Avodah Mailing List

Volume 01 : Number 023

Wednesday, August 19 1998

• [none]
• re: Public Discussions of Matters of Arayos
• When is Tsait
• re: Public Discussions of Matters of Arayos
• Re: impeachment
• Re: When is Tsait
• Misasek
• Re: Misasek
• Re: Misasek
• Re: Misasek
• Re: Misasek
• Re: mis'asek
• Re: Elu VElu - Mitasek

subject: impeachment

Chaim asks

<< Is there a legal mechanism by which a king can be dethroned?

A similar question is whether a cohen gadol can voluntarily resign
or be impeached.

According to the opinion that Pinchas and Eliyahu were the same person
he must have resigned (or perhaps became pasul?) bewteen the time
he was pinchas and cohen gadol and his later life when he was a prophet
in the northern kingdom.

<<  are we bound to follow midrashei Chazal when there is historical 
<< evidence (not from Chazal) to the contrary?

This is particularly relevant to the question of the length of the
Persian kingdom at the time of the building of the second temple.
Accoeding to chazal it lasted about 54 years while according to
Greek historians, archaelogy and many other proofs it lasted about
200 years. There is some discussion (though not much) in the book of
First on the topic (Aronson publishers).

Eli Turkel

Rabbi Bechhofer wrote <<< , I feel very strongly that recent discussions
here ... are way out of bounds. When the Gemara in Chagiga forbids public
discussions of matters of arayos, I believe this is the type of
conversation they meant to forbid, and I think, therefore, that halacha
requires cessation of the conversation. >>>

Does anyone know if there has been any discussion in the Poskim of how
this Gemara applies to us nowadays?

There must be some definition which describes where it does and doesn't
apply, or else the Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah would not have been
able to write those things which I heve been trying to understand.
(Namely, Orach Chaim 240 and Even Haezer 23)

I think that it is accurate to say that I know more about how I am
supposed to act in the Bais Hamikdash, than about how I am supposed to
act in the bedroom. Is this what HaShem wants?

Akiva Miller

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

Depending on how you choose to calculate Tsait you get dramatically
different values for different cities. It would seem that the angle of the
sun below the horizon whould have much more to do with seeing 3 medium
sized stars than waiting a fixed number of minutes after sunset.

The 8.5d refers to the angle the sun is below the horizon and thus how dark
it really is. I don't say that 8.5d is the correct figure to use. I would
suggest that maybe one should work backwards from a determination of a
proper wait for Jerusalem to calculate an angle of the sun below the
horizon that can be used for other cities in the world.

			21-Jan	22-Apr	22-Jul	21-Oct


Anchorage	8.5d	4:55	9:00	11:42	5:36
		72min	4:50	8:52	10:16	5:43
			0:05	0:08	1:26	-0:07

Miami		8.5d	6:33	7:23	7:50	6:23
		72min	7:08	8:00	8:25	7:00
			-0:35	-0:37	-0:35	-0:37

Jerusalem	8.5d	5:41	6:50	7:23	5:38
		72min	6:15	7:25	7:55	6:13
			-0:34	-0:35	-0:32	-0:35
    Dick Fiedler    dfiedler@enteract.com
    Skokie Il   (847) 329-9065 Fax (847) 643-0582       /\
    Efrat Israel  (02) 9932706  Fax (02) 9932707    \--/--\--/
        .. __o    __o    __o    __o    __o    __o    \/    \/
       .. -\<,   -\<,   -\<,   -\<,   -\<,   -\<,    /\    /\
      ..(_)/(_)(_)/(_)(_)/(_)(_)/(_)(_)/(_)(_)/(_)  /--\--/--\
                                                        \/ 

On Tue, 18 Aug 1998, Kenneth G Miller wrote:

> I think that it is accurate to say that I know more about how I am
> supposed to act in the Bais Hamikdash, than about how I am supposed to
> act in the bedroom. Is this what HaShem wants?
> 
> Akiva Miller
> 

Obviously that is not what Hashem wants - but how He wants you to acquire
that knowledge is altogether a different matter!

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

>>>A similar question is whether a cohen gadol can voluntarily resign
or be impeached.  According to the opinion that Pinchas and Eliyahu were
the same personhe must have resigned (or perhaps became pasul?) bewteen the
time he was pinchas and cohen gadol and his later life when he was a
prophet in the northern kingdom.<<<

I'm not bothered by the Pinchas-Eliyahu midrash bec. like many other
midrashim it need not be taken literally. In any case, doesn't the gemara
in Yoma (1st perek?) assume that K"G who were evil died during the year?
(What about the historical accuracy of that?)  Death would certainly
resolve any issue of impeachment <g>. A possible distinction (which is
debatable) is kingship is a political role and is subject to impeachment
for abuses of power and role as well as halachic sins; K"G is a religious
role which at least from the halachic standpoint is vested with less
authority (though the historical is that it was was a significant political
position).  There is a parsha of "mishpitei hmelucha" outlining the rights
and authority of the King; there is no parsha outlining any political
status to the K"G outside service in the Bais HaMikdash.  Apart from a
violation of halacha (for which the king and K"G would be equally guilty) I
don't see grounds for impeachment of a K"G.

-Chaim B.

Yourr premise is the basis of R' Dr. Leo Levi's calculations in his
"Jewish Chronomony". The precise numbers he uses are 4.81d for the Gra and
5.95d for the Ba'al HaTanya, working from the horizon of E.Y. (RT is 16.8
or 19.1 depending on whether you use the 72 or 90 min approach).

YGB 

On Tue, 18 Aug 1998, Richard K. Fiedler wrote:

> Depending on how you choose to calculate Tsait you get dramatically
> different values for different cities. It would seem that the angle of the
> sun below the horizon whould have much more to do with seeing 3 medium
> sized stars than waiting a fixed number of minutes after sunset.
> 
> The 8.5d refers to the angle the sun is below the horizon and thus how dark
> it really is. I don't say that 8.5d is the correct figure to use. I would
> suggest that maybe one should work backwards from a determination of a
> proper wait for Jerusalem to calculate an angle of the sun below the
> horizon that can be used for other cities in the world.
> 

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

Just to add my two cents to this family discussion about misasek on
SHabbos. It would seem that R' Bechhofer and Brown's disagreement about
the nature of misasek is really a machlokes between Abaye and Rava in
SHabbos 72b, 73a amongst other places including Krisos. In 73a the case
of thinking that a reshus harabbim is really reshus hayachid is one of
the points of contention. THe Rambam in SHabbos 1:8 poskens this but it
is not really clear how (see Magid Mishnah) so it seems that this
question should be a machlokes lehalachah although it would seem  we
poken like Rava and therefore there would be a p'tur of misasek.

However, I am not sure why R' Bechhofer distinguishes between SHabbos and
Kashrus because of hanaah, any misasek other than SHabbos would
considered to have done an issur, hanaah is only a detail in the korban,
but  it is still considered an issur (Teshuvas R' Akiva Eiger #8)

More importantly I am not sure that misasek even applies to the issue of
relying on a rav who poskens a shaila or who certifies something is
kosher. Just like if I misunderstand the reality (ie I think that the
street is only 15 amos wide and its really 16 amos) I would be considered
a misasek, but if I confused the halachah (ie knew that the street was 16
amos wide but thought that reshus harabim needed 17 amos) that would be a
shogeg, it seems reasonable that if I asked the rav this shaila and he
made the mistake in halachah and I relyed upon him I would also be a
shogeg. A proof for this would be that a person who asks the Sanhedrin a
shaila and the Sanhedrin made a mistake than he as an individual has to
bring a korban and is not a misasek. Similarly if I rely on a rav who is
machshir an eiruv based upon the idea that reshus harabbim needs 600,000
and it turns out that that is not correct I would be  a shogeg and not a
misasek.  This would be true even if I did not know anything about
eiruvin and did not realize that the heiter of the eiruv was based upon
this kula. HOwever, I guess if an eiruv relied on a unique kula that I
had know way of knowing that it was needed in this circumstance (ie I did
not know that there was a marsh in the area of the eiruv) there you could
have the idea of misasek. 

I am curious to see if people agree with this idea It is interesting that
the only time I have seen the question of misasek by eiruvin is only in
cases like a broken wire etc, but not with halachos

SHraga ROthbart

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

Just to simplify, here's the way I see it:

Case #1, Rashi in Kerisus: you eat cheilev thinking its shuman = shogeg
Case #1, Rashi Kerisus: you give a baby a milah on Shabbos and discover it
was really born Sunday=shogeg

Case #2, Rashi Keritut: you know X is cheilev and Y is shuman and take the
wrong piece=mitasek.
Case #2, Rashi Kerisus: you know baby X was born on Shabbos and baby Y on
Sunday and take the wrong baby for the Shabbos milah = mitasek

(Difference: Case #1 you fufill your intentions, just under wrong
assumptions.  Case #2 your intentions were never fufilled; you never
carried out the act which you intended.)

Case #3: you eat cheilev because your Rabbi thinks its kosher and it is
treif
Case #3: you carry in the eiruv because your Rabbi thought its kosher and
its pasul
Cse #3: you carry in the street and discover it is 16 and not 15 amot wide.

Maybe I'm missing something here and wasting time, but can you tell me why
Case #3, the one we are discussing, is not exactly the same as Case #1???
Didn't you do what you intended, just under a wrong set of assumptions?

Just agav, if I remember R' Akiva Eiger correctly he acknowledges that
mitasek in kol hatorah is a ma'aseh aveirah with a ptur, as opposed to no
ma'aseh aveirah.  The difference is in lomdus; he doesn't say you are
chayav.  In any case, lets define the case here and then we can get into
that point.

-Chaim B.

On Tue, 18 Aug 1998, Paul Rothbart wrote:

> However, I am not sure why R' Bechhofer distinguishes between SHabbos and
> Kashrus because of hanaah, any misasek other than SHabbos would
> considered to have done an issur, hanaah is only a detail in the korban,
> but  it is still considered an issur (Teshuvas R' Akiva Eiger #8)
> 

May be - if this is what Chaim was alluding to all along, fine. I believe,
however, that R' Chaim (Brisker, not Brown) argues with that RAE and state
that mis'asek by other issurim than Shabbos does not require kappara
either - I do not recall where the R' Chaim is off hand, but I can dig it
up (or try to) if necessary.

In any event, my distinction and understanding of the ddifference between
mis'asek by other prohibitions and forbidden foods may be found in R'
Elchonon, Kovetz Shiurim vol. 2 siman 23, particularly osi'os 6-8.

> More importantly I am not sure that misasek even applies to the issue of
> relying on a rav who poskens a shaila or who certifies something is
> kosher. Just like if I misunderstand the reality (ie I think that the
> street is only 15 amos wide and its really 16 amos) I would be considered
> a misasek, but if I confused the halachah (ie knew that the street was 16
> amos wide but thought that reshus harabim needed 17 amos) that would be a
> shogeg, it seems reasonable that if I asked the rav this shaila and he
> made the mistake in halachah and I relyed upon him I would also be a
> shogeg. A proof for this would be that a person who asks the Sanhedrin a

I think not. This is not meleches machasheves.

> shaila and the Sanhedrin made a mistake than he as an individual has to
> bring a korban and is not a misasek. Similarly if I rely on a rav who is
> machshir an eiruv based upon the idea that reshus harabbim needs 600,000
> and it turns out that that is not correct I would be  a shogeg and not a
> misasek.  This would be true even if I did not know anything about

I don't think this is true either. But - this much I agree:

If you *know* that the poskim argue the issue of 600,000 and elect to
follow the majority of Poskim and ignore the MB's ba'al nefesh yachmir -
your halachic right - and ultimately Eliyahu comes and rules in favor of
the minority - you are a shogeg and not a mis'asek. 

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

On Tue, 18 Aug 1998 cbrown@bestware.com wrote (edited):

> Case #1, Rashi in Kerisus: you eat cheilev thinking its shuman = shogeg.
> Case #1, Rashi Kerisus: you give a baby a milah on Shabbos and discover
> it was really born Sunday=shogeg.
> 

In this case you are chayav korban because you were mistaken in the facts:
You thought you had a Shabbos bris baby, but actually did not. You did not
inquire sufficiently into the circumstances.
 
> Case #3: you eat cheilev because your Rabbi thinks its kosher and it is
> treif.  Case #3: you carry in the eiruv because your Rabbi thought its
> kosher and its pasul.  Case #3: you carry in the street and discover it
> is 16 and not 15 amot wide.

I agree that case 3c is a shogeg - you had not measured the street, and
were mistaken in the facts. You did not inquire sufficiently into the
circumstances.

Thus, yes, case 1 and case 3c are identical.

My specific point is case 3b. There are no further facts incumbent upon
you to clarify - a reliable individual (not necessarily a rabbi - let's
assume it is the weekly eruv checker) has assured you that there is an
extant eruv. Except for dinei mammonos (and certain other exceptions), you
are deemed, on the basis of this person's say-so, to have inquired
sufficiently. Were such to have occured in case 1 or case 3c, you would be
a mis'asek as well.

Again, as R' Elchonon explains there (KS 2:23), after the application of
the principle of mis'asek b'chalavim u'b'arayos chayav, this mis'asek will
not help you by forbidden foods.
  
> 
> Maybe I'm missing something here and wasting time, but can you tell me why
> Case #3, the one we are discussing, is not exactly the same as Case #1???
> Didn't you do what you intended, just under a wrong set of assumptions?
> 

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

          > Case #1, Rashi in Kerisus: you eat cheilev thinking its shuman =
          shogeg.
          > Case #1, Rashi Kerisus: you give a baby a milah on Shabbos and
          discover
          > it was really born Sunday=shogeg.
          >

YGB writes>>>In this case you are chayav korban because you were mistaken
in the facts: You thought you had a Shabbos bris baby, but actually did
not. You did not inquire sufficiently into the circumstances.<<<

B'michilas kvodo of R' Elchanan and yourself, it's simply not what Rashi
says!  Rashi writes D"H Tinokot: "Mitasek is where you intended to mal this
baby and were mal the other one; shogeg is where you intended for this baby
but thought it was born on Shabbos".   How do you know the person did not
inquire into it sufficiently??!!  It doesn't say that in my text of Rashi;
all it says is the person DIDN'T KNOW as opposed to KNEW and ACTED
mistakenly.  Could the person have found out had he inquired? - maybe yes,
maybe no, but I don't care to speculate and don't see why you should
without a source.

Simple case - you check the birth certificate of the baby and it says
Shabbos baby.  You mal the baby.  Then it turns out the birth certificate
is  wrong.  Did you "not inquire sufficiently"?  To what limits must you
take your inquiry?   Is this not "intending for the baby which you thought
was born on Shabbos"?

As for the eiruv case and the dimensions of the street, that was S.
Rothblatt's case.

Feel free to pile on names of Achronim, but until you can prove the point
from gemara and Rishonim, I won't budge.   Now, if I'm wrong, and someone
reading this assumes like me, are they shogeg, mitasek, or crazy for
wasting time on this?

-CB

In v1n22, R' YGB writes: 
:                                    We discussed the concept of mis'asek,
: i.e., that since Shabbos is contingent on Meleches Machesheves, if one
: thinks that there is a valid eruv because a reputable Rav has states such,
: then even if there turns out to be a problem with the eruv, no issur has
: been transgressed.

He reiterates later that day:
:                                                        You are not a
: shogeg - which would generate a korban - you are a mis'asek, and, as such,
: exempt from all kappara. This is unique unto Shabbos because of the
: principles of meleches machesheves, and applies even to the d'orysas of
: Shabbos.

Theory 1:
R' YGB seems to be saying that the requirement for mileches machsheves
turns shogeg into mis'asek. This would imply that i- there is no shogeg by
milachos; ii- there is no mis'asek outside of milochos (or other issurim
which require machshavah).

Which would make "mis'asek b'chalavim v'arayos chayav" trivially true.

Theory 2:
The motivation given there is "shekein neheneh". Which would imply that the
difference between shogeg and mis'asek isn't whether the issur requires
machshavah, but whether one enjoyed the results of the mistake.

Theory 3:
Shogeg is defined as preventable ignorance. Mis'asek is where you checked the
facts to the full mistake you're supposed to, but were mistaken anyway.

This makes the most sense from a s'char va'onesh point of view. An avoidable
mistake requires a korban because you didn't put in sufficient effort at
avoidance.

Each of the above s'varos make enough sense to me that I can't see how they'd
be wrong. Even though they contradict. So, if they don't match the facts, why
not?

1- How can a meleches machsheves be bishogeg?
2- Why would the gemara say "shekein neheneh" if hana'ah isn't the deciding
   factor?
3- How would justice be served if the distinction isn't avoidability?

Theory 4:
Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Shu"t, 136), defines the distinction between "kol diparish
meirubah parish" and "kol kavu'ah kimechtza al mechtza dami" to be between
birur of the halachah where the physical reality is unknown (parish) and birur
of an uncertain halachah (kavu'ah).

Perhaps the difference here is similar. Shogeg is uncertainty about the
reality, mis'aseik is uncertainty about the halachah.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287    Help free Yehuda Katz, held by Syria 5896 days!
micha@aishdas.org                         (11-Jun-82 - 18-Aug-98)
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.
http://www.aishdas.org -- Orthodox Judaism: Torah, Avodah, Chessed

When I got home last night I had a chance to look beyond the Rashi's I
posted yesterday.  Just in case anyone needs some Achronim to convice them
of  what I thought was the simple reading of Rashi in Kerisus, see Tzlach
Shabbos 72b, Achiezer vol. 3 tshuvah 57 who mentions Rashi agav some other
interesting stuff.  I don't think there can be any debate about this point:
Rashi [in Kerisus; Rashi in Shabbos may be different] defines mitasek as
choseing the wrong 'chaticha' from among two 'chatichot'.  Misinformation
about a specific chaticha is simply not mitasek.

Regarding YGB's Shmiras Shabbos: in vol. III the Shmiras Shabbos details in
a footnote a range of shittot on mitasek and writes the most
"understandable" is that of Tos. in Shabbos, Shavuot, Sanhedrin, etc.
Acc. to Tos. (and the Rambam) misinformation about a piece of cheilev can
result in a chiyuv bec. of mitasek b'chalavim v'arayot.

So it would seem to me this whole question is a machloket Rashi and Tos.  I
think YGB yesterday could have better served his point by simply pointing
out my reading of Rashi was correct but the Shmiras Shabbos is based on
Tos. and the Rambam (which I didn';t have on hand).

-Chaim B.

********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.           ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                 ]
[ For control requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]