Avodah Mailing List

Volume 33: Number 59

Wed, 15 Apr 2015

• 1. Re: Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's Position on the Kosher Switch (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: tefillas haderech (Marty Bluke)
• 3. Re: Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's Position on the Kosher Switch (Prof. Levine)
• 4. Re: Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's Position on the Kosher Switch (Micha Berger)
• 5. Davening Outdoors (Prof. Levine)
• 6. Re: Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's Position on the Kosher Switch (Prof. Levine)
• 7. Re: Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's Position on the Kosher Switch (Micha Berger)
• 8. tefillat haderech (Eli Turkel)
• 9. Re: tefillat haderech (Marty Bluke)
• 10. Re: RYBS's Talk on Hafkaas Kiddushin, Talmud Torah and Kabala s Ol Malchus Shamayim (Rich, Joel)
• 11. Re: Tan Du (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer)
• 12. Re: RYBS's Talk on Hafkaas Kiddushin, Talmud Torah and Kabalas Ol Malchus ()
• 13. Re: tefillat haderech ()
• 14. Retzuos that are Black on Both Sides (Micha Berger)

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 05:07:57AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
: Rabbi Oelbaum has asked that his son's comment on YeshivaWorld
: regarding Rav Oelbaum's position on kosher switch be publicized.
...
:> Moshe Oelbaum
:> Son of Rabbi N I Oelbaum

Authentication?

-Micha

The reason for not allowing to be motzi someone else is actually quite
simple. The Gemara in Berachos (29b) clearly states that tefilas haderech
is a tefila "Amar R' Chisda hayotzeh laderech tzarich lhispallel tefilas
haderech".  Therefore the general rule of tefilla should apply, namely that
if you are a baki someone else cannot be motzi you. Since nowadays we are
all considered bekiim and for example, we don't allow someone to be motzi
us in tefilas mincha the same would apply to tefilas haderech.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150415/2b8c0766/attachment-0001.htm>

At 06:01 AM 4/15/2015, Micha Berger wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 05:07:57AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
>: Rabbi Oelbaum has asked that his son's comment on YeshivaWorld
>: regarding Rav Oelbaum's position on kosher switch be publicized.
>...
>Authentication?

What I posted was sent to me by someone on my email list whom I trust.
I can send you his email address if you like. YL

 From http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/kosher-switch

> moi...@yahoo.com
> Member

> Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's true position on kosher switch .
> I regret that my father's position on kosher switch was 
> misrepresented by stating that he endorses it l'maaseh . His position 
> is that there are 2 aspects in hilchos shabbos. One is issur melacha 
> and then there is zilzul shabbos. My father's opinion is that there 
> is no issur melacha or chilul shabbos. However , there is a concern 
> about zilzul shabbos as he stated clearly on the video. Before it is 
> used one should ask a shaila from his rav.

> Moshe Oelbaum
> Son of Rabbi N I Oelbaum

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 06:18:35AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
: What I posted was sent to me by someone on my email list whom I trust.
: I can send you his email address if you like. YL
...
:  From http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/kosher-switch

: > moi...@yahoo.com
: > Member

Oh, I believe it really appeared in YWN, and that link can allow you
to check that much for ourselves. What I'm asking is whether
anyone contact R' Moshe Oelbaum or RNIO to authenticate that the
post really was from his son. It is trivial to claim to be anyone
in a YWN chatroom.

I don't know RMO, but I can't picture R' NI Oelbaum promulgating his
position via chatroom. Could be, if his son is a regular there anyway.

The presence of a post really doesn't tell me much.

No matter how honest the person reporting to you is, he can be duped
unless he spoke to the parties himself.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 11th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            strict justice?

At 05:54 AM 4/15/2015, R. Harry Weiss wrote:

>When one davens in a large minyan and is surrounded by other people
>davening it is easier to concentrate on the tefilla.

I do not find this to be true for me personally.  I am not a "group 
person"  and hence prefer to daven in a minyan that has between 20 
and forty participants.   This is the case where I daven during the 
week and also at the Hashkama Minyan at the YI of Ave J where I daven 
on Shabbos.

YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150415/8428c260/attachment-0001.htm>

At 06:44 AM 4/15/2015, Micha Berger wrote:
>                                  What I'm asking is whether
>anyone contact R' Moshe Oelbaum or RNIO to authenticate that the
>post really was from his son. It is trivial to claim to be anyone
>in a YWN chatroom.

I received this in an email from Moshe Deutsch

I personally spoke to Rabbi & Rebbetzin Oelbaum who told me to
publicize this. I was the one who made them aware that the person
behind KosherSwitch is using his name in a way that Rabbi Oelbaum did
not intend. Person behind KosherSwitch does not pick up the phone now
when Rabbi Oelbaum calls.

Moshe

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 09:34:32AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
: I received this in an email from Moshe Deutsch

:> I personally spoke to Rabbi & Rebbetzin Oelbaum who told me to
:> publicize this. I was the one who made them aware that the person
:> behind KosherSwitch is using his name in a way that Rabbi Oelbaum did
:> not intend...

This still doesn't clear up my confusion, although it does confirm what
the YWN post said (if not who authored it).

I am trying to understand whether RNIO's problem with the appearance of
his name on the KosherSwitch.com "approvers" list is because
a- he feels that use of the switch is zilzul Shabbos, or
b- he would hold it's gerama.

What I am trying to understand is the tzad to say their switch isn't
gerama. It appears to conform to the description of the Machon Zomet
switch as it existed at the time R' Neuwirth consulted with RSZA who
ruled it was.

If RNIO holds it's "only" zilzul Shabbos, then clarifying what his
position is was useful, but doesn't remove all my confusion.

I was expecting that the posqim the Kosher Switch people are hearing
overly optimistically (for their investment) would actually all end up
agreeing with RSZA once we got clarification. Such as R' Neuwirth, whose
approval was based on assuming the proposed use was a medical context.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 11th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            strict justice?

<<I suspect that I do not appreciate or understand the meaning of "as a
tefillah and not as a bracha".>>

On many birtchot hamitzva one can be motzeh others even when they are
"experts". This includes shofar, megilla etc (not lulav or netillat yadaim
which is considered as a mitzvah be-gufo)
similarly for kiddush and havdala.

Note that for sefirat haomer  usually each person says the bracha
himself/herself and also
counts for themselves. There are opinions that if needed one can rely on
the chazzan for the bracha but not the count.

In birchat ha-nehenim usually each individual makes his own bracha.
There are some which are a mixture including kiddush and motzi on shabbat
on lechem mishne
(note there are various minhagim on seder night).
For birchat shevach eg lightning seeing great mountains etc each person
says it by himself.

OTOH the shliach tzibbur can be motzi others with shemone esre only if they
cant say it themselves.
Shemonei esrei is a tefillah (bakasha and shevach) even though shemonei
esrei consists of brachot.

The usual minhag is that each individual says birchat hagomel though I once
heard from R Zilberstein that if many people need to say it then it is
preferable for one person to be motzei everyone else

----------------------------------------
I am not sure if I have made things clearer - if not I leave it to someone
else to explain exactly when one can be motze others lechatchila, bidieved
or not at all

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150415/9ecec195/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Akiva Miller wrote:
> I suspect that I do not appreciate or understand the meaning of "as a
> tefillah and not as a bracha".

The difference between tefila and a beracha is whether you can be motzi a
baki nowadays. With a beracha you can however with a tefilla you cannot
which is why these poskim hold that each person should say tefilas haderech
the same way every person davens shemoneh esrei.

You also asked:
> I am very confused. Many poskim recommend point out that Tefilas Haderech
> does not begin with "Baruch", so they recommend saying it after another
> bracha (such as Asher Yatzar, or a Bracha Acharona on food), so as to make
> it into a Bracha Hasemucha L'chvertah. But if Tefilas Haderech is not a
> bracha to begin with, then I do not see the advantage of such a procedure.

Something can be both a beracha and a tefila at the same time, the prime
example is shemoneh esrei which is tefilla par excellence but composed of
18 (19) berachos. Tefilas haderech is a tefila composed (possibly) in the
form of a beracha and therefore the rules of tefilla would apply.

[Email #2. -micha]

R' Eli Turkel wrote:
> The sefer Piskei Teshuvot (siman 110-2) has a discussion whether one is
> required to say tefillat haderech in modern times. He concludes that one
> who does not say it on major roads has someone to rely on but someone who
> also says it has the reward of a tefilla even though we no longer have
> "listin" and wild animals on the roads.

It seems clear from the context of the gemara that tefilas haderech is a
tefila b'eis tzara. The gemara mentions tefilas haderech right after it
mentions that a person who is in a dangerous place says a tefila.

The world has changed a lot since the time of chazal especially related to
travel and we need to understand if these changes affect the din of tefilas
haderech  Here are some of the changes that have occurred relating to
travel.

1. Most travel is no longer considered unsafe. When I get in my car every
morning to drive to work I don't think twice about it
2. The distinction between in the city and out of the city is no longer
true. Most people fell much safer driving in the Catskills then driving
through Harlem. Driving on a highway from Brooklyn to Queens is in the city
but driving in Monsey to the supermarket may be considered out of the city.
3. This is related to 1, people travel all the time. Most people commute
some distance to work, this is normal and part of everyday life. In the
time of chazal yotze laderech was a big deal.

Given the above R' Shachter (in Nefesh Harav) says that R' Soloveitchik did
not say tefilas haderech when he commuted from Boston to NY to give his
shiurim. He felt that because it is a tefila b'eis tzara and nowadays there
is no perceived danger and it is routine that there was no reason to say it.

Recently, I heard a short shiur on tefilas haderech and was happy to hear
that RSZA seems to say a very similar idea to RYBS.

RSZA did not say tefilas haderech when he traveled from Yerushayim to Bnei
Brak. He explained his reasoning as follows:

   1. In many places it is not considered as if you left the yishuv for the
   following reasons:
   1. There are many other cars on the road
      2. The police regularly patrol the road
      3. There are houses on the side of the road

   2. Traveling by car/bus is a normal activity. Whan a person gets up and
   commutes to work he does not say he is going on a trip. The takana
of tefilas
   haderech was for someone who was yotze laderech  these kinds of trips
   are not considered ???? ????.
   3. There is little or no danger of yotze laderech


RSZA reasoning is very similar to RYBS. Basically, the world has changed
and it is no longer unusual or dangerous to travel between cities and
therefore the din of when you say tefilas haderech changes as well.

This is how I understand it:

Just as a leopard cannot change its spots, and just as Shabbos comes each
week whether society accepts it or not, so too, there are certain elements
of the human condition which Chazal have identified as inherent and
unchanging, not subject to variation by time, place, or culture.

Or something like that. At any rate, one can agree or disagree about
whether this assertion is true, and even among those who agree with it,
there might be discussion of exactly which chazakos are unchanging and
which are variable. Still, his point is that there are indeed some
UNchanging aspects.

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
I would add an observation that individual exceptions may exist empirically but are ignored halachically
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.

I personally was always inclined to side with Rabbi Rackman over RYBS on 
tav l'meisav, but this article gives me pause:

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-32303997

KT,
YGB

 

From: Joseph Kaplan via Avodah  <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>

"We must not tamper, not only with the  halachos,

but even with the chazakos, for the chazakos of  which chazal spoke

rest not upon transient psychological  behavioral patterns, but upon

permanent ontological  principles rooted in the very depth of the

human  personality, in the metaphysical human personality, which

is as changeless as the heavens above."



Can anybody explain what  this really means? That is, explain it to someone
who doesn't use the word  "ontological" in his/her normal speech.  I have
read it many many times  but I still don't understand what the Rav is 
saying.



Joseph 

 
 
>>>>>
 
If you leave out the word "ontological" here the sentence is perfectly  
clear:  Human nature does not change.  
 
I'm sure you looked up the definition of "ontological" so no need to go  
there.  But in this paragraph, the word "ontological" serves a subliminal  
purpose.  Here it means, "Don't condescend to Orthodox Jews and do not  assume 
we are backwards, primitive, and ignorant.  One can be  an intellectual and 
still believe the Torah is true and  eternal."
 
 

--Toby  Katz
t6...@aol.com
..
=============


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




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150415/a68fff7a/attachment-0001.htm>

 

From: Eli Turkel via Avodah  <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>

>>The sefer Piskei Teshuvot (siman  110-2) has a discussion whether one is
required to say tefillat haderech in  modern times. He concludes that one
who does not say it on major roads has  someone to rely on but someone who
also says it has the reward of a tefilla  even though we no longer have
"listin" and wild animals on the roads. Instead  we have a car accidents.
Therefore one should also say tefillat haderech on  railroads and planes. He
claims that on small side roads that everyone  paskens you need to say
tefillat haderech<<

-- 
Eli  Turkel

 
 
>>>>
 
Saying tefillas haderech "on major roads" -- does that mean even within one 
 city, not just when traveling between cities?
 
"On small side roads everyone paskens you need to say tefillas  haderech"?  
What does that mean?  Every time I get in the car to go to  the grocery 
store in my own neighborhood?  Or was the word "don't"  inadvertently omitted 
from that sentence ("you don't need to say tefillat  haderech")?
 
 
I was driving someone to the cemetery for a levaya, we were on  the highway 
doing 60 and all of a sudden it started to rain, but I mean a mabul,  a 
hard, driving, blinding rain.  I couldn't see at all in front of  me.  Of 
course I slowed down, as did everyone else, but it was still very  frightening 
and certainly I couldn't just stop in the middle of the  highway.  My 
passenger, a BT, became very agitated and said, "I only know  one perek of Tehillim 
by heart so I am going to say that."  Then she  recited Shir Hamaalos (from 
benching) out loud.  The rain stopped  immediately!  A few miles further 
down the road, there was another sudden  blinding outburst and she said Shir 
Hamaalos again.  Again the rain  immediately stopped.  She was like a reverse 
Choni Hamaagel!  I really  think her emunah peshuta saved the day!
 
But to veer back into Avodah territory -- would it have been appropriate to 
 say Tefillas Haderech at that time?  With shem umalchus?  (I  assume you 
can always say it without shem umalchus.)
 
 

--Toby  Katz
t6...@aol.com
..
=============


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



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150415/dab2eaff/attachment-0001.htm>

There was a bachur next to me this morning whose retzu'os were painted
black on both sides. And I believe I know why this is done, in case
a retzu'ah gets flipped. Or perhaps to be chosheish for the Rambam's
description of such retzu'os being "noi".

The MB 933:21 tells us not to follow the Rambam, whereas the Keses
haSofer (written by R' Ganzfried of the QSA) says even the *sides*
should be black.

But the site got me wondering:

1- If the bottom is painted, why wouldn't the cholqim on the Rambam
consider the paint a chatzitzah between the retzu'ah and the head or arm?

2- If the leather is soaked in dye untile its absorbed and the leather
is fully black (a process developed about 12-13 years ago), how do we
know it's still valid material from which to make a retzu'ah?

R YS Elyashiv is reported by R' Mordeschai Friedlander (a noted sofer
and poseiq, a reliable source) to hold they're fine. I am not challenging
their kashrus. It just struck me that both seem valid concerns. I
assume the talented chevrah can find holes in my problems.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 11th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            strict justice?


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



_______________________________________________
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.)