Avodah Mailing List

Volume 34: Number 120

Tue, 27 Sep 2016

• 1. Re: KeViAs Seudah, MeZonos HaMotzi (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: whole wheat challah (Zev Sero)
• 3. Status of katan (M Cohen)
• 4. Rav Melamed on Metal Pots (David Riceman)
• 5. Re: Status of katan (Rich, Joel)
• 6. Re: Rav Melamed on Metal Pots (David Riceman)
• 7. Re: whole wheat challah (Isaac Balbin)
• 8. Re: Status of katan (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: Mezonos Becomes HaMotzi (Akiva Miller)
• 10. shaking hands with a woman (Eli Turkel)
• 11. Women and Davening (Professor L. Levine)
• 12. Pas Palter Habaa B'kisnin (Akiva Miller)
• 13. Halacha Yomis - Pas Yisroel, Pas Palter, Pas Ba'al Habayis (Professor L. Levine)

On 22/09/16 22:45, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote:
> Also, although sleeping is ALWAYS KaVuAh, nevertheless no Beracha is made
> even when sleeping the night.

Even if you have not already said a bracha in that sukah?!


On 22/09/16 22:38, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
> R' Akiva Miller wrote:
>> But there is another concept also, that bread is the ikar because it is the
>> king of all foods.

> There is no question that at the time of Chazal and until recently bread
> was the king of all foods. But that has changed. In today's world bread
> is in no way shape or form the king of foods anymore. As someone pointed
> out many fancy restaurants don't even serve bread any more.

This also has implications elsewhere. The halacha is that if a person
who does not eat pas palter is a guest in the home of someone who does,
he *must* eat the bread he is given, because not to do so would be an
insult to the host. This only applies to bread, since it's the ikkar food,
so a host feels it keenly if one refuses to eat it. With other foods the
host doesn't mind if a guest doesn't eat, because maybe he doesn't like
it, or is just not that hungry. Now that the social status of bread has
changed, I wonder whether this halacha now applies to (1) no foods; or
(2) all foods; or (3) some foods but not others.

(In the din of pas palter itself we can say that since the original
gezera included this exception we can use it even when the reason for
the exception no longer applies.)

-- 
Zev Sero               Meaningless combinations of words do not acquire
z...@sero.name          meaning merely by appending them to the two other
                        words `God can'.  Nonsense remains nonsense, even
                        when we talk it about God.   -- C S Lewis

On 22/09/16 23:10, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
> R' Eli Turkel asked
>> > I note in my shul that it is becoming more common to see light blue or even
>> > striped shirts on shabbat. Again how much of this dress wear in time
>> > dependent?"
> Of course it is completely time dependent, Did Chazal wear white shirts?

They wore long white tunics, whereas during the week workmen wore short
tunics, which were generally no longer very white, even if they started
out that way.

Still, I agree that what's special about white is its social status,
which no longer exists.

-- 
Zev Sero               Meaningless combinations of words do not acquire
z...@sero.name          meaning merely by appending them to the two other
                        words `God can'.  Nonsense remains nonsense, even
                        when we talk it about God.   -- C S Lewis

RJR writes .. The minchat chinuch in mitzvah 17 [subsection 14] makes the
following comment, "it appears in truth that a minor is subject to
commandments, just that it's not applicable to say that the Torah warns him,
since he is not a being of wisdom (bar daat) but in truth he is bound to
mitzvot."

See igros moshe when he discusses the schar for mitzvos done while a person
is a katon.
He says they receive schar as a mitzuveh v'oseh ! (not as an aino mitzuve
v'oseh) 

Mordechai cohen




=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 9.1.0.2894, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.22240)
http://free.pctools.com/
=======

RAM:

<<what has changed? Is the chemical composition of the
metal a factor? Does the thickness of the walls matter? Is it the
smoothness of the finished product?>>

On cast iron see

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cast_iron

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cast-iron_cookware

Most of the pots in our house are either stainless steel or enameled cast iron or anodized aluminum,
none of which were available for cooking before the 1900s (maybe late 1800s?), and all of which have very different properties
than clay or cast iron pots.

David Riceman

RJR writes .. The minchat chinuch in mitzvah 17 [subsection 14] makes the
following comment, "it appears in truth that a minor is subject to
commandments, just that it's not applicable to say that the Torah warns him,
since he is not a being of wisdom (bar daat) but in truth he is bound to
mitzvot."

See igros moshe when he discusses the schar for mitzvos done while a person
is a katon.
He says they receive schar as a mitzuveh v'oseh ! (not as an aino mitzuve
v'oseh) 

Mordechai cohen

Ty. A quick bar ilan search finds it as Y"D 2:8 where both sides of the question have possible support; A"S
KVCT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.

And the routine use of soap to clean pots is also new.

DR

From: Marty Bluke via Avodah
> R' Eli Turkel asked
>> I note in my shul that it is becoming more common to see light blue or even
>> striped shirts on shabbat. Again how much of this dress wear in time
>> dependent?"

> Of course it is completely time dependent, Did Chazal wear white shirts?
> No one even 200 years ago wore suits white shirts and ties on shabbos.
> In fact even 100 years ago the typical Lithuanian yeshiva bachur dressed
> differently then today (just look at Professor Levine's pictures) and
> would not be recognized as a yeshiva bachur today.

This is true, although on Yom Kippur, of course, males and females have
a universal long time minhag to wear white.

One thing that bothers me is a trend NOT to wear a suit on Shabbos
because the businessman says that they wear a suit and tie on a Yom Chol,
and they don't like to be dressed in "work attire". Perhaps the only
way out is to wear a longer Kapote! To me, it just doesn't work that
you stand at work in respectable clothes (suit, depending on vocation)
and on Shabbos, it's less so. I understand in Israel, especially years
ago, many didn't have or wear suits. Some had one suit, and it was for
Shabbos. Wearing a white shirt and dark trousers certainly looked like
they were Shabbosdik. In my Yeshivah during the week they didn't wear
white shirts during the week, so it stood out on Shabbos. Yom Tov takes
it one step further in terms of clothing quality.

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 01:17:47PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
: The Minchat Chinuch in mitzvah 17 [subsection 14] makes the following
: comment (my free translation), "It appears in truth that a minor is
: subject to commandments, just that it's not applicable to say that the
: Torah warns him, since he is not a being of wisdom (bar daat) but in
: truth he is bound to mitzvot." Any earlier articulation of this concept?

But what about saying that it's only medin chinukh and only derabbanan?
The MC is machmir?

Wouldn't this mean that a qatan is just as chayav as a gadol, and the only
difference in onesheim? Nowadays, without BD, even that's moot.

Gut Voch!
-Micha

R' Micha Berger wrote:

> But a typical Ashkenazi Shabbos meal, and for that matter for
> most Sepharadim today, we do not use bread in a manner nearly
> as central to the meal as Chazal were taking for granted.
>
> I did not assert that bread MUST function as a scoop; I ASKED
> how we knew this was not the criterion in question. Given that
> Chazal take it for granted.

Everyone interested in this should see Mishne Brura 177:1-3 and Aruch
Hashulchan 177:1-2. My usual practice would be to quote them directly, but
in this case, I think that would be a case of "kol hamosif, gorea". You all
should really look inside and see for yourself, and judge for yourself.

I want to be emphatic about this, because there are several critical terms
they use, which seem to be synonyms at first glance. It is clear to me that
their precise meanings are very nuanced, and when an author chooses to use
one or another, it can lead different readers in different directions. For
example, Mechaber 177:1 uses these phrases in his opening lines:

D'varim haba'im b'soch haseudah
D'varim haba'im machmas haseudah
D'varim shederech likboa seudah aleihem l'lafays bahem es hapas

That said, I want to whet your appetite by saying this:

- Mechaber 177:1 lists some foods that are covered by HaMotzi even when
eaten separately from the bread. MB 1 points out that the list includes
porridge, which is *not* eaten together with bread.

- Both MB and AhS give their respective explanations of *why* HaMotzi
covers everything.

- Both MB and AhS give their views on someone who has no desire for the
bread other than to avoid the brachos.

I could offer my opinions now, but I'd rather wait until after the chevrah
has looked inside.

Under the subject line "KeViAs Seudah, MeZonos HaMotzi", R' Marty Bluke
wrote:

> There is no question that at the time of Chazal and until
> recently bread was the king of all foods. But that has changed.
> In today's world bread is in no way shape or form the king of
> foods anymore. As someone pointed out many fancy restaurants
> don't even serve bread any more.
>
> Therefore we have 2 choices. We can say that since Chazal were
> kovea the berachos this way that doesn't change even though
> society changed, like by tereifos and other halachos. Or maybe
> we should say that since society changed hilchos berachos
> should change as well. Not change in the sense of the Halacha
> actually changing but change in the application. As RHS says,
> it used to be that sif 1 applied based on the circumstances
> now that circumstances changed sif 2 applies.

Indeed, "sif 1" is the very famous "bread is king and covers everything."
But as I pointed out above, the halacha was already aware of people who try
to minimize their bread intake, and this "sif 2" appears very clearly in
the MB, the AhS, and many other acharonim. It's NOT a new situation where
we need imaginative and inventive gedolim to break totally new ground; much
of the work has already been done. We only need to apply the existing rules
to our situations.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160925/d902f2ae/attachment-0001.htm>

From memory Maharal Diskin held that shaking hands with a woman was
yehoreg ve-al ya-avot and he very harshly criticized RSRH

see

http://www.jpos
t.com/Not-Just-News/Snack-Bites/Swiss-judge-Muslim-students-must-shake-fema
le-teachers-hands-or-face-fine-468527

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160925/3a6bbb42/attachment-0001.htm>

From

http://tinyurl.com/zsfk2vp


CConclusion

From our discussion, we see that according to the letter
of the law women should daven at least twice a day.
Those who are busy with children are exempt, but should recite a
short tefilah in the morning before going about their day. For those women
who are able to daven, it should be noted that they do not have to feel
that they must daven the entire
Shacharis. It is not all or nothing.

Below is a chart that lists which parts of tefilah women should daven
(those who have time to daven).

Modeh Ani
- Yes
Birchos Hashachar
- Yes
Birchas HaTorah
- Yes
Korbanos
- No
Pesukei D'zimrah
- No according to many
poskim
Birchos Krias Shema
- If she wants (Ashkenazi; some
Sephardi poskim permit a Sephardi woman as well)
Shema Yisrael and Baruch  Shem
- Yes
Emes V 'yatziv until ga'al Yisrael
- Yes

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160925/f676d068/attachment-0001.htm>

In the thread "Mezonos Becomes HaMotzi", R' Isaac Balbin wrote:

> This does not gel nicely with the Halachos of Pas
> Akum/Palter. As I recall everyone who discusses these Dinim
> talks of bread as a STAPLE eg how long/far does one wait/go
> before consuming Pas Palter. Indeed, it is ironic that when
> the Gezera was first made it was not accepted because of
> the importance of bread to their diet. The irony is that
> they tell you to stay away from carbs like bread if you
> want to lose weight. I guess though that supports the
> notion. Granted meat was in short supply and expensive at
> times, but potatoes and the like would have been there.

I see an entirely different irony here, that of the power of "lo plug",
both l'chumra and l'kula.

On the one hand, the halacha of Pas Akum was instituted specifically
because bread is such a basic staple food. In contrast, Pas Habaa B'Kisnin
is - by definition! - a snack food, I.e. NOT the staple of most meals. Yet,
the halachos apply to both.

It seems that when Chazal enacted the issue on Pas Akum, they chose to
include even Pas Habaa B'Kisnin, even though it is not a staple food, and
the reasons that apply to non-Jewish bread would not apply to non-Jewish
snacks. My guess is that it was a Lo Plug - Chazal thought it simpler to
make the same halacha for a Pas, whether it is a staple or a snack.

But the second part of the story is odd too: People accepted this
prohibition as far as non-Jewish *homemade* bread, but the prohibition on
non-Jewish *commercial* bread was too difficult, so it was rescinded. I
can't help but wonder: Given that Pas Habaa B'kisnin is not a staple food,
I presume that they could have been able to give up on non-Jewish snack
foods. The halacha could have been that Pas Palter is allowed only for Pas
Gamur, but that the prohibition remains in place for Pas Habaa B'Kisnin. My
guess is again that it is a Lo Plug: One halacha for all Pas.

The result is an interesting kula: If Pas Habaa B'Kisnin had not been
included in the halachos of Pas Akum/Palter, I presume that Bishul Akum
would have applied to it. (In the phrase "bishul akum", the word "bishul"
refers to any sort of cooking, even without liquid.) In such a world, a
wedding cake would have to be made with Jewish involvement. (I am presuming
that a wedding cake is "oleh al shulchan melachim" even if other cakes
aren't.) But because cake is subject to the halachos of Pas Akum and not
regular Bishul Akum, it can be made by a commercial bakery without any
Jewish involvement.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160927/d298ce85/attachment-0001.htm>

From today's OU Halacha Yomis


Q. Can you please explain the terms Pas Yisroel, pas palter and pas ba'al habayis? What is the halachic status of these items?


A. Pas Yisroel refers to bread that was baked with specific Jewish
involvement. This involvement can take one of three forms: The bread is
placed into the oven by a Yisroel, the oven is lit by a Yisroel, or a
Yisroel stokes the flames or throws in a chip of wood. However, if a
Yisroel was not involved in any of these steps in the baking of the bread,
even if they prepared the dough or shaped the loaves, this would not be Pas
Yisroel.

Pas palter refers to bread that was baked for business purposes by a
non-Jewish bakery without Jewish involvement. Pas ba'al habayis refers to
bread that was baked by a non-Jew for his own consumption, without Jewish
involvement. Both pas palter and pas ba'al habayis are part of a general
category known as pas akum.

Pas ba'al habayis should not be eaten, except in certain extenuating circumstances. (Yoreh De'ah 112:7-8).


Regarding pas palter, the Sefardim follow the ruling of Shulchan Aruch
(Yoreh De'ah 112:2), that if Pas Yisroel is available, one should purchase
only Pas Yisroel. However, if it is not available, or if it is of inferior
quality, then one may consume pas palter. In contrast, the Ashkenazim, as
per the ruling of Rama (Yoreh De'ah 112:2 ) allow pas palter. Nonetheless,
it is a meritorious stringency to consume only Pas Yisroel.

The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 603) advises that even those who eat pas
palter during the year, should only eat Pas Yisroel during the Aseres Yemai
Teshuva. Additionally, Mishnah Berurah (242:6) writes that it is proper to
honor Shabbos and Yom Tov by eating only Pas Yisroel on those special days.


See our Pas Yisroel List - 5777 <http://links.mkt3536.com/ctt?k
n=4&;ms=MTM1MDUwOTQS1&r=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&b=0&j=ODIzOTMz
NTcyS0&mt=1&rt=0> at OUKosher.org for OU certified Pas Yisroel
brands and products.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20160927/d35887d2/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.)