Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 58

Wed, 13 Apr 2011

• 1. Re: R. Chaim Volozhiner and Putting on Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: R. Chaim Volozhiner and Putting on Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin (Ben Waxman)
• 3. R. Chaim Volozhiner and Putting on Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin (Prof. Levine)
• 4. Re: Yet More on Asking the Cohen to Leave (Prof. Levine)
• 5. Re: Torah Reading Without A Kohen (Daniel M. Israel)
• 6. popcorn (Ben Waxman)
• 7. Re: popcorn (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: popcorn (Zev Sero)
• 9. Re: The Singular Way Of Saying Kaddish (Micha Berger)
• 10. gas stove controversy (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 11. HaShem HaMelech (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: HaShem HaMelech (shalomy...@comcast.net)
• 13. Re: HaShem HaMelech (Daniel M. Israel)
• 14. Re: : Chometz milking question (Eliyahu Grossman)
• 15. Re: : Chometz milking question (Micha Berger)
• 16. Shatnez in Carpets, Blankets, Mattresses and More (Prof. Levine)

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:52:24AM -0700, Daniel M. Israel wrote:
> Quoting Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>:
>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 06:05:18PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
>>> Someone sent me the following:
>>> A famous story about R. Chaim Volozhiner, when asked why he didn't put on
>>> Rabbeinu Tam t'fillin: "The din says that unless one is a chosid, he
>>> shouldn't, because it's mechazei k'yuhara...."

>> Does this mean the Gra, who his talmidim (including RCV) called "HaGaon
>> haChassid" (sometimes "haGaon haChassid haAmiti", in true misnagid style),
>> *did* wear Rabbeinu Tam tefillin?

> Certainly his talmidim called him a chassid, but what makes you think he 
> would not have hesitated to call himself a chasid?

My point was that RCV thought his rebbe was a chassid, and that it's
appropriate for chassidim to wear R"T tefillin. It would therefore be
consistent if he actually saw the Gra in R' Tam tefillin.

BTW, it's not RCV's chiddush, it's the SA OC 34:3. It must not only be
a chassid, but someone well known to be one -- "mi shemuchzaq umfursam
bachasidus".


Lemaaseh, further CD Rom search turned up that the Vilna Gaon held that it
was pointless to wear R' Tam tefillin (Biur haGra 34:1 "uminhag"). Keser
Rosh (#13), R' Chaim Tiktiner's notes of things he learned from RCV (his
rebbe), repeats that the Gra said this was because there are numerous
different machloqesin about how to make tefillin (and something like
2^n possible combinations of opinions). Why stop at two pair?

Which means that RCV might have disagreed with the Gra about whether the
machloqes Rashi vs R' Tam is unique. Thus, haGaon haChassid miVilna not
wearing them was not a statement for those who hold there was a specific
"runner up" for meaningful-but-not-yotzei tefillin.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When a king dies, his power ends,
mi...@aishdas.org        but when a prophet dies, his influence is just
http://www.aishdas.org   beginning.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                    - Soren Kierkegaard

IIRC, In the Gra's siddur, it says that he didn't put on Rabbeinu Tam 
teffilin. Since there are other shittot besides RT, nothing was gained.

Ben
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Daniel M. Israel" <d...@cornell.edu>
>>
>> Does this mean the Gra, who his talmidim (including RCV) called "HaGaon
>> haChassid" (sometimes "haGaon haChassid haAmiti", in true misnagid 
>> style),
>> *did* wear Rabbeinu Tam tefillin?

At 03:14 PM 4/12/2011, R. Micha wrote:

>Does this mean the Gra, who his talmidim (including RCV) called "HaGaon
>haChassid" (sometimes "haGaon haChassid haAmiti", in true misnagid style),
>*did* wear Rabbeinu Tam tefillin?

The GRA did not wear Rabbeinu Tam tefillin.  Someone sent me the 
following "BTW, the Gra said that if one wanted to be yotze according 
to all the shitos, he would have to put on 64 pairs of tefilin."

My friend Reb Motel Twerski, A"H, who was a son of the Milwaukee 
rebbe, once said to me, "Do you know how the Chassidim got back at 
the GRA?  He is called Reb Eliyahu Ha Chosid everywhere!" :-)



Yitzchok Levine 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110412/a8e3e67c/attachment-0001.htm>

Someone sent me the following.

>Rav Tuvia Goldstein ZT"L was vehemently opposed to the practice of 
>asking the Kohein to leave and certainly it is forbidden to call out 
>"bimchilas kohanim" as is practiced in many places. The kohein may 
>leave on his own. That's the extent of it.


YL


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110412/521c03e3/attachment-0001.htm>

On this inyan, it would seem to me that while from the POV of the  
gabbai or the kohen, there may be times when it is appropriate to have  
the kohen leave to give the aliyah to someone who has a particular  
precedence, from the POV of that person, wouldn't it always be better  
for him to forgo his precedence and perform the mitzvah giving kavod  
to the kohen.  IOW, if I for example have a yahrzeit, wouldn't it be a  
greater zechus to the nifter for me to forgo an aliyah in order to be  
m'chabed a kohen, then to get the aliyah?  So in that case, even if we  
hold it to be appropriate for the gabbai to ask, shouldn't I decline?   
And certainly I shouldn't push the gabbai to ask.

-- 
Daniel M. Israel
dan...@cornell.edu

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:10:13PM +0300, Eli Turkel wrote [to Areivim]:
> heard that R. Lior allows popcorn on Pesach for ashkenazim as long as it
> dry since only oil and not water is used in the process
 
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 04:02:18PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote [also
to Areivim]:
> I thought the parallel was between qitinyos and chametz, not qitniyos
> and grain. IOW, qitniyos is itself an issue, not wet qitniyos.

> In any case, another snif lehaqeil -- the inclusion of corn in the
> minhag is itself iffy. I wonder if RDL would say the same if we were
> popping peas.

Not just popcorn:

quote from his "Shoot" Devar Chevron on Orach Chaim: Siman 499: (my
translation as people told me that the Hebrew didn't come out)

All kitniyot, which do not come in contact with water during the food
preparation process, either by being roasted (for example home roasting
(without water) sunflower seeds, corn, etc) or by using oil in such a
way that it doesn't sit or contact water... is not prohibited, since
the tafeil can not be more strict than the ikkar.

Ben

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:23:58PM +0300, Ben Waxman wrote (just approved
a moment ago):
> way that it doesn't sit or contact water... is not prohibited, since
> the tafeil can not be more strict than the ikkar.

It was to avoid this objection that I phrased things as I did:
>> I thought the parallel was between qitinyos and chametz, not qitniyos
>> and grain. IOW, qitniyos is itself an issue, not wet qitniyos.

Returning to the CD, SA haRav (454:5) and the Chayei Adam (127:1) hold
that qitniyos that was treated in ways that wouldn't produce chameitz
in grains is not within the ban. (Although I guess that being the SAhR,
he would have you avoid gebochts for such qitniyos too...)

That said, qitniyos oil is an issue of mei qitniyos, and thus depends on
your own locale's version of the minhag, even though oil will always be
made without water. I think this indicates that at least those of you
who don't consume corn oil don't hold this way. And no raayah either
way for those of us who would consume mei qitniyos (if a hechsher would
certify such things).

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A person lives with himself for seventy years,
mi...@aishdas.org        and after it is all over, he still does not
http://www.aishdas.org   know himself.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

On 12/04/2011 4:14 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> That said, qitniyos oil is an issue of mei qitniyos, and thus depends on
> your own locale's version of the minhag, even though oil will always be
> made without water.

Why would oil necessarily be made without water?  There wouldn't be water
in the final product, but the seeds could very easily be washed in water,
or even sprouted in water!

-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                      - Margaret Thatcher

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 12:12:08AM +1000, SBA Gmail wrote:
: Ayen KSA 15:7 saying there should be 9 'oynim' - but at least 5 (or 6?)

The QSA doesn't say "onim", he says "im ein 9 shome'im lehaSha"tz... ki
kol davar shebiqdushah ein omerim befachos mei-10". It sounds like he
assumes only the Sha"tz is saying it, and the need for 9 listeners is
minyan, not answering.

Answering requires rov of a minyan. R' Ganzfried's case is if 1-4 people
are mid-Shemoneh Esrei and thus can't answer. I don't see how this would
include 5, so I go with your "6".

In any case, the MB (OC 55:32) allows fewer answerers beshe'as hadechaq.
Whether their inability to answer is because they themselves are also
saying qaddish qualifies as "dechaq" is a different story.

BTW, in 20:2, the QSA requires 9 answerers, not just listeners -- and he
clearly distinguishes the two: "ve'eino chozeir es haTefillah raq bishvil
shome'im, velakhein tzerikhin sheyihyu davqa 9 shome'im ve'onim..."


Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It is our choices...that show what we truly are,
mi...@aishdas.org        far more than our abilities.
http://www.aishdas.org                           - J. K. Rowling
Fax: (270) 514-1507

http://muqata.blogspot.com/2011/04/banning-gas-stove-tops-for-yom-to
v.html


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110412/af9783aa/attachment-0001.htm>

We were discussing the new Maxwell House Haggadah and its use of gender
neutral language. I commented that I found that "the four children"
is more accurate than "the four sons" since that better describes the
mitzvah of sippur yetzi'as Mitzrayim.

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 4:32 AM, I wrote:
: More problematic is that while HQBH may not be a "King" more than a
: gender-neutral "Monarch", I think He is more of an "Av" than an "Eim" --
: in that fathers are much more often away from the child. By removing the
: gender bias, one creates a different mental image, and thus a different
: metaphor than the original.

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 02:02:46PM -0700, Simon Montagu replied to
Areivim:
: The nevi'im use both metaphors -- e.g.
: http://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt1066.htm#13, a pasuk which was very important
: to me when I was sitting shiv`a for my mother, lo aleichem.

That pasuq is a simile, not a metaphor. IOW, Hashem isn't called a
Mother, Hashem says "Like a person who is comforted by his mother,
so I will comfort you." The comparison is made without elevating
Mother to a title.

But in any case, even if I agreed with this example, it would reinforce
the idea that the metaphor of Father and Mother are distinct, and the
non-specific Parent is thus not identical to the original.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
mi...@aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

R"MB: 
>In the case of Melekh.... well, history changed our relationship to 
>monarchy to an extent that we really can't get the emotional impact of 
>"Melekh" intended by the authors of tefillah. 

This is an issue that I've often wondered about. I'm interested in 
metaphors, and how they work psychologically/linguistically. And, 
the metaphor of HaShem as a Melekh has particularly fascinated 
me. 

As a metaphor it seems to work in an obvious way if you think of 
a king like Henry the Eighth or someone: Absolute and widespread 
power. But, was that really what a melekh was like in the days of 
matan Torah? 

I guess on the one hand you have Paroh. But, on the other hand you 
have the 9 melachim involved in the war in Lech Lecha... How much 
territory could each one have controlled if there were 9 of them in the 
area? 

How are we supposed to think about HQBH based on this metaphor? 

steve 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110411/1c5e4586/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Areivim mailing list
Arei...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org

Quoting shalomy...@comcast.net:
> I guess on the one hand you have Paroh. But, on the other hand you
> have the 9 melachim involved in the war in Lech Lecha... How much
> territory could each one have controlled if there were 9 of them in the
> area?
>
> How are we supposed to think about HQBH based on this metaphor?

Hence "HaMelech, Malchei HaMelachim."  It was common (as was the case  
with the 9 melachim) for a local melech to be the vassal of another  
melech.  (In English we might think of a King and and Emperor.)  Which  
is why HKB"H is described not just as the melech over other melachim,  
but as the melech over the melachim who are themselves over other  
melachim.

At least is my reading.

In any case, for most of the common people, which level of melech you  
were relating to probably didn't matter much: relative to you the  
melech still had absolute power.  The melech-subject relationship is  
what we are supposed to feel in relation to HaShem in this context.   
The distinction you are making was only really relevant to other  
political actors, which goes beyond the intent of the mashal.

-- 
Daniel M. Israel
dan...@cornell.edu

_______________________________________________
Areivim mailing list
Arei...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org

RAM:

> You are presuming that if the cows would eat chometz right up until Pesach
then there would be a problem with the milk that they produce. 
> And maybe there would be. Or maybe it is just a practical step in the
process of cleaning the area to insure that no chometz grains fall into the
milk on Chol Hamoed.

Me: (The following also covers points raised by others on this list)

I am not making any such assumptions, but I am actually stating the
opposite. What I was trying to say was that there is most likely no problem
because milk from a Jewish or non-Jewish source is not chometz, nor is there
any likelihood that chometz is floating in the milk any more than bugs are.

Just because Chometz is part of the input, that doesn't mean that the output
takes on the same characteristics We certainly hold like that, otherwise
nursing mothers might have a problem with their own milk production (many
pump and freeze it for later use). And I am also saying that it cannot be
about grains falling into the milk because of (1) the existing methodology
used for ensuring the quality of the milk (nobody I know strains for the
bugs that were flying around the cows the rest of the year, except, perhaps,
the most neurotic amongst us) and (2) there is no milk that I have ever come
across that is labeled "With KITNOYOT" - which would mean that all
Ashkenazim like myself would have to refrain from all dairy products
throughout Pesach since all milk will either be considered as being derived
from (internally) or tainted from (externally) chomets or kitniyot if we
follow two of the possible reasons.

I suggest that neither is accurate, and that whatever psak we might find is
just a rationale to support doing this at all.

From what I have gathered, we do this because it plays into the neurosis of
certain segments of Jews who feel that the more chumras (sort of a mental
"suffering", if you will) that they take on, then the closer they are to God
(a whole different discussion!). And the companies that require this chumra
about milk are simply doing so for financial reasons, without ever having
any real concerns (see #1-#2 above). Chometz and Kitniyot can be easily
exchanged in this debate about milk concerns. 

The bottom line: It's about the money rather than the possibility of chometz
or kitnoyot. And I have no problem with that any more than if someone wanted
to create "Kosher for Pesach" Gasoline at my local pump. I'm all for free
enterprise, but forgive me if I snicker when I see it.

Yesterday I used Kosher for Pesach (!!!) liquid drain cleaner (an odd smell
was coming from down there. I finally called the plumber, and what he took
out, it sure wasn't chometz!), and after he left, I washed all of our
kitchen shelves with Kosher for Pesach cleaner ("Warning: Poisonous. Use in
a well ventilated room.") I then put on the clean shelving the Kosher for
Pesach paper (I kid you not! It has a great heksher from B'nei Brak). Why do
the companies that make these items do so? For the same reason that you have
Rabbonimm sell their heksherim to companies that make bleach (Yes, my white
clothes are now Kosher for Pesach!)

My only concern about any milk is that the expiration date on the container
is earlier than today's!

All the best.

Eliyahu Grossman

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 08:32:19AM +0300, Eliyahu Grossman wrote:
: Just because Chometz is part of the input, that doesn't mean that the output
: takes on the same characteristics...

This is not so simple. The question of whether milk made by a cow eating
chameitz is actually two inyanim:

1- There is a general rule about 2 goremim -- the chameitz and the cow
being two goremim for the milk.

The SA (YD 142:11) holds that shnei hagoremim is "mutar bekhol maqom".

The Magein Avraham (445:5) and the Taz say that this doesn't apply to
chameitz, where we uniquely worry about less than a kezayis.

The Shach, the Gra, the SA haRav (445:10) and the Bi'ur Halakhah (s"q 2)
are meiqilim.

The Shaarei Teshuvah is the origin (?) of the idea of invoking bitul
before Pesach to satisfy even the MA and the Taz. See also the Igeros
Moshe, OC 1:147.

2- Returning back to /on/ Pesach... the Peri Megadim invokes an entirely
different inyan -- that if the cow ate chameitz within 24 hours of
milking, using the milk would be hanaah from something only due to that
chameitz. The MB (448:33) permits as long as the cow didn't /only/ eat
chameitz. The QSA (117:13 -- from today's QSA yomi) cites shitos both
ways, and advises "shomeir nafsho yachmir", estpecially when this is
the minhag hamaqom.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When you come to a place of darkness,
mi...@aishdas.org        you don't chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org   You light a candle.
Fax: (270) 514-1507        - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

I sent out an email this morning that was a joke about wrapping a 
dead body in a carpet that might be made of shatnez.  Someone wrote 
to me that shatnez only applies to clothing.  This is not true. 
Please see http://home.comcast.net/~shatnez/halacha2.html  where it says

The Torah's prohibition of shatnez primarily refers to wearing of 
shatnez garments. Sitting, lying, or walking on shatnez would be 
permitted. There is, however, a Rabbinic decree prohibiting these 
activities due to the fact that the shatnez material may rise up and 
cover part of the body. This prohibition will largely depend on the 
softness of materials used in the construction of the article in 
question. Due to the complexity of these details, it is advisable 
consult a Rabbinical authority or your local shatnez laboratory 
whenever a question arises regarding presence of shatnez in these 
items. The following are some guidelines to follow.

See this URL for more.

See also http://home.comcast.net/~shatnez/what_items_need_chking.html

What Needs To Be Checked For Shatnez

Blankets/Quilts: Standard wool blankets and down or polyester filled 
quilts do not need testing. Blankets made of reprocessed wool or 
"mixed fibers" should be tested. Hand-made blankets should be tested.

Carpets/Rugs: May require testing. Wool carpets (wall-to-wall) and 
area rugs may be backed or reinforced with linen. Non-woolen rugs and 
carpets are not a problem. Services are available at most shatnez 
laboratories for those who wish to have their carpets tested.

See this web page for a complete listing. YL


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20110413/8fd98473/attachment.htm>

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


Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 58
**************************************

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..."