Avodah Mailing List

Volume 43: Number 52

Wed, 27 Aug 2025

• 1. Re: Transitions (Akiva Miller)
• 2. Re: Kiddushin and Nisuin (Akiva Miller)
• 3. pump toilet (mco...@touchlogic.com)
• 4. Re: pump toilet (Joel Rich)
• 5. The Alleged Consolidation Of Qiddushin and Nisuin (Jay F. Shachter)
• 6. Re: pump toilet (mco...@touchlogic.com)
• 7. Names ending with -ah or -ahu (Akiva Miller)
• 8. Seudas Havraah (Akiva Miller)
• 9. Re: Names ending with -ah or -ahu (Micha Berger)

.
R' Joel Rich asked:

> If the transition in general from the bet medrash to the
> working world weren?t seen as natural, would that mean that
> the "system" has room for improvement?


I am really unsure what is being asked here. Is there a presumption that
the transition from the bet medrash to the working world currently IS seen
as natural? And what is meant by "natural" anyway?

In any case, my opinion is that EVERY "system" has room for improvement.
Even the System of the Torah has room for improvement, in that Hashem
expects us to improve upon it by adding gezeros and takanos, going lifnim
m'shuras hadin, etc, etc.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250823/8dd4d126/attachment-0001.htm>

.
R' Danny Schoemann quoted the AI known as Gemini:

> While specific responsa that directly and explicitly command
> the consolidation of the two ceremonies are not easily found
> in extant Geonic literature, the underlying trend and reasoning
> are addressed in a broader context. The moral and social
> concerns that led to the later consolidation are found in
> discussions about the proper conduct of a betrothed couple.
>
> For instance, the responsa of **Rav Hai Gaon** (939-1038) touch
> on the moral implications of the long waiting period. While he
> does not codify a change to the wedding ceremony itself, his
> writings reflect the communal anxiety over the time between
> *kiddushin* and *nisuin*, as he writes about the severe
> transgressions that might occur if the couple is not married
> quickly and properly.

I wouldn't accept this from a human, much less from an AI. In my opinion,
it sounds very much like someone who tried to research the question, was
unable to find anything solid, and produced something that sounds
plausible, yet has no sources whatsoever beyond citing certain names.

If the AI would have offered even one actual citation from Rav Hai which
attests to the alleged "communal anxiety", then I would be happy to look it
up. But taken as is, this smells like one of the "hallucinations" that have
been blamed on AI lately.

In contrast, RDS wrote (referring to Even Haezer 62):

> However the Beis Yosef  (1488-1575) there comments that some do
> and some don't.
> ?? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ?????? ????? ??? ????
????

Now THAT is a great reference, clearly attesting that in the Beis Yosef's
time, we were in the process of transitioning, which is part of exactly
what the original question asked. But it should be noted that this precise
quote from the Beis Yosef does not appear in the Gemini output that RDS
gave the link to. I suspect that RDS found it on his own, by putting
together clues which Gemini did provide. And if so, this is (in my opinion)
a very proper use of AI.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250823/08a47fa2/attachment-0001.htm>

..but is it lchatchila to build one?
 
i dont understand the question.
 
lchatchila one can build it
lchatchila can use it 6 days
can use it on shabbos in case of kavod habrius (as i described) only
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250824/b6276d6b/attachment-0001.htm>

> On 24 Aug 2025, at 2:21, mco...@touchlogic.com wrote:
> 
> ?
> ..but is it lchatchila to build one?
>  
> i dont understand the question.
>  
> lchatchila one can build it
> lchatchila can use it 6 days
> can use it on shabbos in case of kavod habrius (as i described) only
>  
-8???-///???-0
How many people do you think would find it as kavod habriyot and not walk up the stairs to use the bathroom without it?
Related question can one rent an apartment in a high-rise building knowing they will have to rely on a Nanjo operating the elevator on Shabbat?
Bsorot tovot 
Joel rich 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250824/0add0c34/attachment-0001.htm>

> 
> I was asked twice this past week and didn't know the answer.
> 
> Does anyone have knowledge and, preferably a reference, as to when
> [q]iddushin and nisuin were consolidated?
> 

One should not ask questions that assume facts not in evidence.

In this case, the questioner assumes that qiddushin and nisuin have
been consolidated.  The questioner must first establish that they have
been; and, in fact, we see, on the contrary, in Episode 4 of Season 2
of "Shtisel", that they have not.  There we see qiddushin taking place
in a restaurant, without being immediately followed by nisuin, since
one can take judicial notice of the fact that restaurants do not
contain yixud rooms.


               Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
               6424 North Whipple Street
               Chicago IL  60645-4111
                       +1 773 7613784   landline
                       +1 410 9964737   GoogleVoice
                       j...@m5.chicago.il.us
                       http://m5.chicago.il.us

               When Martin Buber was a schoolboy, it must have been
               no fun at all playing tag with him during recess.

...How many people do you think would find it as kavod habriyot and not walk up the stairs to use the bathroom without it?
 
of course the heter of kavod habriyot does NOT apply to walking up the stairs.
 
i guess your question concerns not very frum people.who would ignore
explicit instructions not to use the electric bathroom unless they can't
wait any longer, and no other bathroom is available.
 
is that your question?
 
as per read the link i sent from RSM

..1. How does a (visiting the hospital) family member use bathroom lights,
toilets and sink taps that are controlled by an electric eye, when there is
no other option?

The person accompanying the patient should find a manually-operated
bathroom in another part of the hospital, and may even directly ask a
non-Jew to open the electric door in order to exit the unit. If this is not
an option, the person may use the electric bathroom facilities in the way
permitted for the patient.
 


Related question can one rent an apartment in a high-rise building knowing
they will have to rely on a Nanjo operating the elevator on Shabbat?  - no.
rent a different apartment 
mc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250826/d473ff47/attachment-0001.htm>

.
Consider these examples: Yeshayah / Yeshayahu. Yirmiyah / Yirmiyahu. Eliya
/ Eliyahu. And others. When a person among us has such a name, they usually
have a preference regarding pronunciation and spelling.

But my question is about the Neviim and their seforim. Is there an accepted
convention for when they end with "ah" and when they end with "ahu"? From
what I have heard when other people speak, and from what I've seen in the
printed word, they seem to be totally interchangeable. But I know how my
brain works, and it's quite likely that there is some pattern that I just
never noticed.

(I did try to research this in my Concordance. It seems that Tanach refers
to Yeshayahu exclusively with the final vav; there is a Yeshaya, but that's
a totally different person. And yet, people DO refer to the navi as
Yeshaya, On the other hand, Yirmiyahu and Yirmiyah both refer to the same
person, and although the great majority are spelled with the vav, the cases
where it ends with the heh are NOT marked as ksiv/kri.)

Any suggestions?

Thanks!
Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250826/7efa8c43/attachment-0001.htm>

.
Kitzur Shulchan Aruch Yomi is currently in Hilchos Aveilus, and I'm having
trouble understanding some of the halachos of the Seudas Havraah, the meal
which others give to the avel after the kevura.

A basic question is frustrating me, because of the way the Kitzur presents
this in Siman 205, and I did not get clarity from the other seforim that I
looked at. In some places, I see halachos about food in general, and in
other places, I see halachos specifically about a seudah. So here are
several perspectives on what's confusing me:

Must the Seudas Havraah be a full seudah, including more than a kebeitza of
bread?
Can the Seudas Havraah be done with a lesser amount of bread?
Does the Seudas Havraah really have to have any bread at all?
If bread is indeed required, can the avel eat non-bread foods prior to the
Seudas Havraah?

Those questions came to me because of how the Kitzur chose to write halacha
205:6: <<< If the body was buried on Erev Shabbos after Mincha Ketana, at
which point it is assur to have a Seudah Kavua, they do NOT make a Seudas
Havraah for him because of Kavod Shabbos, and so the avel should not eat
anything until the night. >>> ArtScroll explains that if there *would* be a
Seudas Havraah, then the avel would not have an appetite, and that
interferes with Kavod Shabbos.

I am bothered by the very last phrase there: <<< lo yochal KLUM ad halailah
- he should not eat ANYTHING until the night. >>> Why can't he have a small
snack? Is it really assur to eat ANYthing before the Seudas Havraah? The
avel has had a very busy and emotional day, and he certainly didn't eat
anything in the cemetery. Do we really want him to enter Shabbos hungry?

In fact, this seems to contradict what the Kitzur himself wrote in halacha
205:1: <<< assur lo le'echol seudah harishona mi'shelo - it is assur for
his first meal to be of his own food >>>. This implies that a meal is
assur, but he *can* eat a *snack* of his own food. I think it is noteworthy
that 205:1 is the longest halacha in that siman, and the Kitzur lists
several foods that the avel should or might eat during this meal -
including eggs, lentils, meat, and wine - yet he never mentions bread in
the entire siman.

We recently had a thread titled "My Current Futile Life Project". One of my
such projects is to get people to be more careful to distinguish "eating"
from "eating a meal". This is FAR from the first example where confusing
those ideas made the halacha unnecessarily complicated. Please do not tell
me that their meals always included bread, because the concept of a snack
was NOT foreign to them.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250826/0fe71f63/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 12:38:11PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
> (I did try to research this in my Concordance. It seems that Tanach refers
> to Yeshayahu exclusively with the final vav; there is a Yeshaya, but that's
> a totally different person...

I the US, where "Micha" is a rare name, the other party often gets my
name wrong. My usual answer to the response "Michl?" is:
>> No, "Micha". Like in Shofetim or in Terei Asar; you can decide which
>> once you get to know me better.

Usage of Mikhayahu is closer to Yeshayahu than Yirmiyahu.

Shofetim 17 refers to "Mikhayhu" in pesuqim 1 and 4. But after introducing
the person Mikhayhu and the Temple Beis Mikhayahu, the name used is Mikhah.
(Pesuqim 5, 8, 9, 10, 12 (2x), 13, pereq 18 (12x).)

I don't know where I picked this up (ie I didn't find a source last
night), but my understanding is that the idol-maker was Mikhayahu,
and that's why he is introduced as such. But because of who he was,
once you know who we are talking about, Shemu'el haNavi switches to a
form of the name that involves less Sheim Hashem.


Mikhayehu ben Yimla, a contemporary of Melekh Yehoshafat (Melakhim I
pereq 22, DhY II peraqim 17-18) is always Mikhayahu.

Similarly Mikhayhu ben Gemaryahu (Yirmiyah[u] 36) is never called Mikhah
or ben Gemaryah.


However, Mikhah haMorashti (Yirmiyahu 26:18, book of Mikhah) is never
called Mikhayahu.

Same for Mikhah ben Riv Baal (Riv Baal = Pi Boshes, Shemu'el apparently
felt that naming a son after Baal was a source of embarassment) - DhY I
pereq 8. And Mikhah ben Uzziel (Ibid peraqim 23-24).


With so many only called by one of the names, and an excuse to explain
Mikha[yahu]h ben Yehonasan ben Gershom ben M[en]asheh, I concluded they were
different names.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 If you're going through hell
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   keep going.
Author: Widen Your Tent                      - Winston Churchill
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF


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



_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/lists/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://www.aishdas.org/lists/avodah/avodahareivim-membership-agreement/


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.)