Avodah Mailing List

Volume 36: Number 16

Wed, 31 Jan 2018

• 1. Re: Haetz and Shehecheyanu (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Segulos (was Parashas Ha'mon - A Segulah for Paranassah!) (Ben Waxman)
• 3. Let's Talk a Bit about Hashem (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Haetz and Shehecheyanu (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: Haetz and Shehecheyanu (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: Haetz and Shehecheyanu (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: Haetz and Shehecheyanu (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: Haetz and Shehecheyanu (Akiva Miller)
• 9. Re: Haetz and Shehecheyanu (Akiva Miller)
• 10. Are Cow & Donkey milk Min BeMino [never Battel] (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi)
• 11. Shehechiyanu on esrog jam (Professor L. Levine)

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 09:18:27AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
: Today's Halacha Yomis from the OU says:
...
:> Mishna Berura (225:11) writes that ...
:>                           alternatively, one can recite *Ha'eitz*, take a
:> bite and then after swallowing the first bite recite *Shehechiyanu*.
:> However it is best not to say *Shehechiyanu* immediately after *Ha'eitz*,
:> as this would cause a *hefsek* (break) between the recitation of the
:> *bracha* on the fruit and eating the fruit.

I don't know why not use a much simpler workaround, but since the MB
didn't suggest it, I assume there is a problem.

Grapes are ha'eitz, and because they're at the first of the 7 minim they
have priority over any other fruit you might be making ha'eitz on. So,
why not make ha'eitz on some grapes, having in mind the shehechiyanu
fruit, and only make a sheha

: My question: Why is this different than the Shehecheyanu on YomTov?...

AhS OC 225:1: shehechiyanu on YT (including Chanukah or Purim) is chiyuv,
on a fruit or anything else that that is not tied to a calendar date
is reshus.
Se'if 6 says that the iqar shehechiyanu for a fruit is for re'iyah,
seeing that the new season has fruit, and we are only nohagim to wait
for akhilah.
And *I assume* it's the fact that the whole shehechiyanu is reshus that
allows us to delay it until eating.

But both would argue that of the two, it would would be *easier* to deem
the shehechiyanu on the fruit less necessarily part of eating a fruit,
and thus more naturally considered a hefseiq.

He doesn't mention the question.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Here is the test to find whether your mission
mi...@aishdas.org        on Earth is finished:
http://www.aishdas.org   if you're alive, it isn't.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Richard Bach

The points he raised were fine but that doesn't mean that people who use 
segulot are practicing "non-normative Judaism".

We can debate the wisdom of segulot all we want. I can probably come up 
with a long list of practices that I don't like and find plenty of 
rabbis that agree with me (if I can phrase it that way). That doesn't 
mean that anyway who keeps said practices is deviating from norm.

Ben

On 1/29/2018 6:40 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote:
> The following is an excerpt from an article
> by Rabbi S. Binyomin Ginsberg   Dean, Torah Academy, Minneapolis, Minnesota
> that is athttps://goo.gl/1ZdeXD

I'm copying this post by RGR (CC-ed) from Torah Musings.
Because there aren't too many topics more important to talk about.

Actually, the only such topic I can think of is: So, what is it He
made me to do? As it has more nafqa mina lemaaseh. But, one doesn't
get to step 2 without this step 1, anyway.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha


Torah Musings
Posted by: Gidon Rothstein in Posts, Ramban Shemot Jan 30, 18

Let's Talk a Bit About Hashem

Parshat Yitro records the events of Matan Torah, the Giving of the Torah,
including the Aseret HaDibberot (which should properly be known as the
Ten Sayings, Pronouncements, Utterances or some such, since dibberot does
not mean commandments). For all that I usually try to spread my choice of
comments throughout the parsha, I got caught up in the first few Dibberot,
since they expand our understanding of Ramban's view of faith and its
role in our Judaism, a topic I find both endlessly fascinating and of
particular importance in this generation, when even highly observant
Jews are unaware of some of these commandments [but my letting it take
up all the room this time means I will strive in coming weeks and months
to look away from such issues].

What Obligates Us to Serve Hashem

The Dibberot open (20;2-3) with Hashem reminding the Jewish people that He
took them out of Egypt, freed them from slavery. Ramban argues that that
was to remind the Jews they owed Him their service, since Hashem freed
them from the yoke of their previous master, Par'oh. He cites a Mechilta
as support, although it's slightly different in a way I find revealing.

Mechilta says "Anochi Hashem Elokecha" preceded the prohibition of other
gods because there's no point in a king making laws until a nation has
accepted that monarch's rule. Hashem therefore first reminds the people,
"didn't you accept My kingship in Egypt [I think this means that was
how they merited leaving, by offering the Pesach sacrifice]? Once they
agreed, talk could move on to the wrong in worship of other powers.

The minimal reading of Mechilta is that it explains Anochi's being
the first words and that the Dibberot start with Egypt as a way to
remind the Jews they had already rendered obeisance to Hashem. Ramban
(knowingly, I assume) took it a step further, that the verse is telling
us that what Hashem did for the Jews in Egypt obligates them (and us)
throughout history.

I like Ramban's explanation better (he cites the Mechilta as if it
meant what he said, but as I've pointed out, he seems to add an element),
because it explains why Hashem opened with Egypt rather than Creation--the
fact that Hashem made the world, set up the laws of physics, itself means
we'd have to do what Hashem says. Mechilta might say our acceptance means
that even within the parameters of freewill we've agreed to be Hashem's
people, but I still would have thought Creation was enough for Hashem
to tell us what we have to do to do well in His world.

Ramban's point, I think, is that Hashem was showing why they (and we)
should feel a personal moral debt to Hashem, stemming from a kindness that
applies to each of us throughout history. Sure, if we did not follow the
Torah, natural consequences would bedevil us (as we saw last time); but
Hashem wants us to realize we should feel obligated to serve, not just
submit to His force majeure. As part of that, Ramban notes that these
Dibberot are phrased in the singular, addressed to each individual Jew,
male or female, because each of us should undertake mitzvot as a matter
of the personal relationship initiated by the One Who took each of us
out of Egypt.

The Definition of Idolatry

The Dibberot say lo yihyeh lecha elohim acherim, you must not "have"
another god. Ramban says "having" a god means to subscribe to, to believe
in, to accept any power as independently powerful in one's life. That's
how to read Ya'akov's words in Bereshit 28;21, when he said that should
he return safely from Lavan's house, Hashem would be his Gd, that he
(and we, by virtue of this dibbur) would not turn to any elim, angels
or heavenly bodies. That includes not believing in them, not accepting
them as a power, not saying to any one of them "you are my Power."

Ramban offers a good opportunity to remember that avodah zarah,
worshipping other gods, is not always about conscious worship or religious
activity. The definition ofavodah zarah (and why `idolatry' is such an
unfortunate translation) includes the case of a Jew who comes to believe
that some other force or being has independent power over his/her life.

This stress matters particularly in the context of Ramban, who himself
believes that Hashem in some way delegates some running of the world
to other forces (as we've seen previously). It's precisely because he
does ascribe some power to those forces that his expansive view of the
prohibition brings us up short--however Hashem works them, we may not
acknowledge them as any kind of meaningful power, because they are not
in any way independent of Hashem.

[To me, this should affect how we speak. When we say that gravity means
we'll fall to the ground if we step off a ledge, it can start us down
the path of thinking that natural events must occur. We have to always
remember that what we mean by gravity and all other regularities of the
world is that Hashem made this the way the world operates in general, even
almost universally, and that we are supposed to expect those regularities
to continue in just about all cases. But we also must remember that any
of that can go differently at any time. A Jew who, Gd forbid, falls off
a tall tower, mountain, or into a gorge, is almost definitely going to
die; but on the way down, that Jew ideally would realize that the issue
isn't gravity, it's whether s/he will merit Hashem's interrupting the
regular workings of the world to save him/her].

It can be a delicate semantic point, but an important one. Avodah zarah
means much more than bowing to idols or rain dances to spirits.

Hashem is Strict and Jealous in a Narrower Band Than We Think

The verse specifies bowing to or worshipping other powers, then adds that
a reason to stay away from that is that Hashem is a E-l kana, a jealous
(or zealous) Gd, visits the sins of the fathers on second, third, and
fourth generations. Conversely, Hashem does kindnesses for thousands,
for those who love Hashem and fulfill His mitzvot.

The simplest reading of this verse seems to me to be that Hashem
generally punishes and rewards far into the future. Stay away from
wrongful worships, we are being warned, since that will hurt our coming
generations, as do all our sins, but this is a particularly serious one.

(That's clearly only for those descendants that continue that path.
Ramban adds that it stops at ribe'im, a fourth generation, because
there's no meaningful connection beyond that. He implies that it was
that connection that is why Hashem punishes that far down- since the
great-grandfather's evil mattered to this current sinner, the ancestor's
sin still is part of the problem. Beyond that, there's too little impact
of the earlier sinner to consider it relevant to this one).

Ramban reads the verse interestingly more restrictively. He says it's
only for this one terrible transgression that Hashem visits the sins
of the forefathers on those of their descendants who follow their ways;
in all other matters, each person is punished for his/her own sins (so
that if a great-grandfather starts eating pork, and the family continues
that practice, knowing it violates the Torah, they would still only be
punished for their own sins).

How Easy It Is To Be Considered One Who Loves Hashem

Perhaps Ramban's way is more intuitive than I've suggested, since he
limits the areas where we might bear the burden of forebears we could
not control (for all that a later generation sins, s/he would likely be
upset to know that s/he is being punished more than a friend who commits
that exact same sin, just because s/he was stuck with a grandparent who
did the same). But then he applies his focus on how we relate to powers
other than Hashem to the next verse as well, in a way that I think is
surprisingly lenient: for him, to qualify as ohavai, as those who love
Hashem, ordinary mitzvot are not the issue.

Rather, one must be moser nefesh for Hashem, insist that Hashem is the
only Power that runs the world, and deny/reject all other powers. More
than just insisting, the person would have to do that at risk of death, in
line with a traditional reading of the verse in Shema, that to love Hashem
with all our souls means even were we required to forfeit those souls.

It's possible Ramban thinks we do not become ohavei Hashem unless and
until we're faced with that significant challenge, but that would make
the verse a bit of a tease--remember that Hashem rewards those who serve
Him well, since He continues to perform kindnesses for generations
of descendants of those who give their lives to avoid accepting some
other god.

I prefer to think he means that if we cultivate that strong a sense of
connection, if we build our insistence that no other power than Hashem
runs any part of the world, such that we would firmly intend to assert
even at the cost of our lives, that we can qualify as ohavei Hashem.

Because if that's true, the entry fee to the club is lower than we
thought. To reach that august level that Hashem calls us ohavav, we
could have imagined that we would need to excel at all or most of the
multiplicity of ways Hashem demands we serve--all the intricacies of
the many areas of halachah as well as of character and belief.

For Ramban, all it takes is inculcating in ourselves the basic truth
that our forefather Avraham taught us: there is one Gd, Who runs the
whole world, is the only Power to Whom we need to (or may) relate in
building our most successful human lives.

Parents as Representatives of Hashem

Kiddushin 30b notes that Scripture refers to the kavod of parents, the
acts of filial piety we owe them, in similar terms to that which we owe
Hashem. Ramban uses that to explain why verse twelve, that command,
is the first dibbur following the ones about Hashem and not serving
other powers. For their children, parents are to be treated as creators,
Hashem's partners.

He then takes it a remarkable step further; while the Talmud lays
out the basic requirement as being to perform certain acts of service
[providing food and drink, helping them dress, helping them get around],
Ramban suggests it's the same kavod we owe Hashem. That means, first,
that we admit this person is our parent, and that we serve this person
for no other reason than the bare fact of being our parent. Much as we
are supposed to serve Hashem without thought of reward, and just because
Hashem is Hashem, Ramban thinks we must not serve our parents for the
sake of an anticipated inheritance or for any other ulterior motive.

He doesn't mean that to the exclusion of what the Gemara said, he says,
he means that that needs to be our underlying attitude in all we do for
these parents. So that as we do what the Gemara said--help those parents
when they need it, and more--the kavod is that we do it as recognition
that this person is our creator, a partner with Hashem and therefore
deserving of something of the service we owe Hashem.

There's more to the Aseret HaDibberot than telling us how to Hashem,
but that's already a significant part of those Dibberot for Ramban,
since at least four of the ten turn on that question, how and where we
should see Hashem in our lives, and what it will do for us when we do.
2018-01-30

About Gidon Rothstein
...
Copyright 2018 All rights reserved

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 03:00:17PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
: actually olives & dates have priority over grapes.  But the simple
: answer is that the MB doesn't presume either that you have grapes at
: that moment, or that you have already eaten grapes that season.

The reisha yes (doesn't presume you have). The seifa -- the whole
point was to be yotzei ha'eitz with something that does not call
for a shehechiyanu. My assumption was you DID already eat the season's
grapes. Therefore, one can get ha'eitz out of the way without making
the berakhah wait for shehechianu AND shehechianu doesn't have to wait
for ha'eitz.

: But I don't get why we need this whole alternative in the first
: place. What's wrong with saying Shehecheyanu first, since the chiyuv
: comes first?

Yes, that fits with what I cited from the AhS. Thanks for spelling it
out, I didn't catch it.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The purely righteous do not complain about evil,
mi...@aishdas.org        but add justice, don't complain about heresy,
http://www.aishdas.org   but add faith, don't complain about ignorance,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      but add wisdom.     - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar

On 30/01/18 12:52, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> Grapes are ha'eitz, and because they're at the first of the 7 minim they
> have priority over any other fruit you might be making ha'eitz on. So,
> why not make ha'eitz on some grapes, having in mind the shehechiyanu
> fruit, and only make a sheha

actually olives & dates have priority over grapes.  But the simple 
answer is that the MB doesn't presume either that you have grapes at 
that moment, or that you have already eaten grapes that season.

But I don't get why we need this whole alternative in the first place. 
What's wrong with saying Shehecheyanu first, since the chiyuv comes first?

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

On 30/01/18 15:19, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 03:00:17PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> : actually olives & dates have priority over grapes.  But the simple
> : answer is that the MB doesn't presume either that you have grapes at
> : that moment, or that you have already eaten grapes that season.
> 
> The reisha yes (doesn't presume you have). The seifa -- the whole
> point was to be yotzei ha'eitz with something that does not call
> for a shehechiyanu. My assumption was you DID already eat the season's
> grapes. Therefore, one can get ha'eitz out of the way without making
> the berakhah wait for shehechianu AND shehechianu doesn't have to wait
> for ha'eitz.

Yes, but *why* do you assume that the person has eaten grapes?

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

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 03:22:33PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
: Yes, but *why* do you assume that the person has eaten grapes?

Grapes come into season in late summer or early fall -- unsurprisingly
in time for Chag haAsif. So by now, most of us on Avodah have had this
year's grapes. My statement wasn't hypothetical. I was offering pragmatic
advice on how avoid the problem. Not an assumption, but a recommendation.

By using one of the 7 minim that is ha'eitz that you did happen to eat
already, you do avoid needing to make both berakhos on the same new fruit.
And there is no problem with choosing one of the 7 minim first.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy,
mi...@aishdas.org        if only because it offers us the opportunity of
http://www.aishdas.org   self-fulfilling prophecy.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                              - Arthur C. Clarke

On Jan 30, 2018 3:00 PM, "Zev Sero" <z...@sero.name> wrote:
> On 30/01/18 12:52, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
>> Grapes are ha'eitz, and because they're at the first of the 7 minim they
>> have priority over any other fruit you might be making ha'eitz on. So,
>> why not make ha'eitz on some grapes, having in mind the shehechiyanu
>> fruit, and only make a shehechiyanu...

> actually olives & dates have priority over grapes.  But the simple answer
> is that the MB doesn't presume either that you have grapes at that moment,
> or that you have already eaten grapes that season.

> But I don't get why we need this whole alternative in the first place.
> What's wrong with saying Shehecheyanu first, since the chiyuv comes first?

The "problem" with saying Shehecheyanu first (and I put it in quotes,
because one could argue that it is more of a perception than a reality)
is that we are accustomed to bundle brachos together, davka to demonstrate
that it is NOT a hefsek.

Examples: She'asa Nisim after Ner Chanuka. Achilas Matza after Hamotzi.
Lots of things after Hagafen.

In most or all such cases, little or nothing would be lost if the brachos
were rearranged to be less of a hefsek. But we don't. Except here. And
that surprises me.

Akiva Miller

.
R' Zev Sero wrote:

> But we're *not* putting Shehecheyanu first to avoid a hefsek,
> we're putting it first because that's where it belongs.

You're not answering my question; you're merely restating it. You say
that in this particular case, the Shehecheyanu "belongs" in the first
position. I want to know why this situation is different. Why does the
Shehecheyanu belong first by fruit, but it belongs in the middle in
every other case?

Someone wrote me offlist:

> The shehechiyanu on fruit is for seeing them. We have some
> weird minhag not to make it until eating. Which is okay,
> because it's a reshus, not a chovah, anyway.
> But, it also means there is no hefseiq after the shehechianu,
> as you saw the fruit already.

Not really such a "weird minhag". Mechaber 225:3 seems to consider it
the *standard* minhag. And Mishna Brurah 225:11 explains how that came
about:

"Because if someone's heart doesn't rejoice at seeing it (the new
fruit), but only when he eats it, then l'kulei alma he should say the
bracha only upon eating it. So that became the minhag always, because
of Lo Plug."

Akiva Miller

The Gemara explains that it is possible to identify non-K species milk [as
opposed to milk from a Tereifah cow] as it has a different hue of white.
However, when it is added to cows milk it is not discover-able. The Kashrus
concern is that it might be in proportions greater than 60. However, ought
it not be Min BeMino which is never Battel?

Similarly, why is the milk [and the cheeses made from such milk] from a
herd of cows that will undoubtedly have a couple of Tereifah cows Kosher -
is it not Min BeMino?



Best,

Meir G. Rabi

0423 207 837
+61 423 207 837
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180131/45e32c1e/attachment-0001.html>

From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis


Q. Some have the custom to eat esrog jam on Tu B'Shevat. If one has not eaten esrog the whole year, does one make a Shehechiyanu on esrog jam?


A. The Mishna Berura (225:16) writes that one does not recite Shehechiyanu
on an esrog, since the fruit does not have a season. The esrog grows on the
tree all year long. Since it does not have a set season, one cannot say
Shehechiyanu. Some poskim disagree with the reasoning of the Mishna Berura.
However, for another reason they too conclude that one should not say
Shehechiyanu. As was alluded to in a previous Halacha Yomis, the bracha of
Shehechiyanu was instituted primarily to be said when seeing a new fruit.
However, since most people experience more joy when they eat from the new
fruit, the custom has evolved to delay reciting the bracha until we eat the
fruit. However in this case, the bracha of Shehechiyanu was already recited
on the esrog when we shook it with the lulav on Sukkos. It is therefore not
appropriate to recite the bracha again upon eating the esrog on Tu
B'Shevat. Additionally, the Aishel Avrohom questions if one may recite
Shehechiyanu on jam, since the p
 ieces of
  fruit are not noticeable. The K'sav Sofer writes that to avoid all
  questions, it is best to recite Shehechiyanu on a different "new" fruit
  before partaking of the esrog jam.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180131/87eaa74e/attachment.html>

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



_______________________________________________
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.)