire article.   YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150422/c1a13695/attachment-0001.htm>

One of my many pet peeves is the use of "chilul hasheim" to teach
ehrlachkeit. It may win the battle -- historically, it hasn't -- but it
does so by avoiding the war.

Mitzvos bein adam lachaveiro as important as mitzvos bein adam lachaveiro.
Derekh eretz is important as Chazal literally call it a prerequisite
for Torah.

Worrying about the bein adam laMaqom effects of the cheit misses the
point. And perhaps the reason why past attempts to change behavior by
talking about chillul hasheim haven't worked is that one is not teaching
the centrality of ehrlachkeit as a *primary* value.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 18th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about
Fax: (270) 514-1507                             balance?

How did Rav Breuer work to ensure the conditions that "we could feel 
justified to call it a Kiddush HaShem"?

Ben


On 4/21/2015 1:32 AM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
>
> Again,  I have to disagree.  I suggest you read Rav Breuer's writings 
> about EY in the book A Unique Perspective under the heading Eretz Yisroel.
>
> The proclamation of a Jewish state would bring great joy to all
> the members of our people, if conditions were such that we could
> feel justified to call it a Kiddush Hashem.

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 05:45:34PM +0100, D via Avodah wrote:
: Hence, though the spuds and tomatoes would be permitted to eat - as
: with any grafted fruit - it would be ossur for a Yid to grow

I think it would be mutar to buy already grafted, and then grow.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 7:45 PM, D via Avodah <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
wrote:

> Though potato and tomato are from the same family, it is clear from
> mesechte Kilayim, fruit [or animals] that look different are treated as 2
> different species.
> Hence, though the spuds and tomatoes would be permitted to eat - as with
> any grafted fruit - it would be ossur for a Yid to grow
>

Do you mean because the potato and tomato that we eat look different?
You're not comparing apples to apples (pun intended). The fruits of a
potato plant look very similar to the fruits of a tomato plant!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150422/a06da866/attachment-0001.htm>

My understanding is that Briskers don't wear a talis katan outside the 
house on shabbos because the shiur is "ad habirchaim" according to the 
Gaon as brought in Keser Rosh by talmidei Reb Chaim Voloshiner. And 
since "until the knees" is a subjective criterion depending upon each 
person's height, there is no specific "one size fits all" length.

Interestingly, Rav Moshe Shternbuch brings a Rav Moshe  that says that 
the source is unreliable and the Gaon never said such a thing.
-- 
___________________________
Joel Schnur, Senior VP
Government Affairs/Public Relations
Schnur Associates, Inc.
25 West 45th Street, Suite 1405
New York, NY 10036

Tel. 212-489-0600 x204
Fax. 212-489-0203
j...@schnurassociates.com
www.schnurassociates.com
http://www.schnurassociates.com/joels-corner/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150422/8f5fb2d7/attachment-0001.htm>

At 03:32 PM 4/22/2015, Micha Berger wrote:
>Mitzvos bein adam lachaveiro as important as mitzvos bein adam lachaveiro.

I believe that this sentence is wrong. I believe you meant to write 
that mitzvos bein adam l'Chaveiro are just as important as mitzvos 
bein adam l'makom.

RSRH points out that the Luchos contained 5 mitzvos bein adam 
l'Chaveiro and 5 mitzvos bein Adam l"Makom on each side, and that 
both sides of the Luchos were the same size!

>Derekh eretz is important as Chazal literally call it a prerequisite 
>for Torah.

And hence may one deduce that those who do not have proper Derech 
Eretz do not have Torah?  If so,  then I guess we should not be 
surprised at the actions of some so-called Jews that are a Chilul 
Hashem.  They do not have any Torah.

YL

On Wednesday, April 22, 2015 3:33 PM, Joel Schnur wrote:
> My understanding is that Briskers don't wear a talis katan outside the
> house on shabbos because the shiur is "ad habirchaim" according to the
> Gaon as brought in Keser Rosh by talmidei Reb Chaim Voloshiner....
> Interestingly, Rav Moshe Shternbuch brings a Rav Moshe that says that
> the source is unreliable and the Gaon never said such a thing.

The reason that Briskers don't where Tzitzes on Shabbos is because they
are Choshesh for the Shita of the Baal HaMeor who says that Techiels is
Me'akev the Lavan.

As such -- by wearing these now unnecessary 'strings' in Reshus Harabim
they will be Oveir the Lav of Hotza'ah on Shabbos, an Issur D'Oraisa
and a capital offense.

Inetrestingly, accroding to the Baal HaMeor, wearing a Beged of Daled
Kanfos using Tzitzs without Techiles is a violation -- same as if he
were wearing it without Tzitzis at all.

I'm told that the Gra did not wear a woolen Beged for his Talis Katan
for that reason. Because wool has a Chiuv D'Oraisa for Tzitzs whereas
cotton is only D'Rabbanan.

HM

On 04/22/2015 03:43 PM, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote:
> On 4/21/2015 1:32 AM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
>> Again,  I have to disagree.  I suggest you read Rav Breuer's writings 
>> about EY in the book A Unique Perspective under the heading Eretz 
>> Yisroel.
>> The proclamation of a Jewish state would bring great joy to all
>> the members of our people, if conditions were such that we could
>> feel justified to call it a Kiddush Hashem.

> How did Rav Breuer work to ensure the conditions that "we could feel 
> justified to call it a Kiddush HaShem"?

He thought his late brother's Poalei Agudah might accomplish it.

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 08:46:08PM +0000, Harry Maryles via Avodah wrote:
: The reason that Briskers don't where Tzitzes on Shabbos is because they
: are Choshesh for the Shita of the Baal HaMeor who says that Techiels is
: Me'akev the Lavan.
: 
: As such -- by wearing these now unnecessary 'strings' in Reshus Harabim
: they will be Oveir the Lav of Hotza'ah on Shabbos...

In the opening post, I referred to the BhM's reason. Since there appears
to be interest, I will spell it out.

The mishnah (Menachos 4:1, 38a) says that techeiles is not me'aqeves
the lavan, and v.v. Seems kind of open and shut, and that's what we
hold lehalakhah.

And so R' Yitzchaq says that R Yochanan ben Nuri says (beraisa , quoted
on 39b) that if you have no tekheiles, you make all strings lavan. But,
Rebbe is choleiq, and says the mishnah means sequence. Normally the
lavan strings have to be put on first, or on a tekheiles garment, the
tekheiles string first. And the mishnah is saying that if you put on
the other color first, it's not me'aqeiv. According to Rebbe, though,
you can't be yotzei without putting on tekheiles altogether.

Getting to this understanding of the mishnah is an amud lonq chaqla
vetarya in which Levi, Shemu'el and Rami bar Chama defend Rebbe's
position.


: Interestingly, according to the Baal HaMeor, wearing a Beged of Daled
: Kanfos using Tzitzs without Techiles is a violation -- same as if he
: were wearing it without Tzitzis at all.

Not really. It's an asei, not a lav. So, if tekheiles truly is
unavailable, why wouldn't it be mutar, if pointless?

However, if you feel there is any possibility whatsoever that the murex
derived dye is indeed tekheiles, safeiq de'oraisa lechumerah would
force one to choose between not wearing tzitzis and wearing the dye.
And there are those who hold it's garua to wear invalid dye, so combine
the shitos right, and the discovery of a possible tekheiles would
make it better not to wear tzitzis.

IF we held like the BhM. But not even Briskers do, me'iqar hadin --
they are merely chosheish for his position as a chumerah.

: I'm told that the Gra did not wear a woolen Beged for his Talis Katan
: for that reason. Because wool has a Chiuv D'Oraisa for Tzitzs whereas
: cotton is only D'Rabbanan.

As usual for the Gra -- clever!

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 19th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote
Fax: (270) 514-1507                         withdrawal and submission?

So what was his Tallis Godol made of?

On 22 April 2015 at 21:46, Harry Maryles via Avodah <
avo...@lists.aishdas.org> wrote:.
>
>
> Inetrestingly, accroding to the Baal HaMeor, wearing a Beged of Daled
> Kanfos using Tzitzs without Techiles is a violation -- same as if he
> were wearing it without Tzitzis at all.
>
> I'm told that the Gra did not wear a woolen Beged for his Talis Katan
> for that reason. Because wool has a Chiuv D'Oraisa for Tzitzs whereas
> cotton is only D'Rabbanan.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20150423/c4742e77/attachment.htm>

------------------------------



_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


------------------------------


**************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."


A list of common acronyms is available at
        http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)