Avodah Mailing List

Volume 06 : Number 129

Saturday, February 17 2001

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 10:49:06 -0500
From: "Markowitz, Chaim" <CMarkowitz@scor.com>
Voss Iz Der Chiluk

L'chorah the chiluk between the 2 cases might be toloi on the machlokes Rosh
and rashba by bittul b'rov.

If you learn like the Rashba that chad b'trei is batul because I say
whatever piece I am eating is kosher then the chiluk is pashut. By the case
of the meat, it makes no difference if 3 pieces are assur because of
neveilah and 2 are assur cause of treifah-bottom line is when I pick up a
piece of meat to eat is it assur or muttar. If rov pieces are assur I can't
eat it.  Mah shein cain by the dayanim where rov works differently, so maybe
one could say we follow the majority of ideas.

I haven't had time to think of a teretz according to the Rosh, that bittul
b'rov works cause issur nehepach l'hetter but I'm sending this in anyway.


Go to top.

Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:00:56 EST
From: CARLSINGER@aol.com
Re: Avodah V6 #126

From: "E. Hoffmann" <hoffmann@centtel.com> [This is from another list...]
> I am looking for T'shuvos on various topics on the mitzvos of Purim.  The
> questions I am specifically looking at are how we do mishlo'ach manos
> today (many try to do group baskets through organizations)...

I don't recall the source -- and, of course, I'm not paskening - but I
was told that the group baskets, etc., are a wonderful tzedukah projects,
but do not "count" as giving Shaloch Manos. I was told that we needed
to independently give Shaloch Manos directly. That is make up packages
and deliver them to at least a few people. Sometimes that's accomplished
simply when people come to your door to deliver to you and you give them
something in return.

Is it permissible to make mandelbroit with pecans?

Kol Tov
Carl Singer

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:28:06 -0500
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Re: Derech halimud - in machshava

On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 09:11:29PM -0500, C1A1Brown@aol.com wrote:
: 6) Slabodka - How can it be that the Torah expects us to learn from kabbalas
: haTorah when the avodah there was through coercion and we are not coerced?

Getting off topic for a bit, this is a potential answer as to why
Yisro comes right before ma'amud har Sinai. Because we are Yisro's --
people who choose without coecion, and he therefore provides an
easier model for us to follow during this period of hester panim.


Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:27:25 -0500
From: "Wolpoe, Richard" <Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com>
RE: Derech halimud - in machshava

-Chaim B. <C1A1Brown@aol.com>:
> We find that BN"Y accep the Torah by gladly saying na'aseh v'nishma, but
> Chazal tell us that they had to be coerced, kafah aleihem har k'gigis.
> What is the hesber?

I heard something like this once.  I don't knowo the source or derech

BNY accepted the Torah willingly - TO DO IT

But whe nit came to having responsiblity to administer it, they balked.
This has loosely been related to the difference in Torah Sehbichsav and
Torah she'bal Peh.

IOW, BNY - as former slaves - willingly submitted to G-d's yoke as
followers.  But they rebelled against being Torah LEADERS. That required

Good Shabbos
Rich Wolpoe

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 10:48:32 -0600
From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
RE: Hachono for Derech Analysis / Voss Iz Der Chilluk?

Eli Turkel:
>> There are several obvious reasons why both the kushya and teirutz are
>> Poilish. The extent to which you are bewildered how such a kushya
>> "hoibtech ohn" indicates how brainwashed you really are by our Litvishe
>> yeshiva system!

>Though I am from a Galicianer background I still don't understand the
>Can you please elaborate on the question/answer and being Polish!
>On the other hand I believe that the Minchas Chinuch and Tchebiner Rov and
>other gedolim were also Galicianers.

Let me precede my response by noting that I am gratified by the swell of 
resolutions - some pretty good ones too! - that has begun to amass in my 
mailbox. Let me make several remarks:

1. There is no "right" resolution: That is the purpose of the exercise, to 
demonstrate how many different approaches can lead to multiple resolutions, 
shiv'im panim la'Torah.

2. Please remember to *try* to categorize your resolution by derech.

3. I feel somewhat constrained as "Rosh Chaburah" to refrain from 
presenting my own proposals until Monday, the "official" end of the weekly 
query's discussion, especially as many chaverim will not have time to think 
over the issue until Shabbos. Depending on volume and personal capacity, I 
will bl"n try to classify your resolutions by derech at that time as well 
(if you have not done so yourself, or I differ with your self-analysis).

4. R' Leon Manel gets sole credit for this idea, not me!

[RET doesn't follow Areivim all that closely, if at all. Without seeing
the pre-chaburah discussion, he couldn't know. -mi]

From a Litvishe perspective, there is no continuum between ne'emonus (eid) 
and decision-making (dayan), thus there is no room for the question.

The answer assumes an a priori jurisdiction and higher authority, granted, 
I assume, by "shelichusyhu kah avdinan" granted to any posek who undertakes 
the task. The Litvak would say, simply "mei'heichei tesei"? To the Litvak, 
this would sound dangerously like an introduction of theological cheshbonos 
to halachic areas.

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:11:32 EST
From: Yzkd@aol.com
Re: RYBS on Piutim of RH and YK

In a message dated 2/16/01 10:37:25am EST, micha@aishdas.org writes:
>: The Rav I heard it from didn't explain it. My guess is that "l'avda
>: ul'shamra" ...                                               (he obviously
>: did not have to physically tend to the Gan the way we go to work today).

> Which is the motivation RSRH gives for the shitah I cited earlier, that
> the point of li'avdah was to exercise chessed, and lishamrah is about
> din.

This view can be found in the Medresh Rabba and the Mforshim Al Asar, my 
point was that from a Pshat view, Odom had to work, (furthermore even Losid 
Lovoi when "Totzee Glusko'os" there we will work of Choreish Vzoreia "Bnei 
Neichar Ikoreichem").

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

Go to top.

Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:25:15 -0500
From: Kenneth G Miller <kennethgmiller@juno.com>
b'dieved (was Erev Pesach on Shabbos)

R' Rich Wolpoe writes <<< Similarly, Minei Targima are ONLY a bedeived
during the rest of the year. However, when Erev Pesach falls on Shabbas
it is imho THE most elegant approach given the alternatives. That is
not a bedieved at all, anymore than shchitas Pesach is a bedieved when
if falls on Shabbos. Get it? >>>

Gut Gezogt!!! I think Chazal phrased it as "shaas hadchak k'bdieved dami",
or something like that. That which is normally bdieved is considered
l'chatchila in a shaas hadchak.

For example, my understanding is that in the conditions which prevailed
in the shtetlach of yore, where paskening against a certain shechita
situation would have left the town with no meat, some such situations
were considered high-level bdieved, or even laughably l'chatchila:
"How can we asser that? We'll have no cows left!" But nevertheless,
were the exact same situation to arise today, the laughs would be in the
opposite direction: "Why should we allow it with that problem? Send it
to the treif pile, and get another cow in here!"

Can anyone offer more concrete examples of this phenomenon? It sure seems
to me that as our affluence increases, we are more and more willing to
take things which had been acceptable, and strive for higher standards.
This can be a good thing, but unfortunately too often, we end up looking
down at the prior doros, thinking that our high standards are better
than their high standards.

Remember when all canned vegetables were kosher? And all "pure vegetable
oil"s? Well, were they or weren't they?

One followup to [the idea that] affluence allows us to raise our
standards. Namely, that this concept is not confined to halacha. Take, for
example, various building codes around the world, or through history. A
hundred, or even fifty, years ago, a requirement for wheelchair ramps
would have been considered too expensive, even by the best-hearted
people. And today many localities see it as a basic right.

Akiva Miller

Go to top.

Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 20:01:59 +0200
From: "S. Goldstein" <goldstin@netvision.net.il>
major Derochim

there are two other major Derochim which were forgotten;
The Chassidische Derech:
"Tey" has nitzotzos of the fire which cooked the water. These Nitzotzos
penetrated the water via Tzinoiros of Kedusha which the Kli has after
being Toiveled in the "Keilim Mikve". The "Tey" is the black and
receives it's Koichos from the Sitra Achra ("Tey" Begimatria [Mispar
KUTEN] Soton (Im Hakolel. and sugar is the Mesikus hatorah. When one
takes the "Lefel" and mixes the nitzotzos with the Mesikus- he is Zoiche
to fight over the Koiches Hatuma of the Sitra Achra.

The Yerushaliymdike way- Vos is dem Chiluk Oib   Dem Tzuker or dem
Lefel? Siz kost nisht kin gelt - "Gib Tzvei"

Go to top.


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]

< Previous Next >