Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 245

Fri, 09 Dec 2011

• 1. Re: Vegetable Peeler (Micha Berger)
• 2. halachic guidelines for kashrus (Prof. Levine)
• 3. Re: halachic guidelines for kashrus (Zev Sero)
• 4. Re: Rav Moshe Shternbuch: On Teaching Children Tanach (Doron Beckerman)
• 5. Re: a woman as a sheliha to mekadesh a bride? (Elazar M. Teitz)
• 6. Katzav in Prison (Eli Turkel)
• 7. "Business Law" (Rich, Joel)
• 8. Re: a woman shaliach (Rabbi Y. H. Henkin)
• 9. Re: "Business Law" (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: "Business Law" (Micha Berger)
• 11. Hamakom yinachem eschem (Prof. Levine)
• 12. Re: Hamakom yinachem eschem (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Halachic Policy Guidelines of the Kashrus Authority of Australia (Micha Berger)
• 14. new chumrah (Eli Turkel)
• 15. Re: new chumrah (Zev Sero)
• 16. Re: new chumrah (Michael Kopinsky)

On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 02:35:02PM +0000, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
: R' Aryeh A. Frimer asked:
: > I must admit that I never understood why there should ever be a
: > problem with a peelr, since the peeler always remove the klipa
: > (peel) with Ochel (food) - hence the peeler NEVER does borer.
...
: I suspect that you are referring to the case of removing an insect from
: one's soup...
: By my recollection, it is because the actual division is being made
: between ochel and ochel, and the bad stuff is removed incidentally...

Just to bring an off-list discussion to the rest of the list.

Many of us are somekhin on this when making tea. Using a spoon to remove
a teabag along with some tea in order to avoid borer bekeli (the tea
bag). Whatever is the maqor for this common practice does not presume
that it only works when removing the pesoles is incidental.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder]
mi...@aishdas.org        isn't complete with being careful in the laws
http://www.aishdas.org   of Passover. One must also be very careful in
Fax: (270) 514-1507      the laws of business.    - Rav Yisrael Salanter

At 05:53 PM 12/7/2011, Rabbi E. M. Teitz wrote:


>       In Europe, a hakpada on glatt was rare.  It was a middas 
> chassidus, based not on a higher standard of kashrus -- non-glatt 
> was not considered less kosher -- but rather as a hiddur, not to 
> eat from basar shehoreh bo chacham, as Yechezkeil Hanavi prided 
> himself (Chullin 37b).   [This only applies to 
> Ashk'nazim.  S'faradim are required to eat only true glatt, since 
> the M'chabeir paskens not to rely on the testing of lungs by 
> removing sirchos.  Hence the newest term in kashrus marketing, 
> "Beis Yoseif glatt," which is today's equivalent of what "glatt" 
> meant forty years ago.  And of course, it does not apply to veal, 
> lamb and goat meat, which must be glatt according to all 
> opinions.]  Today, of course, we are all tzaddikim and lower-case 
> chassidim, for whom all hiddur chumros are mainstream requirements.

It also does not apply to chicken, although the packaging on Empire, 
Kiryas Joel,  Vineland,  and other poultry says glatt on it.

The following if from the article What's the Truth About Glatt Kosher 
by Rabbi Dr. Ari Z. Zivotofsky that is at 
http://www.kashrut.com/articles/glatt/

 From the above explanation, it is clear that referring to chicken, 
fish or dairy products as glatt is a misuse of the term. In addition, 
even when referring to meat, it only attests to the status of the 
lung, but makes no comment about the standards of, for example, the shechitah.

Misconceptions about the meaning of glatt are so widespread that, for 
many, the term glatt has colloquially taken on the implication of a 
higher standard, similar to the term mehadrin. In addition, some 
caterers or stores may have only one kashrut sticker that they use on 
all products, and hence the sticker on the corned beef sandwich and 
on the omelette will both say "glatt kosher." Although it is 
technically inaccurate to label chicken, fish, lamb, or dairy 
products as glatt, it is not uncommon to find such labeling. In the 
majority of cases, it is probably not being done to mislead; but in 
some instances it may be intended to imply that the product was 
processed under a superior hashgachah, as per the term's informal usage.


Yitzchok Levine 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111207/178a79c0/attachment-0001.htm>

On 7/12/2011 6:02 PM, Prof. Levine wrote:
> It also does not apply to chicken, although the packaging on Empire, Kiryas Joel,  Vineland,  and other poultry says glatt on it.

Sigh.  We've been over this many times.  Yes, it does apply to chickens,
since they must be glatt in order to be kosher.  No, that doesn't mean
they're checked; in the USA we assume they're glatt without checking,
because it's rare for them not to be.  In EY, the mehadrin do check.

-- 
Zev Sero        If they use these guns against us once, at that moment
z...@sero.name   the Oslo Accord will be annulled and the IDF will
                 return to all the places that have been given to them.
                                            - Yitzchak Rabin

                    
                

The Netziv in Parashas Haazinu suggests that the Gemara in Berachos means
that we discourage offering one's own explanations in Tanach before being
fully proficient in Darkei Iyyun HaGemara - Halachah and Agadeta (and
experience bears out the wisdom of this recommendation). Just as a Kallah
wears 24 adornments and looks beautiful, but one who is not a kallah who
wears all that jewelry is suspected of being a zonah, so too a Talmid
Chacham who interprets Tanach is beautiful, but one who is not a TC who
interprets Chazal is suspected of Apikorsus.

But Bekius in Tanach is encouraged all along.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111208/e4a39554/attachment-0001.htm>

     Sh'lichus for kiddushin is derived from sh'lichus for gittin
     (Kiddushin 41a), by virtue of the hekeish "v'yatz'a v'hay'sa."  It is
     explicit in the mishna that a woman can be a shaliach to deliver a get
     to another woman (Gittin 23b).  Ergo, she can be a shaliach to be
     m'kadeish.

     (I use the term "shaliach" for a woman, rather than "sh'licha,"
     because the g'mara does: "di'amar lah havi at shaliach." (Gittin 24a).
      Apparently, it is the position, rather than the person, that is
     referred to, and the position is "shaliach," be it filled by male or
     female.)

EMT

____________________________________________________________
Cruise Vacations -- 75% Off
Daily specials, last-minute cruises All cruises discounted up to 75%.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4ee080052c4828b51d9st05vuc

zev writes
The whole topic of mesirah is more complicated in Israel because the
issur is mesirah *legoy*.  Even if one considers the medinah and its
legal system as "goyish", and all its officers as "dinam kegoyim", I
doubt that this can be applied to these laws.  Just as the most fanatical
anti-zionist will concede that one is still obligated to give tzedaka to
a poor zionist, and to save a drowning one, he will surely concede that
one may be alone with a zionist, and take a haircut from one, and therefore
that it's at least plausible that there is no issur of mesirah to one.>>

EY is certainly more complicated. Rav Elyashiv among others agrees that
mesirah is not a problem in EY. I am not sure if it because of Zev's
suggestion or rather he holds that all modern governments are just and so
mesirah doesnt apply.

The complication arises because of the opinion of the Ran that seems to
imply that dina demalchusa doesnt apply in EY. I use the phrase "seems to
apply" since many people hold that the Ran is not advocating chaos in EY
where everyone can do what they want in the absence of a Sanhedrin. Perhaps
other dinim of the rights of a community apply.

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111208/cfb86a10/attachment-0001.htm>

Hilchot maasah umatan takes up all of one siman and sif in shulchan aruch (156-what to do after leaving shul)
The s"a spends much of the time on using HKB"h's name in vain, the rama on partnership with non Jews and the aruch hashulchan on lashon hara.
I had a few meta thoughts on this but am curious if anyone had any insights, thoughts etc. on the placement and topics and brevity.
KT
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111208/e419230d/attachment-0001.htm>

Otzar Haposkim vol. 12 p. 52 (EH 35:6:34)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111208/5062bfb8/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 06:47:27AM -0500, Rich, Joel wrote:
: Hilchot maasah umatan takes up all of one siman and sif in shulchan
: aruch (156-what to do after leaving shul)
: The s"a spends much of the time on using HKB"h's name in vain, the rama
: on partnership with non Jews and the aruch hashulchan on lashon hara.
: I had a few meta thoughts on this but am curious if anyone had any
: insights, thoughts etc. on the placement and topics and brevity.

Well, the actual dinim of masa umatan is in CM 133-152, if you work in
a shituf -- CM 171-174, etc...

So, the brevity might simply because now we're talking about the OC
aspect of being in business, not the dinim of business itself.

Notice that every picks mussar-y topics:

The mechabeir talks about "kol Torah she'ein imah melakhah" but not making
your job your self-definition, and about oaths, expletives and other
sheimos H' lashav work might entice on to utter. Including not partnering
with a kusi, which would lead to taking an oath in the name of AZ.

The Rama loosens the SA's rule against partnering with kusim since they
no longer are idolatrous, but rather the Creater but beshituf. He isn't
really taking on the subject of business partners as toning down an
aside in the SA's discussion of oaths.

Going back to the Tur, I found that he is clearly the SA's source for
choice of topic, with one important addition -- he assures you that
making Torah qeva and one's job arai will bless you with success anyway.

The AhS isn't that short. He also discusses the importance of having
a job, of not making it the iqar, masa umatan be'emunah (added to the
SA's list), not taking oaths, knowing that each person is unique and
how to get along with them (midas hamitzua`), attaching to chakhamim,
ahavas Yisrael, ahavas hager, helping others find teshuvah and mitzvas
tokhachah, being nice to yesomim, almanos, not speaking LH, lo siqom,
and middos in general.

IOW:

The SA is more limited, the OC challenges of masa umatan. And thus he
titles the siman accordingly.

The AhS is saying -- when you leave shul, that's when the challenges
of tiqun hamidos and interpersonal interaction get hard.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             For those with faith there are no questions.
mi...@aishdas.org        For those who lack faith there are no answers.
http://www.aishdas.org                     - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 06:47:27AM -0500, Rich, Joel wrote:
: Hilchot maasah umatan takes up all of one siman and sif in shulchan
: aruch (156-what to do after leaving shul)
: The s"a spends much of the time on using HKB"h's name in vain, the rama
: on partnership with non Jews and the aruch hashulchan on lashon hara.
: I had a few meta thoughts on this but am curious if anyone had any
: insights, thoughts etc. on the placement and topics and brevity.

Well, the actual dinim of masa umatan is in CM 133-152, if you work in
a shituf -- CM 171-174, etc...

So, the brevity might simply because now we're talking about the OC
aspect of being in business, not the dinim of business itself.

Notice that every picks mussar-y topics:

The mechabeir talks about "kol Torah she'ein imah melakhah" but not making
your job your self-definition, and about oaths, expletives and other
sheimos H' lashav work might entice on to utter. Including not partnering
with a kusi, which would lead to taking an oath in the name of AZ.

The Rama loosens the SA's rule against partnering with kusim since they
no longer are idolatrous, but rather the Creater but beshituf. He isn't
really taking on the subject of business partners as toning down an
aside in the SA's discussion of oaths.

Going back to the Tur, I found that he is clearly the SA's source for
choice of topic, with one important addition -- he assures you that
making Torah qeva and one's job arai will bless you with success anyway.

The AhS isn't that short. He also discusses the importance of having
a job, of not making it the iqar, masa umatan be'emunah (added to the
SA's list), not taking oaths, knowing that each person is unique and
how to get along with them (midas hamitzua`), attaching to chakhamim,
ahavas Yisrael, ahavas hager, helping others find teshuvah and mitzvas
tokhachah, being nice to yesomim, almanos, not speaking LH, lo siqom,
and middos in general.

IOW:

The SA is more limited, the OC challenges of masa umatan. And thus he
titles the siman accordingly.

The AhS is saying -- when you leave shul, that's when the challenges
of tiqun hamidos and interpersonal interaction get hard.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             For those with faith there are no questions.
mi...@aishdas.org        For those who lack faith there are no answers.
http://www.aishdas.org                     - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin
Fax: (270) 514-1507

There is, unfortunately, a young woman who lives on my block sitting 
Shiva right now for her husband.  Since he was not from an observant 
home,  most of the time she is sitting alone.

The signs from Misaskim all have the plural on them, namely, eschem.

Tonight I raised the issue of why we do not use the singular when we 
say Hamakom when she is the only one sitting.  Someone said that this 
was raised when some rabbi was present and he said that one should 
use the plural "since the Neshama of the deceased is also 
present."  I replied that "I have no idea what to make of 
this!"  Furthermore,  the title of the first essay in A Unique 
Perspective: Essays of Rav Dr. Joseph Breuer ZT"L,  1914 -  1973  is 
HaMakom Yinachem Osoch.

Any thoughts on why people often use the plural even when there is 
only one mourner.  YL

On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 06:20:38PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote:
> Tonight I raised the issue of why we do not use the singular when we say 
> Hamakom when she is the only one sitting.  Someone said that this was 
> raised when some rabbi was present and he said that one should use the 
> plural "since the Neshama of the deceased is also present."...

I have heard that too, but I think it's a general issue. Do you say
"Shalom Aleikhem" even to just one person?

Besides, what if you're at a daughter mourning her mother, do you say
"eskhen" instead of "-em"? (For that matter, "neshamah" is lashon
neqeivah, maybe if the niftar was a man as well...)

I think that either
1- we simply don't customize such matbei'os, or
2- we address "you and yours". Perhaps there is a general notion about
blessing people as part of the community more than as individuals. We
are even pretentious enough to say "Selach lanu", admitting others'
guilt rather than to stand alone...

(Can anyone tell I'm blogging about the intro to Shaarei Yosher these past
couple of months?)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where
mi...@aishdas.org        you are,  or what you are doing,  that makes you
http://www.aishdas.org   happy or unhappy. It's what you think about.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Dale Carnegie

On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 12:02:52PM -0000, Chana Luntz wrote:
: And RMB replied:
:> 9 chanuyos (the non-qavua instance) is bitul berov. It's not a mixture
:> but the words "bitul" and even "taaroves" are still involved...

: Sorry, I was being a bit imprecise in explaining the distinction - but we do
: know there to be a distinction.  The Shulchan Aruch in Yoreh Deah siman
: 109:1 while discussing a case of bitul b'rov of three pieces that got mixed
: states that while eating each piece individually is fine, one person should
: not eat all three at once, and brings as a yesh omrim that one person should
: not eat all three even zeh achar zeh (the position the Rema holds to
: l'chatchila)...

It is a three way machloqes -- (a) you can't even them at all, (b) only zeh
achar zeh and (c) they may even be eaten bevas achas.

But I think the issue is in how we define rov and whether the
probabilities add if we rely on them in one maaseh, if we rely in them
altogether, or not add at all. Can mi'ut be undone through recombination,
and if so, how?

To my mind, the parallel case in taaroves would be subjecting the
mixture to a cenrafuge. Now, eg, the top of the mix has too much issur
for bitul. Does one thereby undo the bitul?



We were talking about consuming the approved-but-not-certified product. I
believe it's really a case of both probability AND taaroves. After all,
we aren't relying on bitul for a substance we know to be there, we are
relying on bitul in order to not have to know -- the issur is itself only
"present" as a mi'ut (or perhaps even ruba) deleisa leqaman.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             If you're going through hell
mi...@aishdas.org        keep going.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - Winston Churchill
Fax: (270) 514-1507

<<Weinberg adds, however, that anyone who places food over a flame must at
least observe the Jewish Sabbath. "It's not a question of clothing, it's
Jewish law," Weinberg says.>>

see
http://www.haaretz.com/pri
nt-edition/news/kashrut-inspectors-jerusalem-burger-joint-workers-must-don-
kippot-1.400439

what is the reason for such a halacha?
As far as I know even a goy can put the food on a pre-existing fire

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20111209/9830ec5f/attachment-0001.htm>

On 9/12/2011 5:45 AM, Eli Turkel wrote:
>> Weinberg adds, however, that anyone who places food over a flame must
>> at least observe the Jewish Sabbath. "It's not a question of clothing,
>> it's Jewish law," Weinberg says.

> see
> http://www.haare
> tz.com/print-edition/news/kashrut-inspectors-jerusalem-burger-joint-wo
> rkers-must-don-kippot-1.400439

[or <http://bit.ly/rSSXxH> -micha]

> what is the reason for such a halacha?
> As far as I know even a goy can put the food on a pre-existing fire

Only according to the Rama's kullah.  Since the majority of shomrei
mitzvot in EY do not follow the Rama's psakim, it doesn't make much
sense for a restaurant to rely on them.




Here in Brooklyn, where in most kosher restaurants the people who
work at the grill tend to be Mexican, Burgers Bar is a notable exception:
everybody who works at the grill is wearing a kippah.  I don't know that
they all do so after work, but at least they're Jewish, and I have no
grounds for suspecting them of chilul shabbos.

There used to be a place on Kings Hwy, which is a heavily Sefardi area,
that had a sign advising customers that if they were Sefardi they should
advise the mashgiach of this, so he could put their food on the fire for
them.

-- 
Zev Sero
z...@sero.name

On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:

> There used to be a place on Kings Hwy, which is a heavily Sefardi area,
> that had a sign advising customers that if they were Sefardi they should
> advise the mashgiach of this, so he could put their food on the fire for
> them.
>

Leshitasam, doesn't bishul akum treif the keilim?

KT,
Michael
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20111209/2e9c8be6/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 245
***************************************

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..."