Avodah Mailing List

Volume 35: Number 9

Wed, 18 Jan 2017

• 1. Re: The OU on Glatt Poultry (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: The OU on Glatt Poultry (Ben Waxman)
• 3. Re: Tzarich Iyun: Glatt Kosher (Prof. Levine)
• 4. Praying for Miracles (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi)
• 5. Re: Tzarich Iyun: Glatt Kosher (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: Praying for Miracles (Rich, Joel)
• 7. Re: Praying for Miracles (Zev Sero)
• 8. Re: Praying for Miracles (Micha Berger)
• 9. Praying for Miracles (from Areivim) (Saul Mashbaum)
• 10. Micah and Yeshayahu (Eli Turkel)
• 11. Re: Micah and Yeshayahu (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Micah and Yeshayahu (Eli Turkel)
• 13. New TorahMusings article by Aryeh and Dov Frimer (Aryeh Frimer)

On 17/01/17 11:21, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote:
> However, it adds some information about poultry in Europe and Asia
> where apparently lung inspection is required.  I was under the
> impression that at times it has been necessary to inspect the lungs of
> poultry in Israel also.

Israel is in Asia.

In Israel the normal hechsherim don't check poultry lungs, but the 
mehadrin ones do.  They also check the tzomes hagidin.




-- 
Zev Sero                May 2017, with its *nine* days of Chanukah,
z...@sero.name           be a brilliant year for us all

To the best of my knowledge, not all Mehadrin heksherim check the gidin.

http://www.kosharot.co.il/show_hadracha.asp?id=59572

This page has a section on the different practices (in this area and 
other issues).

Ben

On 1/17/2017 8:30 PM, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
>
> In Israel the normal hechsherim don't check poultry lungs, but the 
> mehadrin ones do.  They also check the tzomes hagidin.

At 12:55 PM 1/17/2017, Micha Berger wrote:

>The history RAZZ doesn't discuss is the era in which the Mafia took over
>the kosher meat business.

Timothy Lytton in his book Kashrus relates some of this history. It 
is worth reading.  There were also rabbonim whose hechshers on meat 
meant almost nothing when it came to kashrus.  The claim is that at 
least 40% of the meat sold in the 1930s and 1940s as kosher was not kosher.


>In Boston, it drove my greatgrandfather (R' Yisrael Avraham Abba [Meir
>Simchah] Krieger, 1872-1931) to an early grave. And when RYBS took over
>a year later, there was a mess for him to clean up.

I do not know what you are referring to here,  but I do know that two 
outstanding talmidei chachomim who resided in the Boston area gave 
supervision to Morrison and Schiff delicatessen which many Orthodox 
people in the Boston area would not eat.  The late Bostoner 
Rebbe,  Rabbi Levi Horowitz,  Z"L, told me many years ago that this 
delicatessen was not reliably kosher.

>When the Hungarian and Chassidim for nearby regions immigrated / fled
>to the US, they needed glatt shlachthoisen, as it is their minhag to
>only eat glatt. More meiqil than Bet Yosef's glatt, because it's "only"
>a minhag, but what was already in place wouldn't meat their demand. And
>because they started from a clean slate, they didn't have these problems
>that the existing slaughterhouses did.
>
>During this era, it really was true that the glatt slaughterhouses were
>much more likely to be reliable WRT basic kashrus as well. Even many of
>those who were noheig to ohold like the Rama would look for glatt for
>this reason. And so, the word shifted in meaning.

I am surprised that you made no mention of Rabbiner Dr. Yosef 
Breuer,  ZT"L, and his efforts in the field of kashrus.  He 
originally opposed Glatt meat for two reasons.  1. It was more 
expensive, and his congregants were struggling financially in the 
early 1940s.  2.  This was not the standard in Germany.  Eventually 
KAJ did certify only Glatt meat, because this gave their shechita a 
wider market.

For the record,  Rav Breuer insisted that any meat under his 
supervision be taken from the slaughterhouse on the day it was 
slaughtered and not left overnight as was common practice at the 
time.  The reason - it was discovered that someone was actually 
changing plumbas on the beef that KAJ had slaughtered and putting 
their plumbas on meat that was under KAJ supervision.  A shochet told me this.

Yes,  there was a great deal of corruption at one time.  Lytton 
points out that it was the OU that played a key role in eliminating this.

YL  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20170117/375b0df8/attachment-0001.htm>

[Moving this conversation over from Areivim. -micha]

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 02:08:08AM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Areivim wrote:
:> In reality, bederech hateva there is no solution to the Arab
:> Problem.

: Really? ... You don't think that that is something that can happen
: bderekh hatteva`?  Then you are not allowed to pray for a solution to
: the Arab Problem, because you are not allowed to pray for something
: that cannot happen bderekh hatteva`.


do we not pray for rain even when there is no reason to think that the
drought will break?
on the contrary we see it as HKBHs message to us that we need to repent and
improve -- probably the main purpose of prayer

However, Tefillas Shav
praying after becoming aware of a problem is not just a waste of time, it
is prohibited. One must suppose Shav means KeVayochol, it is a waste of
HKBH's time or perhaps a waste of the supplicants energy.

OCh 230
1- two illustrations both of prayers for past events.
After hearing screaming emanating from the general area of one's home, then
prays that it's not from his home.

One who prays that his pregnant wife should deliver a baby boy.
Rather one should pray for the future and give thanks for what has already
happened.
A traveler entering a dangerous village should pray for safety, and give
thanks when he does arrive safely.

2- A farmer about to measure his produce should pray, "May it be Your
will HaShem, my God, that You send a blessing upon this pile,"
during the measuring process he is to say, "Blessed is He Who sends
blessing to this pile."
It is prohibited, Tefilas Shav, to measure first and then pray, since
"blessing is to be found only in that which remains hidden from the eye."

3- Upon engaging in everyday activities in which there is a well
recognised danger [like driving?] one should say, "May it be Your will
HaShem, my God, that You bring me in in peace and bring me out in peace,
and spare me from this fire and similar things in the future."
At the safe conclusion one says, "I thank You HaShem, my God, for having
spared me."

4- Before a medical intervention one should say, "May it be Your will
HaShem, my God, that this activity should be therapeutic for me, for You
are a free Healer."
At the safe conclusion one should say, "Blessed is the Healer of the sick."

5- One should always be accustomed to say, "All that the Merciful One
does, He does for the good."

It is proper to pray before measuring produce. But is this not equivalent
to praying AFTER hearing screams or AFTER the woman is already pregnant?

Perhaps this is addressed by, "Blessing is found exclusively in those
things that remain hidden from view."
does this mean from the view of the supplicant or from all people?
the scream from the street in which one lives is also Hidden from view of
the supplicant but probably not from others.

But no one knows the gender of the foetus in a pregnant woman -- so why is
that Shav?

can anyone suggest why the Gemara/Mechaber list all these illustrations

Best,
Meir G. Rabi

On 17/01/17 17:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
>
> For the record,  Rav Breuer insisted that any meat under his supervision
> be taken from the slaughterhouse on the day it was slaughtered and not
> left overnight as was common practice at the time.  The reason - it was
> discovered that someone was actually changing plumbas on the beef that
> KAJ had slaughtered and putting their plumbas on meat that was under KAJ
> supervision.  A shochet told me this.

I can see why the KaJ would object to this and want to prevent it, but 
not why this was a kashrus concern.  after all, the meat they were 
stealing was more reliable than their own, not less.

-- 
Zev Sero                May 2017, with its *nine* days of Chanukah,
z...@sero.name           be a brilliant year for us all

[RMR:]
> OCh 230
> 1- two illustrations both of prayers for past events.
> After hearing screaming emanating from the general area of one's home, then
> prays that it's not from his home.

> One who prays that his pregnant wife should deliver a baby boy.
> Rather one should pray for the future and give thanks for what has already
> happened.
> A traveler entering a dangerous village should pray for safety, and give
> thanks when he does arrive safely.

Question- why did the Mishna need to give 2 examples, is there a chiddush
in each?

As far as: It is proper to pray before measuring produce. But is this
not equivalent to praying AFTER hearing screams or AFTER the woman is
already pregnant

My take is that the prayer by the produce is like the bracha of mvarech
hashanim -- not for more crop but more satisfaction from what we have

Kt
Joel Rich

On 17/01/17 18:01, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
> As far as: It is proper to pray before measuring produce. But is this
> not equivalent to praying AFTER hearing screams or AFTER the woman is
> already pregnant
>
> My take is that the prayer by the produce is like the bracha of mvarech
> hashanim -- not for more crop but more satisfaction from what we have

Then why not after measuring?  It seems clear to me that the prayer is 
that the as-yet-unknown amount of produce should increase, since this is 
the sort of hidden miracle that HKBH often performs, while open miracles 
such as increasing something that has already been measured is only done 
on rare occasions, e.g. through Eliyahu or Elisha, and is not something 
one can pray for.  Ditto once the baby's sex has been determined, asking 
Him to change it is too much, although He did it for Leah.

Praying that the house which is on fire is not ones own would seem to be 
beyond what Hashem *ever* does, even through nevi'im, since it's 
changing the past (and thus also people's memories of what happened); 
praying that the fire go out miraculously is fine, but praying that it 
should never have happened in the first place, and thus that one never 
saw the flames or heard the noise, and thus never prayed, and thus never 
got the miracle... Well, you see where that leads.

-- 
Zev Sero                May 2017, with its *nine* days of Chanukah,
z...@sero.name           be a brilliant year for us all

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:01:03PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
: Question: Why did the Mishna need to give 2 examples, is there a chiddush
: in each?

The Mesivta (Berakhos 60a) quotes Shoshanim leDavid who answers:

1- The case of the burning home is needed, because there is still
something to pray for. So, even though he is praying that it not
be his home, one might thing Hashem could still answer his basic
intent by quieting the fire before there is further destruction.

2- The case of the baby's gender is needed because the father really
only cares about the gender once the baby is born. However, any damage
done in the fire cannot be undone. So there is a way in which the fire
is more firmly in the past than the prayer for gender. and so we need
the mishnah to say that even so, both would be a tefilas shav.

To fill in, and answer the question the subject line refers to...
Leah davenend that there be more of the 12 shevatim left for Rachel to
birth, and that tefillah did change Dinah's gender, to free up another
possible boy for Rachel. So why can't one daven that a fetus have a
particular gender? First answer is that we don't pray for miracles. (The
second is that she davened before 40 days.)

: As far as: It is proper to pray before measuring produce. But is this
: not equivalent to praying AFTER hearing screams or AFTER the woman is
: already pregnant

I would suggest that nothing is set in stone until observed. "Ein berakhah
sherurah ela behe'elem ayin". But I would argue this is because the
unobserved isn't real yet.

As for the gender of a fetus, it would seem that according to halakhah,
Schroedinger's fetus observes itself.

: My take is that the prayer by the produce is like the bracha of mvarech
: hashanim -- not for more crop but more satisfaction from what we have

My take was that birkhas hashanim was about the shanah -- the time. IOW,
not for more crop, but for our time spent on parnasah being more
spiritually productive.

This is tied to R' Shimon Shkop's idea that the reason why Moshe made
his fortune off the sapphire chiseled off the second luchos is to teach
us about our own work life. The job is to refine our souls to be capable
of holding Torah; work is a nice side-benefit.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             People were created to be loved.
mi...@aishdas.org        Things were created to be used.
http://www.aishdas.org   The reason why the world is in chaos is that
Fax: (270) 514-1507      things are being loved, people are being used.

An areivim discussion related to praying for miracles. RMRabi cited
the sources in the SA on the limits of prayer: one cannot pray that
the outcome of an event which already took place should be favorable.
OTOH, there does not seem to be a restriction on praying for a future
miracle .

I wonder if nevertheless some prayers could be considered a tfillat
shav because they are for things so miraculous they border on the
impossible. Can we pray that someone with no eyes have normal
eyesight? That a severely retarded person somehow have normal
intelligence? Are these conditions in the category of the
irreversible, "something which happened already", similar to the sex
of an unborn child? I am inclined to believe so, but have no sources
to back up this feeling. Is anyone aware of written sources on limits
of prayer for reversal of physical handicaps which b'derech hateva are
irreversible?

Saul Mashbaum

I went to shiur of R. Benny Lau (part of a series on trei asar) on Micah
and he made several interesting comments (from a 75 minute shiur)

1. We make a big deal of the miracle of the saving of Jerusalem in the days
of Chizkiyahu (see va-ya-hi be-chatzi ha-layla on seder night). However we
forget that Sancheriv destroyed 31 cities (one can see Lachish today) and
basically set fire to the entire country outside of Jerusalem. In many ways
a pyrrhic victory.

2. Micah accuses the those false prophets who are only interested in their
own interests and wage battle against those who disagree with them (a note
RBL compares prophets to todays newspapers - both forms of communication)
and hinted at similarities in modern politics

3. Perek 3 of Michah has a lot of similarity with the prophecy of Yeshayahu
about the times of Moshiach. Michah was probably a student of Yeshayahu and
used much of his terminology.
R Benny Lau insists that however the point is that Micah strongly disagrees
with Yeshayahu (in this he disagrees with R. Yoel Bin-Nun his teacher).
His claim is that Yeshayahu continues - va-yeshvu ish tachat gafno etc"
Yeshayahu see the days of Moshiach as one when every person has his own
peace, prays to G-d and no need of a central government. Micah OTOH
continues "bet yaakov lechu ve-nelcha", see the Moshiach as a continuation
of the kingdom of David and Shlomo. Moshiach is the perfect government. In
addition Yeshayahu is a universalist while Micah is concerns with the
people of Israel.

Rambam hilchot melachim 11 brings that the Moshiach will bring back the
kingdom of David and Shlomo (like Micah). Based on the yerushalmi he brings
the story of Bar Kochba who is backed by R. Akiva to show that the Moshiach
will be a real leader/warrior . He died because of personal faults. Raavad
disagrees and brings the Bavli that the Jews themselves killed Bar Kosiva
because he wasn't spiritual (like Yeshayahu )

In summary we have a disagreement between prophets (both of whom we recite
as their words being just and truth) whether the perfect situation is
having a perfect Monarchy (Micah-Rambam) or else one where each individual
works on himself and we rely on prayer rather than government
(Yeshayah-Raavad) . He concluded by noting that the same disagreement
continues until our day some 2600 years later)

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20170118/e2060471/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 11:20:07AM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: I went to shiur of R. Benny Lau (part of a series on trei asar) on Micah
...
: 3. Perek 3 of Michah has a lot of similarity with the prophecy of Yeshayahu
: about the times of Moshiach. Michah was probably a student of Yeshayahu and
: used much of his terminology.

The gemara assumes that Mikhah and Yeshaiah were misnab'im at the same
time. Speaking about the various nevi'im who collapsed the 613 mitzvos
into fewer and fewer categories (Sotah 14a), "Isaiah came and reduced
them to 6... Mikhah came and reduced them to 3... Isaiah returned and
reduced them to two..." So Yeshaiah was in business before and after
a statement by Mikhah.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Friendship is like stone. A stone has no value,
mi...@aishdas.org        but by rubbing one stone against another,
http://www.aishdas.org   sparks of fire emerge. 
Fax: (270) 514-1507                  - Rav Mordechai of Lechovitz

An example where it is explicit in the pesukim. Tanakh states that
Yeshayahu prophesized from
Uziah to Chizkitahu while Michah prophesized from Yotam (som of Uziah) to
Chizkiyahu.
So they overlapped and Micah was the younger of the two. So Yoel bin Nun
assumes that in
fact Micah was a student of Yeshayahu.


>
> The gemara assumes that Mikhah and Yeshaiah were misnab'im at the same
> time. Speaking about the various nevi'im who collapsed the 613 mitzvos
> into fewer and fewer categories (Sotah 14a), "Isaiah came and reduced
> them to 6... Mikhah came and reduced them to 3... Isaiah returned and
> reduced them to two..." So Yeshaiah was in business before and after
> a statement by Mikhah.
>
> --
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20170118/3c412e27/attachment-0001.htm>

You are cordially invited to read our latest article entitled:
"Partnership Minyanim Revisited: A Response to R. Ysoscher Katz"
by Aryeh A. Frimer and Dov I. Frimer, Torah Musings, January 18, 2017.
Available online at: http://www.torahmusings.com/2017/01/partnership-minyanim-revisited/.
Pdf of the submitted article is available at http://www.torahmusings.com/wp-content/upl
oads/2017/01/Partnership-Minyanim-Revisited.pdf?x55937&;x55937.

--------------------------------------------------
Dr. Aryeh A. Frimer
Ethel and David Resnick Professor Emeritus
   of Active Oxygen Chemistry
Chemistry Dept., Bar-Ilan University
Ramat Gan 5290002, ISRAEL
E-mail (office): Aryeh.Fri...@biu.ac.il<mailto:Aryeh.Fri...@biu.ac.il>
Homepage http://ch.biu.ac.il/frimer
Tel: 972-3-5318610; Fax: 972-3-7384053
Tel Home: 972-8-9473819/9470834
E-mail (home): Frim...@zahav.net.il<mailto:Frim...@zahav.net.il>
Cellphone: 972-54-7540761

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20170118/b30f7dd9/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/lists/avodah/avodah-acronyms
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)