Volume 34: Number 163
Tue, 27 Dec 2016
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: Professor L. Levine
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 15:44:02 +0000
Subject: [Avodah] Which comes first this Motzei Shabbos, Chanukah
From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis
Note that they do not mention when one should eat the donuts!
Q. Which comes first this Motzei Shabbos, Chanukah lights or Havdalah?
A. There is a dispute among the poskim concerning this question. Normally,
in selecting the sequence of two mitzvos we are guided by the principle of
tadir v'she'eino tadir - tadir kodem (the more frequent mitzvah is
performed first). As such, the Taz (681:1) rules that Havdalah is recited
first because it is the more frequently performed mitzvah. The Beiur
Halacha (ibid.) quotes many acharonim who agree with the Taz including the
Maharal MiPrague, the Tosfos Yom Tov and the Pri Chodosh. This was also the
custom of the Chazon Ish (Sefer Hilchos Chanukah, p.44 footnote 46).
However, the Mechaber and the Rama (681:2), followed by the Magen Avraham,
Eliyahu Raba and Gra (see Beiur Halacha ibid.), maintain that Ner Chanukah
comes first. Their rationale is that delaying the departure of Shabbos is
more important than the principle of tadir. A second reason to prioritize
Chanukah is that one performs Pirsumei Nisa (publicizing the miracle) with
the kindling of the Chanukah lights.
In Shul, the accepted minhag is to light Chanukah lights first (Mishna
Berura and Beiur Halacha, ibid.). Possibly, this is because the great
Pirsumei Nisa for an entire shul is very significant (see Aruch HaShulchan
681:2). At home one should follow his own minhag since there is a valid
basis for both viewpoints (MB and BH, ibid.). If one has no minhag, he can
choose what to do since both are valid minhagim (see end of Beiur Halacha,
ibid., in the name of the Pri Megodim).
It should be noted that one is prohibited from doing any melachah after
Shabbos, even if Shabbos has concluded, until he recites Ata Chonantanu in
Shmoneh Esrei. If he forgot to say Ata Chonantanu, he should say the words
'baruch hamavdil bein kodesh l'chol' before lighting (MB 681:2).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161223/cf042c4a/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 2
From: Micha Berger
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:29:16 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Which comes first this Motzei Shabbos, Chanukah
On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 03:44:02PM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote:
: In Shul, the accepted minhag is to light Chanukah lights first (Mishna
: Berura and Beiur Halacha, ibid.). Possibly, this is because the great
: Pirsumei Nisa for an entire shul is very significant (see Aruch HaShulchan
: 681:2).
... where RYME quotes the BY that the reason is to get yesterday out first
before dealing with the next day. He then quotes the Rama in support.
He also notes that havdalah is tadir, and therefore it should be tadir
qodem.
Last he quotes the MA, the Elyah Raba and Gra, that it really depends on
"Atah Chonantanu". So that either way havdalah is first.
And that is more true in shul than when lighting neir ish ubeiso.
And then there's the question of how to make "me'orei ha'eish" after
lighting the menorah. (Kol Bo in the name of the Raavad.) And if you
want to say that because this shimush isn't hana'ah, it's not a problem,
RYME reminds you that you light a shamash.
: At home one should follow his own minhag since there is a valid
: basis for both viewpoints (MB and BH, ibid.). If one has no minhag, he
: can choose what to do since both are valid minhagim (see end of Beiur
: Halacha, ibid., in the name of the Pri Megodim).
The AhS concludes both are indeed worth consideration, but for all
the reasons he gave above, havdalah being first (like the Taz) "asi
shapir". Despite my own impression that his earlier discussion had no
clear winner.
:-)BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Brains to the lazy
mi...@aishdas.org are like a torch to the blind --
http://www.aishdas.org a useless burden.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Bechinas haOlam
Go to top.
Message: 3
From: saul newman
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:31:49 -0800
Subject: [Avodah] rainbow
1. you see a rainbow in the sky after the rain . you believe:
a. the RBSO was going to at this moment destroy the world, but then
the rainbow reminded Him not to
b. the RBSO set up the rainbow of a reminder of the time of the Flood
and His promise not to repeat it
c. the RBSO set up a physical principal that light bent at a certain
angle by dispersed water produces a rainbow
2. while making the bracha 'zocher habrit' , one is thinking
a, b, c as above
Quesion------ 1} the answers to both questions being 'a' makes one a
normative jew. can one be a normative jew if one answers either 'c'
alone to both, or 'b' and 'c' [ ie can one believe anything other that
'a' alone and be a normative jew?
2} if one includes 'c' as part or all of his answer to
number 2, does that detract from his yiddishkeit or make him non-normative?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161223/adce3bc0/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 4
From: Micha Berger
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:58:35 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] rainbow
On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 07:31:49AM -0800, saul newman via Avodah wrote:
: -- MIME section 1 text/plain --------------------
: 1. you see a rainbow in the sky after the rain . you believe:
:
: a. the RBSO was going to at this moment destroy the world, but then the
: rainbow reminded Him not to
I don't think this has much iteral meaning. G-d doesn't need reminders,
he doesn't change his mind in a literal sense, etc...
: b. the RBSO set up the rainbow of a reminder of the time of the Flood
: and His promise not to repeat it
: c. the RBSO set up a physical principal that light bent at a certain
: angle by dispersed water produces a rainbow
or
d. the RBSO set up a physical principal that light bent at a certain
angle by dispersed water produces a rainbow, which He made into
a reminder of the promise by pointing it out as such to Noach.
This is shitas haRamban.
Another possibility (a rationalist take on b) is that the physics
underlying rainbows existed since Maaseh Bereishis, but the humidity in
the air and/or the altitude or thickness of the cloud layer didn't cause
rainbows after a rain. Then, after the climate change brought about by
the mabul, rainbows started happening.
A second take on (b):
R/Dr Eliezer Ehrenpreis suggested that many of the values we consider
physical constants declined over time. A one example, h-bar, the minimum
possible uncertainty in a quantum duality (eg position and momentum)
didn't reach a microscopic size until some time during the 6 days of
bereishis. And the speed of light (which only has meaning in proportion
to other constants) declined over time, giving a false reading for the
age of the universe if you assumed it was really constant. And also
making the entire line between yeish and ayin, between tohu vavohu
and existence, blurry to the point of meaningless. That is why
"tohu vavohu", the non-existence is defined in terms of chaos. (I
recall REE asking, if all is void, what is being chaotic?)
So they asymptotically reached current values, and the laws of physics
didn't act as we expect them to until "yom HAshishi" -- the hinted-at
real end of creation, Matan Torah.
And REE believed that the visible portion of the spectrum caused by
raindrops in the air reached a noticable width only at the end of
the mabul.
:-)BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
mi...@aishdas.org your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Go to top.
Message: 5
From: Professor L. Levine
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 18:12:32 +0000
Subject: [Avodah] The Chanuka Candle / Havdalah Hullabaloo
Do we first light the Menorah or make Havdalah on Motzai Shabbos - Chanuka?
Not a recent question, this situation of competing halachic principles has
been the basis of the centuries-old debate regarding which mitzvah has
priority and should therefore be performed first. In other words, on Motzai
Shabbos Chanuka this annual halachic dispute, simmering since the time of
the Rishonim, really heats up...
To find out what to do, see the full article: "Insights Into Halacha: The
Chanuka Candle / Havdalah Hullabaloo<http://sable.madmimi.com/c/10500?id=80571.499.1.8389cb72759acc
ee0bcbd5001deaa870>".
For all of the Mareh Mekomos / sources, just ask.
Insights Into Halacha<http://sable.madmimi.com/c/10500?id=80571.500.1.0dae9c075a7bdd
cdf30683ac52cc21d9> is a weekly series of contemporary Halacha
articles. If you enjoyed the article, please share it with friends and
family. To sign up to receive weekly articles simply email me.
kol tuv, a Lichtige Chanuka, and Good Shabbos,
Y. Spitz
Yerushalayim
ysp...@ohr.edu<mailto:ysp...@ohr.edu>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161223/aa8087b9/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 6
From: Zev Sero
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:46:01 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] rainbow
C. The RBSO doesn't need a reminder; we do. When we don't need a
reminder they don't happen. That doesn't mean we did something wrong at
the specific moment when they happen, it just means we're a generation
that needs such reminders from time to time, so we get them.
Before the flood either the laws worked differently so there were no
rainbows, or else rainbows had no special significance and were just
pretty things to give us pleasure and remind us to thank Hashem for
creating them.
Where did you see that A is normative, and that one must believe A?
--
Zev Sero Have a brilliant Chanukah
z...@sero.name
Go to top.
Message: 7
From: Michael Poppers
Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2016 00:19:08 -0500
Subject: [Avodah] 10 tribes
In Avodah V34n162, R'Micha noted to R'Zev:
> : Who says Shim`on was absorbed into Yehuda and remained in the south?
> Yehoshua pereq 19. <
To which I would add the implications of Shof'tim 1.
> It is noted that "Shi[m]'on veLevi achim", and neither got their own
territory. <
So, to go back to R'Eli's question, the two "southern" *shvatim* [w/ a
distinct *nachalah*] are Y'hudah and Binyamin; and the 10 vs. 2 count is
based on distinct *nachalah*.
Gut Chanukah! All the best from
*Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161225/62d1f2ff/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 8
From: Micha Berger
Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2016 19:03:08 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] 10 tribes
On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 12:19:08AM -0500, Michael Poppers via Avodah wrote:
: In Avodah V34n162, R'Micha noted to R'Zev:
:> It is noted that "Shi[m]'on veLevi achim", and neither got their own
:> territory.
: So, to go back to R'Eli's question, the two "southern" *shvatim* [w/ a
: distinct *nachalah*] are Y'hudah and Binyamin; and the 10 vs. 2 count is
: based on distinct *nachalah*.
Whether we count Shim'in among Malkhus Yehudah or not as a shevet
at all, we do not have 10 shevatim left for Malkhus Yisrael.
12 brothers, minus Yosef, plus Ephraim & Menasheh = 13
Minus Levi & Shim'on would leave 11 disinct nachalos.
Meaning, Yehudah and Binyamin in the south, and only 9 shevatim in
the north.
(Personally, I like the resolutions I already posted, that either
1- Shim'on eventually does move north in David's day and fall along with
the rest of Malkhus Yisrael, or
2- Sancheirev does make inroads into western Malkhus Yehudah, it is
possible Shim'on was lost then.)
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the
mi...@aishdas.org second time and as if you had acted the first
http://www.aishdas.org time as wrongly as you are about to act now!
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning
Go to top.
Message: 9
From: Micha Berger
Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2016 19:10:07 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Rachel didn't burn the idols because she wanted
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:21:32AM +0200, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
: Does anyone know a source for this idea that Rachel didn't burn the idols
: because she wanted to denigrate outside wisdom? ...
The Zohar ad loc (164b ) says it was to denigrate AZ and thereby ween
her father from them.
This being the Zohar, it doesn't necessarily mean she expected her father
to learn about hte denigration; it could be some kind of metaphysical
causality involved.
Also, the two clauses are quite a distance apart. I might be
misunderstanding with my "and thereby" connecting them.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where
mi...@aishdas.org you are, or what you are doing, that makes you
http://www.aishdas.org happy or unhappy. It's what you think about.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Dale Carnegie
Go to top.
Message: 10
From: Akiva Miller
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2016 08:31:01 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] electronics on shabbat
R' Eli Turkel posted:
> A psak of R Rabinowitz allows the use of card readers and
> many other gadgets used for opening hotels doors on shabbat
> see for more details
<http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/rnerElectronicsShabbat.pdf>
Here's the excerpt that I want to focus on:
> However, according to HaRav Rabinowitz, today, many electronic
> devices do not result in the closure of a circuit or creation
> of a new flow of electricity and the circuits are based on
> miniature automatic semi-conductors, in which the current is
> virtually undetectable and therefore uvda d'chol is not applicable.
What does "virtually undetectable" mean? In context, he seems to take it to
mean the same thing as "UNdetectable", but I would think it is the same as
"IS detectable". What is the shiur of detectability?
Even if he has proven that there's no melacha here, how does that prove
that uvda d'chol is not applicable? The whole idea of invoking uvda d'chol
is for situations where there's no melacha. You have to ask whether the
activity is Shabbosdik, and if it isn't, then it is an uvda d'chol, whether
there's melacha involved or not. (I am not getting into the technical
definition of uvda d'chol here, only isolating it from the concept of
melacha.)
But actually, I am less worried about the "l'halacha", and much more
concerned about the "l'maaseh". How is the average person going to know
whether or not a given device meets these conditions? He himself write that
this applies to "many" such devices. How can I know which ones are
sufficiently advanced?
Another quote:
> In some of the sensors there is an LED indicator but the
> technology of LED is such that there is no ignition/kindling.
> There is no prohibition of "nolad" in this technology according
> to Rabbi Dror Fixler.
Okay, so there's no nolad. What of the much more serious melacha of mav'ir?
Is this not a fire? My understanding is that halachic fire is defined by
either heat OR light. Is Rabbi Fixler requiring heat alone? Is he saying
that because there is no heat from an LED it does not constitute fire,
despite the fact that it does generate light? If that's his view, I would
like to hear more about it.
Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161226/e086486b/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 11
From: Ben Waxman
Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2016 22:25:38 +0200
Subject: [Avodah] God's Will in Syria
From an interview with Shivi Froman in Olam Katan (in reference to his
fundraiser for Syrians) (my translation):
Q: You don't think that it is God's will (Hand of God) that our enemies
are killing each other instead of uniting against us?
A: No, I don't have those types of thoughts about God, he protests. The
only thing that I thought was that God commanded to live as if the world
was created for me. If I feel that something is lacking or there is pain
in this world, then I am lacking something and the pain is mine. If I
can imagine something that God is telling me about Syria, it is this:
"I created for you a black hole, pain, incredible evil in this world. Go
and do something about it". I can't imagine that God allows me to watch
people created in His image doing these things to one another and telling
"enjoy the show". That isn't my God.
Go to top.
Message: 12
From: Professor L. Levine
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2016 11:02:57 +0000
Subject: [Avodah] V'Achar Kan or V'Achar Kach
Different sidurim have either V'Achar Kan or V'Achar Kach in Al Ha'Nissim.
The Artscroll siddur has V'Achar Kach. However, both the Roedelheim
Siddur and Seligman Baer's Siddur, both considered to be authoritative,
have V'Achar Kan.
YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20161227/a259b282/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.)