Avodah Mailing List

Volume 19: Number 1

Fri, 01 Sep 2006

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: hankman <salman@videotron.ca>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:14:25 -0400
Re: [Avodah] Pregnant women's sakana brought on by sense of

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chana Luntz" <chana@kolsassoon.org.uk>
To: <avodah@lists.aishdas.org>
Cc: <salman@videotron.ca>
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 9:56 AM
Subject: [Avodah] Pregnant women's sakana brought on by sense of smell

> > Any medical types on the list? Is there any syndrome known to
> > modern medicine that sounds like the Mishna on Yoma 82a about
> > a pregnant woman who may eat on Yom Kippur to satisfy a
> > desire brought on by an aroma of food, because she would
> > otherwise be in a sakana if the desire is not satisfied.
> I am by no means a medical type, but I have certainly been told that
> fasting in late pregnancy can bring on labor (supposedly the delivery
> rate at frum hospitals goes up around Yom Kippur).
CM responds:
So what's your point. The halacha is that pregnant woman do fast on Yom
Kippur, they do not get a pass if everything is running as a normal
problem-free pregnancy.

> And certainly when I was 34 weeks with Yonit, and they needed to do a
> very minor medical procedure, which normally would only have involved,
> at most, the practice nurse at my local doctor's surgery, they insisted
> on hospitalising me for two days, on the grounds that "anything can set
> off labor at this stage" and they therefore wanted me in for observation
> "just in case".   34 weeks, of course today with modern neo-natal units,
> is not very risky, but I imagine at the time of chazal it was, as the
> lungs are generally not fully formed, and a baby born at that time would
> generally need some form of breathing assistance initially.
CM responds:
While what you say is without doubt true, it is off point. What does this
have to do with a condition wherein a pregnant woman smells something and as
a result is endangered unless she eats?

R'n CL continues:
> I assume that the Mishna must be talking about middle to late rather
> than early pregnancy, given that a pregnancy is not regarded as
> established until three months (at least for nida purposes).
CM responds:
I repeat my previous remarks.

Kol Tuv
Chaim Manaster

Go to top.

Message: 2
From: hankman <salman@videotron.ca>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:39:01 -0400
Re: [Avodah] The Power of a Beis Din to Create a Halachic

I apologize, for my previous post. I had the kal vechomer going the wrong way. However, there is still a pircha in the other direction as well. In the case of the executioner, he is a sheliach bais-din, and has the imprimatur of the psak of bais-din, but the kanaii is a volunteer (I hesitate to use the more derogatory term of vigilante) on his own self appointed (all be it Torah sanctioned and leshem shamayim) mission.

Kol tuv

Chaim Manaster
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20060831/0c9bd3a6/attachment-0001.html

Go to top.

Message: 3
From: Zev Sero <zev@sero.name>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:07:59 -0400
Re: [Avodah] Haaretz: Mamzeirim in Israel

"Moshe Feldman" <moshe.feldman@gmail.com> wrote:

> But wouldn't a rabbinic court rule that this be a case of a mamzer
> safek, which is not a mamzer?

Huh?  Safek mamzer is not a mamzer?  Since when?  (Actually, a safek
mamzer is worse than a vadai, since he can't even marry a mamzeret.)

Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas

Go to top.

Message: 4
From: hankman <salman@videotron.ca>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 17:18:39 -0400
Re: [Avodah] Pregnant women's sakana brought on by sense of

From: "Dr. Josh Backon" <backon@vms.huji.ac.il>
To: "hankman" <salman@videotron.ca>; <avodah@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: Pregnant women's sakana brought on by sense of smell

> At 03:15 AM 8/31/2006 -0400, hankman wrote:
> >Thank you for your response, but from the nature of your response I
> >that this was quite a stretch and that you were grasping at straws in
> >to interpret divrei chazal. I say this because instead of simply quoting
> >standard medical text on diseases and their description, you chose to
> >out some far flung research journals (i.e., not things that are well
DR. JB wrote:
> You asked for the **normal** situation (pregnant woman). I didn't discuss

CM responds:
No, if you will reread my post (as well has the Subject heading above) it is
clear that I was asking about the case of the Mishna which clearly calls for
some circumstance that is or leads to some risk to life.

Dr. JB wrote:
> pathophysiology of hyperosmia [uncinate gyrus epilepsy, migraine,
> adrenocortical insufficiency, very rare cases of drug reaction).

CM responds:
I will have to get out my medical dictionary ... :-)
The definition I found on the net for uncinate epilepsy is: "A form of
psychomotor epilepsy initiated by a dreamy state and by hallucinations of
smell and taste, usually caused by a medial temporal lesion. Also called
uncinate fit." Could be a fit here, but ... does that mean in our sugia that
there is no actual smell and the woman halucinates it, which warns us of the
oncomming epiletic fit? That would be a (possible but) novel peshat in the
sugia. Does eating the food aleviate the epilepsy (my guess is that not
since it is caused by some medial temporal lesion). If not, then it would
not fit in our sugia.

How would migraine fit in here? Is it brought on by smell? Can there be a
chashash pikuach nefesh? Is the symptom alleviated by eating?

I could not figure your intent wrt adrenocortical insufficiency, could you
please explain the connection? (preferably in lay language).

Dr. JB wrote:
> Excuse me ? I provided the LATEST research on the subject [references
> That very recent research has debunked the theory that pregnant women are
> sensitive to odors has to be taken into consideration by poskim. And I
> that the latest research on the fetus being sensitive to odors shows that
> Rashi
> was 101% correct (950 years ago).
CM responds:
The cites are not directly on point showing a medical condition that fits
our sugia. Acondition brought on by smell, has a risk to life and can be
alleviated by eating.
What your cites (so far as I can tell, as you did not point this out) do not
show was that their was some possibility of risk to life shown in any of
these articles or that the condition is helped by eating.

> >neonates and the effect on their sense of smell, but we are discussing
> >humans in utero. Furthermore, the research you cite (based on their
> >I have not read them, please correct me if I am wrong in this assumption
> >from the titles) does not refer to any danger to life, immediate or
> >otherwise, based on disregarding the desire brought on by the smell.
> >
Dr. JB continues:
> There is a neuropsychiatric component to hyperosmia and I mentioned this.
> But you have it farblondjet: it's not that the odor causes the
> desire to eat; it's the histrionic personality of other medical condition
> sensitizes the organism to the odor.

CM responds:
Now we are cooking, (I can smell it now :-) but can this sensitization to
the odor be the cause of any risk to life? This is the heart of the issue
and what I am looking for. See meforshim on SA OH 617 & 618 from whence it
is clear the the chashash of sakanot nefoshos is central here.

Dr. JB continues:
> Could that be considered "life threatening" ? The gemara never hints at
> Indeed, anything "life threatening" would engender the concept of "pikuach
> nefesh"
> so your question is meaningless.

CM responds:   Huh? That's what this whole sugia is all about. I do not get
what you are saying!

Dr JB continues:
>It could, however, be in the category of
> "ahnus"

CM responds:
I am not as well versed as you, could you please cite where I can look this

> where the person has an uncontrollable desire brought about by other
> factors.
CM responded:
> >Also, Bulimia Nervosa is a condition where at best, the time for risk to
> >life is measured in years or decades, not the same day.
Dr JB respnded:
> You're aqain bringing in a strawman argument since NO ONE refers to or
> discusses
> any immediate risk let alone pikuach nefesh.
CM responds:
Again, my understanding is that the chashash pikuach nefesh underlies this
entire sugia! Not at all a strawman. You mentioned Bulimia in your post.

Kol Tuv

Chaim Manaster

Go to top.

Message: 5
From: hankman <salman@videotron.ca>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 17:58:41 -0400
Re: [Avodah] Putting oneself in danger

CM responds: 
What do you mean "I responded that I didn't see the need for it, since there was a simpler and more obvious explanation." In that case once you have one decent peshat, who needs the other 69 - what happened to shivim panim leTorah? That's it. Done my days work. Now that I have one peshat, I can close up shop?

In any case, your problem is not with me but with the Panim Yafos who gives that little pshet'l. My point was not the specific peshat he gives but the fact the pshet'l implies you are don in shailos in an ais milchama. (This is not the best proof of this point as this may not be in the actual battlefield).

Kol Tuv

Chaim Manaster

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: T613K@aol.com 
  To: avodah@aishdas.org 
  Cc: salman@videotron.ca 
  Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 8:16 AM
  Subject: Re: Putting oneself in danger

  In a message dated 8/31/2006 2:18:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, salman@videotron.ca writes:
      R' Chaim Manaster wrote:
      surrounded them on four sides. R. Nosson says they left the fourth side
      open "kedai sheyivrechu," so that they c[s]hould run away. He asks why
      should R. Nosson allow them to get away? [gave a long answer]<<

      TK: >>Please excuse me if I'm saying something so obvious that of /course/ you already knew this, but -- the pshat is, if you don't allow a defeated enemy an escape route, you corner him and force him to fight to the death -- thus leading to unnecessary deaths among your own men.<<

      CM:  >>Sure, but that was not my point. My point was the "[gave a long answer]" that you seem to have ignored.<<

  I didn't /ignore/ your long answer, I responded that I didn't see the need for it, since there was a simpler and more obvious explanation.  You now respond that not everyone agrees with the simple explanation -- well, OK.  But what you probably should have done in the first place is say what problems in the simple explanation necessitated a less obvious and more convoluted explanation.  

  --Toby Katz
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20060831/ef018880/attachment-0001.htm

Go to top.

Message: 6
From: Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 21:04:29 +0200
Re: [Avodah] [Areivim] Haaretz: Mamzeirim in Israel

RMFeldman wrote:
> But wouldn't a rabbinic court rule that this [a bab bron 8 1/2 months after
> a get --arie]  be a case of a mamzer safek, which is not a mamzer?

MideOraita, you make sense, but miderabbanan, a doubtful mamzer is in the 
worst possible situation, being able to marry neither meyuchasim/ot nor 
mamzerim/ot. See the last chapter of Qidushin, concentrate on shtuki/asufi.

Kol tuv,

Arie Folger

P.S. to list owner: RMB, would it make sense to instruct listman to stop 
broadcasting the message ID, the message number and the content type?


Avodah mailing list

End of Avodah Digest, Vol 2, Issue 1

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

You can reach the person managing the list at

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."

< Previous Next >