Avodah Mailing List

Volume 35: Number 51

Sat, 15 Apr 2017

• 1. mimeticism (Eli Turkel)
• 2. "I have an opportunity to kill the terrorist..." (Micha Berger)
• 3. Toilet Paper on Chol haMoed (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Toilet Paper on Chol haMoed (Akiva Blum)
• 5. Re: kitniyot (Rich, Joel)
• 6. Re: mimeticism (Micha Berger)
• 7. Misc interesting Halacha questions from R Shlomo Miller shlitah (M Cohen)
• 8. Burning sold chameitz (Ben Waxman)
• 9. Taanis Bechoros - Women? (Akiva Miller)
• 10. Sefirot Ha`omer (Simon Montagu)
• 11. Re: kitniyot (Marty Bluke)
• 12. Re: Sefirot Ha`omer (Lisa Liel)
• 13. Re: kitniyot (Zev Sero)
• 14. Re: kitniyot (Ben Waxman)
• 15. Re: kitniyot (Akiva Miller)

<<Mimeticism is Judaism as culture. Things like absorbing that "Shabbos
is coming" feeling of the erev Shabbos Jew. The pious Jew of today may
be able to work himself up emotionally on Yom Kippur, the mimetic Jew
of 100 years ago was simply terrified, without such work. (Both kinds
of religiosity have their pros and cons.)

Mimeticism evolves because culture evolves. >>

Doesn't answer my question of how mimeticism deals with new situations.
Sticking
to kitniyot by patents used cottenseed oil but knew nothing about Canola
oil or
Lecitisthin

<<Textualism is also tradition. But it's the formal tradition passed off
from rebbe to talmid. RYBS's dialog down the ages that he watched gather
around his father's table, or later, in his own shiur room. >>

Let me use this to sound off. I have a major problem with textualiism. In
some circles
it means studying a sugya and coming to a conclusion without any regard to
the outside world.
In regard to shiurim the Noda Yehuda has a question. One doesn't suddenly
change minhagim because of a question.

In recent years this doubling of shiurim has become popular because of CI.
First there is evidence that CI himself did not use his own shiur. It is
well known that some descendants of the CC don't use his kiddush cup
because it is not shiur CI.
However, there are loads of proofs that the shiur of CI is impossible.
First the 500x500 amot of the holy part of har habayit doesnt quite fit in
the walls. Even a slightly smaller shiur would hit various walls making it
impossible to walk around while various testimonies make it smaller.
There is now a new exhibition of a virtual 3D reality of walking around the
bet hamikdash. It is based on aerial photographs of the current Temple
mount and supplemented by details in the Mishna and archaeology using the
topography of the land. Theis construction places the holy har habayit on
the currently raised portion of the Temple mount. This yields an amah of
about 38cm (CI=57, CN=44-48)

Other  proofs included the length of the Siloam tunnel which is documents
in amot and can be measured. One of the strongest proofs is based on the
meitzah of the cohen gadol which could not possibly hold the shiur of CI
(note that if his hands were bigger this would redefine the amah).

As to changes over the generations olive pits from the Bar Chocba era are
the same size as today.

In spite of a preponderous evidence that the shiur of CI is way too large
almost all seforim in Israel give the amount of matzah to eat and wine to
drink based on CI (at least lechatchila).
This is textualism at the extreme in contrast to common sense
-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20170410/5bac0930/attachment-0001.htm>

Anyone want to try this one, with meqoros?

RSE raises two issues: killing a neutralized terrorist, and (I guess)
dina demalkhusa on the topic.

Chag Kasher veSameaich (belashon "lo zu af zu"),
-micha


The Jewish Press
Tzfat Chief Rabbi Was Asked in Real Time whether to Kill
Ramming Terrorist
By David Israel -- 11 Nisan 5777 -- April 7, 2017
http://www.j
ewishpress.com/news/jewish-news/tzfat-chief-rabbi-was-asked-in-real-time-wh
ether-to-kill-ramming-terrorist/2017/04/07/

Chief Rabbi of Tzfat Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu, who is not known for
particularly leftwing sympathies (he encourages his flock to refuse Arab
renters, for instance), on Thursday night told a class he was teaching
that one of his students had phoned him from the scene of the ramming
attack that killed an IDF soldier. The student posed a halachic inquiry:

"He told me, I see my buddy here lying down dead," Rabbi Eliyahu recalled,
adding that his student had asked, "I have an opportunity to kill the
terrorist - should I kill him or not?" Advertisement

Around 10 AM, Thursday, an Arab terrorist rammed his vehicle into two
IDF soldiers waiting at a hitchhiking post on Rt. 60, outside Ofra in
Judea and Samaria. Sgt. Elhai Teharlev HY"D, 20, was killed, and the
other soldier was injured. The terrorist was arrested by security forces.

Rabbi Eliyahu said that his response was that "this terrorist deserves
to die. However, unfortunately, the laws in this country are not well
constructed, and so there is no legal way to do to him what needs to
be done."

"I told him that had he been able to do it while the attack was on it
would have been possible, but we were after the event, unfortunately."
Advertisement

R Shlomo Katz asked the following on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1344775595566571/permalink/1468822
016495261/

> Let me run an idea by you guys...

> 1. Tearing toilet paper is melacha

> 2. Melacha is forbidden on chol hamoed

> 3. One of the permits for doing melacha is for tzorech hamoed, but in this
> case, if possible you should do the melacha before the chag

> 4. Therefore, you should tear toilet paper for 7 or 8 days before the
> beginning of Pesach and Sukkot.

> 5. If you find yourself on chol hamoed without pre-torn toilet paper, you
> can tear it, however preferably not on the lines.

> Am I crazy?

:-)|,|ii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A cheerful disposition is an inestimable treasure.
mi...@aishdas.org        It preserves health, promotes convalescence,
http://www.aishdas.org   and helps us cope with adversity.
Fax: (270) 514-1507         - R' SR Hirsch, "From the Wisdom of Mishlei"

On Apr 10, 2017 1:40 PM, "Micha Berger via Avodah" <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
wrote...


> 1. Tearing toilet paper is melacha

> 2. Melacha is forbidden on chol hamoed

> 3. One of the permits for doing melacha is for tzorech hamoed, but in this
> case, if possible you should do the melacha before the chag

> 4. Therefore, you should tear toilet paper for 7 or 8 days before the
> beginning of Pesach and Sukkot.

> 5. If you find yourself on chol hamoed without pre-torn toilet paper, you
> can tear it, however preferably not on the lines.

> Am I crazy?


Not at all.

Please see Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchasa perek 66 footnote 78.

RSZA was machmir for himself, though the author suggests that nowdays it
would be unnecessary.

Akiva
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20170410/b690d97c/attachment-0001.htm>

> There is no question that when Moshiach comes the division
> between Sefardim and Ashkenazim basically will go away. The
> Sanhedrin willl pasken the halacha and there will be no
> machlokes.

This is news to me. There is no machlokes here to be paskened.
Everyone agrees that the halacha allows even rice to Ashkenazim. It is
all minhag. Even if the Sanhendrin would want to, I don't know where
they'd get the authority to do away with minhagim.

On the other hand, if they *do* have the authority to do that, then
how can we know which way they'd pasken? Maybe they'd impose kitniyos
in the Sefardim!
---------------------------------------
Aiui there is some debate as to how much practice was/will be
standardized-some believe (IIRC R'HS) that the shevet Sanhedrin set local
practice and few issues went to great sanhedrin for standardization.
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 Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:04:31PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
:> Mimeticism evolves because culture evolves.

: Doesn't answer my question of how mimeticism deals with new situations.

It answers your question by implying there is no answer. There is no
rule for how common practice will evolve. Rules are textual.

But the truth is, halakhah requires both. Not every evolution of a minhag
is valid. That way lies Catholic Israel. It has to pass muster against
the sources and sevara.

:-)|,|ii!
-Micha

Misc interesting Halacha questions from R Shlomo Miller shlitah

http://baisdovyosef.com/rabbi-past-questions/
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlitah

for a printout of all the Q&As (100 pgs)
https://www.dropbox.com/s/70y971r0ct2l7x8/RS%20miller%20bartfeld%2
0questions
.doc?dl=0

or email me offline
mco...@touchlogic.com

GYT, mc




=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 9.1.0.2894, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.22240)
http://free.pctools.com/
=======

http://bit.ly/2pui5Hy

A rav gave over some quick halachot and cited the Shulhan Aruch that if 
one finds chameitz in one's home, you cover it (if you find it on 
shabbat/yom tov) and later burn it, or burn it right away (cholo moed).

I asked, if one sold one's chameitz, how can you burn it? It now belongs 
to the non-jew. This rav (and second rav) said that the sale only 
includes the chameitz that you specify. If you don't have a piece of 
chameitz in mind, you didn't sell it.

OK. But today i looked at the contract used to authorize the rabbinate 
to sell one's chameitz (linked above). It says very clearly, that they 
are selling ALL of a person's chameitz, everything in all of his 
properties. It makes no mention of what you have in mind. If a contract 
say "ALL" it means all, n'est pas?

So my question returns: would someone burn chameitz that they found?

Ben

My eldest grand-daughter asked me why girls don't go to the siyum on
Erev Pesach, given the medrash firstborn girls *were* killed in Makas
Bechoros. So I read her Mishne Berurah 470:4, which gives the reason
as because there are no halachos in which female firstborns have any
such kedusha.

That seemed to satisfy her, but it didn't satisfy me. After all, if a
boy is his father's first but not his mother's first, then he has no
kedusha which would require Pidyon Haben.

Aruch Hashulchan 470:2 gives that same logic, but explains that
although the father's first doesn't get a Pidyon Haben, he *does* have
special halachos about inheritance, and Aruch Hashulchan 470:3 says
the same thing regarding a boy who was born after a miscarriage, or a
firstborn Kohen, or a firstborn Levi.

My question is: So what? Why is the special status of "firstborn for
inheritance" more relevant than "would've been killed in Mitzrayim"?

(Please note that there is another case that I'm *not* asking about,
namely, where none of the people at home was a technical bechor, then
whoever was oldest was subject to Makas Bechoros. Since that could
vary depending on who was home in any particular year, I can easily
understand why it never got included in the minhag.)

Akiva Miller<div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br />
<table style="border-top: 1px solid #D3D4DE;">
        <tr>
        <td style="width: 55px; padding-top: 13px;"><a
href="http://www.a
vg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&;utm_source=link&utm_cam
paign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail"
target="_blank"><img
src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v
1.png"
width="46" height="29" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;" /></a></td>
                <td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 12px; color: #41424e;
font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
line-height: 18px;">Virus-free. <a
href="http://www.a
vg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&;utm_source=link&utm_cam
paign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail"
target="_blank" style="color: #4453ea;">www.avg.com<;/a>
                </td>
        </tr>
</table><a href="#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1"
height="1"></a></div>

Every year I would like to get deeper into the combinations of sefirot (or
middot) that appear in siddurim with the counting of the Omer, and every
year I get lost and confused. For example, what is the difference between
hesed shebigevura and gevura shebehesed? If tiferet is a synthesis of hesed
and gevura, how does it differ from either of the above? And so on and so
on.

There seem to be a thousand books and websites that explain the sefirot and
their combinations in modern terms, but I haven't found any that quote or
even cite primary sources. Where might one look for such sources?

Mo`adim lesimha!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20170413/c4a84e91/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Akiva Miller wrote:
"On the other hand, if they *do* have the authority to do that, then
how can we know which way they'd pasken? Maybe they'd impose kitniyos
in the Sefardim!"

Given the illogic of the minhag of kitniyos I think not. Why would they
impose a din that makes no sense in today's world.

With regards to visiting children R' AKiva Miler wrote:
"That depends on your posek. By my memory, many poskim, including among
the DL, hold that one can eat from the keilim, but to avoid actual
kitniyos. And many other shitos in both directions."

I was saying that facetiously. WADR you missed the forest for the trees. Of
course there are halachic solutions but it still makes for a very akward
situation for parents and children when parents visit a child and can't eat
all the food.

You are looking at this from a pure halachic perspceticve but in truth,
there is a non-halachic sociologcal perspective here that needs to be
addressed as well.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20170414/26400393/attachment-0001.htm>

Lama li kra?  It seems pretty clear on the face of it.  Hesed 
she'b'Gevura means that you're doing Hesed by means of Gevura.  Your 
intended result is Hesed.  The way you're achieving that Hesed is by an 
act of Gevura.  So let's take R' Aryeh Kaplan's understanding of the two 
Middot, where Hesed means going above and beyond what is required, and 
Gevura is restraining yourself, and here are a couple of examples.

You're at the grocery store, and there's one box of Wacky Macs left on 
the shelf.  You see a mother with a bunch of her kids coming down the 
aisle, and the kids are beginning for Wacky Macs.  So you don't take 
it.  You're limiting yourself in order to do something nice (but not 
required) for the mother.  That's Hesed she'b'Gevura.

You're at the grocery store, and you've taken the last box of Wacky 
Macs.  You know you shouldn't eat it, because it's all starch and fat, 
but you can't help it.  You're standing at the checkout line, and 
there's a mother behind you whose kids are giving her a hard time 
because they wanted Wacky Macs, but the store is out.  So you decide 
that this will help you keep your diet, and you offer the mother the box 
of Wacky Macs.  You're doing something nice (but not required) for the 
mother in order to limit yourself.  That's Gevura she'b'Hesed.

It's a thin line, sometimes.  Figuring out what the actual action (or 
inaction) is and what the purpose is.  Means and ends.

As far as Tiferet, while you can see it as a synthesis of Hesed and 
Gevura, which is nice if you like the thesis-antithesis-synthesis 
paradigm, it's really the point of balance between them.  Where you 
aren't refraining and you aren't overdoing.  Another term for Tiferet is 
Tzedek.  Meaning doing what you're supposed to do, or what you're 
allowed to do: no more and no less.

I think that one of the reasons there aren't books that cite primary 
sources about this is simply because there aren't any.  There are 
primary sources about what the meaning of each of the Sefirot mean, but 
the combination should be fairly clear.

That said, I know it isn't.  When I was a camper as a kid, we had 
discussion groups about whether we were "Jewish Americans" or "American 
Jews".  I was 12 the first time we did it, and it was a mess.  The next 
time, I think I was 14 or 15, and I already realized what the problem 
was, although the counselor leading the discussion didn't.  It's a 
matter of definitions.  If you look at it in terms of language, one of 
those words is the noun, and the other is the adjective.  The noun is 
what you *are*.  The adjective just modifies it.  So "American Jew" is 
putting being Jewish first, and "Jewish American" is putting being 
American first.  But a lot of the other kids (and the counselor) were 
looking at it from the point of view of which *word* came first in the 
phrase.

And theoretically, I suppose, you could interpret X she'b'Y in the 
opposite way from what I've described above, but I'm not sure there's a 
real nafka mina, because we cover all the combinations. It just seems to 
me that the first week, we deal with the concept of *doing* Hesed, with 
all 7 possible intents, since these 7 Sefirot are fundamentally Sefirot 
of action (and interaction), as opposed to the first three, which are 
Sefirot of mind.  But can you say that the first week, we talk about the 
concept of *intending* Hesed, with all 7 possible methods?  I suppose.  
It's not the way I look at it, but absent primary sources to determine 
which way is right, I suppose it's possible.

Shabbat Shalom and Moadim L'Simcha,
Lisa

On 4/13/2017 11:24 PM, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote:
> Every year I would like to get deeper into the combinations of sefirot 
> (or middot) that appear in siddurim with the counting of the Omer, and 
> every year I get lost and confused. For example, what is the 
> difference between hesed shebigevura and gevura shebehesed? If tiferet 
> is a synthesis of hesed and gevura, how does it differ from either of 
> the above? And so on and so on.
>
> There seem to be a thousand books and websites that explain the 
> sefirot and their combinations in modern terms, but I haven't found 
> any that quote or even cite primary sources. Where might one look for 
> such sources?
>
> Mo`adim lesimha!
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 14/04/17 01:56, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
>
> I was saying that facetiously. WADR you missed the forest for the trees.
> Of course there are halachic solutions but it still makes for a very
> akward situation for parents and children when parents visit a child and
> can't eat all the food.

If you think that's a problem now, wait till Moshiach comes and you have 
parents visiting their daughter who married a Cohen.

-- 
Zev Sero                May 2017, with its *nine* days of Chanukah,
z...@sero.name           be a brilliant year for us all

I've said this before but it bares repeating. I was married to someone 
with multiple food allergies. Cooking even at home was always a 
challenge. Going out to eat at someone else's house and giving them the 
list of what yes, what no made that it even harder.
Whenever we had guests, we always asked about food allergies, kashrut 
requirements, and preferences. Compared to allergies, kashrut stuff was 
kid's play.  More than that, I learned that it is perfectly OK to have 
food on the table that not everyone can eat. Any vegetarian who came 
over expecting to be able to eat everything was disappointed.

Not being able to eat rice and having to settle for the five other 
dishes doesn't even make it on my radar. Thinking that one should be 
able to eat everything is a sense of entitlement that I don't accept.

Ben

On 4/14/2017 7:56 AM, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
> Of course there are halachic solutions but it still makes for a very 
> akward situation for parents and children when parents visit a child 
> and can't eat all the food.
>
> You are looking at this from a pure halachic perspceticve but in 
> truth, there is a non-halachic sociologcal perspective here that needs 
> to be addressed as well.

R' Marty Bluke wrote:
> Given the illogic of the minhag of kitniyos ... ...
> Why would they impose a din that makes no sense in today's world.

I could easily argue that avoidance of poultry and milk "makes no
sense in today's world." I'd like to hear whether other people think
that din to be logical or illogical.

(One is a minhag, and the other is d'rabbanan, but that's a side
issue. My question is whether one is less logical than the other.)

Akiva Miller

<div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br />
<table style="border-top: 1px solid #D3D4DE;">
        <tr>
        <td style="width: 55px; padding-top: 13px;"><a
href="http://www.a
vg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&;utm_source=link&utm_cam
paign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail"
target="_blank"><img
src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v
1.png"
width="46" height="29" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;" /></a></td>
                <td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 12px; color: #41424e;
font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
line-height: 18px;">Virus-free. <a
href="http://www.a
vg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&;utm_source=link&utm_cam
paign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail"
target="_blank" style="color: #4453ea;">www.avg.com<;/a>
                </td>
        </tr>
</table><a href="#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1"
height="1"></a></div>


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



_______________________________________________
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/lists/avodah/avodah-acronyms
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)