Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 251

Thu, 10 Jul 2008

• 1. money and halakhah (Eli Turkel)
• 2. Re: money and halakhah (Zev Sero)
• 3. Re: Are any women in Tanach described as loving their husbands? (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Your brother's a Mumar; here's the solution! (Joshua Meisner)
• 5. Re: Beware: Glatt May Not Always Mean Kosher (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: Beware: Glatt May Not Always Mean Kosher (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: TIDE and Austritt (T613K@aol.com)
• 8. Re: TIDE and Austritt (Samuel Svarc)
• 9. Mixed Singing (Mike Miller)
• 10. Re: Mixed Singing (Micha Berger)

That's not the question.  Especially with regard to kiddushin, since
shveh kesef *is* good for kiddushin, and indeed that is what we use!
A ring is shveh kesef, not actual kesef.  You could be mekadesh just
as easily with a can of baked beans.  But perhaps not with fiat money.


> Is a shtar chov the same as money because it has value?

For muktzeh, yes.  For kiddushin, no.  But fiat money is *not* a
shtar chov.>>


The questions come more in other areas.
1. For maasaer sheni the minhag is to redeem on coins and not paper money
I believe that the organizations that provide maaser sheni for individuals
use gold coins and not local shekel coins

2. For mechirat chametz (and heter mechira) I doubt paper money would
be valid even though kesef is a kinyan for a goy

3. Does paying in paper bills and backing out result in a mi-shepara curse?

As Zev has noted paper money would not be good for kiddushin as
it is not shavah kesef but is only a shtar chov

4. For making a kinyan transferring a shtar chov requires maamad shloshtom

-- 
Eli Turkel

Eli Turkel wrote:

> 2. For mechirat chametz (and heter mechira) I doubt paper money would
> be valid even though kesef is a kinyan for a goy

The mechirat chametz I observed this year involved two heavy bags of
coins (IIRC $100 deposit for the chametz, and $50 rent for the storage
places), but I don't know on what basis this decision was made, since
our coins are no less fiat than our notes.   In any case, there were
three additional kinyanim -- shtar, sudar, and tekiat kaf -- as well
as a Jewish arev kablan.


> 3. Does paying in paper bills and backing out result in a mi-shepara curse?

Why not?


> As Zev has noted paper money would not be good for kiddushin as
> it is not shavah kesef but is only a shtar chov

On the contrary, I have said many times that paper money is *not* a
shtar chov, and it's entirely possible that it *is* good for kidushin;
it's a shayla to be discussed, whereas shtar chov for kidushin is not
a shayla at all, it's clearly invalid.


> 4. For making a kinyan transferring a shtar chov requires maamad
> shloshtom

Further proof that a paper note is not a shtar chov.  But that brings
up another question: today it is very common to sell debts, without
the debtor's knowledge or consent.  Would a beit din not enforce the
purchaser's right to collect, or would it do so only on the basis of
dina demalchuta/minhag hatagarim?

-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                                                  - Clarence Thomas

On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 09:03:37AM -0400, M Cohen wrote:
: I get the impression from the general tone of the gemoras
: (kesuvos/yevamos/sotah/etc) that
: the nature of the husband/wife relationship (in those days) was more
: 'business-like'

You're getting an impression from legal texts that the relationship was
very legalistic. Is that a data point that says anything about how the
relationships actually were?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:
>
>
> R' Joshua Meisner Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 2:21 PM
> : Michal bas Shaul, although technically it was before she married him
> (Sh"A
> : 18:20).
>
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 08:19:28PM -0400, R Stuart Feldhamer wrote:
> : Great example - see Sh"B 6:16 : )
>
> A marriage with no anger and fighting isn't a healthy marriage.
>
> I used this idea to explain Avraham's argument with the RBSO WRT Sedom,
> and Moshe's battle to save Kelal Yisrael. I suggested that even when it
> comes to the RBSO, He expects a real relationship from us. And since
> we're human beings, that includes times of anger and argument.


RSF is correct that Michal is likely the only woman in Tanach to feel
bizayon towards her husband, but I don't believe that the two pesukim
provide an absolute contrast (whether or not that was the point being made
by RSF, it was a point that I, myself, have made more than once in the
past).  The opposite of ahavah is not bizayon, but sin'ah.  Bizayon is not
hatred (despite JPS' translation of despise); it's belittlement.

The love that Michal felt for her father's hero need not be counterindicated
by the bizayon she felt towards her husband, the king.  Indeed, it may
precisely have been her powerful love for David that caused her to be so
hurt by her feeling that David was wronging himself by his
self-degradation.  This being the case, the argument between Michal and
David need not have been tainted by anger (although I suppose it depends on
how one defines anger).

Kol tuv,

Joshua
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080709/4a06edcd/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 01:56:40PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
:> In Israel, the lungs of the chickens are checked due to the prevalence
:> of Newcastle Disease. Indeed, there are two types of chicken that
:> are sold in Israel -- Mehadrin and non-Mehadrin. Mehadrin chickens, whose
:> lungs are checked, are considered glatt...
...
: My understanding is that saying an animal is Glatt kosher means that its
: lungs where found to be entirely free of all adhesions...

Glatt chicken? There is no problem of sirchos in an owf. Why is anyone
worrying about checked lungs? I AM SO confused!

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

Micha Berger wrote:

> Glatt chicken? There is no problem of sirchos in an owf. Why is anyone
> worrying about checked lungs? I AM SO confused!

On the contrary, an off with sirchos is treif lechol hadeos.

-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                                                  - Clarence Thomas

 
 
From: "Richard Wolpoe" _rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com_ 
(mailto:rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com) 


RRW:  >> And didn't NCSY evolve out
of  looking at USY for alternative ideas of what to do?<<

 
TK:  No, I don't believe so.  My father was one of the founders  of NCSY in 
the fifties.  But let's say theoretically that some C  congregation came up 
with a good idea -- like, say, a way to save money on air  conditioning.  What 
would be the austritt objection to copying that  idea?  Hirsch gave sermons and 
wrote books in German.  Is there a  problem with that?

 
 
 
RRW:  >>   3. Working with Non-O's does not  necessarily convey any 
legitimacy. {see
below]  The Red Sox  come to Yankee Stadium, does any Yankee Fan have
any desire to  Ausrtitt   the hated enemy by not letting him to play in   the
very Holy of Holies that is Yankee Stadium!   <<
 
TK:  This is a particularly ill-chosen analogy since it does imply  that O 
and C are just two different home teams, eilu ve'elu.  How about  having Yankee 
Stadium host a game between the Yankees and the Nuclear Weapons  Engineers of 
Iran?  That would be a better analogy.
 
 
 
 
 
RRW: >>   4. Austritt has brought out such convoluted  situations such  that 
two
noted Roshei Yeshiva who were  "buddies" in Poland [either roommates of
havrusas I forget  which] - and then lived about 0.5 a miles away from
each other  in the USA - but would not even talk to each other merely  because
of Austritt. Is Austritt a frontal assault on eilu  v'eilu? <<
 
TK: You have a specialized historical knowledge of particular situations in  
the past which may or may not have been justified but have nothing to do with  
the proper policy to be followed today by religious Jews.
 
 
 
 RRW:  >>   6. Didn't the deaths Talmidei R.  Akiva teach us a bit about the 
danger of
lack of mutual respect?  {at least between Austritt O's and non-Austritt
O's]<<
 
TK:  This is no longer an issue.  Re-fighting old historical  battles is of 
interest, perhaps, to scholars of history.  The only  practical issue today is 
whether O Jews should treat C and R as in  some way legitimate "streams" of 
Judaism.
 
 

RRW:  >>  7. No Ta'anis Tzibbur can exist without  a Rasha. It seems that 
throwing
Resha'im out is a new idea.  <<
 
TK:  Again, you seem to be rehashing old historical battles.  In  today's 
world no Orthodox synagogue will refuse to seat a non-observant Jew (and  most 
non-observant Jews are not, in any case, reshaim).  
 
 
 
RRW:  >>At the Seder we remonstrate with them, but  we
don't evict them. <<
 
TK:  We knock them on the teeth.  Works for me.
 
 
RRW:  >> Is having the Rasha
at the Seder  legitimizing his life-style? we let him join in and if he
geahves we don't even start up with him, only when he brings up leitzanus  we
push back.<<
 
TK:  Again you are fighting old battles, from Frankfurt and maybe from  old 
Washington Heights, that I am not qualified to fight.  All I know  is that in 
today's world the advocates of austritt welcome non-frum Jews to  their sedarim 
with open arms.  But a joint seder led by an O and a C rabbi,  or an O seder 
in a C sanctuary,  would be a horrible idea, against the  halacha and very 
harmful from a public policy point of view.
 
You have also alluded in the past to particular policy battles fought  
between Breuer's and YU.  While my sympathies are mainly with Breuer's, I  have not 
seen in practice, and certainly not in my father's life, a blanket  rejection 
of YU outside of that localized community tension.  I note that  many products 
nowadays have both a KAJ and an OU on the label so I guess that  particular 
fight is over -- as there is a close association between YU and  the OU (many 
or most OU rabbanim having smicha from YU).  Of course there  will continue to 
be areas of serious hashkafic  disagreements.




--Toby Katz
=============

President  Reagan talked with the Soviets while pushing ahead with the 
deployment of Cruise  and Pershing missiles in Europe. He spoke softly ? after 
getting himself a  bigger stick.  --Mark Steyn




**************Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live music 
scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com!      
(http://www.tourtracker.com?NCID=aolmus00050000000112)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080709/8e0a202e/attachment-0001.htm>

> From: "Richard Wolpoe" <rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com>
> 
> Dislaimer, I am in NO way questioning RSRH's decision inf 19th Cnetruy
> Frankfort nor do I think the Wurzburger RAv should have medllled in a
local
> affair. I am merely adressing our society here and now:
> I still don't get it.
> 
> 
>    1. if one can filter society in order to use TIDE on Genral Culture why
>    can't this same filter helpe with non-Observant communties with in
> Judaism?
>    Rabbi Mei'ri di it!  Who says that this is diffcicult?  IF it is OK to
>    confront Yaphet why not some imperfcect Sheimim?  And didn't NCSY
evolve
> out
>    of looking at USY for alterantive ideas of what to do?

No connection. The question by Acher wasn't whether or not to acknowledge
his Torah knowledge, it was if it's possible to learn from him without being
affected. Something that the rest of Chazal felt was too difficult. 

>    2. Austritt at KAJ implies that no offical of the kehillah may dine at
> an
>    OU Glatt hotel or restaurant.

Huh? Wouldn't RSRH eat from the Wurzburger Rav's hechsher?

>    3. Working with Non-O's does not necesarrily convery any legitimacy.
> {see
>    below]  The Red Sox come to Yankee Stadium, does any Yankee Fan have
>    anyDesire to Ausrtitt   the hated enemy by not letting him to play in
> the
>    very Holy of Holies that is Yankee STadium!  And to do so  w/o any fear
> that
>    one will confuse the visting grays with the hometown pinstripes.  I
> don't
>    see how joining the Bosox on the field confers legitimacy to them.
True
>    when the lines were not drawn things wer differnt. This is no longer
the
>    case anyomre.

I can't think of a better rayah listor then this one. By playing with them
on one field, the Yankees show that the Red Sox are a team to play with. G-d
forbid, and He does, to show that R and C are a "team" to play with.

>    4. Austritt has brought out such convoluted siutations such  that two
>    noted Roshei Yeshiva who were "buddies" in Poland [either roommates of
>    havrusas I forget which] - and then lived lived about 0.5 a miles away
> from
>    each other in the USA - but would not even talk to each other merely
> because
>    of Asutritt. Is Austritt a frontal asault on eilu v'eilu?  Beth Hillell
> and
>    Beth Shammai got along much better even over the issue of Mamzeirus
> mamash.

As did RSRH with the Wurzburger Rav, who he got along better then with the
Reform of his day. But when someone does something that cuts to the heart of
Yiddishkeit (as does Austritt, which deals with one of the "gimmel chamuros"
namely AZ [in this case minis]) what one considers the din will oblige him
to strong actions. As it did BH who didn't marry those they considered
mamzerim. Where was their Eilu V'Eilu?? But such an interpretation of EvE is
a misinterpretation. EvE never meant, does not mean, and never will mean,
failing to live up to what one considers to be the halacha.   

>    5. In the post Holocaust world it is realyl troubling to see that we
can
>    jsut forget about how precarious a situation we have as a people?

So for the sake of Jewish unity let's not keep Shabbos. At least not in
those places where the vast majority of Jews don't observe it. It's so
divisive, all those restrictions. And kashrus (at least certain aspects) is
designed to separate us. That too must fall by the wayside.

The truth is clear, "Oker hadin es hahar", we must follow it even when it's
not pleasant. As Austritt is an halachic imperative (something that no O Jew
denies; the question is one of degree, not if the principle exists) one must
follow it even post-Holocaust. 

>    6. Didn't the deaths Talmidei R. Akiva teach us a bit about the danger
> of
>    lack of mutual respect? {at least between AAsustritt O's and non-
> Asutritt
>    O's]

I can bandy about mamarie chazal as well. What lesson did you learn out from
tanur tachnie, where the ones who where in the right died? Don't pasken when
it might hurt someone?

Respect for someone (as stated above) is not predicated in subverting what
one knows is the halacha, R insistence to the contrary notwithstanding.  

>    7. No Ta''anis Tzibbur can esit without a Rasha. It seems taht trhowing
>    Resha'im out is a new idae. At the Seder we remonstrate wtih them, but
> we
>    don't evict them. Aderabbah, the fact that the rash ais at the seder
> says
>    sometihng about "aggadic hashkafa" as Micha would say.  Is having the
> Rasha
>    at the Seder legitimziing his life-style? we let him join in and if he
>    geahves we don't even start up with him, only when he brings up
> leitzanus we
>    push back.

"Let your ears hear the words you are saying". Who throws out Reshoim from a
community via Austritt? One wishes they would remain, but they have chosen
to organize their own community built on the lines of their Rishus. It is on
this cold hard fact that one then is forced to the step of Austritt. If only
reshoim would act according to the wishes of the Austritters...

The same applies to the example of the Rasha by the seder. Whose seder is
the ba'al Hagadah referring to, some "humanistic" farce, where the mention
of G-d is verboten and "lessons of freedom" is expounded on, including
"personal freedom of orientation [no, they aren't klerring on which side to
do haseiba...]"? Where the Rasha seats at the head and guides it? No! A
thousand times no! "[W]e let him join in" to *our* seder, our community.
When he starts his own community "l'chem v'lo lo, v'lfi sh'hotzi es atzmo
min haklal..." Then the ba'al hagadah pronounces halachic judgement,
"...kufar b'ikkar", and the halachic implications flow from there.

The Tam who is witness to the whole episode, bewildered, asks, "Ma zos?"
What is the whole fuss about, what happened to EvE? We answer, "B'chozok yad
hotzieonu Hashem m'Mitzrayim m'beis avodim", Hashem took us out and acquired
us as his slaves, we are now duty bound to obey his commands.

KT,
MSS

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3565972,00.html

Assuming we ignore the Halachic (in?)appropriateness of a mixed group
in the first place, is there any halachic heter for a mixed singing
performance?

-- Mike Miller
Ramat Bet Shemesh

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 01:21:00PM +0300, Mike Miller wrote:
: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3565972,00.html
: Assuming we ignore the Halachic (in?)appropriateness of a mixed group
: in the first place, is there any halachic heter for a mixed singing
: performance?

The Seridei Eish (vol II #8) permitted just this very thing, a Bnei
Akiva choir.

1- Terei kolei lo mishtama'ei -- as long as none of the girls are
soloists, one isn't listening to the qol of an ishah, but the qol of the
choir.

2- The SE gives as a senif lehaqil (but usually, better not to rely upon)
the Divrei Cheifetz (cited by the Sedei Chemed, Quf #42) holds that qol
ishah (both din and its rationale) doesn't apply to zemiros, singing to
children and qinos for the dead. (WADR to the DC, either I am atypical,
or at least in the first two cases I have to question his assumption
about the metzi'us.) E.g. Shiras Devorah which she sane with Baraq,
even though bepashtus her husband was Lapidos.

3- Because its purpose is to tie children to Yahadus.

Among his sources was RSRH and R' Azriel Hildesheimer who in practice
allowed women to sing at the Shabbos table with guests at the table.
The SE offers as a possible source: Megillah 23a forbids giving women
aliyos because of kavod hatzibur, not qol ishah.

He also notes the strong opposition to the German practice from the rest
of Europe. And therefore, one may not compell someone who does not listen
to women singing at the Shabbos table to do so. Ad kan the SE. Also in
my notes is Otzar haPoseqim EH vol 21 1:20:3 which lists such opposition.

My notes add that the Nishmat Avraham (5:76-77) cites RSZA and R'
Elyashiv as arguing that the gemara talks about kavod hatzibur because
it would also exclude her aliyah even when the minyan are all qerovim!

I now realize that has strong implications against allowing mechilas
kavod hatzibor. After all, if the gemara were talking about leinign for
immediate family, and didn't consider the possibility, maybe there is
no such possibility.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Strength does not come from winning. Your
micha@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


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 251
***************************************

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..."