Avodah Mailing List

Volume 39: Number 75

Fri, 27 Aug 2021

• 1. What is the preferable time to say selichos? (cantorwolberg)
• 2. Re: OU Mini Seedless Cucumbers (Akiva Miller)
• 3. Re: Deuteronomy 22:17 (Akiva Miller)
• 4. Re: What is the preferable time to say selichos? (Eli Turkel)
• 5. Re: OU Mini Seedless Cucumbers (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: Deuteronomy 22:17 (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: Deuteronomy 22:17 (Zev Sero)
• 8. Re: re the beginning of a new Shemitah year. (Micha Berger)
• 9. Can One Add Water To A Hot Water Urn on Yom Tov (Prof. L. Levine)

When it comes to aveilus, Sepharadim only observe Shavua shechal bo and
their three week observance is only about not making weddings. While
Ashk have real aveilus customs the whole period.
Meanwhile when it comes to selichos, Sepharadim say them the whole month,
and it's Ashkenazim who only start at shavua shechal bo.


Anyone want to venture a theory as to what this says about Ashk vs Seph
hashkafic differences?

On the surface it would appear that when it comes to aveilus, Ashkenazim are machmir and conversely, when it comes to selichos, Sephardim are machmir.

But as to why, I would venture to guess that as a group Sephardim are more in THIS world, whereas Ashkenazim are more into Olam haba.  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20210824/5092cadc/attachment-0001.html>

.
I wrote:
> ... plain old milk. Do you need to worry about the vitamins and other
> additives? No, you don't need to, but you can worry if you want to.

R' Isaac Balbin responded:
> That is incorrect. As soon as milk has additives then those additives
> must be checked. I do not know the basis for a contrary view.

The basis is bitul. Look in just about any guide to kashrus on Pesach. They
all say that if you can't get milk that has a hechsher for Pesach, then any
store-bought milk is fine as long as it is purchased before Pesach begins.
It seems to me that if that is the halacha for Pesach, it is certainly okay
the rest of the year.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20210824/66d9560d/attachment-0001.html>

.
Someone referred to Rashi, and R' Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter responded:

> Yet another case of a contributor to this mailing list making
> an unqualified statement that should be qualified.  Please stop
> doing that.

I see here something shared by Rashi and ArtScroll: Sometimes, an author is
so very popular that they *tend* to drown out all the other voices. Some
could argue that the extent of our emphasis on Rashi is to our detriment. I
will not take sides on that question; I'm only suggesting that it seems to
be a natural result of popularity.

But while we're on the subject of this pasuk, R' JFYS continued:

> Read Ramban on Deuteronomy 22:17.  He disagrees with Rashi, he
> says that the verse means, literally, a bloody sheet, and he
> gives better and more authoritative sources than Rashi.

Over Shabbos, I was wondering what Rashi (who says that there is no actual
physical sheet here) could mean on a practical level. How does one bring
witnesses to a person's virginity? Was she under constant surveillance by
kosher witnesses, who will testify that she never snuck away to be with
someone?

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20210825/d273a821/attachment-0001.html>

> As I have said more than once, "Only maskilim speak and pronounce
> Hebrew properly!" >:-}

you obviously don't know many sefardom and temanim.

> When it comes to aveilus, Sepharadim only observe Shavua shechal bo and
> their three week observance is only about not making weddings. While
> Ashk have real aveilus customs the whole period.
> Meanwhile when it comes to selichos, Sepharadim say them the whole month,
> and it's Ashkenazim who only start at shavua shechal bo.
> Anyone want to venture a theory as to what this says about Ashk vs Seph
> hashkafic differences?

Ashkenazim have many chumrot in the 3 weels chiefly as a reaction to
various tragedies
including the crusades that occurred during this time period. Sefardim had
fewer progroms.

Yes if one could choose between becoming a sephardic or ashkenazi he would
have to weigh
more slichot vs harder 3 weeks and kitniyot -)
sefardim are more machmir on glatt and mixtures in wine but for most
kashrut problems the Rama is machmir

On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 10:48:55PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
> The basis is bitul. Look in just about any guide to kashrus on Pesach. They
> all say that if you can't get milk that has a hechsher for Pesach, then any
> store-bought milk is fine as long as it is purchased before Pesach begins.
> It seems to me that if that is the halacha for Pesach, it is certainly okay
> the rest of the year.

From https://moderntoraleadership.wordpress.com/2014/02/17/products-that-are-kosher-only-without-a-heksher/
"Products that are kosher only without a heksher" by R Aryeh Klapper (2014).

It turns out the bitul only works if there is no hekhasher. The second the
milk has a hekhsher, you canot say the nakhri didn't have Jews in mind, so
it would be attempting bitul lekhat-chilah. So, it's only kosher without
a hekhsher.

I may have mentioned this oddity in previous iterations. This time RAK
helped me find his post. Here's the money quote (about 3/4 of the post):

   Many years ago Garelick Farms decided to market its milk all-natural,
   which meant that it needed a natural source of Vitamin D - and it
   chose shark oil. This had at least two consequences: Hood Dairy began
   running an ad with the tagline "There's something fishy about Garelick
   Farms milk", and the KVH (this was long before I became involved)
   pulled its hashgachah.

   Garelick Farms sued Hood, arguing that the fish was imperceptible,
   and won - the (non-Jewish) judge tasted the milk and agreed there
   was no fish taste. I therefore ruled that the milk was kosher because
   the KVH had pulled its hashgachah.

   The judge's taste test demonstrated that the shark oil was nullified
   (certainly the percentage was below 1/60 anyway), so the only remaining
   issue was deliberate nullification (bittul lekhatchilah), which makes
   a product prohibited to the person or person for whose benefit the
   nullification occurred.

   R. Akiva Eiger (YD 99:5) states that a nullification done with no
   specific end-user in mind, but rather for "whomever will wish to buy",
   is considered to be done for the benefit of all eventual purchasers.
   One understanding of this position is that anything consciously
   produced with observant Jews in mind has that issue, even if the
   observant Jews are a trivial percentage of the intended audience.
   However, by giving up its kosher certification, Garelick Farms
   demonstrated that it did not have any concern for observant Jews,
   and therefore the milk was kosher because it had lost its hekhsher.

   Paradoxically, had the KVH accepted this argument and sought to
   restore the hekhsher, the milk would have become treif. My contrarian
   ambition was to develop a list of products that were kosher only when
   unhekhshered, as many industrial koshering procedures ultimately
   depend on some form of nullification. (Note however that this
   broad interpretation of the prohibition is not obvious either in
   R. Akiva Eiger or in his cited source, Responsa Rivash 498, and is
   not followed consistently in practice today; see for example Igrot
   Moshe YD 1:62-63.)

   I thought this was a compelling but creative psak, and to make sure I
   really believed it, I went out and bought a quart of milk and drank a
   glass before paskening that anyone else could do so. But Dov Weinstein
   shows me that in the current issue of Tradition my teacher Rabbi J.
   David Bleich makes the same argument...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 I long to accomplish a great and noble task,
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   but it is my chief duty to accomplish small
Author: Widen Your Tent      tasks as if they were great and noble.
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF                            - Helen Keller

On 25/8/21 8:00 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
> 
> Over Shabbos, I was wondering what Rashi (who says that there is no 
> actual physical sheet here) could mean on a practical level. How does 
> one bring witnesses to a person's virginity? Was she under constant 
> surveillance by kosher witnesses, who will testify that she never snuck 
> away to be with someone?

No such witnesses are required.  It's up to the husband to prove that 
she cheated on him, and that she did so after the kidushin, so he must 
have produced witnesses.  Without them he has no claim.  Therefore the 
"besulim" that the father must produce are witnesses who disprove the 
husband's witnesses.  They can be eidei hazama (at the time and place 
you claim to have seen this you were elsewhere), or eidei hakchasha 
(e.g. at the time and place you claim to have seen this *she* was 
elsewhere, or the alleged paramour was elsewhere, or we were there and 
saw that nothing happened, etc.)

-- 
Zev Sero            Wishing everyone a healthy summer
z...@sero.name

> Our Sages said a lot of different things, and they said a lot of
> contradictory things (sometimes they even contradicted themselves,
> even the greatest of them, as I pointed out in a recent posting).
> Read Ramban on Deuteronomy 22:17.  He disagrees with Rashi, he says
> that the verse means, literally, a bloody sheet, and he gives better
> and more authoritative sources than Rashi.

First of all, Rashi *is* peshuto shel mikra.  And in this case Rashi's 
source is directly from the Sifri.  I think that's more authoritative 
than the Ramban's sources.

But why did you think I was referring to Rashi in the first place?  I 
was referring to the *halacha pesukah* as laid out by the Rambam.  I 
think that as a statement of what TSBP says about this pasuk, that 
carries the day.

-- 
Zev Sero            Wishing everyone a healthy summer
z...@sero.name

Over on the Torah Musings ezine, R Daniel Mann fields the question we
discussed of buying a minimum land for the sake of being yotzei shemittah.
What's the value qua owning land, what's the value as a means of enabling
shemiras shemittah by subsidizing the rest by real farmers.

I'm including in full.

https://www.torahmusings.com/2021/08/buying-land-for-shemitta/

(RDN is a dayan for Eretz Chemdah, edits their Chemdat Yamim, works
for YU's Gruss Kollel, and wrote 3 sefarim.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha


Torah Musings

Buying Land for Shemitta
Posted by: [Rabbi] Daniel Mann
in Halachah, Magazine, Posts
Aug 25, [20]21

Question: A group provides the opportunity to buy agricultural land in
Israel for the Shemitta year. Is that worthwhile?

Answer: We start with an overview of the agricultural mitzvot of
Shemitta along with a brief analysis of the significance of obtaining
land ownership.

The Rambam (Lo Ta'aseh 220-223) lists four such negative commandments,
about: 1) working the land; 2) tending to the trees; 3) reaping the
produce in the normal way; 4) harvesting fruit of the trees in the normal
way. The prohibition of working the land applies even to one who does not
own the land. There is a machloket whether there is a Torah prohibition
on harvesting someone else's field (Chazon Ish, Shvi'it 12:5 is lenient;
Rav Auerbach, Ma'adanei Eretz 7:4 is stringent). In any case, the reward
for refraining from aveirot is a function of the availability of and
the temptation toward the aveira (see Kiddushin 39b with Rashi). One who
owns a distant, small piece of land is not tempted to work it. Just as we
would not suggest buying a donkey and bull to refrain from plowing with
them together, the above is not a reason to obtain land before Shemitta.

The positive mitzvot are more pertinent. There is a machloket Rishonim
whether the positive state of cessation from working the land (Rambam,
Aseh 135) is a function of an individual's work irrespective of ownership
(Rambam, Shemitta 1:1) or whether it is a landowner's responsibility
to ensure his field is not worked (Ritva, Avoda Zara 15b). A third
approach holds Jews responsible to save the land from being worked,
including by redeeming it from non-Jews who may work it (Netziv,
Vayikra 25:4). According to the Rambam, obtaining land is not a factor
in creating the positive fulfillment. According to the Ritva, buying
creates an opportunity to fulfill the mitzva. According to the Netziv
(whose opinion is not standard), the mitzva entails obtaining land that
would otherwise be worked.

There is also a mitzva to deal properly with the fruit of trees and
other things planted

before Shemitta, including treating them as ownerless (Aseh 134). While
certain elements of the halachot of what to do with the fruit can also be
fulfilled by non-landowners in Israel (beyond out present scope), buying
a field certainly enhances the buyer's ability to fulfill this mitzva.

Another gain of buying land is helping farmers keep Shemitta properly. Rav
Kook (see his introduction to Shabbat Ha'aretz) and all other poskim
who supported the heter mechira, did so for those who were unwilling
or unable (without extreme financial hardship) to keep the mitzva as
designed. Thus buying land from them helps interested farmers survive
without needing to rely on the reluctantly provided leniencies. This is
similar to giving ma'ot chitim to one who cannot afford mehadrin Pesach
provisions or donating to "halachically improve" a mikveh. (One who
rejects the heter mechira would view it as saving people from actual
sin.) If the farmer would anyway not work the land, but with financial
difficulty, buying from him is supporting a deserving person.

If one purchases the field at its value (including overhead), it is
proper to not use ma'aser kesafim money, which is not for personal
mitzvot one can afford (see Tzedaka U'mishpat 6:1). A donation (without
buying land, or the part of the price that is beyond the land's value)
to an organization that helps farmers may be taken from ma'aser money
(see ibid. 10).

While there are wonderful organizations to help with all sorts of tzedaka
and mitzva needs, sometimes there are people "in the field" who plan to
earn a lot of money in the process of providing a "quick mitzva fix."
We therefore recommend that one check that he is either paying a modest
fee for land ownership, if those elements speak to him, or better yet,
joining up with known organizations that help farmers and enhance the
observance of Shemitta, with or without technically buying a small plot
of land.

From

https://www.kosher.com/lifestyle/can-one-add-water-to-a-hot-water-urn-on-yom-tov-if-this-might-cause-the-indicator-light-to-turn-on-1743
[https://www.kosher.com/resized/open_graph/h/o/Hot_Water_Urn_on_Yom_Tov_banner.jpg]<;https://www.kosher.com/lifestyle/can-one-add-water-to-a-hot-water-urn-on-yom-tov-if-this-might-cause-the-indicator-light-to-turn-on-1743>
Can One Add Water To A Hot Water Urn on Yom Tov If This Might Cause the
Indicator Light To Turn On?<https://www.kosher.com/lifestyle/can-one-add-water-to-a-hot-water-urn-on-yom-tov-if-this-might-cause-the-indicator-light-to-turn-on-1743>
By: Halacha Yomit team of OU KOSHER Can one add water to a hot water urn on
Yom Tov if this might cause the indicator light to turn on? Although
cooking is permitted on Yom Tov, one is not permitted to light a new fire.
Therefore, one is not permitted to add cold water to a...
www.kosher.com

By: Halacha Yomit team of OU KOSHER



Can one add water to a hot water urn on Yom Tov if this might cause the indicator light to turn on?

Although cooking is permitted on Yom Tov, one is not permitted to light a
new fire. Therefore, one is not permitted to add cold water to an urn,
since this might cause the light to turn off or on.



Rav Belsky, zt?l, said that one may not even ask a non-Jew to add cold
water to the urn. Although turning on the indicator light is an unintended
consequence, and strictly speaking one is permitted to ask a non-Jew to do
a permitted activity even if this will cause an unintended consequence that
is forbidden (psik reisha), in this case it is not permitted.



Rav Belsky explained that there are two heaters in an electric urn. The
larger heater turns on when the urn is filled with cold water. Once the
proper temperature is reached, the first heater turns off and a second
smaller heater turns on to maintain the temperature. When one adds cold
water to an urn, one is not only changing the status of the indicator
light, but that person

is also turning on the larger heater. Since the intent of adding cold water
to the urn is to cook the water, one cannot consider the turning on of the
heater to be an unintended consequence.



To appropriately add water to an urn on Yom Tov, one should boil the water on the stove and then pour it into the urn.


YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20210826/313c31b0/attachment-0001.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.)