Avodah Mailing List

Volume 23: Number 57

Mon, 19 Mar 2007

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: "Yisrael Medad" <yisrael.medad@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 15:17:31 +0200
[Avodah] Posture/Tachanun

Akiva asks
Has anyone else noticed this problem, or noticed a pattern which I've
missed? Or am I wrong in my interpretations?

Well, for Mincha, Sefradim do not bend over on their arms but just sit down
whereas Ashkenazim bend over.

Recalling Moshe Chalish's book on Kabbalah-based rituals, one problem with
bending over is it symbolizes a belief of snatching souls out of Gehnna and
is therefore circumspect in places.  Another is that one shouldn't bend over
until after saying the first verse of "vayomer david..." but only with
"rachum v'chanun..." as there exists an implicit expression of proposed
suicide in the first verse.

Yisrael Medad
Mobile Post Efraim 44830
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070319/f919716c/attachment.htm 

Go to top.

Message: 2
From: Harry Maryles <hmaryles@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 06:22:18 -0700 (PDT)
Re: [Avodah] microphones on shabbat

Eli Turkel <eliturkel@gmail.com> wrote:
  <<<<<<<<In his most recent weekly shiur, Rav Asher Zelig Weiss expressed
himself about electricity in almost exactly the same terms as RMB does
here: the prohibition was determined first, and then the poskim looked
around for a category to fit it into.>>>>>>>

It is clear that this is the opinion of RSZA about electricity. He
disagrees with CI
about boneh and with others about nolad. He doesn't seem to have any real
reason to prohibit electricity (without light/heat) on shabbat nevertheless he
certainly never allowed one to turn on electricity on shabbat.  --------------------------------------------
  Shaarim Mitzuyanim B?Halacha cites (brings down) R Y.E. Henkin,ZTL,  who was given a Kuntres (notes) by RSZA. It stated that electricity is in no way considered Havaras Aish (burning of fire) if not involved in light bulb with a burning filament. So turning on a motor or a microphone, for example would not be Assur based on the Issur of Havara V?Kibui. 
  Not only that but even sparks that may be generated by a motor  are not considred Aish since they have no substance to them and in any case it is a Davar She?Eino Miskavin and the is no Psik Reisha. Such sparks are no worse than static sparks that are generated by certain activity on Shabbos. 
  So on a D?Oraisa (biblical) level there is absolutely no violation for using electricity on Shabbos. He does however lean to the possibility of elctirity as being Molad, which is a D?Rabbonon (rabbinical edict) because of the Tikun v?Chibur HaZerem, which I understand to mean the completing of an electrical circuit which ?enables? the appliance to function. 
  RSZA also mentions another reason for Assuring the use of electricity, the idea of a Shvus. He says that Matring it would lead people to mistakenly turn lights on and off on Shabbos which would be a violation of  one of the 39 Milachos on Shabbos for which one is Chaive Misah, Kares, or a Korban Chatas ( or at least Malkus according to one opinion in the Gemarah). 
  The fact that the filament is made out of metal and the Gemarah sates that there is no Havara in dousing a hot metal coal does not apply to a burnig filament. If a metal coal were actually burning, it would be considered a violation of Kibui to douse it.
  The Chazan Ish considers the use of electricity as violating the melacha of Boneh, (building) which is one of the 39 Melachos and therefore a violation on a biblical level. And one cannot apply the principle of ?Ain Binyan B?Keleim? (the prohibition against building on Shabbos does not apply to ?vessels?) because that only applies when they are detached from the ground which electricity is not. It is considered attached to the ground. So turning on an electrical appliance is Boneh and shutting it off is Stirah. I?m not exactly sure of the reasoning behind the CI.
  RSZA was a Torah U?Madanik in the sense that he studied very carefully the science of any issue he Paskin?d on them. This is not to minimize the Psak of the CI to whom RSZA always conceded to in matters of Psak IIUC. But it does give RSZA?s Psak substantial weight in my eyes.
  But since neither Matir?d electricity in any case, it is a moot issue.

Want Emes and Emunah in your life? 

Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/
We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love
(and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070319/0a5e8cf0/attachment.html 

Go to top.

Message: 3
From: "Danny Schoemann" <doniels@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 15:55:15 +0200
[Avodah] microphones on shabbat

RET wrote:
> It is clear that this is the opinion of RSZA about electricity. He
> disagrees with CI about boneh and with others about nolad. He
> doesn't seem to have any real reason to prohibit electricity
> (without light/heat) on shabbat nevertheless he
> certainly never allowed one to turn on electricity on shabbat.

Anecdotal evidence:
About 25 years ago I heard a shiur from Rav Y Neuwirth shlita where he
essentially said that RSZA didn't understand why you can't turn on
lights on Yom Tov - but he wasn't prepared to disagree with the CI.

I came away with the distinct impression that RSZA would allow turning
on lights on Yom Tov if it weren't for his total submission to the CI.

- Danny

Go to top.

Message: 4
From: "M Cohen" <mcohen@touchlogic.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 12:34:02 -0400
[Avodah] donating blood

R shlomo miller shlita (posek Lakewood kollel Toronto and Lakewood) told me
that I can tell pple that donating blood is not only mutar, but a mitzvah

(the ikar svarah is that if we refrained, goyim might refrain from giving
when we need, etc)

Mordechai Cohen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070319/d1e3a649/attachment.htm 

Go to top.

Message: 5
From: "M Cohen" <mcohen@touchlogic.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 12:42:41 -0400
Re: [Avodah] donating blood

I have heard others matir based on the assumption that one c/ consider it
the same as hakazas dam (which the Gemara understands to be a health benefit
for us)

Mordechai Cohen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070319/7cf75552/attachment.html 

Go to top.

Message: 6
From: T613K@aol.com
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 12:58:25 EDT
Re: [Avodah] Halachic who is right from "The Lost Scotch"

From: "Samuel Svarc"  <ssvarc@yeshivanet.com>
>>What do the readers on Avodah  say?<<

Regardless of the halacha, I think the menshlich  thing on both sides would 
be pshara.  The chosson should offer half the fee  even if he is not obligated 
to do so, and the singer should accept that and be  happy even if he is (as 
possibly some may poskin) entitled to a full fee.   It's better that neither 
side is left as a total loser.  

--Toby  Katz

************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. 
 Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070319/44400669/attachment.htm 

Go to top.

Message: 7
From: "D&E-H Bannett" <dbnet@zahav.net.il>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 19:47:43 +0200
Re: [Avodah] Microphones on Shabbos

Re: <<...the gut instinct that it doesn't fit with the 
gestalt of hilkhos Shabbos....which  explains why so many 
poseqim reached the same conclusion through different means 
... The reasoning is actually ex post facto, justifying 
something they knew to be true in some ineffable way, the 
gefeel of din.>>

This is not justr the feeling of R' -miB. It is stated quite 
clearly by RSZA.  He says the only issur in chashmal is when 
the resultant action is assur, e.g., bishul, hav'ara.  He 
sees no issur when the resultant is, for example, rotation 
of an electric motor, without any issur being performed by 
the motor. But, kvar horah Zaken, ba'al ha-Bet Yizhak 

I have seen a letter written by R' Moshe in which he states 
that he agrees with the chakhmei Eretz Yisrael that the 
issur is in the result.

So R'MB certainly is correct in his feelings in the comments 
partially quoted above.



Go to top.

Message: 8
From: "Meir Shinnar" <chidekel@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:45:46 -0400
Re: [Avodah] Halachic who is right from "The Lost Scotch"


Therefore, when the real Chaim ben Zundel showed up Yehoshua
> and Davidi were equally surprised, sufficient grounds to exonerate
> Yehoshua
> from paying.  "
> He bases this, amongst other places, on the Mechaber CM 334:1 "Hasocher es
> hapoel l'hoshkos hasoteh mizeh hanahar, v'posek hanahar b'chatzi hayom, im
> ein darko l'hafsek, oh afilu sh'darko lifsok v'hapoel yodeih derech
> hanahar,
> p'seitah d'poel v'ein ba'al habayis (BH"B) nosein lo klum, af al pi sh'gam
> BH"B yodeih derech hanahar, avol im ein hapoel yodeih derech v'BH"B
> yodeih,
> nosein lo s'choro k'poel boteil. HAGA - v'chein b'chol oneis sh'aru
> l'poel,
> ben sh'shneiheim yodim sh'derech h'oneis lavu oh sh'shneiheim einon yodin,
> havi p'seitah d'poel, aval im BH"B yodeih v'hapoel eino yodeih, havi
> p'seitah d'BH"B."
> What do the readers on Avodah say?
I am glad that I know not to buy the book....
WRT the specific issue - there was no ones - davidi could have sung - just
no one wanted him to.  That wasn't ones...

However, independently of the specific shakla vetarya, let me ask - assuming
one finds that  in this case like the book - is one yotze veasita hayashar
vehatov?  If one finds in the end that Davidi gets stiffed because the kalla
hired someone else - is that a morally neutral result that, therefore, the
interest is in the halachic reasoning?

This emphasizes a trend that I think is all too common - in order to
emphasize the independence of the halacha from the normal moral order of the
surrounding society, and that therefore we are not contaminated by foreign
influences, there is an attempt to show how different "halachic" reasoning
really is - and this deliberate opposition to the general moral order is not
something we should be proud of, as at least sometimes the general moral
order does reflect halachic values.  I would not want to go to any bet din
whose members think highly of a book like this....

Meir Shinnar
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070319/fc7ce247/attachment.html 

Go to top.

Message: 9
From: "Michael Kopinsky" <mkopinsky@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 21:05:35 +0200
Re: [Avodah] donating blood

On 3/18/07, T613K@aol.com <T613K@aol.com> wrote:
> I read somewhere that if everyone in the country donated blood just once
> per
> lifetime, there would be no blood shortage.  So when the blood bank  calls
> me
> to donate again, I decline, because I figure I have already  done my share
> --
> and will do again if needed.

In the Magen David Adom blood mobile they had a statistic posted (I read
it while drinking my free juice and waiting for them to tell me I could
leave)  that (IIRC) for a country to maintain an adequate blood supply,
they must receive 50,000 blood donations yearly per 1,000,000 citizens.
This means that if 5% of the population gave yearly, that would be enough.
And considering that the majority of the population (both American and
Israeli) do not give nearly enough, I, as an Orthodox Jew, am not
satisfied to give only according to that minimum, and will give as often
as I can.

A question I've before is, if I'm currently in the US and have an
opportunity to give for the Red Cross etc., but will be going to Israel
before my 3 months end, and by giving now I am delaying when I'll be able
to give to a majority-Jewish blood bank, is it better to give now or to

Go to top.

Message: 10
From: "Meir Shinnar" <chidekel@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:34:42 -0400
Re: [Avodah] Ikkarim Redux

> RMS wrote in part:
> we have  a greater
> obligation that we act right than that they believe  right

> Really-if as RYBS posited, both Bris Avos and Bris Sinai are the defining
> elements of Jewish identity, being Orthodox is as important as being
> Orthoprax-AFAIK, the psulim of edus and re shecitah of a Mchalel Shabbos
> are  because
> the person is a kofer in Brias HaOlam and Gpd's role in history.
1.  RSB's point is irrelevant to the main point of the post - my point is
that in dealing with others, we have a greater obligation with respect to
what we (not they - we) do than what they believe - which is irrelevant to
orthopraxy, orthodoxy, brit avot, brit sinai etc- except that the fact that
people's insistence on focusing on ikkarim sometimes lead them to violate
their obligations (under both brit avot and brit sinai) to the other..

2.  WRT to orthopraxy - in general, someone who makes kiddush and is shomer
shabbat is me'id on briat haolam.   The notion of hezkat kashrut means that
unless we have specific knowledge to the contrary, someone who is orthoprax
has the hazaka of being orthodox - and we don't normally check ikkarim....

Meir Shinnar
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070319/939b2bcb/attachment-0001.htm 

Go to top.

Message: 11
From: "Michael Kopinsky" <mkopinsky@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 21:19:01 +0200
Re: [Avodah] Halachic who is right from "The Lost Scotch"

On 3/19/07, Elliott Shevin <eshevin@hotmail.com> wrote:
> M. Samuel Svarc cited:
> > Is Davidi entitled to get paid despite not having sung? "> > The author
> then writes:> > " No. ... when the real Chaim ben Zundel showed up Yehoshua>
> and Davidi were equally surprised, sufficient grounds to exonerate Yehoshua>
> from paying. "
> I summarized MSS's summary for my Rav, and he suggested that my gut instinct
> was valid:
> Yehoshua should compensate for Davidi's time. (I don't know whether he was
> saying that
> the halacha goes that way, or whether it's just darchei shalom, and I
> haven't yet shown him the
> complete story [I bought the book]).

As the quote MSS brought from SA shows, if there was a difference in
knowledge (what's the technical economic term for that, again?) between
the BHB/chasan and the poel/singer, he would be chayav to pay him k'poeil
bateil = to compensate him for his time.  Since there was no difference in
knowledge, he does not even have to pay that.  As for as Midas Chasidus is
concerned (which I think you mistakenly called Darchei Shalom), I could
certainly understand a svara that he should compensate for his time.


Avodah mailing list

End of Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 57

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 >