Avodah Mailing List

Volume 43: Number 53

Mon, 01 Sep 2025

• 1. Re: Kiddushin and Nisuin (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Psak in hashkafa (Micha Berger)
• 3. AI research (was Kiddushin and Nisuin) (mco...@touchlogic.com)
• 4. Re: Psak in hashkafa (Marty Bluke)
• 5. poalav v?chamara (Joel Rich)
• 6. Re: Psak in hashkafa (Micha Berger)
• 7. radical honesty? (Joel Rich)

On Sun, Aug 17, 2025 at 6:25am EDT, RYGB wrote:
> Does anyone have knowledge and, preferably a reference, as to when
> kiddushin and nisuin were consolidated?

Rabbinu Tam (Seifer haYashar, shut 47:7) says that Rashi requires
making Eirusin and Nissuin on two separate kosos. So someone was
dealing with eirusin and nissuin being back-to-back by Rashi's
day.

A generation later, Machzor Vitri (see 587) says that having them the
same day but not at the same time was the norm. Although he reports that
in some places they were already doing the two together.

Similarly, Tosafos also require separate kosos(Pesachim 102 "she'ein")
which makes the same implication.

So I would conclude the custom was just starting in the late 11th cent,
but had spread to becoming the norm by the Tur's day, early 14th cent. (As
reported by RHS and RDS, citing Tur EhE 22.)

But even the MV's on the same day was a different norm than Chazal's.

(This answer is Ashkocentric. I couldn't find sources earlier than the
already-discussed BY [ad loc] for the evolution of other minhagim.)


On Sun, Aug 24, 2025 at 4:23pm CDT, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote:
>        ...  [T]he 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...

But here in the real world, it is rare to the point of vanishing
(mi'ut she'eino niqar) to have qiddushin and nissuin not abutting
eachother.

Especially according to the rishonim who define nissuin as chupah,
rather than yichud. There is less than tokh kedei dibbur, as they are
under the chuppah a moment after she is given the ring (and before,
but that's not relevant).

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 Integrity is choosing to practice our values
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   rather than simply professing them.
Author: Widen Your Tent                  - Brene Brown
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF

On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 10:18:37PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
> The Rambam writes in 3 places in the Perush Hamishnayos (Sanhedrin 10,3,
> Sotah 3,3, Shavuos 4,1) and in the Sefer Hamitzvos lo taaseh 133 that there
> is no psak on hashkafa which is not relevant to Halacha.

But there are pesaqim when it is relevant. Like when needing to know
what apiqursus, meenus and kefirah are because you need to know whether
the wine is kosher.

So there could be a pesaq WRT how the Torah or TSBP reached us, the limits
of belief in Mashiach, etc, etc, etc...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 If a person does not recognize one's own worth,
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   how can he appreciate the worth of another?
Author: Widen Your Tent                - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye,
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF                author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef

..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.


 
when doing AI research of any significance (halacha, J history, etc) i use
[ https://www.perplexity.ai/ ]( https://www.perplexity.ai/ ) because
it gives links to the actual sources it uses.
 
you will be (perhaps unpleasantly) surprised that often the sources are
unreliable and this will help you evaluate/analyze the AI response with
much more clarity
 
ie sources can often be internet hearsay, conservative/reform 'halacha', random blogs, etc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250827/ec53748d/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 14:42 Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
>> The Rambam writes in 3 places in the Perush Hamishnayos (Sanhedrin 10,3,
>> Sotah 3,3, Shavuos 4,1) and in the Sefer Hamitzvos lo taaseh 133 that there
>> is no psak on hashkafa which is not relevant to Halacha.

> But there are pesaqim when it is relevant...

> So there could be a pesaq WRT how the Torah or TSBP reached us, the limits
> of belief in Mashiach, etc, etc, etc...

That is exactly what I wrote.
hashkafa which is not relevant to Halacha.

The gemara sometimes refers to poalav v?chamarav (see avoda zara 63a). Is
this just a common expression or is there a possible halachic difference
between a worker and a donkey driver?
KVCT
Joel Rich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250827/f41d87bb/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 02:57:23PM +0300, Marty Bluke wrote:
> That is exactly what I wrote.
> hashkafa which is not relevant to Halacha.

My intent wasn't to argue, but to emphasize how much less broad that
rule is than it appears.

Many of the arguments between communities that are both shomerei Shabbos
as understood by similar understandings of valid halakhic process would
fall under this barn door sized exception.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

Attributed to rav mendel shafran who is a posek in bnei brak ? ? some
radical honesty:
???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ??????? ??? ???? ???? ???????? ?????? ?????? ???
???? ???????? ??? ???????? ???? ?????? ??????? ??? ????? ????? ?? ?? ??
???? ??? ???? ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ????? ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ???????.
???? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ?? ????? ??? ?????
???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????? ??????? ?? ???????
???? ?? ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ??? ?? ????? ??? ??? ????
?And the reason that most of the gdolim do not use this (tcheilet)is not
because they doubt the truth of the matter, but rather because in the last
two hundred years there has been established an internal feeling that we
don?t change things even if according to the strict hlacha one should have
instituted them or changed them, and this is as a defense against
destroyers who try to change and adapt.(halacha?)
And to such an extent has this principle been established that there is
power in daat torah to uproot a matter from the Torah, like the commandment
of techelet . the rule being that even a change for the better is viewed by
Torah scholars as the beginning of a breach whose end is not foreseeable ,
and this matter is in the category of ?the chachamim are able to uproot a
matter from the Torah through inaction? (shev v?al ta?aseh).?
Thoughts?
KVCT
Joel Rich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20250827/a09b66e4/attachment-0001.htm>

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



_______________________________________________
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.)