Avodah Mailing List

Volume 34: Number 45

Thu, 28 Apr 2016

• 1. kitniyot (Eli Turkel)
• 2. RMF and gebrocha (Eli Turkel)
• 3. Changes in Shmoneh Esreh (Akiva Miller)
• 4. Re: RMF Mattir Neder Gebrochts (David Riceman)
• 5. Re: Rav Sharki on university students (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: your son speaks harshly to you, so you (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Rav Sharki on university students (Zev Sero)
• 8. Re: Rav Sharki on university students (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: Rav Sharki on university students (Rich, Joel)
• 10. Re: cooking kitniyot in a peasdik pot (Akiva Miller)
• 11. Re: cooking kitniyot in a peasdik pot (Simon Montagu)
• 12. Administrivia: Old Audio Tapes (Rich, Joel)
• 13. I shall sing to Hashem for He is exalted above the arrogant (Lawrence Levine)

<<RET referred here to "seforim". Are there actual seforim that discuss this
question? I have seen many publications - usually issued by the hechsherim
- which tell us that kitnios baby food (for example) must be prepared in
separate keilim. But they give no sources. I'd like to see a posek who
tackles this question in writing, and gives his reasoning.>>

The best source is RYZA halichot shlomo volume on moadim - Pesach page 350
(shin-mem)
He pasjens that (like this year) one can cook kitniyot on friday for
shabbat assuming there are people in the neighborhood who eat kitniyot (ie
sefardim) and on shabbat one can eat foods that has in them chametz
derabban. One should be machmir only on chametz deoraisa. The notes below
go into detailed reasons.
I didnt see anything about the dishes. but as mentioned he just casually
says one can cook the kitniyot.

Rav Rimon in his hagadah (ie the last few years) also allows cooking
kitniyot for the last shabbat after pesach

Though it isnt a sefer the email sent out of ROY's piskei halachot also
allow cooking kitniyot on friday for shabbat for ashkenazim again using the
reasoning that sefardim can eat the kitniyot on Pesach itself (he quotes
the shut of RSZA minchat shlomo tenina end of siman 17). He paskens that it
is preferable to use special pots

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160427/705be40c/attachment-0001.htm>

from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gebrochts

According to Rabbi Yitzchak Eizik of Vitebsk, the custom originated with Dov
Ber of Mezeritch <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dov_Ber_of_Mezeritch>.[2]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gebrochts#cite_note-2>(This appears, for
example, in Shulchan Aruch HaRav
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shulchan_Aruch_HaRav>, c. 1800.)

In fact, the members of some nineteenth century Lithuanian Jewish
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuanian_Jews> communities deliberately
ate gebrochts to demonstrate the permissibility of this practice.[*citation
needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*]
Both the Vilna
Gaon <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vilna_Gaon>[3]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gebrochts#cite_note-3> and Rabbi Moshe
Feinstein <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbi_Moshe_Feinstein> ruled that
there is no reason to avoid eating gebrochts.
(no source given)

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160427/704c490c/attachment-0001.htm>

Yesterday, as I was davening mincha, I found myself working hard to keep my
eyes in the siddur, lest I make one of the mistakes that I'd have to repeat
Shmoneh Esreh for. It occurred to me that in the course of the year, there
are many minor changes which are *not* m'akev the tefila, such as Anenu, Al
Hanisim, and the constant choice between Sim Shalom and Shalom Rav. But it
seems to me that only four of those are so critical that - depending on
circumstances - they can be m'akev one's Shmoneh Esreh:

Morid Hageshem or omitting it
HaMelech Hakadosh vs. HaE-l Hakadosh
Tal Umatar
Yaaleh V'yavo

The chidush that came to me suddenly is that of these four changes, *three*
of them apply on Chol Hamoed Pesach. There are three parts of the tefilah
that we must get right, because messing up *any* of those three requires us
to repeat the Shmoneh Esreh from scratch.

This seems to be unique. Is there another part of the year where even two
difference changes are me'akev? In Eretz Yisrael, Tal Umatar begins only
two weeks after Geshem, but in Chu"l, I don't think there's ever a
situation where even two of those apply at the same time. Even on Aseres
Y'mei Teshuva, which has six changes (Zachrenu, Mi Kamocha, HaMelech
Hakadosh, HaMelech Hamishpat, U'chsov, B'sefer), only one of them is
critical.

I'm not sure if there is any special significance to all this. I just
wanted to point it out in case it might help others pay more attention and
not forget the changes.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160427/bdd104f3/attachment-0001.htm>

RMGR:


> 
> May I venture that a Posek who suggests that it does require [or will not
> permit] Hatarah is also only protecting broader issues or being polite. A
> Posek's opinion is therefore no better than the position taken by Reb
> Moshe. What we require is that the matter have some Halachic foundation.
> But we have yet to see any practical/Halachic foundation that there is
> a risk that Matzos may become Chamets if they become wet.
> 

I would have thought just the reverse.  If there?s a halachic foundation all it requires

is a psak.  When the behavior is extra-halachic we may require hataras nedarim.

David Riceman

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:06:02AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote:
:> (of MIT) "proves" that an Omniscient Omnipotent Omnibenevolent (OOO)
...
:> We can't have a contradiction, so one of our givens must be false.
:> (1) is true by definition -- G-d is by definition OOO

: This is wrong. Omnipotence is an incoherent concept. I actually
: once started a thread here called "What can't God do?". Some examples:
: Can God break his own promises? Can God punish people for doing good?
: Can God lie?

The Moreh discusses both points.

1- Omnipotence is really a statement that nothing lies beyond his Potency
than insisting He posesses an infinite amount of power.

2- The Rambam believes that logic is a aspact of Truth, and therefore
part of His Essence. And therefore that He cannot do the illogical.
But this is no more a limitation of Omnipotence, in the Rambam's opinion,
any more than His inability to create bloomfargs or any other meaningless
nonsense clauses.

The Ramchal says that logic is a nivra, and therefore Hashem can indeed 
create round squares and other self-contrdictory things.

...
: I suspect omnibenevolence is equally incoherent.  But Hazal certainly
: reject it when they say that the world is a shituf of din and hesed. 
: Omnibenevolence is analogous to pure hesed,

Why? It would be pure Tov, not Chesed.

: Furthermore it is presumptuous to define God.

Thus the idea I labeled #1 above from the Moreh, and his via negativa.

R' Moshe Taqu infamously takes the opposite approach -- it would be
presumptuous to define G-d even to the extent of insisting that we
must limit ourselves to defining what He Isn't. RMT therefore
insists we must accept the descriptions in Tanakh uncritically.

(Which is why it is usual to assume that the Raavad is referring to R
Moshe Taqu when he speaks of someone holier than the Rambam who believes
that HQBH has a body. Though I doubt it, because that's not what RMT
actually says. More that he refuses to take a position on the subject,
one way or the other.)

:> (2) is not really an assumption, but a logical conclusion. (It hides a
:> prior formal proof.) A G-d who would know about any evil, doesn't want evil
:> to exist and can do anything would have eliminated that evil.

: Again, evil is a fuzzy concept. But this is an example of a general
: problem with utility functions. People, and possibly, for all I know,
: God,
: have multidimensional vector valued preferences. Two bundles of goods
: may exist without one being fully better or worse than another.
: So, for example, excising evil would also excise free will. Would God
: really want that?

Well yeah, that's a frequently given piece of theodicy. A world without
Nazis is a world of robots, not people. There would be no moral agents
for good to happen to. And thus no real good in the universe at all.

But it only explains the evil people do. Not congential birth defects
and other such natural evils. This could be one element in a broader
answer.

And that was sort of my point... By ignoring the whole subject of
theodicy, Dr Haslanger misses the main point she would need to refute.

As an aside, a central part of RYBS's hashkafah is that much of free
will is choosing between goods that are in dialecitcal tension. More
often than a pure good vs evil choice.

:-)||ii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 4th day
mi...@aishdas.org        in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Chesed: When is Chesed an
Fax: (270) 514-1507                           imposition on others?


the tragic which 

:-)||ii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 4th day
mi...@aishdas.org        in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Chesed: When is Chesed an
Fax: (270) 514-1507                           imposition on others?

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 10:41:11PM +1000, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi, its Kosher! via Avodah wrote:
: Re the son the Rasha - your son is saying something harsh to you, so you
: should also say something harsh to him
: 
: This is not in line with our tradition that a soft response demolishes the
: harsh attack.

Maybe it's true by definition. A rasha is someone who is beyond listening.
And the child ready to hear the soft response isn't a rasha.

I saw someone suggest haqheih here is meant in the sense of morbid craving,
not blunting. As in Y-mi Shevi'is 4:6 (vilna 12a) "Amar Rabbi Avun: derekh
haqeihus okhelin oso".

And shinav -- in the sense of veshinantam.

In which case, you have the pretty idea: Make him crave his studies.

But it doesn't work. "Haqhei es shinav" is an idiom that is used
elsewhere by Chazal, such as Sotah 49a (2x).

(There is also "anavim qeihos" as unripe or sour grapes in Avos 4:20,
but that may just be a third usage.)

But since haqhei es shinav is an idiom, maybe the idiomatic meaning is
far milder than a literal translation. Like "shut him up". (Edginess of
my translation intentional, to relay the aggressiveness implied by the
idiom.)

:-)||ii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 4th day
mi...@aishdas.org        in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Chesed: When is Chesed an
Fax: (270) 514-1507                           imposition on others?

On 04/27/2016 12:12 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> 2- The Rambam believes that logic is a aspact of Truth, and therefore
> part of His Essence. And therefore that He cannot do the illogical.
> But this is no more a limitation of Omnipotence, in the Rambam's opinion,
> any more than His inability to create bloomfargs or any other meaningless
> nonsense clauses.
>
> The Ramchal says that logic is a nivra, and therefore Hashem can indeed
> create round squares and other self-contrdictory things.

CS Lewis agreed with the Rambam.  See my .sig

Chabad chassidus agrees with the Ramchal.  Hashem is "nimna` hanimna`os",
and "keshem sheyesh Lo koach bevilti ba`al gevul, kach yesh Lo koach
bigvul".  The purpose of creation, Chabad says, and of all our avodah,
is to make Him a "dira batachtonim", which is a logical impossibility.

-- 
Zev Sero               Meaningless combinations of words do not acquire
z...@sero.name          meaning merely by appending them to the two other
                        words `God can'.  Nonsense remains nonsense, even
                        when we talk it about God.

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 01:21:10PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
: >The Ramchal says that logic is a nivra, and therefore Hashem can indeed
: >create round squares and other self-contrdictory things.
...
: Chabad chassidus agrees with the Ramchal.  Hashem is "nimna` hanimna`os",
: and "keshem sheyesh Lo koach bevilti ba`al gevul, kach yesh Lo koach
: bigvul"....

Nowadays there are multiple logics. Some are just mathematical playthings,
but many are used in the real world. (The two I somewhat know are fuzzy
logic, used in many problems like thermostats, to represent predicates
like "hot" which has varying degrees of truth; and quantum logic, used
in subatomic physics.)

Speaking of non-classical logics
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-classical_logic>, I heard RYBS
discuss bein hashemashos one year in a yarchei kallah shiur in which
he asserted that halakhah is a multivalent logic (one that allows
for values other than true vs false). Frankly I think he meant that
halakhah uses a logic that has no law of contradiction. Because RYBS's
topic was how bein hashemashos is actually both days at once. This
explains why an esrog used one day is assur BHS because it's the same day
and then assur the next day because it was also BHS -- the start of
that day.

But the notion of noone special logic makes the Rambam's idea that logic
is part of Truth and thus of His Essence much harder to support. You would
have to go meta, and speak of the usability of various logics in general.

:-)||ii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 4th day
mi...@aishdas.org        in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Chesed: When is Chesed an
Fax: (270) 514-1507                           imposition on others?

> 
> Speaking of non-classical logics
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-classical_logic>, I heard RYBS
> discuss bein hashemashos one year in a yarchei kallah shiur in which
> he asserted that halakhah is a multivalent logic (one that allows
> for values other than true vs false). Frankly I think he meant that
> halakhah uses a logic that has no law of contradiction. 
----------------------
I heard him say several times that Judaism does not believe in the law of the excluded middle.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_excluded_middle

Moadim lsimcha
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.

I had asked:

> Are there actual seforim that discuss this question? I have seen many
> publications - usually issued by the hechsherim - which tell us that
> kitnios baby food (for example) must be prepared in separate keilim.
> But they give no sources. I'd like to see a posek who tackles this
> question in writing, and gives his reasoning.

Yes! "Medical Halachah for Everyone" [1980, Feldheim] by Abraham S. Abraham
MD, page 82, gives a specific procedure for an Ashkenazi who is suffering
from diarrhea and needs to eat rice on Pesach, and then writes:

> Separate utensils must be used for cooking and eating such foods on
Pesach.

His only source for this is Kaf Hachayim 453:27, which opens with:

> Regarding keilim which were used for cooking kitniyot, for those who
> follow the issur of kitniyot -- after 24 hours they are allowed.

He cites *five* sources on this, but unfortunately, I cannot decipher any
of the rashei teivos (which is par for the course, with me and the Kaf
Hachayim). Then, he discusses at length whether or not a (Ashkenazi) guest
needs to worry if his (Sefardi) host used those keilim in the past 24
hours, and several related situations.

HOWEVER --

I am shocked by how different this halacha appears in Dr Abraham's book,
and in the sefer he cites. I concede that the Kaf Hachayim does cite
several problems that the Ashkenazi should be concerned with, and I concede
that Dr Abraham's procedure safeguards against them all. But it also
conjures up additional problems that the Kaf Hachayim was NOT worried about.

Some might say that I am being too hard on a "kitzur sefer" that tries to
service the layman by packing a lot of information into a few pages. I say:
On the contrary! His book could have been two words shorter if he had left
out the words "and eating". If the kli rishon is okay after 24 hours, I
would imagine that the kli sheni is okay even sooner.

Oh - here's another thing: The Kaf Hachayim was talking about a *healthy*
Ashkenazi who eats from Sefardi keilim. I think that if Dr Abraham is going
to apply those halachos to an Ashkenazi *choleh*, maybe he should cite a
posek on it.

Caveat lector! Check the sources whenever you can!

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160427/c8a574f5/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 4:35 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah <
avo...@lists.aishdas.org> wrote:
>
> His only source for this is Kaf Hachayim 453:27, which opens with:
>
> > Regarding keilim which were used for cooking kitniyot, for those who
> > follow the issur of kitniyot -- after 24 hours they are allowed.
>
> He cites *five* sources on this, but unfortunately, I cannot decipher any
> of the rashei teivos (which is par for the course, with me and the Kaf
> Hachayim).
>

What if I told you the Kaf Hachayim has an key to rashei teivot at the
beginning of the first volume?

Unfortunately it doesn't help much with ZR', which he already gives two
possibilities for, Zera Avraham and Zera Emet, and I've no idea which Zera
Avraham, but PRH is the Pri Hadash, MHRLNH is R. Levi Ibn Habib, and `RH is
the Erech Hashulhan. That's as far as I can go before Hag!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160428/a5d1045c/attachment-0001.htm>

Our shul is getting rid of a large number of old shiurim on audio
cassettes and CD's. Does anyone know of any digitization projects that
might be interested before they are disposed of?

Kol Tuv
Joel Rich

See

http://tinyurl.com/gmsnkks
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20160428/621aeecc/attachment.htm>

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



_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/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://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..."


A list of common acronyms is available at
        http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)