Avodah Mailing List

Volume 36: Number 8

Wed, 17 Jan 2018

• 1. Re: Brisker Methodology (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Are Vegan Restaurants Kosher? (Zev Sero)
• 3. Re: Are Vegan Restaurants Kosher? (Ben Waxman)
• 4. BO Ahavat Chinam should be the guiding LIGHT (Cantor Wolberg)
• 5. Re: Are Vegan Restaurants Kosher? (Zev Sero)
• 6. Halacha Yomis - Eating Before Davening, Women (Professor L. Levine)
• 7. More on Women eating (Professor L. Levine)
• 8. Re: Are Vegan Restaurants Kosher? (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: Are Vegan Restaurants Kosher? (Zev Sero)
• 10. Location of Yeshivos of the Amoraim? (Micha Berger)

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:16:09AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
: I'd welcome some feedback on some Brisker methodology thoughts. Brisker
: dialectics sometimes seem like Newtonian physics(more Boolean in
: nature-there are 2 dinim or two explanations and it's 100% one or the
: other), which explains a lot, but not all, the data. I wonder if a more
: quantum mechanics, less Boolean approach might explain more (but be much
: more difficult to prove).

There are other non-boolean logics to advocate.

As I've said whenever this comes up in the realm of birur, I believe
that halakhah's main focus is refining its adherents, and therefore
it deals with unknowns not probabilistically or using fuzzy sets, but
using the psychology of how people natively deal with unknowns. Which
extends to explain chazaah and qavuah seamlessly.

Something similar can be done here too.


The famous line about the difference between Brisk and Telzh is that R'
Chaim's derekh asks "Vos?" (What?) and R' Shimon asks "Fahr vos?" (Why?)

But there is another difference. R' Chaim assumes that two causes have
two effects, if there are two causes we will speak of tzvei dinim. In
contrast, R Shimon often discusses how a single din may emerge from a
hitztarfus of two causes. In the realm of metzi'us too, it is usual for
something to only happen because two or more things caused it, neither of
which could have caused it alone. (A car doesn't run over a ball unless
the ball rolled into the street AND someone was driving down it.)

People are often conflicted. Whether we mean something like a dialectic
between conflicting values, common experiences of mixed emotions, or
conflicting beliefs we draw in in different situations. (Such as the way
Hashem is in heaven -- Avinu shebashamayim -- and also also Omnipresent.
Halevai we were aware of such conflicts so that we can relate to them
on a dialectic level.)

So it would make sense for a discipline designed to refine such creatures
would have laws based on combinations of causes EVEN IN CASES where
those causes imply contradiction!

A logic that defies both the law of contradiction and the law of excluded
middle would work better than anything boolean.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and
mi...@aishdas.org        this was a great wonder. But it is much more
http://www.aishdas.org   wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a
Fax: (270) 514-1507      "mensch"!     -Rav Yisrael Salanter

On 12/01/18 05:32, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
> One might think that if a restaurant is vegan,? then there are no 
> kashrus problems with eating at it.? However, as the article from the COR at
> 
> https://goo.gl/GrbWpM
> 
> points out,? this is not the case.

There are additional problems that the article doesn't mention, for 
instance the fact that it's very common in restaurants for employees to 
bring in their own food and cook it on the restaurant's equipment.  A 
kosher-certified restaurant must ban this, or at least provide separate 
equipment for employees to use for their own meals.


-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

Frankly I don't understand the question. One of the main reasons we 
demand hasgacha on a meat restaurant is because we don't believe the 
owner's word when he says "Don't worry, all the ingredients are Badatz". 
The same would apply with a vegan place. Maybe he fries up his french 
fries in lard. Maybe the sauce has butter in it. Maybe he bought lettuce 
directly from the secular kibbutz.

Ben

On 1/12/2018 12:32 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
 > One might think that if a restaurant is vegan,? then there are no 
kashrus problems with eating at it.? However, as the article from the COR at
 >
 > https://goo.gl/GrbWpM
 >
 > points out,? this is not the case.

The Rabbis see the plague of darkness (which did not affect the Jews) in
more spiritual terms, and connect the phrase "no man could see his brother"
to the darkness. We assume that it was because it was dark, people could
not see one another, but the Rabbis suggest that it is the other way
around! It was because they could not see one another, it became dark.
Because the Egyptians were not able to be concerned with others, they were
in a psychological darkness (melancholy in Greek means 'dark mood'). And
here is our spiritual lesson: people not prepared to be concerned for one
another are at risk of being in a spiritual darkness. 
The Gemara defines 'dawn' (the earliest time for Shacharis) as the time "when one can recognize the face of a friend" (Berachot 9b).
That is why we are also reminded of the mitzvah ?vahavta l?rayecha kamocha? right before we begin shacharit.

Excerpted from Kolel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180113/ae7133cb/attachment-0001.html>

On 13/01/18 12:05, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote:
> Frankly I don't understand the question. One of the main reasons we 
> demand hasgacha on a meat restaurant is because we don't believe the 
> owner's word when he says "Don't worry, all the ingredients are Badatz". 
> The same would apply with a vegan place. Maybe he fries up his french 
> fries in lard. Maybe the sauce has butter in it. Maybe he bought lettuce 
> directly from the secular kibbutz.

There are people who will eat at any restaurant that says "kosher" in 
the window, trusting the owner both not to lie and to know what kosher 
is.  Many of the same people will eat at vegan restaurants even if they 
*don't* claim to be kosher, thinking that if it's vegan it must 
automatically be kosher.  The page is aimed at clearing up that 
misconception by showing how vegan places can still be treif.  For 
instance, many people think bishul yisroel is a mere chumra, and don't 
understand that bishul akum is *lechol hadeos* just as treif as chicken 
parmesan.

-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

From today's OU Halacha Yomis

Does the prohibition of not eating before davening also apply to women? I
usually say Modeh Ani and Birchas Hashachar and then eat breakfast, and
then daven Shmoneh Esrei later. Is this permitted? (Subscriber's Question)


A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 106:2) writes that women are obligated in Tefillah
(i.e. Shmoneh Esrei). However, the Magen Avrohom (106:2) points out that
most women do not regularly daven Shmoneh Esrei, but instead fulfill their
obligation with any prayer, such as a short prayer that they recite when
they awake in the morning. The Mishnah Berurah writes that this is a
minority opinion, and therefore women should make sure to daven Shacharis
and Mincha daily.

Igeros Moshe (OC 4:101) writes that based on the Magen Avrohom, there is a
basis for a woman to be lenient and eat before davening Shacharis, so long
as she has already recited some prayer. Teshuvos V'Hanhagos (3:37) writes
that women who are very busy in the mornings (e.g., taking care of
children) are exempt from Tefillah at that time, and therefore may eat.
However, he too writes that women should nevertheless recite Birchas
Hashachar and the first pasuk of Shema before eating. He concludes that
although it is proper for women to daven Shacharis (like the Mishnah
Berurah), regarding eating before davening, they may rely on the Magen
Avrohom.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180115/d3d7def5/attachment-0001.html>

From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis.


I was not aware of the fact that a married woman can eat before Kiddush provided her husband has not yet davened Shachris.


Q. After davening on Shabbos morning, one may not eat without hearing Kiddush. May women eat before hearing Kiddush, after reciting a short prayer?


A. Mishnah Berurah (286:7) writes that once one davens Shacharis, one
becomes obligated in Kiddush and may not even drink until hearing Kiddush.
However, before davening one may drink water or coffee (as was discussed in
a previous Halacha Yomis). Shemiras Shabbos K'hilchasa (52:13) writes that
women who do not daven Shacharis, but instead rely on the opinion that it
is sufficient for them to say a short prayer in the morning become
obligated to hear Kiddush after reciting that prayer. If a woman is feeling
weak and does not have grape juice available, some poskim are lenient to
allow them to eat and drink before hearing Kiddush, since there is an
opinion that women are not obligated in Kiddush on Shabbos day [Teshuvas
Minchas Yitzchok 4:28 (3)].


However, Igros Moshe (OC 4:101) writes that a married woman may eat before
Kiddush provided that her husband has not yet davened Shacharis. According
to Igros Moshe the obligation of a married woman to hear Kiddush only
begins after her husband has davened Shacharis and he himself is obligated
in Kiddush. For example, we can assume that if a man went to a 9:00 minyan,
he will have finished davening Shacharis by about 9:45 AM. According to
Igros Moshe provided that the wife said a short prayer in the morning, she
may eat without hearing Kiddush until 9:45. If she wants to eat afterwards
she must recite Kiddush.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180116/2526194d/attachment-0001.html>

Let's say we are talking about people who are religiously vegan, who
would shun a dish ever used for meat -- regardless of temp, of sharpness,
and they have no concept of kashering. That includes numerous Hindu
communities, Jains, etc...

Why is their own religious repugnance not at least as reliable as beer
indutry standards or pride in a true bagette (when in France)? (As a
she'eila, not a qushya.)

One might have a totally different problem in such places, taqroves AZ.
It's common to have house shrines. What if one part of the dish was
offered, does it only prohibit the the taqroves itself, or because it
is an anti-terumah that is intended to reflect on the whole, what is
served is also assur?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The trick is learning to be passionate in one's
mi...@aishdas.org        ideals, but compassionate to one's peers.
http://www.aishdas.org
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On 16/01/18 17:58, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> Let's say we are talking about people who are religiously vegan, who
> would shun a dish ever used for meat -- regardless of temp, of sharpness,
> and they have no concept of kashering. That includes numerous Hindu
> communities, Jains, etc...

*If* one could know that the owner really is that makpid on keilim, 
*and* that he personally eats from the restaurant and from its keilim, 
then one might be able to rely on it for those questions. But this 
itself requires investigation to see whether it's in fact the case. At 
the very least one would have to explicitly find out his policy on 
employees cooking their own food.

And this would still leave the problem of bishul akum.  This can only be 
solved if the restaurant serves exclusively things that are not subject 
to this prohibition.  Some "health food" places may qualify.


> Why is their own religious repugnance not at least as reliable as beer
> indutry standards or pride in a true bagette (when in France)? (As a
> she'eila, not a qushya.)

In both cases we rely not on the owner's pride but on his fear of ruin 
should he be caught adulterating his product.  Here you're asking us to 
rely on his own conscience, which is a different proposition, though 
perhaps a stronger one.  Maybe we can, but those cases don't prove it.


> One might have a totally different problem in such places, taqroves AZ.
> It's common to have house shrines. What if one part of the dish was
> offered, does it only prohibit the the taqroves itself, or because it
> is an anti-terumah that is intended to reflect on the whole, what is
> served is also assur?

I would think that even if they have this concept of what you call 
"anti-terumah", i.e. that they are "matir" a dish by giving part of it, 
we wouldn't be bothered by it unless they physically offered the whole 
dish to the idol and then removed a portion to "feed" it while taking 
the rest back to serve the customer.  The world has enough religions 
that this is possible.

All I can report from personal observation is that the statue in the 
front window of Madras Mahal, a former restaurant in NYC's "curry hill" 
under the hechsher of R Gulevsky, *was* worshipped by the staff and 
believed to be a god who cares how he is treated, and they may well have 
offered it food, though I never saw this, but I ate there often enough 
that I think I would have noticed if they ever brought a dish out to the 
window and then served it to a customer, let alone if they brought a 
whole pot of something out to the window and then back into the kitchen. 
I can't say whether they were "mafrish terumah" into a keli that could 
then be offered to the idol after closing.


-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

Doing a favor for a self-described "certified lurker", who asked me
to forward this anonymously:

: Someone who's learning Gittin asked me to find maps that would show
: relationship of Eretz Yisroel (e.g. Acco aka Acre) to Sura,
: Neharda'ah and Mechuzah.  I can find Sura on Wikipedia etc but I
: can't find a way to print a map with all of these cities.  Maybe
: someone knows their present day names, or knows how to find such a
: map?

I can get you started:

Rav started Nehardaa, in what is now the governate of al-Anbar. He
eventually leaves Nehardaa to Shemuel, whose father was the mora de'asra,
and started a second yeshiva in Sura. They were intentionally at distant
parts of Jewish Babylonian settlement, to make Torah available to as
many towns as possible.

Igeres R' Shrira Gaon says that Sura was identical to Masa-Machsia. R'
Natronai Gaon says Sura was a few miles from al Hira in the direction
of Mechoza (see below). Academics think Mata-Machsia was a suburb.
Either way, there are records of shiurim of Sura sometimes being at MM.

When the city of Nehardaa is destroyed (259ce), about a decade after
Rav's petirah, many rebuld in nearby Pumbedisa. Pumbedisa is today's
Falluja. (In honor of the costly US action in Falluja during the Iraq war,
I blogged in 2010 something about R' Yehudah, Pumbedisa, and the birth of
Babylonian amoraic "lomdus" <http://www.aishdas.org/asp/falluja>. I make
Rabbi Yehuda out to look like a precursor to R' Chaim Brisker -- thought
it was wrong to make aliyah, invented a new way to learn halakhah, etc...)

The original yeshiva in Nehardaa doesn't entirely close, and really
regains its former glory under Rava (about a century later).

So, Nehardaa was where the Euphrates and the King's Canal (Nahr Malka)
meet. I think the city of Ramadi is there now, unless I got my canal's
confused. Pumbedisa is in Falluja. Ramadi and Falluja are < 10 mi apart,
so that fits the history.

Abayei was Rosh Yeshiva in Pumbedisa. When he was niftar, his
talmidim relocated the yeshiva to Mechoza (today's al-Mada'in),
where Rav was teaching, and absorbed the school already there.
So, Mechoza and Pumbedisa are two different locations, but the
same yeshiva.

Meanwhile Sura runs continually for the whole period. Perhaps with an
occasional side trip to Masa-Machsia, depending on whether it's a town
and a suburb, two names of the same place, and why we find amoraim of
Sura often talking in MM.

Both Sura and Pumbedisa end up in Baghdad and evaporate in the 11th
cent CE.

HOWEVER, R' Berel Wein says that a Baghdadi institution that had a
continuous history from THE Academy of Sura and retained the name Sura
was closed as late as the Baathist party (the people who put Saddam
Hussein into power) in 1958. Making Sura the longest running institute
of higher learning in human history.

Chodesh Tov!
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "As long as the candle is still burning,
mi...@aishdas.org        it is still possible to accomplish and to
http://www.aishdas.org   mend."
Fax: (270) 514-1507          - Anonymous shoemaker to R' Yisrael Salanter


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



_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/lists/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://www.aishdas.org/lists/avodah/avodahareivim-membership-agreement/


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.)