Avodah Mailing List

Volume 32: Number 139

Fri, 03 Oct 2014

• 1. Re: Wristwatch on Shabbos (Kenneth Miller)
• 2. Who decides if someone eats on YK (Ben Waxman)
• 3. Re: Ben sorer u'moreh (David Riceman)
• 4. Re: shabbos app (Kenneth Miller)
• 5. Re: Ben sorer u'moreh (Zev Sero)
• 6. chagiga 23a (Rich, Joel)
• 7. time and place (Rich, Joel)
• 8. Re: Supporting Shemittah - deOraisa or deRabbanan (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: chagiga 23a (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Judaism is not a Religion? (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: Daat Torah (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: (Not) to Eat Meat on Rosh Hashana (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Thermal Cup on Shabbos [hatmanah] (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: (Not) to Eat Meat on Rosh Hashana (Prof. Levine)
• 15. mass media meschilah (Eli Turkel)
• 16. Re: mass media meschilah (Micha Berger)
• 17. Re: mass media meschilah (Kenneth Miller)

R' Micha Berger wrote:

> Winding a watch and winding a mechanical baby swing are
> mechanically very very similar.
> But AFAIK, typical pesaq is that the first is assur, and the
> latter -- mutar.
> The difference? Watches are supposed to run down. A non-running
> watch is useless. Swings, OTOH, don't need to run continually.
> Similarly, you want a lock that is sometimes open and sometimes
> closed. An closed lock isn't "broken" in the same sense a
> non-running watch is, so opening it isn't tiqun.

I think you meant to write that "Watches are NOT supposed to run down."

In other words: The normal operation of a baby swing is that one winds it
up, it rocks the baby for a while, and then it stops. That's the normal
operation - winding it up is not a *repair*. In contrast (if I recall
correctly from 40-50 years ago) my wind-up watch would continue running for
more than a day when fully wound, enabling me to wind it up about the same
time each day without it ever stopping, and that was its normal use. But if
it would totally wind down and stop, that's when winding it up would be
considered a *repair*.

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
The #1 Worst Carb Ever?
Click to Learn #1 Carb that Kills Your Blood Sugar (Don't Eat This!)
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/542beb83b80306b835314st04vuc

http://en.calameo.com/read/0016608026a15a69a2c56  (page 70)

Rav Melamed in last week's Bsheva about how to decide if one eats on YK.
In the past the we've discussed the topic and Rav Melamed is very clear:
the doctor decides. In his discourse about determining if someone should
eat he never mentions asking a rabbi, just speak to doctor. He is the
sole determiner if someone's condition demands suspending the fast. The
doctor doesn't have to be dati, just honest and ethical.

Ben

RAM asked how to distinguish history from allegory.  I suspect that this 
is one of those cases, beloved by RMB, for which there is no definitive 
algorithm.  The Rambam (hakdamah to Perek Helek) says that this is 
essential for understanding aggadot Hazal, as does R. Avraham ben 
HaRambam in his essay on Aggadot printed in the introduction to Ein 
Ya'akov.  R. Moshe Cordovero in Or Ne'erav says that this is an 
essential prerequisite for the study of Kabbalah, which why they didn't 
allow people in Tzfat to study Kabbalah until they turned 18 (!), by 
which time they can be expected to be qualified to do that.

RZS makes the question more complicated by asking for an example where 
it is not obvious that the story isn't meant literally.  I can recall 
two such cases; unfortunately my memory is a bit sketchy so I hope 
someone who is CD enabled can help me out with the details.

See ShHShR 1:15:3 where RYbRY asks if it's literal.  I recall a variant 
where he says "Rebbi, hayitachen?", which is even more explicit, but I 
couldn't find it.

Also see the Hakdamah to Perek Helek where the Rambam analyzes the 
shakla v'tarya around Shabbat 30b (In Kafih's translation it's on p. 
139, column 2, the text around note 91).

Both of these are cases where (a) the source says it's meant as an 
allegory but (b) one of the students who was present didn't realize it.  
If that's not adequate for RZS perhaps he can tell us what would meet 
his requirements.

David Riceman

I wrote:

> ... but I would point out on Rav Heineman's Sabbath Mode ovens
> (which not everyone allows) there is no visual change on any of
> the controls, and even that is allowed only for yom tov, not
> Shabbos.

That was not totally accurate. According to the manual for my model,
pressing the various buttons generally does not cause any change in the
display panel, but after completing the several-button process, one presses
the "Start/On" button, and then:

> After a random delay period of approximately 30 seconds to 1
> minute, "][" will appear in the display indicating that the
> oven is baking/roasting.

Let's say for a minute that Rav Heineman is being more machmir than the
Shabbos App. Just for the sake of illustration, let's suppose that the
Shabbos App programmers designed it with a delay of only 5-10 seconds. I
will now note that their Home Page shows five sample text messages, whose
lengths are 69, 38, 39, 3, and 75 characters. This means that these
messages would take 8.6, 4.7, 4.9, 0.3, and 9.3 MINUTES to type out!

Besides all the halachic problems, I suspect that this extreme slowness
would make the Shabbos App very unpopular. On the other hand, this very
fact might mitigate the Uvda D'Chol that R' Micha pointed out.

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
The #1 Worst Carb Ever?
Click to Learn #1 Carb that Kills Your Blood Sugar (Don't Eat This!)
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/542c68d4e6b168d315best03vuc

On 1/10/2014 3:16 PM, David Riceman via Avodah wrote:
>
> RZS makes the question more complicated by asking for an example
> where it is not obvious that the story isn't meant literally.  I can
> recall two such cases; unfortunately my memory is a bit sketchy so I
> hope someone who is CD enabled can help me out with the details.
>
> See ShHShR 1:15:3 where RYbRY asks if it's literal.  I recall a
> variant where he says "Rebbi, hayitachen?", which is even more
> explicit, but I couldn't find it.
>
> Also see the Hakdamah to Perek Helek where the Rambam analyzes the
> shakla v'tarya around Shabbat 30b (In Kafih's translation it's on p.
> 139, column 2, the text around note 91).
>
> Both of these are cases where (a) the source says it's meant as an
> allegory but (b) one of the students who was present didn't realize
> it. If that's not adequate for RZS perhaps he can tell us what would
> meet his requirements.

1. We are not talking about agedeta here.  Agadeta (obvious agadeta) works by
different rules.   In our case we are talking about a statement of fact given
*as irrefutable proof* to win an argument. It's exactly the same as R Akiva's
attempted proof in the last mishnah of Yevamos.   In that case he doesn't win
the argument, because the Chachamim give the rest of the story.  But nobody
suggests that the story didn't really happen, let alone that R Akiva made it
up because he was so certain he was right. If it were to emerge that he did
invent the story, he would have been discredited forever.

2. As you say, in the case in ShShR the source says he didn't mean it literally,
so we don't have to speculate.

3. In the case in Shabbos, the Rambam proves that it's not meant literally.
If we didn't have that proof, then perhaps we should have taken it literally.
Indeed, I'm pretty sure there are those who do take it literally, and say
the Rambam's proof-text is talking about an earlier stage in the geulah, or
for different people (like the man, which worked differently for different
people).


-- 
Zev Sero             Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable
z...@sero.name        from malice.
                                                          - Eric Raymond

I was wondering about the gemara in chagiga 23a where the opinion of
r'chanania ben akiva is stated that  when the chachamim made a gzeira based
on an incident, it was limited to the specifics of the incident(per rashi
there).   It sounds like his opinion is the chachamim would make a gzeira
based on a single incident and limit it to that circumstance and I was
wondering what the underlying philosophy might be (e.g. God made the
incident happen so we would legislate on it or perhaps the chachamim wanted
to make note of the occurrence).  All this must tie in with general
gzeirah/takana rules(unless the algorithm is multivariate which is my
suspicion) with not making a takana in highly unusual cases, ones the
tzibbur can't keep....
Gmar Chatimah Tova
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/20141002/fbcdd78a/attachment-0001.htm>

http://seforim.blogspot.com/2014/10/how-to-read-hasidic-texts-qu
ick-guide.html
How to Read Hasidic Texts: A Quick Guide
by Ariel Evan Mayse


Interesting piece, I was particularly struck by:

4. THE CONTEXT - Now reflect on the text in two ways: First, try to read
the text on its own terms. How might this message have sounded to its
original audience, and why might it have been an appropriate teaching for
that time and place?

I wonder if this is true as a general rule for mussar as well, let alone halacha.

GCT
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/20141002/681ebe74/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 10:08:35PM -0400, via Avodah wrote:
: I believe that aniyei Eretz Yisrael -- or maybe it's only aniyei  
: Yerushalayim? -- are considered "aniyei ircha."

I have herd this before too -- from people collecting for Israeli causes.
I do not know of a real source. RHS explicitly says there is none,
and that this marketing ploy isn't true.

Although he also says that "irekha" needn't be geographic. It's the
community you belong to, your "me and mine". That ought to be largely
geographic, but it could also be your fellow descendents from some part
of the world, of people of some hashkafic camp, etc...

Alnd it struck me that with telecom, RHS's point has growing truth. I'm
in constant contact with people from all over the globe. If one of them
were to have a need, would they be less "aliyei irkha" than someone I
never heard of from the far end of my eiruv?

GCT!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I always give much away,
mi...@aishdas.org        and so gather happiness instead of pleasure.
http://www.aishdas.org           -  Rachel Levin Varnhagen
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 08:53:00PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:          
> I am still a little bewildered by the gezera to eliminate shofar (and
> lulav, megilla) on shabbat because some one might carry outside an eruv.
> Does that mean anytime there is room for error we should outlaw the
> procedure?

I think this is answered by R' Joel Rich's post of 11:54am EDT today:
: I was wondering about the gemara in chagiga 23a where the opinion of
: r'chanania ben akiva is stated that when the chachamim made a gzeira
: based on an incident, it was limited to the specifics of the incident(per
: rashi there)...

I think we proved that a gezeira must come from a risk that actually
caused a problem, and (less conclusively proven but seems only logical)
the risk (probability times possible loss) is great enough to justify
it.

GCT!
-Micha

To recap from where this thread began, I think we went in a number
of false directions. The opening quote (Judaism Eternal, pg 103):
: "Judaism is not a religion, the synagogue is not a church, and the 
: rabbi is not a priest. Judaism is not a mere adjunct to life: it 
: comprises all of life."
...

So how did we get to:
: In the following accepted definition, I would like to know how WE
: are NOT included:

Why ask? The quote tells you what RSRH meant. As RAF put is on Mon Sep 22:
> I think that Rav Hirsch meant it exactly in the same way the German
> reporters recently used it, namely, to contrast it with Christianity's
> compartimentalization of the sacred and the prophane ("give unto caesar
> what caesar is due"), while some other religions see their system of
> thought as being more all encompassing. In that manner, Islam resembles
> Judaism...

RSRH didn't talk here about it being G-d's Anthropology whereas religion is
Man's Theology. (Although that would mean Buddhism isn't a religion?)
That's a distinction RSRH makes elsewhere, in his first essay for
Sivan, sec 2, pg 185 (Ar Prof Levine's site,
<http://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/sivan_1.pdf>.

In short, RSRH says "Judaism is not a religion" more than once, each
time tells you what he means, and it's not always the same distinction
being drawn.

But the choice between "Judaism is not a religion" and "Judaism is very
different than other religions" is a pedagogic one. Since RSRH tells us
the exact distinction he means each time, it's not about the "category"
religion.

GCT!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Rescue me from the desire to win every
mi...@aishdas.org        argument and to always be right.
http://www.aishdas.org              - Rav Nassan of Breslav
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   Likutei Tefilos 94:964

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 08:19:36AM -0400, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
: R" H Schachter has said it is wrong (actually IIRC he uses stronger
: language) to say that the position on heter mechirah is a result of how
: one looks at the medina.

Much the way many people confuse his rebbe's position on Hallel on
Yom haAtzma'ut with a lack of personal enthusiasm for YhA. Rather,
RYBS had a typically Brisk technical argument against picking your
own days for Hallel, leining, etc...

GCT!
-Micha

On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 1:0pm EDT, Prof. Levine quoted R Yehuda Spitz
<http://ohr.edu/5259>:
: Postscript:
: Many later authorities, including the Chacham Tzvi (cited by his son
: the Yaavetz, Toras Hakinaos 8), Rav Chaim Volozhiner (ibid.), and the
: Chazon Ish (cited in Maaseh Ish vol. 1 pg. 119), among others, share
: an interesting and different viewpoint regarding the Shulchan Aruchs
: Maggid. [This author has also heard this view bsheim noted mekubal Rav
: Yaakov Hillel shlita]. They understand that a Maggid does not actually
: rule with Heavenly authority; rather it uses the individuals own merit
: and koach to present rulings. Meaning, although Rav Karo cites psakim from
: the Maggid, it is essentially utilizing his own personal hidden strengths
: to bring out these rulings. Therefore, concludes Rav Chaim Volozhiner,
: that in this instance it must be that notwithstanding how great he was,
: Rav Karo must have somehow personally made a mistake, and the outcome
: of that resulted in an erroneous conclusion being taught by the Maggid.

FWIW, and given the sources, that's "no much", I suggested in prior
discussions that the SA's policy of following the mejority of his
triumverate (Rif, Rambam, Rosh) also leaves little room for the maggid
to have influenced his pesaq anyway.

More along their lines.... Maran Bet Yosef's maggid was the embodiment of
the Mishnah. The spiritual manifestation of his won encounter with a book.
That's not entirely "bashamayim". I am picturing this is the same point as
the CZ's, but in very different wording.

GCT!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Take time,
mi...@aishdas.org        be exact,
http://www.aishdas.org   unclutter the mind.
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm

On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 08:55:30PM +0000, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
: If so, then another question can be raised: Hatmana only applies when
: the insulating material is in direct contact with the kli rishon. But
: here, the inner and outer pieces are davka separated by a partial
: vacuum! And it is actually the vacuum that preserves the temperature,
: and not the outer piece! I wonder how all this would play out l'halacha...

Well, the insulating non-material is directly in contct with the keli
rishon...

It might depend on whether hatmanah is its own gezeira (Rambam), or an
aspect of the same gezeira as shehiya (Rashi). Rashi's position appears
to imply the shehiyah-hatmanah gezeira is functionally defined. OTOH,
maybe one can say that since shehiyah requires actual contact with the
oven, contact is part of that function.

(Frankly, I remember having something better to say, and 12 days later
this is all that remained of what I was planning to write.)

GCT!
-Micha

At 03:06 PM 10/2/2014, Micha Berger wrote:
 >FWIW, and given the sources, that's "no much", I suggested in prior
 >discussions that the SA's policy of following the mejority of his
 >triumverate (Rif, Rambam, Rosh) also leaves little room for the maggid
 >to have influenced his pesaq anyway.
 >
 >More along their lines.... Maran Bet Yosef's maggid was the embodiment of
 >the Mishnah. The spiritual manifestation of his won encounter with a book.
 >That's not entirely "bashamayim". I am picturing this is the same point as
 >the CZ's, but in very different wording.

I really have no idea what you are saying.  What does it mean to be
"the embodiment of the Mishnah"?  Please elaborate.

YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20141002/e215058d/attachment-0001.htm>

In a few shiurim I attended over the past few days the speakers said that
asking for forgiveness of mass media, email, whatsup,  etc is fairly
meaningless. First SA states that one should preferably ask for mechila in
person and not through a messenger. Second the request for a specific deed
and not a general request for unknown activities. One cannot really forgive
someone for an unknown action, mechilla should be honest and not just a
verbal statement.

There is a story of a masgiach in a yeshiva who was insulted by one of the
boys. The boy later came to ask for forgiveness and the masgiach refused.
He came back several times and the masgiach always refused to forgive.
Finally after several weeks the masgiach forgave the boy. The boy then
asked why it took so long to get forgiveness. The masgiach answered that he
was very hurt by what the boy had said. It had taken all this time to work
on himself to forgive the boy.

Question: In tefillat Zaka we ask for mechilla from others and forgive
them. How does this mass forgiveness to others work when we have no idea
what they did to us.

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20141003/543742d0/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 12:09:44PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: In a few shiurim I attended over the past few days the speakers said that
: asking for forgiveness of mass media, email, whatsup,  etc is fairly
: meaningless....

: Question: In tefillat Zaka we ask for mechilla from others and forgive
: them. How does this mass forgiveness to others work when we have no idea
: what they did to us.

See the thread "Ad sheyeratzeh es chavero" <http://j.mp/1xKE3HE>.
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=A#AD%20
SHEYERATZEH%20ES%20CHAVERO

R' SB Abelesz asked a similar question in 2008, based on "Aveiros
shebein adam lechavero ein Yom Hakipurim mechaper ad sheyeratzeh es
chavero." (RSBA cited the QSA 131:4, but it's older)

Before asking on-list, someone had told him that RSZA holds that
Tefilas Taka is only about forgiving minor matters. The kind of
incidents we so don't hold on to, we would need reminding that
they happened.

Onlist, kedarkeinu baqodesh, we went off on tangents.

I brought up the machloqes between RYSalanter and the CC about asking
mechilah when the person doesn't know you wronged them. The CC holds
you must. RYS refused to give a haskamah to the CC, lest people see the
letterhead and think he agrees -- even if he writes in the body of the
letter that he he disagrees on this one point. That is how vehemently
RYS holds it is assur to hurt someone by telling them you wronged them
in order to ask mechilah. I wondered if Tefillas Zaka, if heartfelt,
would be enough to satisfy the CC *and* RYS.

R' Eliyahu Gerstl discussed famous stories of gedolim (giving one
about R YB Lipmann Heller as an example) who forgave their tormentors.
What if the person owes money, is mechilah sufficient? Does it matter
is the money is a debt or payment for hezeq? What about taqanos hashavim?

GCT and :-)@@ii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "The worst thing that can happen to a
mi...@aishdas.org        person is to remain asleep and untamed."
http://www.aishdas.org          - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm
Fax: (270) 514-1507

R' Eli Turkel wrote:

> In a few shiurim I attended over the past few days the speakers
> said that asking for forgiveness of mass media, email, whatsup,
> etc is fairly meaningless. First SA states that one should
> preferably ask for mechila in person and not through a messenger.
> Second the request for a specific deed and not a general request
> for unknown activities. One cannot really forgive someone for an
> unknown action, mechilla should be honest and not just a verbal
> statement.

The operative word here is "fairly". Such apologies are far less than
ideal, but that doesn't make them totally meaningless. Under the
circumstances, they are often the best that can be accomplished.

Is there much difference between "mass media, email, whatsup, etc", and
when the shul president or gabbai gets up in front and apologizes to all,
on behalf of those who run the shul, for any real or perceived inequities?

Or, for that matter, when the Kohen Gadol confesses the sins of the whole
nation? For the moment, I'm not asking about korbanos or kaparah. Like RET,
I'm simply questioning how the how the apology works.

> Question: In tefillat Zaka we ask for mechilla from others and
> forgive them. How does this mass forgiveness to others work when
> we have no idea what they did to us.

Let's look at it on two levels. There is a deeper level where the effects
of the sins are totally cleaned away, as if the sins never occurred. On
this level, I think that Tefilas Zaka is either ineffective, or perhaps the
opposite: If "we have no idea what they did to us", then we are declaring
those sins to be superficial and ignorable, as if they had never occured.

On a lighter level, perhaps Tefilas Zaka concedes that the process is
incomplete. Nevertheless, there is a quid pro quo here: "HaShem, listen to
me! All those who sinned against me, I hereby forgive them despite their
lack of apology, or lack of sincerity. So too, mida k'neged mida, You will
please forgive me, even for the sins that I have not done a proper teshuva
for."

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
The #1 Worst Carb Ever?
Click to Learn #1 Carb that Kills Your Blood Sugar (Don't Eat This!)
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/542eb046590b530463bdest02vuc


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



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


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


***************************************

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