Avodah Mailing List

Volume 34: Number 139

Wed, 02 Nov 2016

• 1. running creates electricity (Eli Turkel)
• 2. fitbit (Eli Turkel)
• 3. R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion (Eli Turkel)
• 4. Re: fitbit (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: fitbit (Eli Turkel)
• 6. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion (Eli Turkel)
• 8. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion (Zev Sero)
• 9. Re: Rav Melamed on Metal Pots (Isaac Balbin)
• 10. Re: fitbit (Zev Sero)
• 11. Re: running creates electricity (Zev Sero)
• 12. Bircat Cohanim (Beth & David Cohen)
• 13. Re: Minhag Ashkenaz During Chol Moed Succos in EY (Eli Turkel)
• 14. halacha vs minhag (Eli Turkel)

<< It's all about sparks, not electricity.  Who mentioned sparks here?
What have they got to do with the topic?  There's no mention of sparks in
the article, so why do you suppose they would exist? >>

No there is no sparks that I know. My assumption was that this would be
worse than sparks since they have a long term effect. If part of the heter
for sparks is that they are not intended this would not apply to these new
clothing.

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161101/bfa7e82a/attachment-0001.htm>

<<This touches on my fitbit question of a short while ago. Say you had
a fitbit like device that posed no halakhic question other than this:
After Shabbos you could push a button to see how far you walked or how
well you slept. >>

I asked both R Ariel chief rabbi of Ramat Gan and R Rosen of Tzomet this
question.
They both answered that  technically it is permitted  but it is zilzul
shabbat and they would only approve it for medical need.

returning to running for electricty the article says
"The objective was to harvest energy from our living environment, for
example, human walking or muscle movement and fabric; the goal is to drive
small electronics (eg a smartwatch or phone)

So (1) there is positive intention to create and store electricity
(2) it might (in the future) be put into active use

So again it would seem to me that it is more serious than the heter for
causing static electricity which has neither of these problems.

Similar to the fitbit even if it is technically allowed many poskim would
forbid it as zilzul shabbat

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161101/b0ea4ab7/attachment-0001.htm>

<<The curvature of the earth may not be relevant but the earth's rotation
around its axis surely is. >>

First I completely agree with Rbn Katz.  My only point was the question
whether up is defined as a radius from the earth's center to the cemetery
and onwards or by some vertical to a plane on the earth's center.

Obviously for points nearby the difference is negligible but not for points
far away.
In any case we agree that it is ridiculous to apply this to a cohen on the
moon.
What about a cohen astronaut in an orbit that passes "above" (whatever that
means) the Holon cemetery. In this case one is out of sight looking from
the ground up to the sky

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161101/6537d7fd/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 08:13:41PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: I asked both R Ariel chief rabbi of Ramat Gan and R Rosen of Tzomet this
: question.
: They both answered that  technically it is permitted  but it is zilzul
: shabbat and they would only approve it for medical need.

Okay, next case:

When you don't press the button, the pedometer is a perfectly usable
digital watch. (This is actually closer to the vivofit's reality, except
that said watch goes dark when kept at rest for a long enough time. In
which case, moving your wrist lights up LEDs... But let's stick to the
imaginary example.)

Is it still zilzul Shabbos when you have a perfectly Shabbosdik reason
to wear the watch in addition to tracking one's walking?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of
mi...@aishdas.org        greater vanity in others; it makes us vain,
http://www.aishdas.org   in fact, of our modesty.
Fax: (270) 514-1507              -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980)

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
> Okay, next case:

> When you don't press the button, the pedometer is a perfectly usable
> digital watch....
> Is it still zilzul Shabbos when you have a perfectly Shabbosdik reason
> to wear the watch in addition to tracking one's walking?

I can't answer for them but I would assume that it is OK

-- 
Eli Turkel

On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 07:53:29PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
: First I completely agree with Rbn Katz.  My only point was the question
: whether up is defined as a radius from the earth's center to the cemetery
: and onwards or by some vertical to a plane on the earth's center.
: Obviously for points nearby the difference is negligible but not for points
: far away.

I don't understand the latter possibility. Chazal don't talk about an up
that fits the definition.

Take a plane parallel to the tangent at Jerusalem. Now go far away,
say to Pumbedisa. The trig ended up being over my head, but let's say
the resulting proposed "up" would be 9 deg off from vertical. Wouldn't
Shas have to had mention that fact that someone in a tree slightly to
the west of a qever may be tamei?

The "line from the middle of the earth through the meis" definition of
lemaalah is the only definition I could think of that ends up with the
commonsensical (ignoring the earth's curvature) definition the gemara
assumes.

Tir'u baTov!
-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

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 9:07 PM, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
> The "line from the middle of the earth through the meis" definition of
> lemaalah is the only definition I could think of that ends up with the
> commonsensical (ignoring the earth's curvature) definition the gemara
> assumes.

I severely doubt that chazal knew enough about a spherical earth and its
center.
Again far away with Rbn Katz that the halacha doesn't apply. Within a
distance of several amot which is what chazal was concerned the difference
between the tangent plane and a curved earth is probably very small.
I haven't done the math but have worked in meteorolgy. The standard
model in meteorology for any local forecast is to use the tangent plane
assumption.

-- 
Eli Turkel

On 01/11/16 00:03, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
> This is the part I don't get. What good does the fence do if he is
> carrying it? How does a portable fence insure that he won't step over a
> grave?

There's no chance that he'll step on a grave.  Graves are well marked, 
and if he sticks to the path he won't step on them.  A fence allows him 
to come within four amos of them.


[Email #2. -micha]

On 01/11/16 06:08, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> In either case, I share your confusion about how a mobile wall would help.
> You get the 2 reshuyos to allow it deOraisa, but you don't cover the
> gezeira to avoid accidental negi'ah or ohel.

Simple.  He's walking on the path. But the path comes within four amos 
of graves.  Without a fence he might be maahil over a grave; with a 
fence he's on one side, the grave is on the other, so no part of him can 
be over it.

-- 
Zev Sero                Hit the road, Jack
z...@sero.name           but please come back once more

> I am lost. RMF makes a convincing argument that nosein ta'am is not an
> issue for stam yeinam, such as sherry casks. His proof, bitul besheish.
> One part wine to 6 parts water is easily tastable.

> Leshitaso, 1:6 works because too much mezigah, and the mixture isn't
> yayin -- as the gemara says WRT 4 kosos. One doesn't need bitul, because
> the gezeira of stam yeinam doesn't apply.

> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha

Rav Weiss starts the Tshuva by saying that it has been shown to
be permitted by many before him and expresses surprise why he is
being asked. He then goes onto give some new reasons why it should be
permitted. One of them is what I wrote: Where do we have a source for
Nosen Taam, taking many years? Was that Chazal's definition too? According
to Rav Weiss, throughout Shas, the Taam, happens "automatically" with
the mixture. Now, I acknowledge his point, but I have trouble when the
outcome (taste) is the same (even if it took 8 years to happen). Rav
Weiss goes onto also argue that in blind tests, most people won't know the
difference between whether there was ageing in a wine-based cask or not,
as support for his view. I am somewhat of a whisky lover, and I feel that
I could pass some blind tests, however, in one of the Shules I attended
many years ago, the Gabbay used to keep some expensive bottles and pour
blended cheap whisky in them. We used to have a rule. If it's an open
bottle, don't trust what you are drinking :-) He was a holocaust survivor,
so we didn't dare meddle in his kitchen lest he give us a Misheberach.

It seems that the cRc are the main authority which investigates
and has ruled that many whiskys (and other alcoholic beverages) are
"not recommended" according to the list on their iPhone app which is
regularly updated. The OU however seems to have stepped up to the plate
by increasing the number of whisky's which are from plain casks and
therefore have the OU stamp on them, so that those who want whiskys with
a reliable Hechsher can purchase it. At home, I have "Mehadrin" whisky
and if I host an event, I generally put that out. I do have sherry cask
whisky, and will provide it for someone whose "nose is out of joint" when
they see what is being offered. I haven't discussed this issue with Mori
V'Rabbi Rav Schachter. Does anyone reliably know his personal opinion on
the issue? In the OU itself, he and Rav Belsky z"l didn't always agree,
but mostly they did. There is an internal Sefer at the OU with Tshuvos on
the issues where they disagreed. The OU policy though is to go with the
stricter opinion given that the OU is relied upon by many right across
the spectrum. I think this is a good policy for a Kashrus organisation
that wants to be trusted across the world by everybody.

Tangentially, On a related issue, there is the question of Benedictine
where there is also possibly added brandy. The LR used to have it on his
table at Farbrengens and drink it. That then stopped. Rabbi Moshe Gutnick
of Sydney, wrote to the company and tried to be 'Mesiach Lefi Toomo'
or perhaps even more than that, by pretending he knew some people with
an allergy to wine/wine derived/infused alcohol(e.g. by adding brandy)
and asked Benedictine whether they could guarantee there was absolutely
no wine used in production. I remember thinking that this was an issue
that was Efshar Liverooray, and wondering why nobody seemed to actually
do so. There was a rumour that Rav Lande of Bnei Brak allows it. I have
not seen this in writing and therefore don't take it seriously. Here is
what I have found out though. I found this OLD article

http://www.crcweb.org/kosher_articles/Benedictine.php

It seems to imply that Benedictine (*non B&B*) is okay. I have never
had it (and I'm not a Lubavitcher :-)

The cRc app on my iPhone doesn't list Benedictine. What is the ruling
of the cRc and how does this relate to the article I posted?

I do not understand why R Msika doesn't drink *non* B&B. Is this because
of the cRc comments or is it because he only drinks Mehadrin with a
Mashgiach at least Yotze VeNuchnas, or is it political, or a personal
Chumra/Maris Ayin as they look similar. I was then advised by the cRc
that they were revisiting Benedictine. I received a recent email which
stated as follows:

"We did some work on this a few months ago, but I honestly cannot remember
what we found at the time. As I vaguely recall, *nothing had changed
since the original article was written*, and we were going to stand by
our original recommendation."

If they say that Coca Cola is okay and that is a guarded secret, I can't
get my head around why Benedictine is still seemingly such a mystery
story. In Melbourne, the central respected Kashrus Agency, Kosher
Australia, under Rabbi Mottel Gutnick, which is trusted by the OU and
the Badatz etc do not allow Benedictine (and he's a Lubavitcher). Yet,
I see other Yeraim and Shleimim drink it.

I just updated the cRc app database on my phone, and it says that *ALL
B&B* liqueurs are not recommended. In addition it has a *separate*
entry for Benedictine which also says Not recommended.

Personally, I have never drunk Benedictine.

On 01/11/16 14:13, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
>
> So (1) there is positive intention to create and store electricity
> (2) it might (in the future) be put into active use
>
> So again it would seem to me that it is more serious than the heter for
> causing static electricity which has neither of these problems.
>

again, according to the material you cited about static the whole 
problem was sparks.  Since there is no mention of sparks in the article, 
none of that discussion was relevant to our topic.  That problem, as far 
as we know, doesn't exist, so doesn't need a heter.

How is it zilzul shabbat to simply wear clothes, just because they do 
something that will be useful after shabbos?  Surely it's just like 
wearing a self-winding watch, which I don't think anyone has a problem 
with.


-- 
Zev Sero                Hit the road, Jack
z...@sero.name           but please come back once more

On 01/11/16 08:15, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
> << It's all about sparks, not electricity.  Who mentioned sparks here?
> What have they got to do with the topic?  There's no mention of sparks
> in the article, so why do you suppose they would exist? >>
>
> No there is no sparks that I know. My assumption was that this would be
> worse than sparks since they have a long term effect. If part of the
> heter for sparks is that they are not intended this would not apply to
> these new clothing.

You seem to be missing the entire point of the discussion you cited. 
Who cares whether there is a long or short term effect?  Who told you 
that this is at all a problem?  The entire problem discussed there was 
sparks; some found a heter for the sparks, some didn't.  But if there 
are no sparks then there is no problem in the first place, so there's no 
need for a heter.


-- 
Zev Sero                Hit the road, Jack
z...@sero.name           but please come back once more

After duchaning for the second time today, the following questions occurred
to me:

Why do we say Bircat Cohanim a second time for Musaf? In the BHMK didn't
they only recite it once daily?

Why do we say the bracha a second time? Can't we be have in mind the second
duchaning when we say the bracha in Shacharit ans not say the bracha again
in Musaf?

David I. Cohen
Yerushalayim
(formerly of Stamford, CT)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161102/88bd97e7/attachment-0001.htm>

> In an earlier post R. Eli Turkel asked what those who put on Tefillen
> during Chol Moed do regarding the leining for Chol Moed.  Please see
> https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/Ashkenaz/Lu'ach%20-%205777.pdf

> If you scroll down to Succos you will see what Rabbi Hamburger says one
> should do in EY during Chol Moed.  Note what he says about Tefillen (and
> the different minhagim regarding when to remove them) and the leining
> during Chol Moed.

> YL

again R Hamburger is very much a daas yachid on this issue

-- 
Eli Turkel

I found another case for a difference between minhag and psak

Most poskim say that the cohen's hands should be outside the tallit during
birkhat kohanim.
One proof is the minhag not to look at the chohen's hands. If his hands are
inside the tallit then this custom is meaningless.

Nevertheless the overwhelming minhag is for the cohen's hands to be inside
the tallit.
A look at any picture of the mass birkhat cohanim at the kote show all the
cohanim with hands under the tallit

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20161102/a0b9bf6e/attachment.htm>

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



_______________________________________________
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.)