Avodah Mailing List

Volume 34: Number 134

Sun, 30 Oct 2016

• 1. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion for the next few weeks (Zev Sero)
• 2. R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion for the next few weeks (Eli Turkel)
• 3. cohen in plane over cemetery (Eli Turkel)
• 4. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion for the next few weeks (Marty Bluke)
• 5. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion for the next few weeks (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion ()
• 7. tefillin on chol hamoed (Eli Turkel)
• 8. The Difference Between Man and Animal (Professor L. Levine)
• 9. re grammarians and the siddur (Hillel Bick)
• 10. Re: tannaitic transmission? (H Lampel)
• 11. Re: CARRYING ON YOM TOV: IS IT ALWAYS PERMITTED? (Akiva Miller)

On 30/10/16 03:36, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
> If it is really a problem for a Kohen to fly over a cemetary then I
> don't understand how Kohanim fly anywhere. Take a flight from Israel to
> NY. The plane flies over much of Western Europe and England, there are
> any number of Jewish cemetaries there who says that the plane doesn't
> fly over one of them.

Who says it does?   Without certain knowledge that it does there is no 
problem.  The overwhelming majority of the earth's surface does *not* 
consist of Jewish graves, and all of it was created without such graves, 
so each bit of surface you travel over can be assumed to be tahor unless 
you know (as in this case) that it isn't.


> Is there any sevara to say that the tumah doesn't reach the height
> of planes to 30,000+ feet? If not what about in orbit? What about on
> the moon?

What about it?  Why should it be any different?  What basis do you have 
to distinguish it?  Tum'ah goes down to the centre of the earth and up 
forever.  If we happen to know that a particular bit of space is over a 
Jewish grave then we'd have to treat it accordingly.


[Email #2. -micha]

On 30/10/16 03:36, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
> This is quite an issue for Kohanim, basically it means that Kohanim
> can't leave Israel as Ben Gurion is pretty much the only international
> airport.

The article suggests an alternative.

-- 
Zev Sero                Hit the road, Jack
z...@sero.name           but please come back once more

<<If it is really a problem for a Kohen to fly over a cemetary then I don't
understand how Kohanim fly anywhere. Take a flight from Israel to NY. The
plane flies over much of Western Europe and England, there are any number
of Jewish cemetaries there who says that the plane doesn't fly over one of
them. When they get close to NY all of the flights to JFK fly over Long
Island which has a number of large Jewish cemeteries, Again, who says that
the planes don't fly over them. Since it's an issur d'oraysa we should say
sefeka d'raysa l'chumra.

I have a few questions related to this.
Is the problem with the Holon cemetary because the plane flies low over teh
cemetery (close to takeoff)?
Is there any sevara to say that the tumah doesn't reach the height of
planes to 30,000+ feet? If not what about in orbit? What about on the moon?
>>

first not everyone agrees with the psak of R Karelitz. Among the reasons
are precisely that perhaps tumah does not really go on "forever". In
addition to questions about the moon how about accounting for the curvature
of the earth?
As we have have pointed out in the past numerous poskim state that
:ma-shehu" on Pesach should not be taken literally, i.e. a nano particle of
chametz is not prohinted. Similarly tumah rises as far as a person can see
with a naked eye. One woulkd need to check how high the plane is over the
Holon cemetery I have also seen other reasons for allowing a cohen to fly
over a cemetery.
RMF says that there is a question of the status of the modern  materials
that a plane is made out of - are they halachic metals?

In any case the problem with the Holon cemetery is that the flight path is
well known. It is highly unlikely to be flying over a Jewish grave in
Europe and we wouldn't prohibit the flight based on a far fetched safek.
see for example
http://www.dailyhalacha.com/m/halacha.aspx?id=1026
a detailed discussion - in Hebrew appears in

http://www.elhamikdash.com/49876/%D7%98%D7%99%D7%A1%D7%AA-%D7%9B%D7%95
%D7%94%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%9E%D7%A2%D7%9C-%D7%A7%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9D-
--%D7%94%D7%A8%D7%91-%D7%93%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%90%D7%9C-%D7%95%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%A
3-

As a generality I highly recommend the site of olamot that has hundreds of
topics with sources.
The main problem with the site is that each discussion is a collection of
source material with no connection between the various materials
For the specific topic of kohanim flying over a cemetery see
http://olamot.net/shiur/%D7%98%D7%99%D7%A1%D7%AA-%D7%9B%D7%94%D
7%A0%D7%99%D7%9D



-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161030/373f75b2/attachment-0001.htm>

As previously mentioned one of the heterim for flying over a cemetery is
that a plane is not made from the metals mentioned in the Torah.

When looking at responsa it is important to take into account the change of
plane construction of the years. In fact the Wright aitplane was made
mainly from wood!
Todays planes are made mainly from Alumimum and titantium and various
composites
see
http://howthingsfly.si.edu/ask-an-explainer/what-kinds-
materials-are-used-make-aircraft

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161030/96c3212e/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
> On 30/10/16 03:36, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
>> This is quite an issue for Kohanim, basically it means that Kohanim
>> can't leave Israel as Ben Gurion is pretty much the only international
>> airport.

> The article suggests an alternative.

As someone who lives in Israel, that is not a realistic alternative to fly
from Haifa to Cyprus.


[Email #2. -micha]

I did a quick search on Orbitz for flights from Haifa to Cyprus, here is
what I got:

We've searched more than 400 airlines that we sell, and couldn't find any
flights from Haifa (HFA)  to
Larnaca (LCA) on Tue, Nov 1


[Email #3. -micha]

On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
>                     Without certain knowledge that it does there is no
> problem.  The overwhelming majority of the earth's surface does *not*
> consist of Jewish graves, and all of it was created without such graves, so
> each bit of surface you travel over can be assumed to be tahor unless you
> know (as in this case) that it isn't.

Why not? Maybe Kohanim should have to check teh flight path and ensure that
they aren't going to be flying over a cemetery. There are quite a number of
Jewish cemetaries in Europe.

On 30/10/16 09:31, Marty Bluke wrote:
>> Who says it does?   Without certain knowledge that it does there is
>> no problem.  The overwhelming majority of the earth's surface does
>> *not* consist of Jewish graves, and all of it was created without
>> such graves, so each bit of surface you travel over can be assumed
>> to be tahor unless you know (as in this case) that it isn't.

> Why not? Maybe Kohanim should have to check teh flight path and ensure
> that they aren't going to be flying over a cemetery. There are quite a
> number of Jewish cemetaries in Europe.

Why should they have to?  The vast majority of the earth's surface is 
permitted to them; why should they suspect that the flight path includes 
one of the few forbidden places?


>>     Why did you write this, when the article suggests an alternative?
>>

> As someone who lives in Israel, that is not a realistic alternative
> to fly from Haifa to Cyprus.

The dayanim who suggested it also live in Israel, and they seem to think
otherwise.


> We've searched more than 400 airlines that we sell, and couldn't
> findany flights from Haifa (HFA) to Larnaca (LCA) on Tue, Nov 1

Could they have meant to go to Cyprus by sea, and then fly from there?

-- 
Zev Sero                Hit the road, Jack
z...@sero.name           but please come back once more

 
From: Marty Bluke via Avodah  <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
Subject: [Avodah] R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis  Din: Kohanim cannot fly
from Ben Gurion for the next few  weeks
"

>> Due to the fact that all flights taking off will pass  over the cemetary 
in
Holon (see  http://www.kikar.co.il/212365.html).

This is quite an issue for Kohanim,  basically it means that Kohanim can't
leave Israel as Ben Gurion is pretty  much the only international airport.

If it is really a problem for a  Kohen to fly over a cemetary then I don't
understand how Kohanim fly  anywhere. .... <<
 


>>>>>
 
 
Don't Lubavitcher kohanim go to the cemetery wearing some kind of a  box?  
Why wouldn't being in an enclosed airplane be the same thing?   Not 
answering the question, just asking it.
 
--Toby Katz
t6...@aol.com
..
=============




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



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161030/0a59f956/attachment-0001.htm>

<<When it comes to EY,  the claim is that it is minhag Eretz Yisroel not to
put on Tefillen during Chol Moed.  However,  according to Rabbi Chaim
Pinchas Scheinberg, Z'L, Rabbi Binyamin Hamburger, and I am sure others,
there is no such thing as minhag EY. EY is a melting pot with congregations
having many different minhagim.  CWhen it comes to EY,  the claim is that
it is minhag Eretz Yisroel not to put on Tefillen during Chol Moed.
However,  according to Rabbi Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg, Z'L, Rabbi Binyamin
Hamburger, and I am sure others, there is no such thing as minhag EY. EY is
a melting pot with congregations having many different minhagim.  Thus, to
assert that one should not put on Tefillen, because one lives in EY seems
to me to be unjustified.  Indeed,  I am told that there are people who live
in Eretz Yisroel who put on Tefillen privately.  Furthermore, there are
some minyanim in EY at which Tefillen are worn publicly on Chol Moed.
Ehrlau'er is one  Indeed,  I am told that there are people who live in
Eretz Yisroel who put on Tefillen privately.  Furthermore, there are some
minyanim in EY at which Tefillen are worn publicly on Chol Moed. Ehrlau'er
is one >>

The vast majority of religious people in EY with almost all poskim require
everyone in EY to follow the minhagim of EY. R Hamburger has been fighting
this position for years claiming that the ancient ashkenazi (German)
minhagim are the most accurate and therefore they should not change. My
impression is that there is a handful of shuls that follow this opinion
while thousands follow minhag EY.

I am not familar with all the psakim of R. Hamburger (he has several
seforim on the topic). For example standard practice that I know is that on
chol hamoed succot the parshah of the day is read 4 times consecutively. Do
these shuls really read from the next day also as done outside of Israel? I
take it for granted that these communities do not keep two days of yomtov
and eat in the succah on shemini azeret.

I know that Rav Elyashiv was asked about wearing tefillin on Chol Hamoed
and prohibited it but these communities continued to argue with the psak.

<<Thus, to assert that one should not put on Tefillen, because one lives in
EY seems to me to be unjustified >>

I find this statement quite strange. The minhag of not wearing tefillin in
EY on chol hamoed is practiced by 99% of religious Jews living in EY.
Isn't that justification enough?  RSZA, RYSE, ROY, RAL among others
didnt wear tefillin on chol hamoed were they all wrong?

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161030/9202c616/attachment-0001.htm>

The following is from RSRH's commentary on Bereishis 3.1


Now the serpent was more cunning than any animal of the field that God had made, and it
said to the woman: Even if God has said so, are you [really] not to eat from all the trees of the garden?


The difference between man and animal is the touchstone of human
morality. The logic of an animal persuaded the first man to deviate

from the path of duty; today this same animal logic still serves as midwife
to all human sin. The story of the first sin is the story of all
subsequent sins.
The animals are truly k'elokim yodiai tov v'ra. They are endowed with
instinct, and this instinct is the voice of God, the Will of God as it
applies to them. Whatever animals do is in accordance with their instinct;
they can act only in accordance with their instinct. For animals,
this instinct is Divine guidance operating within them. What animals
do in accordance with their instinct is good, and any act from which
their instinct restrains them is bad. Animals cannot err; they have only
their one nature, whose call they must heed.

Not so in the case of man. He is to opt for the good and shun evil
out of his own free will and sense of duty. Even when he gives his
physical nature its due, he must do so not because of the allure of his
senses, but out of a sense of duty. Even when he takes physical pleasure,
he must act in moral freedom. Man must never be an animal. Therefore,
he has within him Divine forces besides physical drives. His physical
nature must of necessity be opposed to the good and attracted to evil;
only thus will he choose the good and shun evil - not because of the
urging of his senses, but in spite of it. Through the freedom of his
Divine nature, he is to fulfill his lofty Divine calling. For this reason,
the voice of God does not speak from within him, but to him, telling
him what is good and what is evil. God's voice meets resistance from
man's physical nature, as long as this nature remains independent and
without guidance. God's voice that whispers within man - the innate
conscience, whose messenger is the sense of shame - serves only to
warn man, in general terms, to do good and shun evil. Precisely which
acts are good and which evil - this he can learn only from the mouth
of God speaking to him from outside himself.
The animal merely develops its physical nature, to which its intelligence
is completely subservient. Man, however, was not placed in Par

subservient. Man, however, was not placed in Paradise to satisfy

his physical nature with the delights offered there. He
was placed in Paradise l'avdah u'lismarah , to serve God there and to build
His world. This service is man's task, and only for its sake was he permitted
to partake of the fruits of Paradise.

The individual nature of the animal is the basis on which it assesses
everything, because the animal was created only for itself. Man, however,
was created to glorify God and to build His world. He must gladly
sacrifice his individual nature to this higher calling. He must learn what
is good and what is evil, not in accordance with his individual nature,
but in accordance with his lofty calling. For this reason, the tree was
appealing to his senses, and its fruit was enticing to him. Everything in
his individual nature told him: "This is good." But God's Word to him
forbade him to eat of the fruit of this tree and told him that to do so
would be evil. This was the rule by which man was to differentiate between
good and evil; this was the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Our
Sages, too, see in God's Word to man the revelation of all of man's
duties (see above, 2:16).

At this point, man encountered animal logic in the form of its cleverest
representative: the serpent. Even the cleverest of animals is incapable
of understanding how man could possibly forgo a pleasure that
becomes available to him.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161030/32cea36f/attachment-0001.htm>

have a look at the introductions to Rav Yaakov Emden's Luach Eres -by R. JJ Scechter and R David Yitzchaki ( about 60 pages of material)

Hillel Bick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161030/ca64a4cb/attachment-0001.htm>

On 10/30/2016 5:24 AM "Rich, Joel via Avodah" wrote:
> The gemara in makot (15b-top) has an exchange between R'Yochanan and a
> Tanna (whose job it was to memorize tannaitic material) concerning the
> memorized text (bitlo vs. kiymo)... On one level, it could be simply a
> transmission error that R'Yochanan was looking to fix.
Although I'm not in the sugya, from R. Yochonon's introductory phrase, 
''mai ka-amart,'' (''what are you saying?!''), I would go with this 
explanation, especially since we know that Amoraim were critical of such 
''reciters'' who sometimes produced corruptions of the citations that 
knowledge and application of halachic principles would prevent.
>   Yet we see cases where an intermediate case is indeterminate and the gemara simply concludes that we can't determine the halacha from this source.
Perhaps the difference is whether, as in the case cited, the Amora, 
considers his editing obvious on the strength of what he maintains are 
established external principles.

Zvi Lampel

R' Zev Sero wrote:

> The only reason one is carrying the key is so that it won't be
> stolen; thus it has no use on yomtov, but the MB says that if
> carrying it gives one peace of mind then perhaps that itself is
> a yomtov use.

There are two different situations we must look at: (A) A person who lives
alone and the lock is his only protection against theft, and (B) One who
has other means of protecting his property. In the first case, there is a
machlokes whether he may carry his key, and RZS's use of the word "perhaps"
signals that he agrees that this is a machlokes.

But regarding the second case, I quoted the MB who wrote:

> (in the square brackets): "And especially in a situation where one
> can give the objects or the key to a trustworthy person who is at
> home, for then it is assur according to all opinions."

to which RZS responded:

> Again, this is a situation where it is guaranteed that there will
> never be a legitimate reason to use the key on yomtov.  There is
> nothing in the drawer that one might want on yomtov, nor is one
> going to put anything there on yomtov.  The only reason one is
> carrying the key is so that it won't be stolen; thus it has no use
> on yomtov, ...

I disagree. Everyone agrees that there's no distinction between "real"
ochel nefesh (like bringing food to one's friend) and other needs (like
bringing a lulav to shul). The only distinction is between those needs and
theft prevention. In other words, there's no distinction between preventing
the theft of my money that's in the locked drawer, and the theft of my food
that's in the locked house.

I don't want any of the things in my house to get stolen, and that's why I
lock the house when I go to shul. There is a machlokes on whether or not
this justifies carrying the key on Yom Tov, and the MB says that if I can
secure those things in some other way, then "all opinions" forbid me to
carry the key. And that's why I wrote that when I lived in an area without
an eruv, and people were home to let me in, I saw no heter to carry my key,
so I used my Shabbos key.

> Why don't you leave it at home, both on shabbos and yomtov, and let
> those people let you in?   Obviously you have a reason, and thus a
> use for the key.  Therefore there is not even a hava amina that you
> should not carry it on yomtov.

There might have been more reasons, but I can only think of two now: They
might not hear me knocking, and even if they do hear me knocking, I don't
want to trouble them to come unlock the door. If you think that's enough of
a tzorech then I won't argue, but I figure that since the only reason the
door is locked is for security anyway, I didn't think that justifies me to
put them to that trouble.


[Email #2]

From R' Micha Berger:

> R/Prof YL quoted Rabbi Doniel Neustadt from torah.org
> <http://tinyurl.com/h7s3g2z>:
>: 1)-Carrying for a positive Yom Tov purpose - permitted
>: 2)-Carrying for no purpose - prohibited
>: 3)-Carrying for a "preventive" purpose - questionable

> Same question, chol hamo'ed? I assume preventative purpose would
> be okay, as would a positive ChM or YT purpose, including ChM
> trips and other entertainment as positive. But it struck me when
> reading this -- need I be careful about even carrying (a melakhah
> garua) on ChM?

In "Chol Hamoed" by Rabbi Dovid Zucker and Rabbi Moshe Francis, they write
on pages 8-9:

: There are some restrictions which are applicable on Shabbos and
: Yom Tov but not on Chol HaMoed. Specifically, the following
: prohibitions are not in effect on Chol HaMoed:

: a) Hotzaah - the prohibition of transferring an item from a
:    private to a public domain or vice versa; also Haavarah, carrying
:    an article four cubits within a public domain. (There is a
:    dissenting view that Hotzaah is prohibited on Chol HaMoed.)
: b) Techumin ...
: c) Muktzeh ...
: d) Mimtzo Cheftzcha V'daber Davar ...

The footnote on Hotzaah is quite lengthy, so if you want to see the
sources, please find the sefer, or I can send you a scan of the page. In
any event, he *does* explain this exemption as due to "melacha garua", and
also because even on Yom Tov itself we are so very lenient, and because
there is no tircha involved. In fact, he adds that for these very same
reasons, some poskim allow Hav'arah (lighting a fire, not to be confused
with the Haavarah mentioned above) on Chol HaMoed "afilu shelo l'tzorech".

Akiva Miller


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



_______________________________________________
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.)