Avodah Mailing List

Volume 33: Number 119

Sat, 05 Sep 2015

• 1. Re: Another Tereifos Observation (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: Chitzonios and Tereifos (Akiva Miller)
• 3. bavli variants (Eli Turkel)
• 4. Re: Chitzonios and Tereifos (Akiva Miller)
• 5. Re: Chitzonios and Tereifos (Micha Berger)
• 6. Chitzonios and Tereifos (Michael Poppers)
• 7. How does Prozbul work? (Akiva Miller)
• 8. Re: How does Prozbul work? (Rich, Joel)
• 9. Footnote to the Shulchan Aruch (Rich, Joel)
• 10. What am I missing? (Ben Waxman)
• 11. Re: Footnote to the Shulchan Aruch (Zev Sero)
• 12. Re: Factory Farming and Panicking the Animals ()

On 09/01/2015 01:49 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
>
> Language note: I noticed that rei'ah means "lungs", even though the term
> is in the singular and the translation is in the plural. There is no
> term of art for a single lung -- the main body of each lung is an omah
> and the lobes are onos or in Hebrew "aznayim".

Yes, Chazal conceived of the lungs as a single organ.

-- 
Zev Sero               I have a right to stand on my own defence, if you
z...@sero.name          intend to commit felony...if a robber meets me in
                        the street and commands me to surrender my purse,
                        I have a right to kill him without asking questions
                                               -- John Adams

R' Micha Berger asked:

> Similarly the brain -- if the outside is solid, the inside
> could be rotten and the animal is still kosher.
> ...
> However, I can't picture drawing the conclusion that
> chitzonius is more important than penimius.
>
> Maybe something more like "fake it till you make it" -- as
> long as you keep the externals going, there is hope that
> the internals will fill in.
>
> But I'm fishing for better suggestions.

I will offer another data point which also seems to suugest that chitzonius
is more important than penimius.

Mechaber 78:1 and Mishne Brurah 78:2,3 are obviously talking about a person
who unfortunately suffers from incontinence. If he urinates while davening,
he must pause, but can continue when the flow stops. This applies even if
his legs and undergarments are totally wet, but NOT if the urine is on his
outer garments. It seems that the cleanliness of one's outer garments is
more important than the cleanliness of his undergarments, or even of his
body itself.

Similarly, if one needs to defecate, but he can hold himself for 4 mil, he
will be yotzay davening b'dieved -- Mechaber 92:1. But that leniency is
because it is mere pnimius; Mechaber 76:4,5 seems to be stricter once the
tzoah has gone external.

(Note: I think that it would not be difficult to show that chitzonius *is*
important. The problem as I see it is that we've found some cases where it
is *more* important than pnimius.)

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150901/90f4ade2/attachment-0001.htm>

We are pleased to announce the launch of a new version (1.2) of the '
*Hachi **Garsinan*' Site for Variant-Readings of the Talmud Bavli.
The site is freely accessible to all through the Friedberg portal:
http://jewishmanuscripts.org
<http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001NmQpG_ZOJcYySHIAAWdvNzIf3T7UK0TKs1ZqL2fETd
3Xaeojl4wHMF0EkY_1TBHPnvxn3NV6-jwpKuqj0ifFXnpuZejm2GywLrehURbiww9Y8dgzhgAAU
lt30wynU3MOGQCUiJgKORnnuigD1HpAiDg7GKZzuixgI5qRbktqznjrgsdDMInOCQ==&
;c=afqnbMUqh216qPq8XeKPXp4lvsDxWLX4TSXxHzdT6PC-9G3lxkY0Jg==&ch=9WnhvXbI
KPiKRQZN5YPH54VEP-8ziN3nVESkOwd7CYDKriD1n4P7dA==>
.
Version 1.1 of the website shows all hand-written text witnesses of the
Talmud Bavli from the Cairo Genizah, with digital images (more than 4,600)
and their transcriptions, in the framework of a software that allows the
display of all text-witnesses of a specific Talmudic text in parallel
columns in small units. Identical excerpts in a specific text-witness and
in the Vilna can be marked, in order to spare the user the effort of
comparing the texts. There are also additional helpful functions such as
Save and Print, as specified in the website Homepage.
*In the new version (1.2) - text witnesses from the following early
printings have been added:*

   - *Guadalajara**(1480?), Spain / Portugal (Toledo? 1480-1490), Portugal
   (Faro? before 1498), Faro (1497?), Fez (1516-1521)*
   - *Soncino (1484-1489), Italy (1489-1498), Barco (1498-1499), Pesaro
   (1509-1516), Constantinople (1505-1509)*
   - *Venice** (1520-1523) *


*(for details on tractates included in early printings - see Homepage). *
*Furthermore, a function has been added to enable the user search for **terms
or expressions in the Vilna** edition and each of the text witnesses that
take part in the current version (Genizah and early printings) as well as a
function to display the lexicon (**list of different words and their
frequency**) of Vilna and of each of the other text-witnesses. Finally, the
new version allows each user to alter the way that the text units are
displayed on the variant-readings screen, using special editing tools
designed for this purpose.*

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150902/67434c59/attachment-0001.htm>

In my previous post, I cited some halachos which seem to demonstrate -
surprisingly - that externals are *more* important than internals. Perhaps
the source pasuk for those halachos might help us out. Devarim 23:15:

"... v'hayah machanecha kadosh,
v'lo yir'eh v'cha ervas davar..."

"... your *camp* will be holy,
and nothing unseemly will be seen in *you*..."

We learn much from each of these phrases, but does anyone compare the
relative importance of the reisha to that of the seifa?

Akiva Miller
(now at AkivaGMiller at gmail)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150902/cc8eba23/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 09:45:33PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
: Mechaber 78:1 and Mishne Brurah 78:2,3 are obviously talking about a person
: who unfortunately suffers from incontinence...
: Similarly, if one needs to defecate, but he can hold himself for 4 mil, he
: will be yotzay davening b'dieved -- Mechaber 92:1. But that leniency is
: because it is mere pnimius; Mechaber 76:4,5 seems to be stricter once the
: tzoah has gone external.

I am not sure these are examples. It may have to do with when tzo'ah
smells, or when it starts being "tzo'ah" rather than part of the
person.

: (Note: I think that it would not be difficult to show that chitzonius *is*
: important. The problem as I see it is that we've found some cases where it
: is *more* important than pnimius.)

Thinking about it more, I have more confidence in my earlier guess,
that chitzonius is a better indicator of future penimius than current
penimius is. Someone who is a passionate eved H', but for some reason
isn't acting on it will likely lose that passion, and someone who
develops the right habits in attempt to develop the feelings, mitokh
shelo lishimah, ba lishmah.

So it's not that it's more important; it's still of derived value.
And yet, this reasoning explains Yahadus's focus on halakhah.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Never must we think that the Jewish element
mi...@aishdas.org        in us could exist without the human element
http://www.aishdas.org   or vice versa.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                     - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch

In Avodah V33n118, R'Micha wrote:
> However, I can't picture drawing the conclusion that chitzonius is
more important than penimius. <
Isn't this yet another example in *halachah* of working only with what can
be seen?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150902/36b01633/attachment-0001.htm>

We recently had a thread which discusses the meaning of the word "mesorah".
Coincidentally or not, I'd like to ask about the meaning of the verb
"moser" as it occurs in the context of the Prozbul.

I'd like to begin by giving two different *colloquial* uses of "moser": It
can refer to the act of literally handing a fellow Jew to the authorities,
but it can also refer to merely informing the authorities about a fellow
Jew. My question about Prozbul is this: When the Prozbul says that the
lender is "moser" the loans to Beis Din, does he actually hand them over,
or does he merely inform?

For decades, I had thought that the lender actually gives the loans to the
Beis Din, in a manner similar to how anyone can use a commercial collection
agency: Usually, if someone owes me money, I can sell that debt to a
collection agency, but in the context of Shmitta, I give it as a gift to
the beis din. Then, the beis din authorizes me to collect the debt on their
behalf, and will allow me to retain 100% of it as my service fee.

With the above, I have accomplished three important things: (1) When Rosh
Hashana arrives, no one owes me anything, so I have no possibility of
violating any halachos of Shmitas Kesafim. (2) When I collect from the
borrower, I'm merely acting as an agent of beis din, to whom Lo Yigos does
not apply, so I'm not violating anything. (3) Although the lender did not
repay anything to me directly, my finances did not suffer, and future
Shmitos will not influence to me avoid lending.

BUT - From what I've learned, when a Prozbul is done, no kinyan ever occurs
between the lender and the Beis Din, not even a kinyan sudar of the sort
that I do when authorizing the rav to sell my chometz. Without a kinyan, I
can't see how the loan ever leaves the ownership of the lender.

So it is clear to me that Prozbul does NOT follow the "collection agency"
model. Is there some other model that it does follow?

The Mechaber Choshen Mishpat 67:8 talks about a situation that I will
presume occurs before Erev Rosh Hashana: "If one claims money, and the
other denies it, and the first sues in beis din and wins, and the psak din
is that the second one must pay - this is a gibui, and shmita does not
cancel it."

If I'm understanding this correctly, then when a court verdict declares the
A must pay B, this is not the sort of debt that shmita cancels, because the
requirement to pay does not come from any interaction between the two men,
but directly from the beis din's power. In other words, the lender can ask
the borrower for money, but he is not asking for the loan to be repaid;
rather, he is enforcing the court's ruling. This is a new obligation upon
the borrower, which was created by the court, and is therefore exempt from
Shmitas Kesafim.

Perhaps this is how Prozbul works: Without any evidence or documentation,
or even an itemized list, a person approaches the beis din and tells them
that there are debts which are owed to him. The beis din responds with a
court order that those debts must be paid. He can now collect them, because
it is the *Beis Din* that wants them to be paid (irrespective of the fact
that the lender wants them paid).

This explanation solves the problem of Lo Yigos: The lender is not pressing
the borrower for repayment of a personal loan; he is pressing the borrower
to pay the court judgment. But the personal loan does still exist, doesn't
it? The lender would still have an obligation to be personally m'shamet the
loan at some point, but I think most people think that the Prozbul relieves
them of that obligation.

I'm stumped. When the lender is "moser" the loan to Beis Din, exactly what
is happening?

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150904/6fc7e475/attachment-0001.htm>

We recently had a thread which discusses the meaning of the word "mesorah".
Coincidentally or not, I'd like to ask about the meaning of the verb
"moser" as it occurs in the context of the Prozbul.

Akiva Miller

=================================

Listen hear for discussion on point



http://www.torahbase.org/prozbul-concept-halachos-5775/?lang=en

Rav Asher Weiss-Prozbul ? Concept and Halachos 5775



Kvct

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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150904/e2f23f0f/attachment-0001.htm>

S"A O"C  55:11 as recorded in the 1st volume of the mishna brurah (it's not
in my regular S"A) has a footnote delineated with *)  . The text of the S"A
deals with the stauts of an avaryan who was not in nidui counting for a
minyan. The footnote says nidui  doesn't apply "now" because dina dmalchuta
has done away with nidui.   Anyone know who added this footnote?
KVCT
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150904/2e660a57/attachment-0001.htm>

Re prozbul, I seem to be missing something. Personally I haven't loaned 
out any huge sums such that if I don't get them back, I would  be 
reticent about loaning in the future. If I did loan out something small, 
why should I sign the prozbul?

If the borrower doesn't pay me, well he doesn't have to (right?).
If the borrower does pay me, he gets a bracha and everyone is a winner.

What am I missing?

Ben

On 09/04/2015 04:07 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
> S?A O?C  55:11 as recorded in the 1^st volume of the mishna brurah
> (it?s not in my regular S?A) has a footnote delineated with *)  . The
> text of the S?A deals with the stauts of an avaryan who was not in
> nidui counting for a minyan. The footnote says nidui  doesn?t apply
> ?now? because dina dmalchuta has done away with nidui.   Anyone know
> who added this footnote?


The note appears in the first edition, so presumably it was put there
by the original publisher, in order to get it past the censor.  Or
perhaps it was inserted at the censor's insistence.  In any case it
houldn't need saying that it was not intended to be taken seriously
by the intended audience.
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=49623&;pgnum=170

(BTW, the censor's approval is dated 23-Dec-1882, the Hebrew date on
the front page is 5683, but the secular date on the front page is 1884.
Presumably that's how long publishing took.)

-- 
Zev Sero               I have a right to stand on my own defence, if you
z...@sero.name          intend to commit felony...if a robber meets me in
                        the street and commands me to surrender my purse,
                        I have a right to kill him without asking questions
                                               -- John Adams

 

From: Micha Berger via Avodah  <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>

>> If the lung is tzemuqah (dried  enough to be wrinkly like a raisin, but
not dry enough to be called  yeveishah)... There is a halakhah leMoshe
miSinai that
if it was due to  fright caused by a person, the animel is tereifah
if it's caused by HQBH (eg  a lion attack), the animal is kosher.
(AhS YD  36:70)


....Interesting is a comment at the end of se'if 70:
Therefore it is correct that shoechtim be careful not to shecht
one ba'al chai in front of another ba'al chai
so that  the lungs not get wrinkly and will require checking, ae
will be  explained. <<

Micha  Berger   
          

>>>>
 
I remember reading that Temple Grandin had designed a spiral ramp with  
high walls for cattle to walk along before reaching the slaughtering  spot.  
The design was such that the animal could not see out the sides or  very far 
ahead as it walked, and would thus not witness other animals being  
slaughtered.  This was meant to keep the animal calm and not frightened. I  did not 
find the article with a quick google search but I am sure it's available  
somewhere.
 
Temple Grandin is a famous expert in humane methods of animal  slaughter.
 

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


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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20150906/fb9f4db1/attachment.htm>

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



_______________________________________________
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.)