Avodah Mailing List

Volume 36: Number 24

Thu, 01 Mar 2018

• 1. All food decrees driven by social isolation policy (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi)
• 2. When and Where to hear the Magila (Professor L. Levine)
• 3. Re: When and Where to hear the Magila (Micha Berger)
• 4. Purimfest (cantorwolb...@cox.net)
• 5. Re: When and Where to hear the Magila (Prof. Levine)
• 6. Missing Hearing a Word of the Megillah (Professor L. Levine)
• 7. Re: Missing Hearing a Word of the Megillah (Micha Berger)
• 8. [TorahMusings] Receiving Credit Card Benefit on Purchase for Someone Else (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: Defending Traditional Practices (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Heter Iska and "The Howey Rule" (Micha Berger)
• 11. Last night's reading (Ben Waxman)
• 12. Besamim and Havdala (Michael Poppers)

The Mishneh AZ 35 b

The Mishneh lists items manufactured by G which may not be consumed, but
are permitted for benefit.
And these are items that are prohibited, but may nevertheless be used for
benefit:
Milk that was milked by a gentile and a Jew was not monitoring him
and their bread
and their oil.

The Mishneh notes that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and his court permitted the oil
of gentiles entirely.

then resumes its list:
and boiled vegetables
and pickled vegetables, whose usual manner of preparation involves adding
wine and vinegar to them,
and minced tarit fish,
and brine that does not have a kilbit fish floating in it,
and ?ilak,
and a sliver of ?iltit,
and salkondit salt (see 39b);
all these are prohibited, but may be used for benefit.

The Gemara AZ 35, Rashi explains -
SheLaKos, food cooked even in and with clean utensils.
They are ALL prohibited due to Chasnuss.

Rashi is saying 2 things
firstly, defining Shelakos
Next, explaining the ENTIRE structure of Chazal banning G's foods
ALL things that Chazal forbade are prohibited due to Chausnuss


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/20180227/85a3e053/attachment-0001.html>

From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis


Q. Given that it is preferable to hear Megillas Esther together with a
large crowd (b'rov am hadras Melech), is it better to daven with a small
crowd at the Vasikin Minyan (at sunrise), or to daven with a larger crowd
later at the main Minyan?


A. In this case, there are two competing factors. On the one hand, it is
preferable to perform a mitzvah at the earliest opportunity (zerizim
makdimim l'mitzvos). On the other hand, it is preferable to hear the
Megillah together with a large crowd (b'rov am). The question here is which
one of these considerations takes precedence. Rav Zylberstein (Chashukei
Chemed, Megila 27b) rules that in this case, it is proper to delay the
mitzvah, so it can be performed b'rov am. This is because joining together
with a large crowd offers a greater publicization of the miracle, which is
a fundamental component of the mitzvah of reading the Megillah. However, if
one is accustomed to davening with the Vasikin Minyan all week long, they
should daven there on Purim as well. This is because the Mishnah Berurah
(687:7) writes that one who has a makom kavua (set place to daven) need not
change their location to daven b'rov am.


I daven at the Flatbush Vosikin Minyan and on Purim morning the minyan will
be held  in the High School  Bais Medrash of Yeshiva Rabeinu Chaim Berlin. 
In previous years there has been a very large crowd of both men and women,
so at least here in Flatbush there is no problem with Vosikan and a large
crowd.


YL


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180227/b36aba6e/attachment-0001.html>

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 11:05:01PM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote:
: From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis
...
:     A. ...                                                      Rav
:     Zylberstein (Chashukei Chemed, Megila 27b) rules that in this case,
:     it is proper to delay the mitzvah, so it can be performed b'rov
:     am. This is because joining together with a large crowd offers
:     a greater publicization of the miracle, which is a fundamental
:     component of the mitzvah of reading the Megillah. However, if one
:     is accustomed to davening with the Vasikin Minyan all week long,
:     they should daven there on Purim as well. This is because the Mishnah
:     Berurah (687:7) writes that one who has a makom kavua (set place to
:     daven) need not change their location to daven b'rov am.

Interesting. RYZ's hava amina was that berov am would trump kevasiqin,
if it weren't that it was your maqom qavua:
    maqom kavuah
    berov am
    kevasiqin

Of course, if someone were talking about berov am and leining Mon & Thu,
the first two concerns are intertwined. Qeri'as haTorah is frequent
enough for regularly davening kevasiqin to *define* one's maqom kavua.

This is really only an issue for people like myself, who want to daven
qevasiqin because it's Purim, and there is so much to do before the
se'udah.

I have a feeling or at least a hope that shalom bayis trumps all three...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When memories exceed dreams,
mi...@aishdas.org        The end is near.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - Rav Moshe Sherer
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On 1 October 1946, after 216 court sessions, the International Military
Tribunal at Nuremberg delivered its verdicts sentencing the leaders of
the Nazi party to death by hanging. The author of the following account,
Kingsbury Smith of the International News Service, was chosen by lot to
represent the American press at the execution of ten of those leaders.

> NurembergGaol, Germany
> 16 October 1946
> International News Service

> ...Julius Streicher made his melodramatic appearance at 2:12 a.m.

> While his manacles were being removed and his bare hands bound, this ugly,
> dwarfish little man, wearing a threadbare suit and a well-worn bluish
> shirt buttoned to the neck but without a tie (he was notorious during his
> days of power for his flashy dress), glanced at the three wooden scaffolds
> rising menacingly in front of him. Then he glanced around the room, his
> eyes resting momentarily upon the small group of witnesses. By this time,
> his hands were tied securely behind his back. Two guards, one on each arm,
> directed him to Number One gallows on the left of the entrance. He walked
> steadily the six feet to the first wooden step but his face was twitching.

> As the guards stopped him at the bottom of the steps for identification
> formality he uttered his piercing scream: 'Heil Hitler!'

> The shriek sent a shiver down my back.

> As its echo died away an American colonel standing by the steps said
> sharply, 'Ask the man his name.' In response to the interpreter's query
> Streicher shouted, 'You know my name well.'

> The interpreter repeated his request and the condemned man yelled,
> 'Julius Streicher.'

> As he reached the platform Streicher cried out, 'Now it goes to G-d.' He
> was pushed the last two steps to the mortal spot beneath the hangman's
> rope. The rope was being held back against a wooden rail by the hangman.

> Streicher was swung suddenly to face the witnesses and glared at
> them. Suddenly he screamed, 'Purim Fest 1946.' [Purim is a Jewish holiday
> celebrated in the spring, commemorating the execution of Haman, ancient
> persecutor of the Jews described in the Old Testament]...

> Streicher had been a Nazi since early in the movement's history. He was
> the editor and publisher of the anti-Semitic newspaper "Das Strummer." In
> May of 1924 Streicher wrote and published an article on Purim titled "Das
> Purimfest" (The Festival of Purim). In order to publish his vitriolic
> attack Streicher must have had a good deal of knowledge about Jewish
> thought and practice. However we can only speculate to what extent
> he was aware of the remarkable parallels between Haman and his own
> execution. However, they are indeed striking:

> "And the king said to Esther the queen, 'The Jews have slain and
> destroyed five hundred men in Shushan the capital, and the ten sons of
> Haman...Now whatever your petition, it shall be granted; whatever your
> request further, it shall be done.'

> Then said Esther, 'If it please the king, let it be granted to the Jews
> that are in Shushan to do tomorrow also as this day, and let Haman's
> ten sons be hanged upon the gallows.' " (Esther 9:12-14)

> If Haman's ten sons had already been killed, how could they hanged?

> Our Sages comment on the word "tomorrow" in Esther's request: "There
> is a tomorrow that is now, and a tomorrow which is later." (Tanchuma,
> Bo 13 and Rashi, Shemot 13:14).

> In the Megilla, the names of Haman's ten sons are written very large
> and in two columns. This is in distinct contrast to the style of the
> rest of the Megilla. The left-hand column contains the word v'et (and)
> ten times. According to our Sages the word v'et is used to denote
> replication. The inference is that another ten people were hanged in
> addition to Haman's ten sons.

> If we examine the list of Haman's sons three letters are written smaller:
> the taf of Parshandata, the shin of Parmashta and the zayin of Vizata.

> Those three letters together form taf-shin-zayin, the last three numbers
> of the Jewish year 5707, which corresponds to the secular year 1946,
> the year that those ten Nazi criminals were executed.

> The Nuremberg trials were a military tribunal and thus the method of
> execution was usually by firing squad. The court, however, prescribed
> hanging. Esther's request "Let Haman's ten sons be hanged" echoes down
> the ages,

> Equally uncanny is that the date of the execution (October 16, 1946)
> fell on "Hoshana Rabba" (21 Tishrei), the day on which G-d seals the
> verdicts of Rosh Hashana for the coming year.

> As the Megilla recounts, a decree that the king has sealed cannot be
> rescinded, and thus Achashverosh had to promulgate a second decree to
> allow the Jewish People to defend themselves. In other words, that first
> decree was never nullified.

> Our Sages teach us that eventually the Jewish People will return to G-d
> either voluntarily, or if not, G-d will raise up another despot whose
> decrees will be "as severe as Haman" (Sanhedrin 97b).

> When we look toward the place of our original encounter with Haman and
> see the rise of a fanatic whose rhetoric rivals our most vicious enemies,
> we should remember that history most often repeats itself for those who
> fail to learn its lessons.

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Hazzanet" group.
...

At 05:48 AM 2/28/2018, Micha Berger wrote:
>Interesting. RYZ's hava amina was that berov am would trump kevasiqin,
>if it weren't that it was your maqom qavua:

Berov Am is important and that is why I have always wondered how in 
some places they make 2 or 3 or 4 or even more minyanim on Motzoei 
Shabbos when 2 or 3 or more people have yahrtzeit during the following week.

When I was an Avel I never went along with making another minyan if 
there was another avel.  I felt that Berov Am was more 
important,  and hence I would let the other Avel daven for the amud 
and just say Kaddish.

YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180228/b0bd2409/attachment-0001.html>

From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis


Q. If I miss one word of the Megillah reading, have I fulfilled my obligation of hearing the Megillah?


A. The Mishnah Berurah (O.C. 690:48) writes that if one misses a single
word, the obligation of reading the Megillah was not fulfilled. There may
be a difference between men and women in this regard. The Rama (O.C.
689:2), based on Tosfos (Megillah 4a), writes that a woman's obligation of
Megillah is to "hear" the Megillah, not to read it. Mo'adim U'zmanim
(2:170, quoting the Leket Yosher) extrapolates from this that a woman's
requirement is one of pirsumei nisa (publicizing the miracle). Therefore,
should she miss a word during the reading of the Megillah, she has still
fulfilled her obligation. However, the Mishnah Berurah (O.C. 689:1)
indicates that women do need to hear every single word. Therefore, it is
advisable that everyone follow along quietly with a Chumash, so if one
misses a word or two, they can quickly read the missing words and then
continue hearing from the Ba'al Korei.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180228/2431ab94/attachment-0001.html>

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 02:40:36PM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote:
: From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis

:> Q. If I miss one word of the Megillah reading, have I fulfilled my
:> obligation of hearing the Megillah?

:> A. The Mishnah Berurah (O.C. 690:48) writes that if one misses a single
:> word, the obligation of reading the Megillah was not fulfilled. There
:> may be a difference between men and women in this regard. The Rama
:> (O.C. 689:2), based on Tosfos (Megillah 4a), writes that a woman's
:> obligation of Megillah is to "hear" the Megillah...

The phrasing in the AhS (OC 690:12) is "lishmoa milah bemilah". The
MB is even more explicit "vetzarikh hashomeia' leha'azin ozno velishmoa
kol teiva veteiva".

The question talks about "hearing" every word, but as the answer makes
clear, the obligation is to *listen*.

So, when the Rama says (based on the Mordechai, the source in Tosafos
is the teshuvah writer's conjection, not the Rama's citation) a women is
mevarekhes "lishmoa megilah" -- does it mean "leha'azin oznahh"?

If a woman is in the room and her mind wanders... So she heard every
word whether she happened to pay attention aside, was she yotzeit?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Strength does not come from winning. Your
mi...@aishdas.org        struggles develop your strength When you go
http://www.aishdas.org   through hardship and decide not to surrender,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      that is strength.        - Arnold Schwarzenegger

From Torah Musings.
https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/02/receiving-credit-card-benefit-purchase-someone-else/

I has starting reading this wondering about both ribis and whether it
was fair to the credit card company or taking advantage of a flaw in the
contract. RDN addresses the former by a particular approach to the
company's motives.

Purim alegra y dulce!
-micha


Receiving Credit Card Benefit on Purchase for Someone Else
by R. Daniel Mann

Question: Reuven paid for Shimon's plane ticket using his credit card
and was to be reimbursed. Is it considered that Reuven lent money to
Shimon, so that if Reuven receives more than he gave because of credit
card points he earned, it is ribbit (forbidden usury)? Also, who deserves
to get the points, i.e., should Reuven credit Shimon for his gain?

Answer: When Reuven gave money to the airlines via his credit card
based on Simon's request, it is indeed considered as if he lent
money to Shimon. This is based on a broad concept known as arvut
(guarantorship). By means of arvut, the one who becomes obligated
is not the one who received the money (the airline) but the one
who requested the money to reach the party he specified (Shimon)
(Kiddushin 7a). This concept can be used in creating loan obligations,
kiddushin, and transactions. Thus, if Shimon would refuse to pay Reuven
back because Reuven did not directly give him anything, we would say
"Are you kidding?! When asking Reuven to pay the airlines, you said
(or implied) you would pay Shimon back."

Now that we have determined that Reuven has, effectively and halachically,
lent money to Shimon, the question is whether Reuven can receive benefit
as a result of the transaction. Indeed, ribbit is not only when a lender
receives money straight from the hand of the borrower. If, for example,
the borrower wanted to give the interest to the lender by means of a
shaliach (agent), it would also be forbidden.

However, the problem is only if the benefit that Reuven receives is, in
some way, coming from Shimon (Bava Metzia 69b). This case is different
because of the nature of the benefit the credit card company gives
Reuven. Because credit card companies benefit when their card is used
more times/for larger sums of money, they sometimes give incentives to
cardholders to use their card as much as possible. The company, thus,
gives benefit to the cardholder, i.e., because Reuven decided to use
their credit card; they are certainly not doing it at Shimon's behest.
Therefore, there is no problem of ribbit.

Is Reuven, though, required to give or share the gain with Shimon, and,
then, if Shimon waived his rights, would that waiver not be considered
ribbit? The gemara (Ketubot 98b) asks about a case in which someone
serves as an agent to buy a certain amount of a commodity for a buyer
for a certain price, and the seller decides to give more commodity
than was requested. The gemara says that if the object does not have
a set price, we say that the buyer's money ended up bringing him more
than expected. If, though, there was a set price, we view the extra as
a present.

Who receives the present? The gemara accepts the opinion that it is
divided equally between the buyer and the agent. Rashi explains that
this is because there is a doubt for whom the present was intended.
Based on this, the Rama (Choshen Mishpat 183:6) says that if the seller
specified that he added on for the agent, the agent keeps the whole
surplus. The Rif (Ketubot 57b of his pages) says that even assuming the
agent was the intended recipient, the buyer deserves a share because
the benefit came through him. The Beit Yosef prefers the Rif's opinion,
and the Shach (183:12) wonders why the Rama wrote according to Rashi as
if it is agreed upon.

One might have claimed that our case depends on the machloket of
the Rif, Rashi et al., as Reuven got the benefit because of Shimon's
purchase. However, in this case, Shimon is less directly involved with
the credit card company than the gemara's seller is to the buyer. Also,
the "present" is part of an ongoing deal between company and client
(Reuven), to which Shimon is not a party. The Rashba (Meyuchas L'Ramban
60; see K'tzot Hachoshen 283:7) says that when the present is because
of the agent's relationship with the seller, the agent receives the
whole benefit.

In summary, based on your description, Reuven need not credit Shimon
for the points benefit, and there is no problem of ribbit.

2018-02-28

About Daniel Mann

This column is produced on behalf of Eretz Hemdah by Rabbi Daniel Mann.
Rabbi Mann is a Dayan for Eretz Hemdah and a staff member of Yeshiva
University's Gruss Kollel in Israel. He is a senior member of the Eretz
Hemdah responder staff, editor of Hemdat Yamim and the author of Living
the Halachic Process, volumes 1 and 2 and A Glimpse of Greatness.

On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:07:41AM +0000, Rich, Joel wrote:
: Shut Beit Efraim (O"C 6) [R'Efram Zalman Margaliyot - 1762-1828) strongly
: defends the Ashkenazy practice of not duchening except on the Shalosh
: Regalim. If you are looking for a spirited defense of traditional
: practices, even ones that we can't really easily explain how they are
: supported by the halachic process( a traditional Avodah topic), this is
: a good tshuva to read!

So, kayadua, the AhS will get quite creative in trying to figure out how
accepted practices passed the "peer review" of generations of rabbis.
Basically, how to textually justify the mimetic .

Reaching shemitas kesafim (CM 67) is a notable exception. In se'if 1
he lists possible outs to allow a loan beyond shemittah w/out pruzbul.
He notes that today it's derabbanan, and practiced by the amoraim
and the posqim agree, "but we see that even in the early generations,
the world were not careful in it, as the Rosh writes in a teshuvah,
and our rabbis put in effort to find a reason for it".

Yest, he concludes that the reasons are weak, "vehayarei es devar Hashem
yinhog beshemitas kesafim" (yinhog?), and after all, it's only pruzbul,
not a major sacrifice. Many places are careful in it even today. And
then gives you the prior and next shemitah yar acording to the chashbon
of the Rambam, the geonim, and chakhmei EY.

In se'if 1 he lists the Y-mi which says about terumos uma'aseros that
the law passed to observe them in chu"l was only lands adjacent to EY,
or that shemitas kesafim derabbanan was only enacted iwhen a BD of
musmachim were beqadeish the shemitah.

In se'if 6 he discusses the idea that since a person can make any
finanacial obligation on himself, he can obligate himself after shemitah
as well. As long as it's not worded as a tenai al mah shekasuv baTorah.
And there is also a rule that anything that is convention to be included
in the contract is assumed even if not written in. We just assume it's a
scribal error, taken too for granted. Combine the two, (end of the se'if)
and in a place where everyone ignore shemitas kesafim we can assume the
loveh accepted such an obligation on himself.

And in se'if 10 he discusses Hillel's standardization of pruzbul. "Ein
kosevim pruzbul ela al loveh sheyeish lo qarqa." With galus, fewer and
fewer lovim have qarqa. These aren't the days of settlement in Bavel
and EY. It got to a point where Hillel's original concern, that the
poor would be unable to get loans, would not be addressed even with
pruzbul! And therefore, vadai nidchis tanqanta derabbanan.

And then again , he tells us not to rely on these arguments -- ubevadai
hu lemidas zekhus al Kelal Yisrael. And again "yarei es devar H'" would
make a pruzbul as they do in many places.

The possible reason for this exception? "Vekhakhah nohagim bekhol medinas
Lita" -- his primary audience lives in one of those "harbei meqomos"!

So, we know the AhS will work hard to justify a minhag Yisrael even when
it's someone else's minhag. And then work to minimize his audience from
taking it as a new-for-them leniency.


Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless
mi...@aishdas.org        he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness.
http://www.aishdas.org   Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive
Fax: (270) 514-1507      a spirit of purity.      - Rav Yisrael Salanter

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:58:36AM -0500, Yonatan Kaganoff wrote:
: For professional reasons, I have been researching "The Howey Rule" and its
: applications.
: 
: In short (tl;dr) the Howey Rule was the outcome of a landmark Supreme Court
: decision (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_v._W._J._Howey_Co.) defining a
: "security" and how it differs from a "commodity".

Learning about loans in AhS yomi, I realized something.

The word piqadon is used both for collateral and for an investment.

Relevant?

Purim alegra y dulce!
-Micha

Interesting Megillah reading. I ended up going to a Yemenite beit 
knesset and they did things a bit differently.
1) They served refreshments right after Maariv and before the megillah 
reading.
2) The men and women's sections are separated by a short wall and a 
curtain on top of the wall. During the reading, the curtain was open, 
something which isn't done during regular tefilla.
3) What they said before and after the megillah reading wasn't what is 
said in an Ashkenazi shul (I have no idea what they said).
4) The person reading the megillah used a microphone. After coming home, 
I double checked Rav Moshe and Rav Melamed and both of them totally 
oppose using a microphone. (I ended up going to another reading later 
that evening. )
5) Unlike the Yeminite place that I got to know in Efrat, at this beit 
knesset they make noise when Haman's name comes up.

As we know, there are parallels between Kiddush and Havdala.  On the
subject of *b'samim* at Havdala, consider the *minhag* of *b'samim* prior
to Kiddush (e.g. see here: http://asimplejew.blogspot.com/2010/10/minhag-of-
smelling-spices-and-hadasim.html ).

?
*?leahciM* morf tseb eht lla dna *!miruP tuG*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180301/d1862122/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.)