Avodah Mailing List

Volume 27: Number 80

Sun, 21 Mar 2010

• 1. Re: hat and coat (Elazar M. Teitz)
• 2. several questions (Tal Moshe Zwecker)
• 3. Re: kitniyot (Zev Sero)
• 4. Re: Selling bourbon before pesach (Zev Sero)
• 5. Re: Ratzuy l'Rov (T6...@aol.com)
• 6. Re: Timtum HaLev (T6...@aol.com)
• 7. Re: Ratzuy l'Rov (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: Timtum HaLev (Micha Berger)
• 9. timtum halev (Eli Turkel)
• 10. Re: Timtum halev (T6...@aol.com)
• 11. Re: Selling bourbon before pesach (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 12. Re: popcorn (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 13. Re: Selling bourbon before pesach (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 14. Re: popcorn (David Riceman)
• 15. Re: Selling bourbon before pesach (Ben Waxman)
• 16. Re: Ratzuy l'Rov (Zev Sero)
• 17. Re: popcorn (Zev Sero)

<However, some rabbonim wore a high type of yarmulka including I believe, RMF
and R. Lifschitz (please confirm). Hence, they may have felt this was equivalent
to a hat. Certainly one could not put a hat on top of this kind of
yarmulka as many do for tefilla or bentching. Hecne, the story that R. Teitz brings
would be a proof from R. Gifter and others but not from RMF.>
     That was a fairly standard yarmulka, at least for rabbonim.  RMF did indeed wear one; my father z"l, in my youth, wore it in shul on Shabbos and yuntef.
     However, when they davened without a tallis, they always wore hats. 
     They did not put in on top of the yarmulka.  They took the yarmulka
     off, as they did whenever they put on a hat.  The custom of wearing a
     yarmulke under the hat is no more than 60 or so years old. (No, I
     don't know who was the first to do it.)  I know that my father's
     brither wore his yarmulka under his hat, and when Rav Hutner saw it,
     he commented, "What a great idea! If the hat gets blown off by the
     wind, the head stays covered!"  IOW, he was not accustomed to leaving
     it on under his hat, at least until he saw my uncle doing it.
EMT
____________________________________________________________
Weight Loss Program
Best Weight Loss Program - Click Here!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=1OQ-NDzHkzy7i7hNrO0yLQAAJ
1BiYjhMSt0qMJcLz_08tNkJAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEUgAAAAA=

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100319/de015352/attachment-0001.htm>

Only women are present at the kallah's side till the badeken, and onlt the
chosson and rabbonim/family actually see her before she is veiled for a
brief moment (at least in our circles this is the way its done and then
again in our circles that is where you find a totally opaque non see thru
veil)

During Zivug Sheni weddings if there is a large wedding and guests etc. like a regular wedding brides in our circles do wear detichels same as in Zibug Rishon

Please quote the Gemarra in question where we permit people to gaze at the kallah

what you may consider not darkei noam and "cruel punishment" is personal
and subjective and has no basis as an argument here (not because I dont
respect your opinion chas veshalom) but because this minhag is very old has
its basis in the Maharil and therefore was and is practiced in Ashkenaz for
many generations, obviously the norms and customs in earlier generations
dont fit with some modern people's conception of what they consider normal
and pleasant

For example many chassidic weddings are 100% separate affairs and after the
chuppah men and women are at separate halls for the entire wedding till the
mitzvah tantz at the end. Many non chassidim are horrified by this custom
and imagine it as ruining the family simcha etc. but to us its normal

so what may be normal for some is strange and horrible for others (btw my
wife loved the dektich she told me afterwards that it was great not having
to see anyone and not to feel self conscious)

Kol Tuv,
R' Tal Moshe Zwecker
Director Machon Be'er Mayim Chaim
Chassidic Classics in the English Language
www.chassidusonline.com
chassidusonl...@gmail.com
Phone: 972-2-992-1218 / Cell: 972-54-842-4725
VoIP: 516-320-6022
eFax: 1-832-213-3135
join the mailing list to keep updated about new projects here: 
http://groups.google.com/group/beermayimchaim 
Noam Elimelech, Kedushas Levi, Pirkei Avos more!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100321/e5495bd5/attachment-0001.htm>

Ben Waxman wrote:
> Last week's Tzohar dealt with the Canola issue.
> 
> The ossirim state:
> 
> 1) The seeds come in a pod, so they look like kitniyot (Avni Nezir).

This is why mustard is kitniyos (and there is *no* disputing that).  So
why would the same logic *not* apply to rapeseed?


> The mattirim state:
> 1) We don't add to the gezira or the minhag (Avnei Nezir, Shulhan Aruch
> Harav, Igrot Moshe)

SAH says this?!  Where?  Corn wasn't in the original minhag, and yet the
achronim are very clear that it is forbidden.  And who says rapeseed
wasn't in the original minhag, at least in theory, as something that we
wouldn't eat on Pesach if it were edible?


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

Ben Waxman wrote:

>>> Oh yes. Rabbi Shabbtai Rappaport did a hakira on how whiskey is made today
>>> and concluded that it is not hametz at all.
> 
>> Huh?  How can that be?  The only ingredients are barley and water!

> To answer your question with a question - the only ingredients in matza is
> wheat and water and that is no hametz (I hope). How can that be?

Because the chimutz is stopped by baking.  If you left it to ferment,
as *must* be done to whisky (where do you think the alcohol comes from?!)
then it would be chametz.


> I don't know the details, frankly. I know that he examined the process of
> how it is done today and that was his conclusion. I spoke with his brother
> in law (also a rav) and got the info from him.

I cannot believe this.  Malted barley is chametz by definition.  You may
as well tell me that chazir is kosher.  If you see this fellow regularly
please ask him what is going on, and what it is that either you or I are
misunderstanding.

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

 

From: Micha Berger _micha@aishdas.org_ (mailto:mi...@aishdas.org) 

>>  Moreover, there is no mention of Eretz Yisrael or the Beit  Hamikdash
in Megillat Ester, even though the events of Megillat  Ester occurred
in 482 B.C.E., 478 B.C.E., and 473 B.C.E., long  after Cyrus permitted
Jews to return to Eretz Yisrael (539  B.C.E.) and the Beit Hamikdash
was completed (515 B.C.E.).  (This follows the approach of the Daat
Mikra in understanding  the Peshuto Shel Mikra of Ezra-Nechemiah,
especially the order  of Persian emperors that appear in the beginning
of Ezra  chapter four.) <<





>>>>>>>
How does this square with the notion that Cyrus was Esther's son (or  
grandson)? I guess not everyone agrees that he was.
 
However the entire "gefeel" of the Megillah is that the Jews were in galus, 
 that it was churban time.  The fear that they might be wiped out  
altogether would surely have been mitigated if some of them were already  living in 
Eretz Yisrael with the BHM'K rebuilt.  It just doesn't sound  right.
 
 

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

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




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100320/2527106a/attachment-0001.htm>

 
From: Micha Berger _micha@aishdas.org_ (mailto:mi...@aishdas.org) 

>> Similarly,  does a qemei'ah work if the person who has it isn't triggered
to think about  its contents?  <<




>>>>>>
YES!
 
sheesh, what a Litvishe question!
 
Have you ever seen a kimei'ah?  It's all mumbo-jumbo.   NOBODY can "think 
about its contents."  (Well, maybe a mekubal can.)   The person who gets one 
davka is /not/ supposed to "think about its contents,"  and if they are the 
type of person who is inclined to "think about its contents"  they will 
probably not believe in the efficacy of kamei'ahs anyway.
 

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

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




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100320/6e1fdb9e/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 11:05:33PM -0400, T6...@aol.com wrote:
: However the entire "gefeel" of the Megillah is that the Jews were in galus, 
:  that it was churban time.  The fear that they might be wiped out  
: altogether would surely have been mitigated if some of them were already  living in 
: Eretz Yisrael with the BHM'K rebuilt.  It just doesn't sound  right.

Esther's son is usually taken to be Darius II, the king who permitted
the completion of the BHMQ after the contruction began under Cyrus
was interrupted.

But if what "sounds right" is against the Daas Miqra, then perhaps it
is worth trying to rethink one's mental image...

Or perhaps, it just requires rethinking the return to Israel. It really
was a minority of the Jewish people. And when the Kusim got the building
of the BHMQ halted, I don't know how un-galus it felt.

For that matter, all of bayis sheini was during galus. Galus Paras ends
when the Persians are conqured by Alexander, which we know was during
Shim'on haTzadiq's lifetime. Galus Yavan involved a short interruption
of avodah, but turing most of their rule we had a BHMQ, and we only had
autonomy for a short time before the Hasmoneans sold out to Rome and
got replace by Herod for the bargain.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 11:16:01PM -0400, T6...@aol.com wrote:
: sheesh, what a Litvishe question!

But isn't my whole point that this atittude toward objects was not
historically part of Litvisher thought? Not just that "tamim tihyeh"
would rule out usng them (which I doubt anyone would debate was true of
Litvaks), but that the whole philosophy about their efficacy is alien
as well. So what kind of question *should* I ask? <g>

: Have you ever seen a kimei'ah?  It's all mumbo-jumbo.   NOBODY can "think 
: about its contents."  (Well, maybe a mekubal can.)...

But is that true of the kemei'os mentioned in the gemara? With the rise
of qabbalah, there were many more things to put down in a qemei'ah than
people would put in back before it emerged from the underground.

A shevisi is also covered in a lot of text, not all of it always normal
words. And yet it too started out being a kavanah tool, to keep the
chazan thinking about Hashem being before him.

THere is a discussion of qemei'os in Shabbos 61a-b. Among the questions
is whether a qemei'ah has qedushah -- first in terms of saving it from
a fire on Shabbos, but also in terms of geniza and taking one into the
bathroom. The assumption is that they contain osios umei'inyanim harbei
shebaTorah.



When I'm working on a middah, I usually keep slips of paper with some
pisgam related to the topic around -- on my alarm clock, on my seat at
the dining room table, my office desk, in my pocket, and the like.

Eg (AishDas's eVaad1 is on zerirus...):
    'Ushemartem es hamatzos' shelo yavo liyei chimutz... al tehi qorei
    'es hamatzos' ela 'es hamitzvos'!

Personally, I don't see how the Rambam or any of the staunch rationalists
could understand the gemara's qemei'os as anything but that kind of
thing. Things that engender meritorious thoughts, and thus might be
effective.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Every second is a totally new world,
mi...@aishdas.org        and no moment is like any other.
http://www.aishdas.org           - Rabbi Chaim Vital
Fax: (270) 514-1507

In terms of kavannah for a mitzvah there is a slightly different case

Assume a chiloni doctor oerforms surgery on shabbat to save a life.
He doesnt care that it is shabbat and maybe even anti-shabbat.

Is he considered a mechallel shabbat since he didn't do the melacha
because of pikuach nefesh but would have done it anyway

The answer seems to be a machloket between RMF and RSZA concerning
the issue of whether an O doctor/soldier can ask a nonobservant Jew
to subsitutte for him on shabbat.

RMF allows it on the basis that the the nonfrum doctor is doing fewer
sins in the hospital than at home because much of his chillul shabbat is
for very sick people and so either mutar or at worse a debrabban and so
lifne iver doesnt apply

RSZA does not allow asking a chiloni to take over since he considers
this as lifne iver. He seems to assume that chiloni doctor driving
to the hospital on shabbat is a mechalel shabbat even though he might save lives
since he would drive anyway on shabbat

See an article in the recent issue of the Journal of Halacha in Contemporary
Society where they bring various sugyot whether one can get a mitzva
without intention, i.e. someone fishing and the nets catch and save an infant.

-- 
Eli Turkel

 
From: "Beth & David Cohen"  <bdcohen...@gmail.com>
>> However, I still have trouble with the  non-Jewish wet nurse. Perhaps, 
since
the parents are responsible for the  aveirot of a child, they're lev is
somehow affected by the child's ingestion  of milk that stemmed from 
treifot.
Frankly, I am not convinced by my own  hypothesis. <<

Shabbat shalom
David I. Cohen

 
>>>>>
Moshe Rabbeinu, as an infant, would not nurse from an Egyptian  woman. 
Rashi says it was because he was destined to converse with the  Shechinah.   The 
implication is that there would have been some kind  of spiritual 
contamination.
 

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

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





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100321/3070fe4f/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Ben Waxman wrote:
> Rabbi Shabbtai Rappaport did a hakira on how whiskey is made today
> and concluded that it is not hametz at all.

I have long wondered about these drinks, and how they are made, and why it
is common to hear them referred to as "chometz gamur". I tried looking on
Wikipedia under "whiskey" and "distillation", and other articles, and they
really did not explain anything to me.

Can someone direct me to a simple explanation of how these drinks are made?
For example, do the grains merely soak in water until the water has
absorbed their flavor? If so, then this would not really be chometz gamur,
but more of a "kavush k'mevushal" status. Or are the grains actually
dissolved into the water?

(And I understand that distilled water is when steam is collected into
droplets of liquid water, but I have no idea what that has to do with
"distilled spirits".)

Akiva Miller


____________________________________________________________
Get Free Email with Video Mail & Video Chat!
http://www.juno.com/freeemail?refcd=JUTAGOUT1FREM0210

elitur...@gmail.com
> Poskim who discuss an ashkenazi eating by a sefardi for Pesach mention
> that one should avoid the kitniyot being served and otherwise it is okay.

Caveat:

Consult your LOR for halachah l'maase but here is some theory:

A. It seems a slamdunk that an Ashkenaz could not eat Qityniyos even
when served by a Sephardi

B. However, a careful reading of Rema permits qitniyos that has fallen
into a tavshil. As such, it seems to pashut me that Rema would permit
an Ashkneazi to eat a "taaroves" made by a Sehardi.

Illustrations:

A if a Sephardi served some rice, then an Ashkenazi could not eat it

B However, if a Sephardi served a soup or stew containing beans, Rema
would permit an Ashkenazi to consume it

Zissen Pesach
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Ben Waxman wrote:
> Oh yes. Rabbi Shabbtai Rappaport did a hakira on how whiskey is made
> today and concluded that it is not hametz at all.

I'm confused
Did he mean
A. Whiskey is not hametz 
OR
B. Corn-based bourbon is not hametz?

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Eli Turkel wrote:
> <<Cooked* kitniyos.  Where do you see anything about not eating raw ones?>>
>
> Quoting R. Shimon Eider " One cannot eat legumes on Pesach"
>   
I think this is a source of a lot of confusion.  "Kitniyos" and 
"legumes" are not synonyms (neither rice nor corn, for example, is a 
legume).
> Asking arounf no one has heard of a minhag of ashkenazim eating raw kitniyot.
>   
That's the question.  Are sweet peas or edible pea pods or green beans 
kitniyos? Or does something have to be grown as a field crop rather than 
vegetable and harvested in large quantities in order to be preserved to 
be construed as kitniyos? Certainly fresh vegetables would not normally 
get mixed up with the wheat crop; only dried seeds would.
> One of the reasons given for the minhag of kitniyot is that the fields of grains
> and kitniyot were near each other and so frequently the seeds of each
> got mixed up.
> That would apply equally to raw kitniyot as to flour.
>   
David Riceman

He meant A.

Ben
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <rabbirichwol...@gmail.com>

> 
> I'm confused
> Did he mean
> A. Whiskey is not hametz 
> OR
> B. Corn-based bourbon is not hametz?

T6...@aol.com wrote:

> How does this square with the notion that Cyrus was Esther's son (or 
> grandson)? I guess not everyone agrees that he was.

Is there such a notion.  AIUI Artachshasta, AKA Darius II, who sent
Hatirshasa/Nechemiah to prop up the struggling colony in EY, was Esther's
son.

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

rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
> elitur...@gmail.com

>> Poskim who discuss an ashkenazi eating by a sefardi for Pesach mention
>> that one should avoid the kitniyot being served and otherwise it is okay.


> B. However, a careful reading of Rema permits qitniyos that has fallen
> into a tavshil. As such, it seems to pashut me that Rema would permit
> an Ashkneazi to eat a "taaroves" made by a Sehardi. [...]
> B However, if a Sephardi served a soup or stew containing beans, Rema
> would permit an Ashkenazi to consume it

If they're be'ein then they're not in ta'aroves.  So you still can't eat
the beans, but you can eat the potatoes and meat and eggs from the hamin,
but not the chickpeas.


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


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 27, Issue 80
**************************************

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..."