Avodah Mailing List

Volume 34: Number 136

Mon, 31 Oct 2016

• 1. Re: tannaitic transmission? (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Rav Melamed on Metal Pots (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: Kima (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Matana Al M'nas L'hachzir (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion for the next few weeks (Mike Miller)
• 6. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion ()
• 7. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion (Zev Sero)
• 8. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly / What about Beth David cemetery? (Zev Sero)
• 9. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion (Eli Turkel)
• 10. Re: Rav Melamed on Metal Pots (Zev Sero)
• 11. running creates electricity (Eli Turkel)
• 12. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly from Ben Gurion (Zev Sero)
• 13. Re: R' Nissim Karelitz's Beis Din: Kohanim cannot fly / What about Beth David cemetery? (Ben Rothke)
• 14. Re: running creates electricity (Zev Sero)

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 08:42:44AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
: The gemara in makot (15b-top) has an exchange between R'Yochanan and a
: Tanna (whose job it was to memorize tannaitic material)...

R' Yochanan was a first generation amorah. Being a talmid of Rebbe's since
before the closing of the mishnah. I think "tanna" still meant literally
"he who repeats" in that era, and only came to refer to the ones whose
words tended to be the things repeated much later.

...
: My other thought was that the tanna's transmission was true and it
: reflected the earlier generation's surety concerning the halacha in the
: endpoint cases, but lack of surety with the halacha in the in-between
: case and thus they recorded the agreed upon halachot and left the
: middle case unadjudicated. Perhaps R'Yochanan was saying it was time
: to finalize the adjudication according to his opinion. Thoughts?

Perhaps the most fundamental difference between the Bavli and the Y-mi
is that the Bavli is willing to interpolate what an earlier source would
have said, must have meant, etc... whereas the Y-mi would just leave such
questions unanswered. (Instead, Y-mi shaqla vetarya is about comparing
and ontrasting two dinim -- why does X hold here and not there? if X
holds there, we should assume it would work here too! and the like.)

We say that R' Yochanan and RL compiled the Y-mi, but if that were
true there would only be one generation of Israeli amoraim. Perhaps
they started the process of making a talmud, the way Abayei and Rava
started something which much later ended up R' Ashi and Ravina's Bavli
(which then got further editing...)

But in any case, if we use the Y-mi as an indicator of R Yochanan's style,
who would have cared more about preserving the mesorah, and quoting the
statement unmodified. I would therefore guess that if he is deciding
how the quote should be repeated, he isn't merely changing the din,
he is asserting that was how it was originally said.

It's a guess based on the feel of Israeli amoraic culture. Could well
be wrong.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When memories exceed dreams,
mi...@aishdas.org        The end is near.
http://www.aishdas.org                   - Rav Moshe Sherer
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 07:56:35AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
:> So the idea of kefeilah, lekhol hadei'os, is not that ta'am means
:> biological taste. Every shitah has a role for bitul beshishim. And since
:> biological taste is part of psychological ta'am, this combination of
:> ratio and experiment fits psychology more than biology.

: No, not really. Given that the kefeilah is a human who puts the food in his
: mouth and comments on that experience, ta'am certainly does mean biological
: taste..

Well, but then bitul beshishim wouldn't override taste nor would taste
override 1:60 -- none of the rishonim would make sense.

But what I meant was that the kefeilah is a case of psychology. Nothing
creates the expectation of taste as a witnesses's report that it actually
has one. Then the rishonim debate if this is in addition to 1:60,
or is 1:60 is when we would doubt the report, etc...

...
: POSTSCRIPT: In my learning on this topic, I was surprised to find that some
: important data points are not logical or philosophical) svaros, but come
: from the world of Gezeras Hakasuv. I had long known that in the story of
: Klei Midian (B'midbar 31:22-23), HaShem explicitly tells us that metal can
: be kashed via libun or hag'alah. What I learned only recently is that there
: is a pasuk (Vayikra 6:21) that teaches us that pottery can*not* be
: kashered. I saw this in Rabbi Binyamin Forst's "The Kosher Kitchen"
: (ArtScroll) pg 339, based on Pesachim 30b. These Gezeros Hakasuv suggest
: several things to me. (1) Klei Midyan explicitly name iron as one of the
: metals that need to be kashered, and stainless steel is mostly iron; I
: wonder how absorbency experiments can override a d'Oraisa. (2) Similarly,
: glass *is* made of sand; to say that it is a new material, unrelated to the
: earthenware the the Torah says is unkasherable, seems quite innovative.

Except htat

(1) Stainless steel is exactly that -- *mostly* iron, and that alloying
is part of why it holds on to less product than cast iron would.

Also, kelei Midyan is about tevilas keilim, not kashering. They require
the miqvah even if they were never used before; just as something could
need kashering after Jewish use.

If the two correlate, that correlation is not gezeiras hakasuv.

(2) Similarly, glass is melted dust, not dust and water (and other things
to harden the clay) baked until dry.

The question is whether or not they are close enough to the base cases
in the pasuq to be included in the gezeiras hakasuv or not. Given the
ubiquituity of the concept of nosein ta'am, it would seem that Chazal
saw the edges of these categories defined by how they hold on to ta'am.

In fact, the AhS (YD 120:24,25) concludes that Chazal decided glass is
therefore like metal, not pottery. WRT kashrus, tevilas keilim, tum'ah
vetaharah. Sand melted into one lump is more like a nugget of ore (also
found in the ground) than like pottery. And, like metal, both have tziruf
be'eish.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             What we do for ourselves dies with us.
mi...@aishdas.org        What we do for others and the world,
http://www.aishdas.org   remains and is immortal.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Albert Pine

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 03:54:21PM +0300, Lisa Liel via Avodah wrote:
: Everything I can find online identifies Kima, mentioned in Amos and
: Iyov (and later, in the Gemara), as the Pleiades.  But I can't find
: any source that explains how that identification was made.  Does
: anyone know why it's assumed that Kima is the Pleiades?

R Saadia Gaon translates it al turayya, which would be the Pleiades.
The Bedouins still use the name. Kima. IE (Amos 5:8) cites this (not
besheim omero) and rejects it, saying kima is Aldebaran (the left eye
in Taurus).

Shemuel (Berekhoas 58a) describes kima as a cluster of "kemei'ah" stars,
some say they are close together, some say they are not.

Iyov 9:9 refers to "as, kesil vekhimah", and Amos also has "kumah
ukhesil", so we know the names of things in its neighborhood.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             We are what we repeatedly do.
mi...@aishdas.org        Thus excellence is not an event,
http://www.aishdas.org   but a habit.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Aristotle

On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 12:31:35AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
: Now suppose an adult gives his lulav to a child, clearly and expressly
: invoking that it is a Matana Al M'nas L'hachzir. It appears to me that the
: child is halachically incapable of fulfilling the tenai, so the gift is
: never chal to begin with...          The procedure has the advantage that
: the exact same words are said regardless of whether the recipient is an
: adult or a child.
: 
: (I do realize that there's a side problem, regarding Mitzvas Chinuch,
: because if the child doesn't own it, then the child is not doing the
: mitzvah properly, so how is the parent doing Chinuch? This is dealt with in
: the second half of MB 658:28.)

A different chinukh problem -- one of teaching choshein mishpat. I could
just picture these children growing up mistakenly thinking that a qatan
can be maqneh. "After all, didn't we participate in a matanah al menas
lehachzir every year when we were kids?"

And in general, there may be midevar sheqer tirchaq issue in encouraging
people to give something they are calling a matanah because we know
the matanah won't be chal.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A cheerful disposition is an inestimable treasure.
mi...@aishdas.org        It preserves health, promotes convalescence,
http://www.aishdas.org   and helps us cope with adversity.
Fax: (270) 514-1507         - R' SR Hirsch, "From the Wisdom of Mishlei"

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 5:10 AM, Zev Sero via Avodah
<avo...@lists.aishdas.org> wrote:
> On 30/10/16 07:25, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
>> As we have have pointed out in the past numerous poskim state that
>> :ma-shehu" on Pesach should not be taken literally, i.e. a nano particle
>> of chametz is not prohinted. Similarly tumah rises as far as a person
>> can see with a naked eye. One woulkd need to check how high the plane is
>> over the Holon cemetery
>
>
> (a) Planes can be seen with the naked eye even at cruising altitude, if the
> weather permits.  (b) Even if that were not so, surely it's beyond all
> question that planes taking off from NTBG and flying over Holon can be
> easily and clearly seen from the ground.  It's only ten km from takeoff,
> after all.

I spent some time today looking at ADS-B data broadcast by airplanes
departing LLBG. Two things that may be of interest:

1. Altitude when passing near the cemetery is under 4000 feet. All
commercial airlines are easily visible at that height (and
identifiable). You can use Google earth to get a feeling for what the
cemetery looks like from that height, but's it's not that small.

2. Of the ten planes whose tracks I checked, 7 of them reported
passing outside of the cemetery's boundary, whereas 3 overflew it.
Note, however, that the planes that did not fly over the cemetery
passed within 100 feet of it, which means that (a) the wings may have
overflown it (is that a halachic problem?) and (b) we're getting very
close to the tolerances of the GPS and its reporting. Please do NOT
take this to mean that it is safe for a kohen to board a flight just
because it looks like many flights do not, technically, fly over the
cemetery. (I've tried to set up a bit of logging to see if I can get
some more data; we'll see if it works).

Note that this route is fairly restricted for a pilot. Flying further
south is not an option, as there is a reserved training area just
south of the cemetery (the "channel" is a few hundred feet wide).
Flying north of the cemetery would overfly Bat Yam, which I strongly
suspect is undesirable from a noise standpoint (obviously both of
these problems could be theoretically be solved, and I'm not taking a
stand on whether this is insensitivity to kohanim; just pointing out
that it's not trivial).

-- Mike Miller
Ramat Bet Shemesh (also home of the #1 contributor to FlightAware's
ADS-B collection
https://flightaware.com/adsb/stats/user/mikeage#stats-21920 and one of
the top contributors to FlightRadar24)

 

From: Zev Sero via Avodah <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
>  first not everyone agrees with the psak of R Karelitz. Among the reasons
>  are precisely that perhaps tumah does not really go on "forever". In
>  addition to questions about the moon how about accounting for the
>  curvature of the earth? [--RET]

What about it?  How is it  relevant?   at any given point in the 
universe, you are either  above a grave or you are not.



-- 
Zev  Sero          




>>>>>
 
At any given point in the universe, what do the words "above" and "below"  
even /mean/?
 
 
The curvature of the earth may not be relevant but the earth's rotation  
around its axis surely is.  Our planet is rotating at a rate of  about a 
thousand miles an hour.  It's also moving around the sun at about  66,000 miles 
an hour.  It's not obvious to us, partly because our  atmosphere moves right 
along with our planet.  So when we look up we  might see a nice puffy cloud 
or two that may seem to be right above our  heads.  The clouds are not 
racing backwards at a thousand miles an hour,  they're moving with us.  
 
But how far out in space is this true?  If you were standing in a  
graveyard and you looked up and saw, say, Orion's belt, would that mean that a  
kohen could not travel to one of Orion's stars because the tumah from the  
cemetery extends all the way UP to those stars?  But no, in the course of  the 
night, Orion moves!  (Well, our planet moves.)  So now where is  "up"?  Where 
is "above"?
 
I could also pose the problem a different way.  Let's say you're on a  ride 
in an amusement park, some kind of Tilt-a-Whirl, and the ride is such  that 
it twirls you around.  Above your head is let's say a transparent  canopy.  
No matter which way you are twirled the canopy remains "above"  you.  But 
the sights you can see through the canopy change every second so  that at one 
moment the sky is above you and then the grass is "above" you and  then the 
horizon is "above" you.  Maybe you can see some mountains in the  distance 
or the seashore, and as you twirl, now the mountains and now the beach  are 
"above" you, as seen through the transparent canopy which is the only thing  
that is indubitably above you as your cabin spins.
 
It seems to me that the atmosphere, like that transparent canopy, must  be 
the limit of "above" a grave.  (How high? I don't know.) Otherwise  all of 
outer space in every direction is "above" us as we spin!
 

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


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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161031/130ec6be/attachment-0001.htm>

On 31/10/16 08:15, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
>
> I severely doubt the dayanim looked at flight schedules.  Sorry to say I
> have not always found some poskim knowledgeable of reality.  I still
> recall the cohen who wrapped himself in plastic. As far as I know that
> was never repeated .

What's your problem with that?  Why should it not be repeated if 
necessary?  (IIRC it was an emergency psak, the kohen's flight had been 
diverted, and he had no other way of getting home before Pesach.)


> Then there was the posek who recommended lighting
> chanukah candles on a plane for a short time not withstanding the risks
> involved and that it is against all regulations.

I personally know someone who asked the crew's permission, which was 
readily granted; she lit openly in the galley, with full pirsumei nissa, 
and has the photos to prove it.

-- 
Zev Sero                Hit the road, Jack
z...@sero.name           but please come back once more

On 31/10/16 08:55, Ben Rothke via Avodah wrote:
> Also, anyone who spends more than 5 minutes at Beth David cemetery in
> Long Island will see (and hear) planes landing. With that, wouldn't that
> be a issue also for cohanim coming into JFK?

Not all planes pass directly over the cemetery.  If they did, then it 
would indeed be a problem.

-- 
Zev Sero                Hit the road, Jack
z...@sero.name           but please come back once more

>
> <<Then there was the posek who recommended lighting
> chanukah candles on a plane for a short time not withstanding the risks
> involved and that it is against all regulations.
>

I personally know someone who asked the crew's permission, which was
readily granted; she lit openly in the galley, with full pirsumei nissa,
and has the photos to prove it.  >>

No problem with the crew's permission (though it seems to be against
regulations)
The psak I saw said explicitly to light without permission and to put it
out when the crew demands it


>
> --
> Zev Sero                Hit the road, Jack
> z...@sero.name           but please come back once more
>



-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161031/aa51e796/attachment-0001.htm>

On 31/10/16 12:11, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> Also, kelei Midyan is about tevilas keilim, not kashering. They require
> the miqvah even if they were never used before; just as something could
> need kashering after Jewish use.

The pasuk is explicitly about kashering: "Whatever is used in fire you 
shall pass through fire and then clean it in a mikveh, and whatever is 
not used in fire you shall pass through [boiling] water."   Whether it 
is *also* about tevilas kelim is AIUI a machlokes rishonim; some hold 
that tevilas kelim is midrabanan, and the pasuk is only an asmachta.

-- 
Zev Sero                Hit the road, Jack
z...@sero.name           but please come back once more

one can create electricity on ones clothing by running.
Is this allowed on shabbat?

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2016/10/31/run-
for-it-smart-fabric-generates-electricity-when-move.html

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161031/df0ac27d/attachment-0001.htm>

On 31/10/16 13:32, via Avodah wrote:
 > Zev Sero wrote:
 >> R Eli Turkel wrote:

>>> In addition to questions about the moon how about accounting for the
>>> curvature of the earth? [--RET]

>> What about it?  How is it relevant?   at any given point in the
>> universe, you are either above a grave or you are not.

> At any given point in the universe, what do the words "above" and
> "below" even /mean/?

No matter where in the universe you are, you are above every point on a 
line that extends between you and the centre, and below every point on 
that line's infinite extension.  At least until we reach the point where 
relativistic curvature of space-time becomes significant.



> The curvature of the earth may not be relevant but the earth's rotation
> around its axis surely is.

No, it isn't.  All it means is that objects not in a geosynchronous 
orbit are constantly moving over the earth, passing over different 
points at different times, exactly as if they were in a plane or a car, 
or even walking.



> But how far out in space is this true?

Forever.  Why is this surprising?  What basis do you have for supposing 
otherwise?


>  If you were standing in a
> graveyard and you looked up and saw, say, Orion's belt, would that mean
> that a kohen could not travel to one of Orion's stars because the tumah
> from the cemetery extends all the way UP to those stars?  But no, in the
> course of the night, Orion moves!  (Well, our planet moves.)

When it is not above the grave there is no problem.  When it is there 
is.  If a kohen knows that every 24 hours it passes above a grave, then 
of course he may not go there.  I fail to see why anyone could have a 
problem with this.


> So now where is "up"?  Where is "above"?

Where it's always been.  How is this harder to understand than a person 
who "flies" in a bus at an altitude of about one metre?



> I could also pose the problem a different way.  Let's say you're on a
> ride in an amusement park, some kind of Tilt-a-Whirl, and the ride is
> such that it twirls you around.  [...].

As you say, you are *moving*.  Thus what is above you changes 
constantly, just like anyone else who is moving.


> It seems to me that the atmosphere, like that transparent canopy, must
> be the limit of "above" a grave.  (How high? I don't know.) Otherwise
> all of outer space in every direction is "above" us as we spin!

No, only one direction is above you.  We just finished sukkos, when we 
demonstrated the concept of six directions.  Have we already forgotten? :-)


-- 
Zev Sero                Hit the road, Jack
z...@sero.name           but please come back once more

Yes, but there are 4 runways at JFK

04R/22L
04L/22R
13R/31L
13L/31R

About ? of all flights use 13R/31L.

With that, it remains, a sofek d'orisa.


On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
On 31/10/16 08:55, Ben Rothke via Avodah wrote:

> Also, anyone who spends more than 5 minutes at Beth David cemetery in
> Long Island will see (and hear) planes landing. With that, wouldn't that
> be a issue also for cohanim coming into JFK?
>

Not all planes pass directly over the cemetery.  If they did, then it would
indeed be a problem.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161031/258dc0b0/attachment-0001.htm>

On 31/10/16 13:53, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote:
> one can create electricity on ones clothing by running.
> Is this allowed on shabbat?
>
> http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2016/
> 10/31/run-for-it-smart-fabric-generates-electricity-when-move.html


I don't think anyone has a problem on Shabbos with electricity itself. 
It's *doing* things with electricity that raises various problems.  So 
if going about ones normal business while wearing this clothing doesn't 
do any of those things, then I can't see the problem.  What you do with 
the clothing after Shabbos is your business.


-- 
Zev Sero                Hit the road, Jack
z...@sero.name           but please come back once more


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



_______________________________________________
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.)