Avodah Mailing List

Volume 31: Number 115

Tue, 18 Jun 2013

• 1. Medicine on Shabbos (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: Medicine on Shabbos (Lisa Liel)
• 3. electricity on Shabbat (Eli Turkel)
• 4. Re: computers and shabbat (Zvi Lampel)
• 5. Re: Shelach Gems - (Dr Isaac Balbin)
• 6. sfeik sfeika (was: non_jewish housekeeper) (Saul Mashbaum)
• 7. Reading by candlelight on Shabbos (Kenneth Miller)
• 8. Shelach Gems (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi, its Kosher!)
• 9. Re: [Areivim] RTJTS [was: whats the difference] (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Opening Yahadus to ridicule (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: [Areivim] maharat or smicha (Micha Berger)

I have never understood the gezera against taking medicine on Shabbos.
I'm not talking about now, when compounding has become an arcane art,
even more than that of making or fixing musical instruments, and thus
according to the principles of Tosfos the whole gezera ought not to apply.
That's an interesting question for another time.  Right now I'm talking
about Chazal's time, when everyone was his own apothecary, and it was
a real possibility that if one were allowed to take medicine on Shabbos
one might end up compounding it as well.

Still, we see that Chazal took the obligation of oneg shabbos very
seriously.  They relaxed many of their gezeiros for a choleh, or even
bimkom tza`ar.  And they made other gezeiros for the express purpose of
protecting oneg shabbos, by prohibiting things that might lead one to
mental or physical distress.

So why in this case did they do the opposite, and make a gezera that
prevents a person from relieving his distress, and thus from having oneg
shabbos.  For surely nobody takes medicine who is not in distress, and
surely oneg shabbos is severely impacted or completely prevented by being
in distress, and more so by knowing that one could easily relieve it
were it not Shabbos.

So why did they make this gezeira in the first place?  Was the *risk*
that one will come to compound drugs so high that it justified the
*certainty* of partially or completely ruining people's shabbos?


-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan

On 6/14/2013 6:33 PM, Zev Sero wrote:
> I have never understood the gezera against taking medicine on Shabbos.
> I'm not talking about now, when compounding has become an arcane art,
> even more than that of making or fixing musical instruments, and thus
> according to the principles of Tosfos the whole gezera ought not to 
> apply.
> That's an interesting question for another time.  Right now I'm talking
> about Chazal's time, when everyone was his own apothecary, and it was
> a real possibility that if one were allowed to take medicine on Shabbos
> one might end up compounding it as well.

I don't understand why, if medicines are a problem, things like salt and 
pepper aren't an issue as well.  And other spices.  Peppermills are so 
common that it's far more likely that someone will grind themselves some 
pepper than mix up some Tylenol.

Lisa

<<E-Ink is a bigger problem, as the text and drawings will persist on their
own. Most LCD systems require refreshing the picture, so that the original
drawing is not "shel qayama". With e-Ink, though, the LCD will retain the
picture it was given for months or years unless someone sets a new image.
I don't think a regular LCD would pose a deOraisa issue. I know kesivah
with disappearing ink is derabannan. What about tzoveia?>>

Why isnt every writing (eg on parchment) tzovea?

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130616/384c9800/attachment-0001.htm>

On 6/15/2013 11:53 PM, avodah-requ...@lists.aishdas.org wrote:
> Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 18:38:22 -0400 From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
> A shabbat car ought to be no different from the shabbat belt that allows
> us to "carry" our keys, .... If it's "not shabbesdik" to
> be able to get from place to place at faster than a walking pace, then it
> must be equally "not shabbesdik" to be able to leave ones home empty without
> worrying about how to get back in,...  The whole question of what is "not shabbesdik" seems full of
> fuzzy post-facto reasoning; if a "shabbat car" becomes available then driving
> would simply no longer be "not shabbesdik".
The Shabbos hanhaga with bicycles doesn't seem to have developed this 
way, however.

ZL

R' MR wrote
On 16/06/2013, at 1:53 PM, avodah-requ...@lists.aishdas.org wrote:

> Moshe Rabbenu was DaAs Torah. Yet he permitted the Meraglim to go and
> return with a report, in spite of HKBHs obvious displeasure with the
> proposal.
> I don't think we can say they contradicted Moshe.
> 
> Was their misdeed not that they spoke LH or were Motzi Shem Ra?
> Did they have an argument that it was LeToEles and they ticked off all the
> necessary conditions?
> 
> In that case are they not to disagree with DT?
> 
> Rashi teaches that Gd did not want us to simply accept His word and enter
> the Land without questioning and exploring the offer of the Land of Israel.
> In the Sages' mind this exchange between Gd and His People is to be
> compared to when we engage in a business transaction with an acquaintance
> with whom we have already had a positive experience in such transactions.
> Once we are given permission to "test drive" the product in whichever way
> we like, it is insulting to actually take the product for the "test drive".
> 
> So this is not about not trusting Gd. It is about not being a Mentsch.

Is this a Drush that you intend to interpret as applying L'Halacha and L'Maaseh today?
Who are the Meraglei HaTorah today who are punished for not following DERECH Hashem U'Mitzvosov?
Was this has Hor'aas Sho'oh or was it brought by Poskim as they way to go.

I don't know where you got the idea that Moshe was Daas Torah in the sense that some use it today.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130616/1dd26459/attachment-0001.htm>

RET, RBW, and RMB have been discussing sfeik sfeika. For example, RET wrote
>>BTW it seems that ROY is much more willing to use sfek-sfeka to be mekil
>>than many other poskim (though I don't understand why others do not tend
to
>>use it very much)

I have a question on the MB regarding sfeik-sfeika l'chiyyuv bracha, and
propose a very tentative answer.

A good example of the use of sfeik-sfeika in the Mishna Brura is in hilchot
sfirat ha-omer. The mechaber says that one who is in doubt if he skipped a
day can continue to count with a bracha. The Mishna Brura says that this is
because there is a sfeik-sfeika to require a bracha: maybe he didn't skip a
day, and even if he did, maybe the halacha is not like the BeHag, and one
should count with a bracha even if he skipped a day.

OTOH, in hilchot brachot 215 MB ot 20, the MB quotes (apparently
approvingly) the achronim (shaar hatziyyun cites the Chayei Adam , and
perhaps the Pri Megadim agrees) who say that in birchot hapeirot, even if
there is a sfeik-sfeika to require a bracha achrona,  -  eg. someone who
ate a safek k'zayit amount of a biria:  maybe he ate a k'zait, and even if
he didn't, perhaps one needs to make a bracha achrona on a biria in any
event  -one should *not* make a bracha.
This is the opposite of what the MB wrote regarding sfirat ha-omer.

True, one case is birkat hamitzvot and the other is birkat hapeirot, but
the principle of regarding safek bracha (or sfeik skeika l'hayyev bracha)
should be the same.

R Asher Weiss has both written and said in shiur that although we are
choshesh for the BeHag regarding sfira because of safek brachot l'hakel,
 nevertheless, since the BeHag's position is rejected by almost all the
rishonim, almost any additional safek l'chiyyuv is enough to allow one to
continue to count with a bracha.

If we accept this idea, we may understand that sfirat haomer may not be a
typical case, and in other areas, a sfeik sfeika l'chiyyuv may *not* be
enough to require a bracha.

Saul Mashbaum
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130616/c4c24c51/attachment-0001.htm>

In the thread "electricity on Shabbos - R. Asher Weiss", R"n Toby Katz wrote:
> My impression was that the issur of reading by candle-light
> is only if  you are alone.  If someone else is there with
> you, they'll warn you and  stop you if you start to move the
> candle closer or adjust the wick.  Am I mistaken?
>
> And PS the issur /is/ still relevant, there have been times
> when the Shabbos clock went off and the only available light
> for reading was a candle on the table and everyone else was
> asleep and I said to myself, "OK lady you're out of luck, if
> you want to keep reading now you will have to go to sleep and
> dream that you are reading."  Well the other option is to
> read a secular magazine in the small throne room. Spirit of
> Shabbos? I don't  know.

There *isn't* any issur of reading by *candle*-light. The issur only
concerts the light of an oil lamp. Candles simply aren't subject to the
sort of adjustments one might make to an oil lamp. For more details, see
Mishnah Berurah 264:23, or the article from Ohr Somayach at ohr.edu/245

One might argue that even with candles, there can still be a temptation
to move it to a more useful location. My guess is that the gezera was
never intended to include this issur d'rabanan of muktzeh, but only to
d'Oraisas like improving fuel flow to the wick.

[email #2]

Just after hitting "send", I realized how very relevant this is to the
current discussion: The invention of solid candles, as a means of easily
reading on Shabbos without restriction, can now be added to R' Zev Sero's
wonderful list of inventions (blech, key-belt, etc) which have allowed us
to enjoy Shabbos without making it "un-Shabbosdik".

Akiva Miller

Reb Mincha, your question was: If the gedolim have DT, how did so many
meraglim produce an answer different than Moshe's, Yehoshua's and Caleiv's
DT?
I answered - the very act of the Meraglim going which was contrary to Gd's
will was itself not the issue. So it's hard to propose that for opposing
the conclusion of DT, they were punished.

Your conclusion, Doesn't that mean that, DT was wrong, the people followed
it anyway, and were punished for doing so?

Not necessarily, they were evil and obviously so, because their conclusion
was that HKBH was INCAPABLE of granting them success. That's unmitigated
Kefira.

The DT telling people to stay in Europe , was not DT. For those who think
it was, they have a serious problem that is beyond medicine.

I asked, Did the Meraglim have an argument that it was LeToEles and they
ticked off all the : necessary conditions?

Your response Reb Mincha, is invaluable: you say, That's an issue of pesaq,
not da'as Torah. So now we see where DT is taking us or where it's already
gone - DT need not be synchronised with Halacha, it's Eis LaAsos LaHaShem,
anything goes.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130617/03072ab8/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 07:03:17PM -0400, T6...@aol.com wrote:
: The Old Yishuv, all the way back to the students of the Besht and the Gra,
: not to mention many Sefardim, was made up almost entirely of what we would
: now call chareidim...

Is this true? I'm not even sure the line your asserting existed yet.

My grandfather's memory of pre-State Israel describes far more Jews in
R' Kook's camp than the descendents of the chalukah recipients who called
themselves the yishuv hayashan.

Was RAYK himself really of the DL ilk? What about R' Aryeh Levine, or R'
Elyashiv's parents? Can you justify placing these people in either
chareidi or DL pigeonholes to the exclusion of the other?

Recall that RAYK himself was the talmid muvhak of a Chareidi
Zionist. Banning My Uncle the Netziv doesn't change who the Netziv
actually was!

Over in the US at the time, "chareidi" was just Hebrew for O, and we
have the OU (the "Agudas haQehilos haChareidios") to prove it.

: themselves that Palestine (later, Israel) ended up with a secular majority
: is that same old false, false, false narrative that we have heard a million
: times...

Because their compatriots in Europe wouldn't come.

: ruthless, don't forget, they were Russian Communists and Socialists, people
: who well knew how to destroy those they considered their "enemy." The British
: of course carry most of the blame but they gave the secular Zionists the
: means to exclude religious Jews from Palestine, and the Z's were not shy
: about using that power.

This is just disgusting. That's right, the guys of Aliyah Bet, who were
both chilonim and tended to think they were the agents of the prophets
who told of the eventualy ge'ulah, were out to exclude Jews. Did you
ever read The Exodus? Do you know how these people related to the nevi'im?

Not that they naturally favored their own, as any person would,
as halakhah even tells us to -- aniyei irkha qodmin -- but they were
a bunch of malicious commies?! (What about our communists -- Qibbutz
Mizrachi and Poalei Agudah -- they also get tarred simply for believing
in communist economics?)

I understand what motivates writing a book like Perfidy -- when it's our
family being passed up in favor of their own, it hurts. One can't expect
objectivity when people were passed over for a chance to be saved. But
understanding it doesn't me it's fair, right, or true.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             If you're going through hell
mi...@aishdas.org        keep going.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - Winston Churchill
Fax: (270) 514-1507

Back on Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 03:01:26PM EDT, I wrote:
:: What does is mean to "open Yahadus to ridicule"? In what cases is it assur?
: 
: Well, we know it's the definition of chillul hasheim WRT how talmidei
: chakhamim dress and comport themselves in general (YhT 5:11). Unless you
: think that any O Jew today does not appear to the masses as an "adam
: gadol baTorah umfursam bachasidus"...
:                                     the common definition of chillul
: hasheim. So, to forestall reiterating /that/ thread, I'll quote R'
: Schwab's essay "Chilul Hashem" ...
: 
:     The second sentence of Sh'ma Yisroel begins with the command: "You
:     shall love Hashem", which is interpreted by our Sages: "Let the
:     name of Hashem become beloved through you." ...

Someone at the askarah for Rav Dovid Lifshitz yesterday (today is his
20th yahrzeit) rememinded me that rebbe quoted this gemara in a number
of his shmuessin. The quote right before this one (Devei R' Yannai)
is even closer to the phrasing in my post.

It's Yuma 86a. I just blogged it with the following translation:

    At Rabbi Yanai['s school] it was said: Anyone whose peers are
    embarassed by what is heard about him, that is a desecration of
    Hashem's name.
    Rav Nachman bar Yitzchaq said: For example, if people say [about him],
    "May the Lord forgive So-and-so."

    Abaye said: As the beraisa says, "'And you shall love Hashem your G-d':
    that the Name of Heaven shall be beloved because of you."
    If someone studies Tanakh and Mishnah, and apprentices under the Sages,
    is trustworthy in business, and speaks pleasantly to people, what do
    people say about him? "Enriched is his father who taught him Torah!
    Enriched is his rebbe who taught him Torah! Woe for those who didn't
    study Torah! For So-and-so who learned Torah, look how pleasant his
    ways are, how sweet his deeds!" The pasuq says of him "[Hashem]
    said to me: Yisrael, you are my servant that in you I will be
    glorified!" (Yeshaiah 49:3)
    But, if someone studies Tanakh and Mishnah, and apprentices under
    the Sages, but is not trustworthy in business, and his words are
    unpleasant toward people, what do people say about him? "Woe for
    his father who taught him Torah! Woe for his rebbe who taught
    him Torah! So-and-so who learned Torah, look how accursed are his
    ways, how disgustinghis deeds!" The pasuq says of him, "About them
    people say: These are Hashem's people, and they are gone from His
    land." (Yechezqeil 36:20)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man is capable of changing the world for the
mi...@aishdas.org        better if possible, and of changing himself for
http://www.aishdas.org   the better if necessary.
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 08:01:55AM -0700, saul newman wrote:
: http://www.jta.org/2013/06/17/default/what-doe
: s-an-orthodox-ordination-certificate-look-like
: 
: does this look like the male  rabbi  certificates?

Actually, the prose reads much like a typical Yoreh Yoreh, except the
topics tested on including issur beheter (vague) rather than more spefic
references to parts of YD, and the emphasis on Shabbos and nidda. Although
Lakewood does give topical semichah, so the list is atypical, but not
outside the real of what's done.

The bigger difference is "Manhigah Ruchanis uleHoros Halakhah...
be-HETER HORA'AH LERABBIM" (caps to denote bold in the original) rather
than Rav uManhig or Yoreh Yoreh. Kind of like the themes of both without
using the politically sensitive buzzwords.

(I don't know if any yeshivos bother putting on a Yoreh Yoreh kelaf that
the man is also fit to be a mere Rav uManhig.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A person lives with himself for seventy years,
mi...@aishdas.org        and after it is all over, he still does not
http://www.aishdas.org   know himself.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 31, Issue 115
***************************************

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.)