Avodah Mailing List

Volume 31: Number 75

Thu, 25 Apr 2013

• 1. Re: V'el bnei yisrael tomar (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: two income families (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: V'el bnei yisrael tomar (Zev Sero)
• 4. Re: ben ish chai psak (Zev Sero)
• 5. Pesach Sheni (cantorwolb...@cox.net)
• 6. Re: Pesach Sheni (Kenneth Miller)
• 7. Re: Pesach Sheni (Zev Sero)
• 8. kosher shrimp (saul newman)
• 9. Re: kosher shrimp (Lisa Liel)
• 10. any problem with this? (saul newman)
• 11. Re: any problem with this? (Zev Sero)
• 12. Re: kosher shrimp (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Opening up Yahadus to Ridicule (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: What Is Kiddush HaShem? (Micha Berger)
• 15. Re: precedent (Micha Berger)
• 16. Re: Ger Toshav on Shabbos (was: Israel Torah Community) (Micha Berger)
• 17. Re: Pesach Sheni (Akiva Blum)
• 18. Re: Ger Toshav on Shabbos (was: Israel Torah Community) (Chana Luntz)

On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 09:57:29PM +0300, Liron Kopinsky wrote:
: In Parshat Kedoshim (beginning of Perek 20), right before it lists the
: punishments for all of the issurim mentioned previously, it says "Vayedaber
: Hashem el moshe leimor: V'el bnei yisrael tomar".

I started researching this. Tangentially, the Sifra said something
interesting, after listing various ways Hashem tells Moshe to tell
the Jews things
    R' Yosi would say: diberah Torah kelashon benei adam
    in many leshonos
    and all must be darshened.

An interesting contrast to R' Yishmael, who uses diberah Torah belashon
benei adam as an explanation of why he wouldn't make many of the derashos
R' Aqiva would.

Interestingly, I saw the pattern in parashas Emor is for the verbs
to match.

21:1-2 Vayomer H' el Mosheh: Emor el hakohanim...
21:16-17 Veydaber H' el Mosheh leimor: Dabeir el Aharon Leimor...
22:1-2 VHEML: Dabeir el Aharon ve'el banav...
22:17-18 VHEML: Dabeir el Aharon ve'el banav ve'el kol BY ve'amarta aleihem...
23:1-2 (the moadim): VHEML: Dabeir el VY ve'amarta

I want to find a serious answer. A midrashic one is easy, this is a
possible source for Makkos 1:10, where various tannaim talk about how
rarely they'd apply the death penalty. Moshe is supposed to use a soft
tenor with BY because this list is about theoretical severity more than
actual threat.

The whole thing is weird anyway... Anyone who needs to be told not to
offer their kid to molekh (the first aveirah mentioned) ought to be
screamed at!

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 28th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Malchus sheb'Netzach: What role does
Fax: (270) 514-1507      domination or taking control play in building brotherhood?

On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:18:19PM +0300, Eli Turkel wrote:
:> Simtuta says that any convention that creates a mutual understanding
:> that one party lost ownership and the other party gained ownership is a
:> qinyan
: 
: That is far from clear....
: For example if a money transfer is done automatically by computer without
: any human intervention one cant use simtuta to create a kinyan when no
: human action was done...

What if I modified my theory, defining simtuta as a rule that any maaseh
by a person which solimnifies a mutual understanding that ownership was
transferred is a valid qinyan?

Then we could test if the qinyan usage of dina demalkhusa is a form of
simtuta by checking if a law that transfers ownership without action is
considered a valid qinyan.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 28th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Malchus sheb'Netzach: What role does
Fax: (270) 514-1507      domination or taking control play in building brotherhood?

On 23/04/2013 5:10 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> The whole thing is weird anyway... Anyone who needs to be told not to
> offer their kid to molekh (the first aveirah mentioned) ought to be
> screamed at!

Why?  It seems that this was very common at one time, the "in thing",
that one would do just to get along and be seen to be doing the right
thing and honouring the AZ, whether one believed in it or not.  So a
person might think what's the harm?  All the kid's friends have done it,
why should he be different, the religious fanatic who refuses to have a
Molekh ceremony?

-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan

On 23/04/2013 2:19 PM, saul newman wrote:
> *Question:* What happens when there is only one Cohen in town and he
> happens to be a Shabbat violator, can he be called up to the Torah? And
> what happens if in this small town there is only one Levi and he is a pimp,
> can he be called up to the Torah for an aliya?

http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1401&;pgnum=245
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1401&;pgnum=246

-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan

Must it be shmurah matza, or does ordinary pesach matza suffice?
Some say it should be shmura matzo but it isn't an absolute.

WHEN is this matzah to be eaten?  
It could be eaten anytime during the calendar date.

What is very interesting is that when the KP was brought on Pesach Sheni,
it was perfectly acceptable to each chometz with it. 

"Behold I do not give lectures or a little charity. When I give, I give myself."  Walt Whitman

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130423/adec25d8/attachment-0001.htm>

Regarding the minhag to eat matzah on Pesach Sheni, R' Akiva Blum wrote:

> Since overall this minhag makes little sense, surely the
> answer is - whatever your minhag is.

In what way does this minhag make little sense?

On the 14th of Nisan I should have been busy shechting the Korban Pesach,
and later that night I should have eaten it. For various reasons, I did not
have the opportunity to do so, and therefore, I ate afikoman matzah in that
korban's stead.

It is now a month later. My reasons for not doing the Korban Pesach on time
were legitimate, and therefore I am entitled and required to bring the
Korban Pesach Sheni on the 14th of Nisan. Alas, I've been prevented from
this too. Why should I not eat matzah in its place?

Of course there is no obligation to do so, but it sure sounds reasonable to
me. Consider this: The mitzvah of the afikoman (which one could argue is
"only" a minhag) is so great that if one has only a single kezayis of
matzah at the seder, he should eat it not at the beginning of the meal, but
rather at the end, as his Afikoman. (Orach Chayim 482:1)

Amazing! All year long, whenever a special mitzvah comes our way, we are
reminded that we must not eat until after we've done that mitzvah. And here
we are told the reverse: There is a mitzvah d'Oraisa to eat a kezayis of
matzah, and while most people do it both before the meal and again
afterward, in this unusual case you have to choose one or the other, and
the halacha says to delay it to after the meal!

And why? So that the matza will be eaten the way the Korban Pesach was eaten.

May it be Hashem's will that next year, we will actually eat the Korban Pesach in Nisan, and not have to wonder what to do in Iyar.

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
How to Sleep Like a Rock
Obey this one natural trick to fall asleep and stay asleep all night.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/51773c4e270203c4d4674st03vuc

On 23/04/2013 5:42 PM, cantorwolb...@cox.net wrote:

> What is very interesting is that when the KP was brought on Pesach Sheni,
> it was perfectly acceptable to each chometz with it.

No, it wasn't.  The Pesach Sheni, like Pesach Rishon, must be eaten "al
matzos umrorim", and the definition of matzoh is that it is not chametz.
Chametz may be eaten *before* the Pesach Sheni, and may contribute to the
satisfaction that one must feel before eating the PSh, and it may be in
ones possession while eating the PSh, but it may not be eaten together with
the PSh.

(Rashi Bamidbar 9:10 says this explicitly, but it's also implied by the
fact that the the biggest chidush the gemara can give is "imo babayit",
not "ne'echal imo".)

-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan

http://www.koshertoda
y.com/04-22-13---A-Leading-Kosher-Symbol-is-Used-in-Europe-on-%E2%80%9CPork
-style%E2%80%9D-Sausages/

i dont understand why 1000's of uber-gashmi luxury items should  get  a
hechsher ,  but  fake pork not---- in fact  why is that any different than
pareve coffee whitener ----  an idea of meat and  'milk'  that should
equally disgust......
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130424/6ca9a606/attachment-0001.htm>

On 4/24/2013 9:44 AM, saul newman wrote:
> http://www.
> koshertoday.com/04-22-13---A-Leading-Kosher-Symbol-is-Used-in-Europe-o
> n-%E2%80%9CPork-style%E2%80%9D-Sausages/
>
> i dont understand why 1000's of uber-gashmi luxury items should  get 
>  a hechsher ,  but  fake pork not---- in fact  why is that any 
> different than pareve coffee whitener ----  an idea of meat and 
>  'milk'  that should equally disgust......

Coffee is important.

Anyway, what about Rabbi Tarfon?  "Don't say pork is disgusting, so I 
won't eat it.  Rather, say my soul craves pork, but what can I do, 
seeing that my Father in Heaven has forbidden it?"

I guess this guy is cholek.

Lisa

http://blogs.forward.com/the-jew-and-
the-carrot/175303/best-synagogue-kiddush-ever-shabbat-ice-cream-acc/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130424/ffe03ca3/attachment-0001.htm>

On 24/04/2013 12:16 PM, saul newman wrote:
> http://blogs.forward.com/th
> e-jew-and-the-carrot/175303/best-synagogue-kiddush-ever-shabbat-ice-cr
> eam-acc/

Assuming there's an eruv, or that the outdoor seating area described is
inside a mechitzah, the only objection I can think of is that a shul should
be promoting hidur bemitzvos, and therefore an official shul function should
not rely on RMF's heter for commercial milk.   The accounts, though, are
being run by each individual, not by the shul, so if someone doesn't want to
be mehader, or doesn't want to impose his own hidurim on his children, then
I can't think of an objection.

People should be taught, though, to be careful what they say when they order
the ice cream on Shabbos.  I don't think they can say "put it on my tab".
They should just give their names, and the shopkeeper will understand what
to do with that information.


-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan

On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:52:05AM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
> Anyway, what about Rabbi Tarfon?  "Don't say pork is disgusting, so I  
> won't eat it.  Rather, say my soul craves pork, but what can I do,  
> seeing that my Father in Heaven has forbidden it?"

Not relevent to nidon didan, but the Rambam limits R' Tarfon to mitzvos
shim'iyos. Mitzvos sikhlios embody values a human can comprehend and
should do his best to internalize.

The problem is that as RYBS pointed out repeatedly, every mitzvah has choq
and mishpat elements. We may not be able to understand parah adumah, but
we understand the value of a ritual for returning to normal life after
encountering death, and can find meaning in many of its elements. In
contrast, lo sirtzach seems self evident until you have to decide whether
it includes various instances of abortion or euthenasia.

So if we adapt the Rambam's statement to apply to the less absolute
reality, there may be some elements of hilkhos maakhalos asuros that do
have lessons for us that we should internalize. I'm not hazarding an
opinion about what they are, beyond noting that this whole trend may
be in the opposite direction of being capable of living a life of pas
bamelach tokhal when/as needed.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 29th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Hod: When is submitting to another
Fax: (270) 514-1507                       an act of kindness?

On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:00:01AM +1000, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi, its Kosher! wrote:
: Is it possible that the discussion about who did not or does not wear a
: head covering, is prohibited chatter, since it is perceived by some to be a
: slight upon the character of those they hold in esteem, notwithstanding
: that others see not wearing a head covering by those people as an honorable
: stance?

OTOH, if we bow to contemporary but mistaken impressions of the limits of
appropriate or at least tolerable behavior, and color our presentation
of the past accordingly in order to prevent LH, how will anyone learn that
they are being more restrictive than their role models?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:29:25PM +1000, Meir Rabi wrote:
: Halacha differentiates between a Yid being coerced to violate Torah for the
: benefit of the G, where we are not instructed to give up our life and
: according to some forbidden from doing so; and those instances where we are
: coerced to belittle our allegiance to HKBH.

: This being the case it does not seem correct to suggest that Kiddush HaShem is
: achieved by defying the world's opinion...

About what is right. Defying the world's opinion on matters other than
right-and-wrong shouldn't be any different than being forced to violate
Torah for their benefit.

IOW, there is a difference between standing up to hostility against the
yarmulka, and not standing up to hostility against people in plastic bags.
The former is a minhag that they are opposed to because it's our minhag --
they already formed their opinion about Torah, and we're refusing to bow
to it. The latter is insisting on a chumerah not held by most kohanim that
makes the Torah look silly because getting into a plastic bag looks silly
(and reminds people of warnings they were given as children, etc...) --
we are creating or reinforcing a negative opinion of Torah. And that
has to be weighed against the value of chumerah.

I already noted sources that define chilul hasheim in terms of things
that disuade people from listening to the Torah's voice (eg Yesodei
haTorah 5:1, sheya'aseh adam gadol... devarim shehaberios meranenos
acharav). This isn't the same usage as yeihareig ve'al ya'avor (at least
not in any obvious way -- although the difference between betzin'ah and
befarhesia implies /something/), but it's still a real issur.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 29th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Hod: When is submitting to another
Fax: (270) 514-1507                       an act of kindness?

On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 08:51:58AM -0400, David Riceman wrote:
>> I don't see the harmonization problem. The Rambam appears to be
>> saying the authority of manuscript evidence overrides accepted
>> precedent, which in turn overrides sevara you find personally
>> compelling.

> Think for a minute about the nature of manuscript evidence. Admittedly  
> the rishonim used the term "geonim" in a fluid manner, so the Rambam's  
> "kol hageonim" could mean only "geonay hama'arav"; nonetheless they also  
> had a manuscript tradition...

Did they? I understood the qabalah the geonim had was an accepted
practice, not text. The Rambam saying that all the theory and texts aside,
if from time immemorial everyone counted shemittah a certain way, that
was the halakhah lemaaseh.

In contrast to the case in Hilkhos Ishus which was theory in books.

And so it's quite possible to say that what was done in practice
is more significant than the books -- if theory contradicts accepted
practice, and what you find in accurate texts can tell you to
follow 

> Now the blatant distinction between the two cases is that the din in H.  
> Shemitta V'Yovel is a legal construction, but the din in H. Ishus is a  
> codification of clinical observation.  And what's particularly  
> disturbing is that the Rambam doesn't say this: he could have said that  
> his clinical experience is not like the standard psak, so he checked the  
> old manuscripts and they confirmed his experience. Instead he cites  
> legal precedent but not experience.

Maybe just there was no reason to go there. The explanation he gave
was both sufficient and more generalizable.

> And we do know other cases (e.g., blanching meat after salting) where  
> the Rambam did allow sevara to override precedent.  So I'm really  
> puzzled about whether the Rambam even had a consistent opinion about  
> this topic.  If he did, it must be more subtle than you suggest above.

But afterward I also said reality is more complex. The Rambam (and for
that matter, Chazal and even many writers outside the realm of Torah)
often writes in absolute form, describing archetypes that never exist,
and in the real world you have to turn that into relative statements
about things that more or less fit one or more of those archetypes.

To repeat what I wrote before:
>> [T]he limits aren't going to be etched in stone. One has to weigh
>> how compelling a sevara appears to be against how old and widespread
>> the accepted practice and how large the textual precedent is. And since
>> these magnitudes aren't comparable (they measure very different things),
>> it ends up being an art, not a science.

>> Search the archives for the word "heuristic" for prior discussions of
>> this latter idea.
... I batted this around with R' Rich Wolpoe repeatedly.

I see that 6 years ago I blogged my thesis, though. See
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2007/11/halachic-process-part-i.shtml
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2007/12/halachic-process-part-ii.shtml

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 29th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Hod: When is submitting to another
Fax: (270) 514-1507                       an act of kindness?

On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 09:30:48PM +0300, Doron Beckerman wrote:
: Lemaaseh, we pasken that a Ger Toshav who is one's Eved must be restrained
: from any melachah, and a Ger Toshav who is not one's Eved must not be
: instructed to do melachah on behalf of a Jew. This is all Assur
: Mide'oraisa. See Shulchan Aruch OC 304:1 with Mishnah Berurah note 1.

Or, a pasuq I say weekly:
    Lo sa'aseh kol melakhah:
        atah,
        uvinekha uvitekha,
        avdekha va'amashka,
        uvhemtekha,
        VEGEIRKHA ASHER BISH'AREKHA.

The SA appears to say "or", not "and": an eved kenaani who was mal utaval
lesheim grirus or one who wasnt mal utavel and therefore isn't formally
an eved but is therefore still like a geir toshav. He isn't calling
the eved a GT, but that an informal eved has the din of one.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 29th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Hod: When is submitting to another
Fax: (270) 514-1507                       an act of kindness?

On 24/04/2013 4:57, Kenneth Miller wrote:
> Regarding the minhag to eat matzah on Pesach Sheni, R' Akiva Blum wrote:
>
>> Since overall this minhag makes little sense, surely the
>> answer is - whatever your minhag is.
> In what way does this minhag make little sense?
>
> On the 14th of Nisan I should have been busy shechting the Korban
> Pesach, and later that night I should have eaten it. For various
> reasons, I did not have the opportunity to do so, and therefore, I ate
> afikoman matzah in that korban's stead.
>
> It is now a month later. My reasons for not doing the Korban Pesach on
> time were legitimate, and therefore I am entitled and required to
> bring the Korban Pesach Sheni on the 14th of Nisan. Alas, I've been
> prevented from this too. Why should I not eat matzah in its place?
>
>
So why on the 14th? Korban pesach is only eaten on the 15th.

Akiva

On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 09:30:48PM +0300, Doron Beckerman wrote:
: Lemaaseh, we pasken that a Ger Toshav who is one's Eved must be restrained
: from any melachah, and a Ger Toshav who is not one's Eved must not be
: instructed to do melachah on behalf of a Jew. This is all Assur
: Mide'oraisa. See Shulchan Aruch OC 304:1 with Mishnah Berurah note 1.

And RMB replied:

>Or, a pasuq I say weekly: Lo sa'aseh kol melakhah: atah, uvinekha uvitekha,
avdekha va'amashka, uvhemtekha, VEGEIRKHA ASHER BISH'AREKHA.

No, that is the pasuk in Devarim which is understood to be referring to a
ger tzedek (Talmud Bavli Yevamos 48b), the pasuk that is understood to be
talking about a ger toshav is Shemos 23:12:

 ??? ???? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ?? ????
????
Six days shall you do all your work and on the seventh you shall rest in
order that shall rest your ox and your donkey and the soul the son of your
maidservant and the ger.


>The SA appears to say "or", not "and": an eved kenaani who was mal utaval
lesheim grirus or one who wasnt mal utavel and therefore isn't formally an
>eved but is therefore still like a geir toshav. He isn't calling the eved a
GT, but that an informal eved has the din of one.

The gemora in Yevamos 48b says clearly - "it is the opinion of everyone that
the nefesh ben amatcha is an uncircumcised servant".  That is, the regular
eved knani is referred to over in Devarim, along with the ger tzedek (also
see the 10 dvarim).  It is that eved that a master must restrain, Over here
in Shemos, the pasuk is dealing only with the uncircumcised servants, gerei
toshav, and animals. That is, the group that are collectively allowed to do
work for themselves to the extent they want just not for their master or
other Jews.

The Rishonim on whom this Shulchan Aruch is based state clearly that this
uncircumcised eved has the din of a ger toshav, ie the last two categories
in the pasuk in Shemos are equal in din - see Rambam Hilchot Shabbat perek 2
halacha 14, the Mishna L'Melech there  - who helpfully divides the term eved
into three different kinds (not counting an eved ivri) a classification
referred to by many who come later) and  Shut HaRashba Chelek 1 siman 59.

RDB also wrote:

:[The Issur hanaah mimaaseh nochri is the same derabbanan with the same
rules (Mishnah Berurah note 14 ad loc.)]

I am not sure that is so clear.  That the hana'ah mimaaseh nochri is
d'rabbanan is not disputed - not only is that what the Magen Avraham (304:8)
states (as does the Mishna Brura you cite), but after all hana'ah mimaaseh
of a Jew is also only d'rabbanan (as the Rambam states in hilchos shabbas
perek 6 halacha 23 - as it says "v'shmartem es ha shabbas ki kodesh hi" - hi
kodesh v'ain ma'aseh kodesh.  Hence we have these debates as to when a Jew
can have benefit from a melacha on shabbas (bemezid - either never for him,
or after shabbas for him, for others immediately after shabbas etc) which
all would seem to be disputes in a din d'rabbanan.

It would thus be surprising (despite some hints in the rishonim) if the
hana'ah from a ma'aseh of a non Jew who is allowed to work on shabbas for
himself would be assur d'orisa when hana'ah from a Jew who is forbidden to
work on shabbas would only be d'rabbanan.

However, I don't think the Mishna Brura and Magen Avraham are saying what
you are saying ie that:

:but once you get around the amirah (i.e., you do it shelo bederech tzivui),
the halachos are the same.

This is the Magen Avraham:

Magen Avraham siman 304:8

That he does not benefit: -  this is d?rabbanan like that which is written
at the beginning of siman 276 and in siman 252 that it is forbidden to say
to a tzadoki to do melacha on Yom Tov see there ...

And the Mishna Brura:

Mishna Brura Siman 304:14
And so long as he does not benefit: - this is d?rabbanan and an eved is not
more than the rest of non Jews that do melacha according to the intention of
the Jew that it is forbidden for a Jew to benefit from that melacha on
shabbat and like it seems to me at the beginning of siman 276.

Ie you seem to be assuming the reference to siman 276 means that in fact all
the leniencies brought there are the same for an eved, which is therefore
the same for a ger toshav (such as a choleh she ain bo sakana)- whereas the
Mishna Brura may well only be saying exactly what he states, that there are
equivalent prohibitions.
 
This seems more likely to me given that the Mishna Brura himself writes in
si'if katan 24:

A complete non Jew: - but if he accepts upon himself the seven mitzvos
behold he is a ger toshav and it is forbidden for him to do work for a Jew
even for one who is not his master and so it seems to me.  

Which does not suggest any qualification regarding needing amira.

Secondly the Aruch HaShulchan writes (Siman 304 si'if 3):

this is the ger toshav and the eved toshav that accepts upon himself the
seven mitzvos and does not circumcise and does not immerse and his din is
made clear there that for himself it is permitted for him to do melacha on
Shabbat and this is for his own needs but for a Jew it is forbidden from the
Torah that he does melacha whether for his master or whether for another Jew
and the Tur that writes that he is forbidden in the work of his master he is
referring to the normal way but this is the din that he is forbidden in the
work of all Jews and so a ger toshav his law is so like that which the
Rambam writes there.

And the key teshuva on this is that of the Rashba Shut HaRashba Chelek 1
siman 59- and his specific teshuva was about whether they could have an
shifcha yishmaelis light a candle for a a choleh she ain bo sakana and warm
up hot food for him.  And the Rashba held no.  That is while he held that a
ger toshav or an an eved (when not acting for his master) could be assumed
to be acting on his own daas even if he does it al daas Yisrael, he
qualifies this by saying:

???? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ?????? ???? ?????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ????
???. ??? ?????? ??????? ???? ??????? ???? ???? ????. ?????? ???? ????? ??
???? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ??????
/????/.

But in any event we do not say these things except for things that a Jew
does not use on Shabbat and does not have benefit from them.  But to have
use of their work on Shabbat and to have benefit from them on Shabbat is
assur. And even for a regular non Jew all that he does for the need of a Jew
or even for his own needs that there is in it an addition for the need of a
Jew is forbidden.

So while this issur of hana'ah may be d'rabbanan (given the pasuk regarding
kodesh hi), I don't see that it follows that you can happily incorporate
heterim such as tzorchei rabbim or choleh sheyesh bo sakana into the
prohibition vis a vis gerei toshav.  And if you can, why don't you say the
same for the issur hana'ah regarding Jews, and quite happily let the non
religious run the hospitals and electricity and the like (so long as we
don't have any amira, which would violate lifnei iver, as the poskim discuss
on this same siman 304).  

So if get back to the question we started with - namely the state of Israel:
First of all, running a state on hints and winks and no amira (which is,
assuming we are dealing with gerei toshav, assur from the Torah) hardly
seems practical.  I doubt that is what is being discussed when shabbas goyim
are utilised. 

And even were you able to manage it, I certainly don't believe it is clear
from the above that heterim regarding tzorchei rabbim or choleh she ain bo
sakana or tzorchei mitzvah that we have for a regular non Jew applies to a
ger toshav any more than it applies to a non religious Jew.   Thus if we are
going to run a state on Torah principles, it would seem imperative to work
on solutions that deal with hospitals and electricity generators and the
like that do not rely on non Jewish or non religious labour.

Regards

Chana



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 31, Issue 75
**************************************

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