Avodah Mailing List

Volume 30: Number 8

Sun, 01 Apr 2012

• 1. why do we Kasher Counter-tops (Meir Rabi)
• 2. Leading Charedi Posek Says metzitza' Should Not (hankman)
• 3. Re: Leading Charedi Posek Says metzitza' Should Not (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: costa concordia (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: costa concordia (Rich, Joel)
• 6. Re: costa concordia (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Soft Matza (Zev Sero)
• 8. Soft Matza (Meir Rabi)
• 9. Hallel Wars (Prof. Levine)
• 10. Hats and Ohel (Micha Berger)
• 11. What Could be Wrong? Part I Daf Ha Kashrus (Prof. Levine)
• 12. Re: Soft Matza (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Soft Matza (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: Soft Matza (Zev Sero)
• 15. hilchot pesach (Eli Turkel)
• 16. Re: metzitza be'peh (Ben Waxman)
• 17. Re: hilchot pesach (Zev Sero)

My query has more to do with the Mechabers choice of words. ReGiLin which I
am inclined to translate as, we are in the habit of, rather than VeHaMnhag
Pashut-the widespread custom. As someone pointed out to me offline, the Tur
DOES use Minhag. Which of course makes the Mechabers CHANGE all the more
significant
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120330/f0250e11/attachment-0001.htm>

RMB wrote:

Realize that the health risk doesn't rise up to halachically significant
levels. There are a few cases of permanent harm among hundreds of
thousands of berisim. And while "even one is too many", the same is true
of traffic fatalities. More Jewish kinderlach die or are permanently
injured in car accidents, r"l. Do you think we have to assur letting
children cross the street, too?

CM notes:

I think there is a clear difference between the examples you raise like
?crossing the street? and a mohel actively passing on a disease via
metsitse bepeh. While both may may have a very tiny probability of
occurrence (I have no idea of the relative size of tiny here), but from my
point of view, metsistse bepeh is your act beyodayim and a risk you can
100% eliminate by merely only permitting mohalim who are not carriers of
the virus, whereas accidents when crossing the street are not your act
beyodayim, nor is it possible to live your live so that you avoid that risk
100% and live risk free.  So I think there is room to consider the pikuach
nefesh you may cause beyodayim if you are infected by the virus, even if
the probability of a bad outcome is small, and to be CERTAIN that you are
not the cause of even a minimal risk to the life of the infant, by only
permitting those who are not carriers to perform metsitse bepeh (if you are
among those who insist upon it).. 

Kol Tuv

Chaim Manaster


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120329/83f0ac81/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 04:28:26PM -0400, hankman wrote:
: I think there is a clear difference between the examples you raise
: like ???crossing the street??? and a mohel actively passing on a disease

Actually, I said letting young children cross the street themselves,
but in any case...

:                     While both may may have a very tiny probability of
: occurrence (I have no idea of the relative size of tiny here), but from my
: point of view, metsistse bepeh is your act beyodayim...

The question is whether halakhah makes this chiluq.

I argued that one in hundreds of thousands is milsa delo shekhachah, and
thus ignorable. See Arukh haShulchan OC 544:5. I don't see anyone being
choleiq between being the sibah or not being mosir hamoneia. I think
that is why the debate isn't over the piquach nefesh side of things,
but whether the chiyuv of beris milah means that metzitzah bepeh is
a chiyuv.

Tangential to RCM's post, just a thought:

I think problem we have accepting an actuarial treatment of piquach
nefesh, the "even one is too many" response, is because we naturally
respond to an anonymous news story by thinking of the probability
that some baby among all of Kelal Yisrael, rather than the probability
one-by-one for each baby. When ch"v something happens to someone who
has a name,

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             If a person does not recognize one's own worth,
mi...@aishdas.org        how can he appreciate the worth of another?
http://www.aishdas.org             - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye,
Fax: (270) 514-1507                  author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef

On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 02:33:41PM -0400, Rich, Joel wrote:
: 1. Is the statement of the crew's obligation based on an "umdna" that
: this is what they get paid for? Is the expectation set by halacha or
: the company's training and employee's contractual obligations or is this
: some Halachic standard set outside of these agreements?

I understood R' Zilberstein differently.

It's not about the pay or contract directly, but because the others only
were in this mess because they had an expectation that the crew knew what
to do in the case of an emergency and would do it.

: 4.Why does the most help needed make a halachic difference to the order
: of the mishna if someone will not be saved who would have otherwise.

The conventional rules of triage maximize the number of people
saved. Perhaps that's more of an issue than who. Just thinking out loud.

: Bottom Line -- the horiyot priorities once again get treated as a tertiary
: methodology, unclear why.

At some point you have to conclude that the rules are /never/ taken
as primary. Vehara'ayah, the very next mishnah is the famous "mamzer
talmud chakham" vs "kohein gadol am haaretz". So, if the whole list of
rules is secondary to talmud Torah (and perhaps not current knowledge --
"shevirei luchos" too?) is it such a stretch to understand why poseqim
assume it is even lower down the criteria list, perhaps even "if all
else were equal"

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The waste of time is the most extravagant
mi...@aishdas.org        of all expense.
http://www.aishdas.org                           -Theophrastus
Fax: (270) 514-1507

At some point you have to conclude that the rules are /never/ taken
as primary. Vehara'ayah, the very next mishnah is the famous "mamzer
talmud chakham" vs "kohein gadol am haaretz". So, if the whole list of
rules is secondary to talmud Torah (and perhaps not current knowledge --
"shevirei luchos" too?) is it such a stretch to understand why poseqim
assume it is even lower down the criteria list, perhaps even "if all
else were equal"

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
But no one suggests a Talmud torah test either to the best of my knowledge.
 In essence it has become assume all else is equal.  So if one follows the
order has he sinned (e.g. gives a talmid chochom medicine that someone
closer by needed)
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.

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 05:44:02PM -0400, Rich, Joel wrote:
:>                                               So, if the whole list of
:> rules is secondary to talmud Torah (and perhaps not current knowledge --
:> "shevirei luchos" too?) is it such a stretch to understand why poseqim
:> assume it is even lower down the criteria list, perhaps even "if all
:> else were equal"

: But no one suggests a Talmud torah test either to the best of my
: knowledge...

Right, because the whole sugya is already deemed all else equal. Not that
the second mishnah alone trumps the first (and the gemara's elaborations
thereon) but that that section of mishnayos -- both sets of criteria --
are an "all else equal" discussion, to come after rules that maximize
the number of people saved, who came because someone else took achrayus
for them, etc...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I thank God for my handicaps, for, through them,
mi...@aishdas.org        I have found myself, my work, and my God.
http://www.aishdas.org                - Helen Keller
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On 29/03/2012 7:55 AM, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
>
> R' Meir Rabi wrote:
>> Why and when did Matza become hard? Matza used to be a home-baked,
>> soft product. It was baked daily during Pesach. However, Matza
>> production eventually moved out of our homes. We also stopped
>> baking it during Pesach. It was all manufactured prior to Pesach.
>> That is when, in order to prolong its "shelf-life" and prevent it
>> from becoming mouldy, it became necessary to bake it dry.

> Is this really the only reason? For a very long time, the reason I
> learned was that this is just another in a long line of chumros adopted
> for chametz and matza.
>
> [...]
> Similarly, I was taught that although the halacha is to allow matza even
> up to a tefach thick, our practice (please note that I am not using the
> word "minhag") is to minimize the possibility of chometz by baking the
> matzos very thin.

True, but "very thin" is defined for this purpose (e.g. in Ba'er Hetev)
as an etzba, which is about 10 times the thickness of today's matzos.

There are other proofs: all the poskim, right into the 19th century,
talk about the baal habayis having the only ke'arah, and distributing
from his matzos a kezayis to everybody.  It's even specified that the
middle matzah must be made bigger than the others, because each person
needs a kezayis from its smaller half.  Today's matzos barely have 3
kezeysim total, and there's no way to get more than one kezayis from
the smaller half of the middle matzah.

The poskim also talk about baking the three matzos from an isaron of
flour (which is the same as the shiur of challah); if you took that much
flour and baked three matzos as thin as ours, they would be enormous,
and wouldn't fit on most tables, and in any case would probably break
under their own weight.

RMF writes about the modern minhag of each man having his own ke'ara
that this is because our matzos are much smaller than the ones we
used to have, and therefore if each man has his own ke'ara he can
share with one woman, and it will roughly balance out.  I just went
looking for this to quite his exact lashon, and couldn't find it,
but IIRC it seemed pretty clear that he was talking about the matzos
being much bigger in his own memory, or at least in recent memory,
i.e. quite recent times.  Again, this is unlikely to mean bigger in
diameter, so it must be in thickness.



-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

Isaac, your were not sure if your memory has served you well; I think it
has and it also has not.


A) the letter from HaRav Schachter is pretty clear. You have recalled that
pretty clearly, and anyone interested can see it if they wish, here [
http://www.realmatza.com/harav-schachter.html], thank you also R Micha for
publishing your chat with Rav Schachter.


B) In fact, many saw from HaRav Wosners letter that there is no problem
with Ashkenasim eating soft Matza. His concern was that "Chadash Assur"
aside from all the normal concerns that arise when making Matza, any Matza.

Put simply, Rav Wosner actually saw and had his hands on these Matzas, and
yet he made no observation that reflected upon them poorly, other than -
they are a break with our tradition.


Reb Moshe has no hesitation in permitting Nikkur of the hindquarters for
Ashkenasim, for a community that has for many years not performed such
Nikkur, provided the Menakker is Gd fearing and an Mumche.


The preference expressed by the Rama is not for HARD Matza but for THIN
 Matza.

The Matza I produce is not more than 1mm thick, that is significantly less
than machine made and hand made Matza.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120330/40de6c7b/attachment-0001.htm>

 From http://tinyurl.com/87mxm4b

Long, long ago, there emerged a debate about the 
recitation of Hallel on the night of Pesach in 
the synagogue.  Should it be said in synagogue as 
well?  Or do we just recite it at night at the 
Seder?  The debate began during the times of the 
Rishonim, and the debate continues on until our times.

There are modern manifestations of the debate as 
well.  What happens when you are at a minyan 
where they say the Hallel, and your custom is not 
to say it?  Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky Shlita holds 
that you should surreptitiously slip away and not 
say it.  Indeed, he writes that you are obligated 
to do so.  Rav Moshe Feinstein zatzal wrote 
otherwise.  He wrote that one should still recite 
it ? even against one?s own family minhag.

See the above URL for the rest of this article.   YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120329/b19e4483/attachment-0001.htm>

I had never seen a *serious* treatment of this question, although I have
teasted bar mitzvah boys about it. Now that yesivish fashion is a rather
stiff expensive fedora with a brim around a tefach wide, how is it more
permissable to wear a such a hat than to carry an umbrella?

And I'm not sure carrying an umbrella really ought to be assur, I'm asking
more about the (dominant) shitah that permits one and not the other.

The gemara (Shabbos 138b) says a siyana, which both Rashi and Tosafos
say is a kind of hat, one with a brim a tefach or more wide, may only be
worn on Shabbos if the brim is meduhaq. Rashi defines meduhaq as tight,
meaning it won't blow off, and therefore one is safe from the risk of
carrying the hat in a reshus harabim.. Tosafos, however, quote Rabbeinu
Chananel, who understands the criterion to be flexibility -- a hat with
a floppy brim isn't an ohel, but a stiff one would be.

The Rambam defines siyana differently, but also concludes that a stiff
piece of clothing that protrudes a tefach is a problem of boneh.

The MB (301:152) gives some reasons to be meiqil:

We can dismiss the one about floppy brimmed hats on umdena issues. A
new Borceleno's brim could support a good deal of weight before bending.

The MA says that a brim that slopes down isn't an ohel.

But what about the back of the hat? Perhaps slopes up isn't a problem
either. Really, my problem is the original comparison to an umbrella.
If this a matir, the umbrella isn't an ohel either.

The MB invoked Rashi as a matir, but I don't see that one, either. Rashi
simply has the gemara talking about a different issur. It means we
have nothing on this inyan from him one way or the other, not a raayah
that Rashi holds there is no problem. We would need a record of Rashi
considering this peshat and rejecting it because a stiff hat isn't an
ohel in order to draw this conclusion.

Of the MB's arguments, the only one that sat well with me (not that the
CC needs my approval) was the notion that the brim isn't there for shade
or rain protection, just looks.

So, when buying a bar mitzvah boy his first hat, be sure to tell him
that he can't get hana'ah from the shade, and if he finds thoughts of
the sun and shade (or being dry in the rain -- while ruining the hat)
crossing his mind -- take the hat off before the thought becomes a
significant motivation for wearing it!

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik,
mi...@aishdas.org        but to become a tzaddik.
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507

Please see http://www.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/kashrus/daf20-6c.pdf

Can matzah for the mitzvah be made from a belila rakah? Okay, it's not
chameitz, but it is lekhem to qulify as lekhem oni? I could ask the same
thing about Shabbos -- can you use two baked formerly belilos rakos for
mishneh lekhem?

IIRC, belilah rakah is patur from hafrashas challah. But then challah is
a din in raw dough more than baked bread.

And if not, RDR, could you share how you produce matzos that thin that
quickly?

Turning to the quote page, I notice that RYSE is quoted as saying
"that from what he observes, these Matzot would be perfectly Kosher for
Pesach." (quoting R' Zev Weitman) RHS speaks of Ashkenazi use of soft
matzah in general, as does R' Aviner and R' Chaim Twersky. I do not see
any of them necessarily trying to think about the question I raised.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Education is not the filling of a bucket,
mi...@aishdas.org        but the lighting of a fire.
http://www.aishdas.org                - W.B. Yeats
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 02:32:04PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote:
: Can matzah for the mitzvah be made from a belila rakah? Okay, it's not
: chameitz, but it is lekhem to qulify as lekhem oni? I could ask the same
: thing about Shabbos -- can you use two baked formerly belilos rakos for
: mishneh lekhem?

Well, just after sending, I found where we discussed whether wraps
(wheat, not corn, flour) are hamotzi. Three consecutive posts (seems to
be the whole thread)
starting at <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol26/v26n260.shtml#01>.

The theory:
    See SA OC 168:8 just to see what it isn't, and to see why 8's
    discussion of belilah rakah doesn't apply, see se'if 15, the MA 40,
    the MB s"q 88-89 and the Bi'ur Halakhah d"h "qemach".

    It would seem that a wrap that has a texture such that it could be
    eaten on its own would be hamotzi. Note that's only about having
    a texture soft enough for the wrap to qualify as terisah, nothing
    about whether it's so bland few would eat it that way.

    Wraps are baked like the MB s"q 88, "de'i lo yahah belilasah rakah
    k"k... kol shebasof asuyah betanor" is a hamotzi. Similarly in 89,
    citing the Rosh: "kivan she'ofin oso beguma umeqabeitz ha'isah
    yachdav" produces bread, hamotzi.

I concluded 3 years ago that wraps are hamotzi despite being belila
rakah, which appears to close my question WRT matzos mitvah.

:-)BBii!
-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

On 30/03/2012 2:32 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> Can matzah for the mitzvah be made from a belila rakah? Okay, it's not
> chameitz, but it is lekhem to qulify as lekhem oni? I could ask the same
> thing about Shabbos -- can you use two baked formerly belilos rakos for
> mishneh lekhem?

AIUI "belila racha" means a liquid dough, like that for cake or blintzes.
I very much doubt that anyone makes matzos, however soft, like that!
As for whether one could use such a pancake for matzah, from the Ashkenazi
POV I would say no, because it's not hamotzi.  But Sefardim say mezonos on
normal matzos all year, and yet on Pesach they elevate it to hamotzi and
use it for the mitzvah as well as for lechem mishneh, because they say that
on Pesach it has that chashivus even though all year it doesn't.  If so, I
don't see why the same principle couldn't be applied to pancakes.

-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

I recently went to a shiur of R. Avraham Yosef on Pesach. Some of his
points were

1. No problem cooking kitrniyot on the 7th day for the shabbat after Pesach
(for Ashkenazimn - obviously only in EY)
    Theoretically it also applies to real chametz - the only problem being
a technical one of getting the chametz since the rabbi buys back the
chametz only motzei shabbat

2. Soft matzot are preferable to our regular matzot when one is sure the
hasgacha. From the Ramah giving a maximum of 1 tefach it seems that they
had soft matzot in his days. The advantage of soft matzot is that it easier
to eat a kezayit in achilat peras, especially for those who eat 2 kezeytim.

3. Hasgachot on products like ammonia etc are stealing from the public and
giving a bad name to a hechsher

4. Someone who eats matzah on erev Pesach is compared to "bo-el arusah
be-vet chamiv".  This rather stranger comparison is based on the permission
to be with ones wife only after 7 berachot. On seder night there are 7
berachot before eating matzah (works only according to thise that dont say
a beracha on the second cip of wine - otherwise there are 8).

5, As is well known sefardim completely ignore shiurim of CI and rely only
on minhag yerushalaim as given by R. Chaim Naeh.

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120331/5cca0188/attachment-0001.htm>

This is an old question. I remember hearing a shiyur on the subject of 
what to do when the conclusions of scientific evidence point to 
something that differs from the talmud? The rav dealt with the question 
of mamzerim and how certain poskim wouldn't even accept blood tests that 
proved conclusively that the baby couldn't be the husband's. And this 
type of question started long before blood tests were around.

Ben

On 3/29/2012 4:45 PM, Saul.Z.New...@kp.org wrote:
>
>
> -------  i wonder if this has implications on the issue of  chazal, 
> science , and metzius. i am not  sure that there is any level of 
> scientific  data [eg DNA typing of the viral cultures] that could 
> change such a posek's opinion ---even if it rises to the level of 
> 'beyond a reasonable doubt'  [jury]  standards.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120331/9079912f/attachment-0001.htm>

On 31/03/2012 3:49 PM, Eli Turkel wrote:
> I recently went to a shiur of R. Avraham Yosef on Pesach. Some of his points were
>
> 1. No problem cooking kitrniyot on the 7th day for the shabbat after Pesach (for Ashkenazimn - obviously only in EY)

This is pretty clear.  The kitniyot are not included in the sale, even if
they're in the cupboards that were leased to the goy, so there's no reason
not to take them out.  And the "har`ama" that the eruv tavshilin depends
on: that you're cooking in case guests arrive 10 minutes before shabbos,
works just as well with kitniyot; those hypothetical guests might very well
be Sefardi.


>      Theoretically it also applies to real chametz

Huh?!  How could one cook chametz on Pesach?  How could one even have it
in the kitchen and handle it, even if it belongs to the goy?  If nothing
else, what about the risk that one will absentmindedly eat some?  I don't
understand this at all.


> - the only problem being a technical one of getting the chametz since the rabbi buys back the chametz only motzei shabbat

This could be got around very simply, by having the goy stipulate that he
gives permission for people to help themselves to his chametz after Pesach.



> 2. Soft matzot are preferable to our regular matzot when one is sure
> the hasgacha. From the Ramah giving a maximum of 1 tefach it seems
> that they had soft matzot in his days. The advantage of soft matzot is
> that it easier to eat a kezayit in achilat peras, especially for those
> who eat 2 kezeytim.

But that would only apply for the seder.  Are they also preferable
during the rest of Pesach, and if so why?



-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 30, Issue 8
*************************************

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..."