Avodah Mailing List

Volume 33: Number 62

Fri, 17 Apr 2015

• 1. Re: Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's Position on the Kosher Switch (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's Position on the Kosher Switch (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's Position on the Kosher Switch ()
• 4. Re: Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's Position on the Kosher Switch (Kenneth Miller)
• 5. Re: chametz post pesach (Kenneth Miller) (D via Avodah)
• 6. re Chametz post Pesach (elazar teitz)
• 7. Re: Eilu v'eilu (Kenneth Miller)
• 8. Re: Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's Position on the Kosher Switch (Zev Sero)
• 9. Re: tefillat haderech (Kenneth Miller)
• 10. SF - Focus on the Good (Prof. Levine)
• 11. Re: tefillat haderech (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's Position on the Kosher Switch (Kenneth Miller)
• 13. Re: Rabbi Noach Isaac Oelbaum's Position on the Kosher Switch (Saul Guberman)
• 14. yom hazikaron origin (saul newman)
• 15. Re: Eilu v'eilu (Rich, Joel)

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 04:25:42PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
:> What's relevant is the probability of the wind eventually blowing the
:> candle out or the switch turning the light off. If it's a rov or maybe
:> a rube deruba, then it's gerama.

: That doesn't seem to be what the SA says.  But again, with the caveat that
: intention might make a difference.

But we already know it does, according to RSZa and numerous other posqim.
IOW, your seifa answers your reisha.

: >Whether you can break down the likelihood of the melakhah occuring into
: >a union of the probability of a number of sub-steps or not doesn't seem
: >to me to impact the question. Because this isn't a safeiq situation,
: >it's whether your action can be blamed for the melakhah.

: It's putting further causal distance between "cause" and "effect".
: What if you had a series of these routines, each of which may or may not
: call the next one, until the last one which may or may not do something?

That's exactly what I'm saying -- gerama is always a chain of events
that can be subdivided according to your taste (how fine grained you wish
to define the word "event").

There is an oft-discussed difference between melakhah and CM, where the
latter subdivides into gerama (culpable) and garmi (no libability) but
hilkhos Shabbos does not. And then even so, garmi is about number of
human actions, not physical events.


On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 05:05:38PM -0400, Samuel Svarc wrote:
: On Apr 15, 2015 6:01 AM, "Micha Berger via Avodah" <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
: 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.
:> ...
:>:> Moshe Oelbaum
:>:> Son of Rabbi N I Oelbaum

:> Authentication?

: Um, the fact that R' Oelbaum says the same thing on the KosherSwitch video
: (<https://youtu.be/Aneast2yakU>)?

YOu misunderstand what I'm asking to be authenticated. Yes, I agree
that RNIO talks about zilzul Shabbos. He does in the original alleged
approbation in print (or PDF) as well.

I was asking for authentication that RMO was really the one who said
it's "only" zilzul Shabbos and not also gerama.

There is nothing in his caveat about them avoiding melakhah that explains
in what way shabbos is being cheapened. Could be uvda dechol, could
be gerama, could be any other derabbanan or shevus. No?

Not to verify the new "chumera", but to very he wasn't being even more
machmir. That's a lot to glean from a post on a YWN chatroom that claims
to be from his son. No one identity checks on YWN.

: What I find very disturbing is that this information is in the public
: arena. Why are people commenting or conjecturing without looking at the
: companies materials?

In the same post I cite the site in numerous ways, including commenting
on parts of the patent application. It's not like I stinted on the
research.

Never blame until the possibility of miscommunication has been
eliminated. No?


: On Apr 16, 2015 2:46 PM, "Micha Berger" <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
: Take a look at R' Schapiro's teshuva (available on the KosherSwitch
: website) as well as listen to the shuir they link to (26 min.).

One thing I had noted about the teshuvah is that he doesn't bother with
the whole thing about a second randomizer. Which is why I was lost as to
why anyone would think this is more mutar, and why people who generally
follow RSZA more often than RZS would think this solves anything.

See R' Neuwirth's summary rejection, repudiating the claim he backed
their work <http://j.mp/1HyFFw>. Consistent with what he reported
besheim RSZA decades ago.

I already noted OC 277, which is specific to geram kibui being mutar,
with the exception of taking a candle outside while the wind is calm,
lest someone not wait for the wind to be calm. And havarah or bishul?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 12th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Gevurah: What aspect of judgment
Fax: (270) 514-1507                  forces the "judge" into submission?

Here's the current state of my understnading, to start the conversation
over by clearing the exchanges that got me there. Feel free to correct
any misunderstandings, or even points that needn't necessarily be as I
present them.

1- RSZA considers Zomet's Gerama Switch to be just that -- gerama,
and therefore assur derabanan except in special cases.

Randomly delayed changes to a circuit is, leshitaso, gerama.

2- KSTI considers their switch to be halachically different because
their version of the Gerama Switch then goes into a second randomizer
which determines whether or not it actually turns on or off your light.

They invoke the words "sefeik sefeika", which I don't understand, since
the random element is to insure an unknown delay, not a doubt about
whether or not the switch eventually turns the light on.

3- Those who hold like RSZA -- R Neuwirth (obviously), R' Nebenzahl, R'
Shternbuch -- gave the same ruling to the new switch.

4- Those who say this switch is gerama do not actually invoke the second
random element. I found nothing in
<http://www.kosherswitch.com/live/halacha/responsa> that wouldn't
apply to Zomet's switch. I see them as simply disagreeing with RSZA
and R' Yehoshua Neuwirth when they dealt with that question decades ago.

Which, given the stature of RSZA and the acceptance of Shemiras
Shabbos keHilhasah (and thus RYN), I don't think will get very far
in terms of communal acceptance.

5- The Machloqes between RSZA and R Chaim Zvi Shapiro (to pick
two representative names) appears to be over how to understand
the distinction between two statements by the Rama:
    334:22- Geram kibui is only allowed in special cases, and
    514:3-  You may put a cnandle next to an open window even in
            a windy area.

RSZA distinguishes between whether the intent is kibui or not. RCZS
makes the chiluq between whether the maaseh is one of kibui.

But I still don't see how this makes the Kosher Switch not a maaseh kibui
that we would group it with open windows, not the normal geram kibui.

6- You can't take a candle outside to a windy area even when there
is no wind because of a gezeira atu not waiting for the wind to die
down. This is different than the window, because one is moving the candle
itself. Still, the Magein AvrahamA applies the gezeira to the window as
well -- inlike the Rama.

So my wondering about how the Kosher Switch isn't a maaseh kibui
means that I also have no idea why the switch wouldn't be covered by
the gezeira. And according to the MA, the gezeira definitely applies,
regardless.

If so, wouldn't you need the switch to be physically blocked when the
response could be immediately, and not merely warned off with a red light?

6- R' Oelbaum is against general usage, due to zilzul Shabbos. (To
my understanding, zilzul Shabbos means violating a shevus or
other deRabbanan, chilul Shabbos means deOraisa.)

According to <http://www.kosherswitch.com/live/?wpfb_dl=75> he explicitly
states "it is clear it is not a grama". So, my prior approach to figuring
out what he holds was pointless. Regardless of whether the person in YWN's
chatroom is his son or just someone pretending to be, ie whether that
text is likely to reflect the nuances of his position. And regardless
how one is medayeiq the difference between melakhah and zilzul, ie
whether he considers geram melakhah a melakhah or a shevus.

RNIO is in the same camp as R' Chaim Zvi Shapiro WRT the mechanics of
gerama, but with RSZA it all in practice.


But at least now my opening question has some kind of resolution:
No poseiq makes a point about how the switches differ, its a machloqes
about whether the switch is more like bringing a candle outside or
opening a window.

It may also be a machloqes about whether it's only geram kibui that
is limited to acts of kibui, or even other melakhos.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 12th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Gevurah: What aspect of judgment
Fax: (270) 514-1507                  forces the "judge" into submission?

 

From: Zev Sero via Avodah  <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>

>> Why not?  For the  shabbos-keeping household, a switch that sometimes 
fails
is better than no  switch at all.<<

-- 
Zev  Sero
z...@sero.name




>>>>>
 
Now that Shabbos lamps are readily available -- they work by covering the  
light rather than turning it off -- why do we need the Shabbos switch at  
all?
 

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


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



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150416/bbd6c66d/attachment-0001.htm>

> But that whole discussion assumes that
> extinguishing the flame is not the purpose for which the door is being
> opened, it's just a possible side-effect. Is the halacha different if
> that was the intention?

If the operative principle were Psik Reisha, then intention certainly would
matter. So here's a question: Is Grama a version of Aino Psik Reisha, or is
it another principle entirely? 

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Forget the iPhone 6
1 little-known Apple supplier holds wealth-changing growth potential.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/55305d31763705d3173a1st04vuc

This idea (that the days of the Omer are a type of chol hamoed) is mentioned 
in Avoidas Yisroel [Koznitse Maggid] and Ramban in Acharie Mois.
Dovid Rubin 

>What did it grow out of? Avoiding she'avar alav es hapesach? A way of
avoiding chodosh, at least during the omer period?<

     Since chadash is grain which has taken root after the minchas ha'omer
on the second day of Pesach, and it takes more than 7 weeks for newly-sown
grain to be ready for harvest, how is it possible for chadash to exist
between Pesach and Shavuos?

EMT
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150416/7dd76466/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Joel Rich asked:

> Question: If one doesn?t view eilu v?eilu as multiple truths
> but rather one truth and one nice try (but we don?t know which
> is which), ...

You've lost me. Doesn't the grammar and definition of the words "eilu
v'eilu" imply that the two things under discussion are equal? I just can't
wrap my brain around a way to translate "eilu v'eilu" where one is truth
and the other isn't.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Fast, Secure, NetZero 4G Mobile Broadband. Try it.
http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT2

On 04/16/2015 09:59 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> They invoke the words "sefeik sefeika", which I don't understand, since
> the random element is to insure an unknown delay, not a doubt about
> whether or not the switch eventually turns the light on.

I assume they disagree with this characterisation.  This is your editorial
opinion, that since it's inevitable that sooner or later the ducks will all
be in a row and the light will come on, all that it achieves is a delay of
random length.  They would say no, each time the sequence is triggered (let's
say every minute) is a discrete event, in which there is a sfek-sfeka whether
anything will happen, and the fact that in the next hour there will be 60 more
such opportunities, one of which is "bound" to succeed, is irrelevant.  They
would also point out that there *is* in fact a doubt whether the light will
ever turn on (before Shabbos is over or the owner decides to flip the switch
back), and they would deny your premise that the tininess of that doubt renders
it meaningless.  *You* think it's halachically insignificant; they are not
required to agree with you.


> But at least now my opening question has some kind of resolution:
> No poseiq makes a point about how the switches differ, its a machloqes
> about whether the switch is more like bringing a candle outside or
> opening a window.

They seem to say that this is like a case where at the time you open
the window there is neither a wind nor a candle, but you know that some
time later a goy is likely to put a candle in front of the window, and
that some time after that a wind is likely to blow and put it out.


On 04/16/2015 08:56 PM, T6...@aol.com via Avodah wrote:
> Now that Shabbos lamps are readily available -- they work by covering
> the light rather than turning it off -- why do we need the Shabbos
> switch at all?

I assume
1. To save electricity
2. If you want a brighter light than you can get from a 15w CF light (which
is the maximum that it's safe to put in a Shabbos lamp)
3. For applications other than lights

-- 
Zev Sero
z...@sero.name

R' Eli Turkel wrote:

> On many birchot 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.

I am not aware of any situation where the halacha says that I cannot say a
birkat hamitzva on your behalf, AND that the reason why I cannot do so is
because you are a baki. (There might be other good reasons, depending on
the situation, but I don't know that "being a baki" is ever such a reason.)

That said, I do concede that the common practice is for one person to say
the bracha on shofar and megilla for all the assembled, yet we all say our
own brachos on lulav, hallel, and sefira.

I have never seen this explanation, but I've always felt there was a very
simple explanation for how this distinction developed: When I take the
lulav, say hallel, or count sefira, I am doing the mitzvah myself. I am
doing it in shul, among many other people, but we are each acting as
individuals. I do the mitzvah myself, so I say the bracha on it myself.

In contrast, I am dependent on someone else to blow the shofar or read the
megillah. You can say that I am personally hearing the shofar with my own
ears, and you can say that "shome'a k'oneh" means that I am actively doing
the mitzvah of krias hamegillah -- but the bottom line, l'maaseh, is that
if the guy on the bimah messes up, I've lost the mitzvah. I am dependent on
him to get the mitzvah done. I have to do my share of the work too, of
course, by paying attention etc etc, but that's not enough. We *both* have
to do it right. Under such conditions, I really don't want to risk saying a
bracha that could end up being l'vatala. I'd rather answer Amen to *his*
birkas hamitzvah.

Following that logic, someone who has his own kosher megila, and actually reads along with the baal kriah, ought to say his own Al Mikra Megila. I suppose so!

This distinction appears in other brachos too, even brachos other than
birchos hamitzvah. For example, at Kol Nidre, everyone says their own
Shehecheyanu on the Yom Tov, because, why not? We all say our own Netilas
Yadayim, and brachos on Talis and Tefilin, for the same reason. We all
listen to one person say Kiddush, but I think that's mostly because only
he/she has a cup from which to drink the required amount. But at the Seder,
everyone has a cup, so (in many families) everyone says their own Kiddush.

EXCEPTION: There are some brachos which *ought* to be said by each
individual according to the above logic, but we rely on the other person
because a few brachos got bundled together. For example, if we pass around
the b'samim and candle at havdala, we should each say our own bracha on
them, but most people don't, because it is part of havdala. Similarly, if
you are at the Seder and don't have your own 2.5 matzos in front of you,
you'll have to hear Hamotzi from someone because of Lechem Mishne, but why
not say your own Al Achilas Matza after you have a piece in your hand, and
the answer is because Motzi Matzah go together.

All of the above is purely my own logic, and I'm sure many of you will be able to punch some good holes in it. And I'm looking forward to reading that!

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Forget the iPhone 6
1 little-known Apple supplier holds wealth-changing growth potential.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/553077e61f4dd77e644e0st03vuc

[]

Focus on the Good

In ancient days if a person spoke loshon horah he contracted 
tza'aras. The message was that just as he exposed the flaws of a 
person, so too, his flaws were exposed. His rectification was to go 
into isolation and introspect on his own shortcomings.

Lesson: If we focus on the faults of others, we are held responsible 
to correct our own faults. If we focus of the good of others, HaShem 
will mercifully overlook our flaws and  focus exclusively on our good.

App: Avoid saying all unbecoming comments about others.

(Based on the writings of Rabbi Yisrael Salanter)


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150417/4171c38d/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 03:02:13AM +0000, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
: I am not aware of any situation where the halacha says that I cannot
: say a birkat hamitzva on your behalf, AND that the reason why I cannot
: do so is because you are a baki. (There might be other good reasons,
: depending on the situation, but I don't know that "being a baki" is ever
: such a reason.)

More than that, Beis Hillel (Berakhos 38a, brought lehalakhah AhS OC
298:28) gives *preference* to one person making havdalah for all than
each person making their own, because of berov am hadras Melekh.

Similarly, it is better to be yotzei qiddush from the baal habayis than
each person make their own. (AhS OC 273:6, citing Berakhos 53a, and a
din mentioned in most Hagados, because at the seder each person already
has their own kos.)

But when it comes to birkhas shevach and birkhos hanehenin (which are
unattached to other berakhos, unlike the the borei peri hagafen of
qiddush or havdalah), we do hold that it's better to make your own.
(Berakhos 42a)

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 13th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 6 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Yesod sheb'Gevurah: To what extent is judgment
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   necessary for a good relationship?

R' Zev Sero explained two views:

> I assume they disagree with this characterisation.  This is your
> editorial opinion, that since it's inevitable that sooner or later
> the ducks will all be in a row and the light will come on, all that
> it achieves is a delay of random length.  They would say no, each
> time the sequence is triggered (let's say every minute) is a
> discrete event, in which there is a sfek-sfeka whether anything
> will happen, and the fact that in the next hour there will be 60
> more such opportunities, one of which is "bound" to succeed, is
> irrelevant.  They would also point out that there *is* in fact a
> doubt whether the light will ever turn on (before Shabbos is over
> or the owner decides to flip the switch back), and they would deny
> your premise that the tininess of that doubt renders it
> meaningless.  *You* think it's halachically insignificant; they
> are not required to agree with you.

If I'm understanding this correctly, the difference of opinion centers on:
how many links does the chain need, to reach a point where one end has no
halachically significant effect on the other end.

To me, this whole discussion is very reminiscent of another topic in
hilchos Shabbos, namely, that the Gemara never gave any halachos about
cooking in a Kli Shlishi. One view says: "A Kli Rishon obviously cooks, and
we were told that some easily-cooked things are capable of being cooked in
a Kli Sheni, but that's as far as they went, so obviously nothing can get
cooked in a Kli Shlishi." The other view says: "A Kli Rishon obviously
cooks, and we were told that some easily-cooked things are capable of being
cooked even in other keilim, so you have to be careful with *any* keli
that's above Yad Soledes."

To me, both of those arguments are very logical, and we must follow our
poskim to know which one Hashem wants us to follow. I imagine that this
whole Grama discussion might be similar: Chazal laid out circumstances
under which indirect action is still assur -- so does that mean that *all*
indirect action is assur?, or perhaps I can structure an even more remote
indirectness which is acceptably distant.

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Old School Yearbook Pics
View Class Yearbooks Online Free. Search by School & Year. Look Now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/5530f6662145376662eacst01vuc

 A shabbos lamp is tiny.  Do you have shabbos lamps to light up your dining
room table or the main lighting on a timer?



> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 8:56 PM, via Avodah <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Now that Shabbos lamps are readily available -- they work by covering the
>> light rather than turning it off -- why do we need the Shabbos switch at
>> all?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *--Toby Katzt6...@aol.com <t6...@aol.com>*
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150417/ebfd47e3/attachment-0001.htm>

http://www.biu.ac.il/JH/Parasha/tazria/Ahrend.pdf
on rav goren's placement of  yom hazikaron on 4 iyar, analogizing to the
israeli shmini atzeret , where hakafot precedes yizkor...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150417/975519e8/attachment-0001.htm>

> Question: If one doesn?t view eilu v?eilu as multiple truths
> but rather one truth and one nice try (but we don?t know which
> is which), ...

You've lost me. Doesn't the grammar and definition of the words "eilu
v'eilu" imply that the two things under discussion are equal? I just can't
wrap my brain around a way to translate "eilu v'eilu" where one is truth
and the other isn't.

------------------------------------------------------
See here  https://ka
vvanah.wordpress.com/2012/06/07/rav-soloveitchik-religious-definitions-of-m
an-and-his-social-institutions-part-1of-7-1958/ for a general approach
(especially "Part III- Rav Soloveitchik?s God
 In Judaism, God himself is the hidden God, Jal Mistatar ? unknowable and
 unknown. The Jewish experience of God (shared by other religions is
 antithetic, a polarity. it has both remoteness and intimate closeness. How
 is that possible? Judaism does not use Aristotelian logic of excluded
 middle. Unlike classic physic, modern physics uses both waves and
 particles; modern physics does not use Aristotle. God is both remote and
 close- in our encounter we are bewildered and comforted. Since Creation is
 also revelation, the every tree also incomprehensible strange. "
And here for some more specifics:
http://nishma.org/articles/commentary/slifkinrevisted3print.pdf
  especially starting around page 11.


KT
Joel Rich (who still can't really understand the double slit experiment, yet it's there)
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.

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



_______________________________________________
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.)