Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Dash: Someone asked R’ Schachter about that. I don’t remember the answer. I think it’s Pashut in the Mishnah, though, which only Assers a “B’heimah Shenispatma Kol Y’mei Chayeha Mei’Issurei Hanaa’h”.
42: Chametz isn’t Batel B’shishim on Pesach. Why would it be Batel before? We say Chozer V’neor. By your logic, why not say Bittul B’rov?
That aside, Chametz before Pesach is a D’var Heter, not Issur. There is a significant number of Achronim (spearheaded by the Chochmas Adam) who hold that the whole concept of Bittul is never Shayach by Heter.
42: Did you not see my answer? Eggs and milk have nothing to do with Bittul L’chatchilah.
Also, concepts like Davar Hama’amid don’t matter to Chamezt because Chametz is Oser B’mashehu. It doesn’t matter if it’s there. So even if you don’t want something from the assembly line in your food, unless it’s actually Nosein Ta’am Lifgam then it becomes Assur and Bittul is irrelevant.
yekke: It’s a Machlokes HaPoskim. The Rama Paskens Chozer V’neor and that is the prevalent Ashkenazi Psak.
yekke: It’s not Batel. It’s just a Gorem. It’s not Shayach to say Zeh V’zeh Gorem when both are Muttar (milk before Pesach). It’s only an issue of Zeh V’zeh Gorem on Pesach. It’s not about buying before Pesach. It’s about not buying milk that was milked on Pesach. So the first day of Chol Hamoed is fine also as long as you don’t live right next to a farm. You can also check the expiration date and if it expires on or right after Pesach, you know it was milked long before.
It’s not about a Chashash Chimutz. It’s a Gemara in Temurah (maybe Me’ilah) that a calf that grew up its entire life eating only Issurei Hana’ah is Treif (the Rishonim discuss a Zeh V’zeh Gorem issue and what if it eats both Tarfus and other stuff; there is also a strange Taz which extends it to all Ma’achalos Asuros, not just Issurei Hana’ah). So the issue is that if the cows and chickens eat Chametz, the milk and eggs could have a status of something that grew only because of Issurei Hana’ah. (And when something is Assur B’mashehu we say that Zeh V’zeh Gorem is Assur, so there’s that issue too. If you assume that the cow’s nourishment and body combine to produce the milk, which we Halachically do, then the milk that was produced because of nourishment from Chametz on Pesach should be Assur.)
We cannot be M’vatel Chametz before it becomes Assur because we hold that since Chametz is an Issur Mashehu, it’s Chozer V’neor on Pesach and becomes Assur, even if it’s .00001% of the mixture when Pesach starts. Eggs and milk are an entirely separate issue, as I explained above. The reason not all eggs and milk are Assur on Pesach is because since the Chametz was only a Zeh V’zeh Gorem and is completely gone without a trace before Pesach, then we say that it was completely gone was Pesach started, not just Batel.
PBA: I think many do. Many consider them good friends and people to talk, hang out, or discuss life and religion with. There’s just a knowledge that they’re not “Frum”. Your question is that a woman can wear pants and still avoid the “not-Ftum” moniker. What’s the Chiluk? Probably that you can trust the Kashrus of a woman who wears pants but not a M’challel Shabbos. That’s an important distinction.
HaLeiVi: Who says there’s an issue with using lettuce wrong? How could that be?
yekke: We hold that Chametz is Chozer V’neor. I don’t hear the question.
PBA: I think you’re not right about this. Many “MO” Shuls have full members who are M’chalel Shabbos. They are accepted as people, though their Chillul Shabbos is never condoned (just not publicly condemned). I once Davened in a very left-wing Shul and a Balabas gave a D’var Torah at Shalosh Seudos about how considerate a Rabbi must be because he can’t give Shiurim on things his Balabatim aren’t Makpid on. The Rabbi then publicly responded that just because there are people who have trouble with some things the Torah says doesn’t mean we change what the Torah says. He said what everyone does on a personal level is up to them. But it’s his job to educate and guide, not to pander.
I do hear your question about RIETS. I’d actually be very curious to hear if they would have a reasoning behind that.
Akuperma: There’s a separate issue that you might not be Yotzei at all with horse radish. Just eat lettuce.
HaKatan: I do not know anything about R’ Schwab’s and R’ Schachter’s relationship nor have I seen R’ Schwab’s response to R’ Schachter. I have, however, seen what R’ Schachter writes on this issue and have heard him discuss it in Shiurim on YUTorah many times. Never does he cite “Nationalism” or random S’varas about this. He bases his Shittah in the Rambam, Sefer HaChinuch, the Minchas Chinuch, and others. It is very much a Torah-based opinion. It is possible R’ Schwab did not understand it as such, for whatever reason, but that doesn’t change the fact that R’ Schachter did no such thing.
And your lack of knowledge (refusal to acknowledge) of ways Talmidei Chachamim speak is glaring. All the way back to the Tannaim, we have cases of major Talmidei Chachamim strongly insulting each other. Read how the Ra’avad refers to the Rambam and the Ba’al Hamaor. You are being foolish, deceitful, disingenuous, and slanderous to insinuate that when a Talmid Chacham (especially a Yekke) makes a disparaging remark about another it means he disregards the latter’s entire way of life rather than just strongly disagreeing with an opinion. Even here, DY and Popa have both had very harsh words for certain opinions of mine in the past (and I for opinions of theirs), because that is the nature of Torah. I don’t think any of us have any personal or religious animosity for one another because of it. Ad’raba, it creates a stronger relationship. Your attempts to portray the case as being the opposite are, for lack of a better word, evil.
PBA: I think you’re making an incorrect assumption (well, your assumption might be correct but I don’t know that every community agrees with it). You assume that Hocheach Tochiach means publicly, on a communal level, taking a stand on any widespread violation of Halachah and not allowing it. And you might be right. However, the Derech that the “MO” communities hold on this issue is not that way. They assume that, for whatever reasons (and there are a few that might be legit) we cannot apply Hocheiach Tochiach to that extent. So yes, “MO” communities as a whole would not ostracize someone who doesn’t keep Shabbos or who eats pork. They might realize that there are other, inherent, obligatory separations from these people (e.g. you can’t trust their Kashrus). But these communities wouldn’t reject such a person on principle. They would reject, as DaMoshe says, the thief or the molester because he hurts others. Where does that Chiluk come from? Probably nowhere. But social norms develop all the time. Just like a Chareidi community would reject someone who doesn’t wear the uniform, even if there is no source for such a thing in Halachah.
yekke: It is Mashma from all of Sefer Iyov that the Satan/Malach HaMaves has some level of autonomy, whatever that means.
Epis: He’s saying that because he’s Ashkenazi, his Minhag should be to wear. So, presumably, his Minhag was changed (not necessarily properly) at some point and he wants to change back.
I just want to point out that HaKatan just called out R’ Schachter for Avodah Zarah, mostly because he could not (refuses to?) understand what R’ Schachter actually said. I have explained in the past that the Shittah is entirely Torah and based in Halachic logic, not nationalism.
oy: I said the same thing. I was told that R’ Schachter and R’ Willig have both said the same as well. It’s apparently a very prevalent mistake, just like saying the words “Hashem S’fasai Tiftach Ufi Yagid Tehilasecha” while taking 3 steps back and forward.
nsnsh: You have to wait 3 seconds before stepping forward, not after.
notasheep: There are officially 4 cups and 4 L’shonos of Geulah. The fifth cup for Eliyahu Hanavi is a cute Minhag that started relatively recently (I think well after the time of the Rishonim).
R’ Yehuda Hertzl Henkin quotes his grandfather as saying that some pants are more Tznius than some skirts. R’ Ovadia says the same.
Nisht: No. It’s the same Michael Broyde who was kicked off the BDA for creating a fake persona and infiltrating Conservative message groups with it. That aside, his piece on hair-covering was discussed and accepted or rejected as a Limud Z’chus on its own merit. Everyone agrees the logic is sound and that it’s a Chelek of Torah. The question is whether L’ma’aseh it’s Emes. If you insist on judging a Halachic argument based on the author, I expect a public declaration of the impermissibility of quoting the Sefer Nachal Eshkol. (Which, to quote R’ Ovadia, is not authoritative but if the Svaras are good we can accept them.)
Ben: I recently saw an incredibly Charif T’shuvah by the Tzitz Eliezer against women wearing pants. See the end of Chelek 11, I think (maybe 11:62 or so?).
Also, correlation does not equal causation.
DY: When I saw my Rav’s wife crying because some moronic Balabas thought her house was Treif because she made Gebrokts, I knew something was seriously wrong.
I saw a T’shuvah in the Avnei Nezer today (Y”D 376 Os 5) where he disagreed with a T’shuvah in the Masa’as Binyamin (100). The M”B held that Seforim nowadays have no Kedushah and the A”Z said Chalilah to say such a thing. Also see Rambam Shabbos 23:25.
HaLeiVi: Actually, it belongs even more. There are far, far too many people who think those who eat Gebrochts aren’t Frum. It’s sad and frustrating.
Scratch the second half of that (which I already did). This is what happens when I try to answer questions without actually learning Daf Yomi. I was thinking Maaser Sheni, not Kerem Revai. Kerem Revai does apply nowadays. My bad.
HaLeiVi: I never looked up any Shlomo HaMelech stories, but I do know for a fact that several of the “Midrashim” I heard quoted as a kid came straight out of my Arabian Nights book (I read the children’s version; apparently the original isn’t so appropriate).
You are absolutely right on the last line. That’s the simple answer (though Tosfos in Arachin, I think, holds that Kedushas Yerushalayim was never Batel even if you hold Lo Kidsha).
Sounds like an Issur D’oraisa of Bal Tashchis to me. (Okay, maybe D’rbanannan to several Rishonim.)
Also, I have never looked into it, but someone reliable once told me that the brothers story is actually an Arab folktake that was adapted into Jewish sources in the 1700s.
PAA: Shoheh implies leaving it on. If I begin to take it off as fast as humanly possible, there is no Sh’hiyah before I begin to remove the Bigdei Kehunah.
PAA: They don’t have to be off the second the Avodah is done. You would just have to begin removing them as soon as the Avodah is done. Even so, that is an unfair expectation of human beings.
Well, I was the second Rabbi named Shmuely Wollenberger to move to Vegas. So Sam2
PAA: Also, I think you’re overreading this. It’s not about the time. It’s not Meilah instantly. You’re allowed to take it off as soon as you’re done with it (similar to when you’re Chayav for not having Tzitzis on your Arba Kanfos). Even so, this is an unreasonable expectation.
I was recently talking to someone who said they were just diagnosed with ALS. I had no idea what to say. After sitting quietly for a minute, I told him, “You’ve done so many great things for so many people. Someday they’re going to call this “Person X’s disease” instead of “Lou Gerig’s disease” and the whole world will work to fight illnesses in your memory.”
PAA: The concept of time doesn’t exist. Toch K’dei Dibur kills it.
son and yekke: The Tzitz Eliezer brings the whole Sugya down in a T’shuvah. I think it’s towards the beginning of Chelek 11.
Wolf: It’s a Machlokes Achronim whether a Sefer is Torah (sorta). Many hold that you can take bound Seforim into a bathroom.
The way the Chassidim say it is that they want to show that it’s not really Chametz so that they won’t come to think that us Gebrochts-eating people aren’t Over on eating Chametz.
Utah: It is much easier out of YU, but you can get a job out of Touro. It’s a less valuable degree, sure, but it is still a degree that will give you a leg up over anyone without it.
Silver Spring is about a 15-minute drive from UM. I highly, highly suggest that if you go to UM, you live in the Jewish community in Silver Spring (either Kemp Mill or Woodside) and not on campus.
Akuperma isn’t wrong, though. Many Yeshivos throughout the country have decent colleges within driving distance. Find a college that could work for you, make sure there is a Yeshiva that fits you nearby, and just go for that.
YU exists. Touro exists. Ner Yisrael has UMBC and Johns Hopkins nearby.
/thread
Methinks the OP makes an assumption.
LF: Someone could do the exact same without a smartphone. The phone isn’t a cause here. An enabler, maybe. But certainly not a cause.
Cherrybim: Chazal didn’t institute Kitniyos. Also, the apparent Minhag (of the Kashrus organizations, at least) is to Asser peanuts, not like R’ Moshe.
DY: Stop being Popa. Purim’s over.
And several of the Rav’s leading Talmidim have publicly denied this story on multiple occasions.
The famous story of the Rav and the women with the Tallis without Tzitzis isn’t true. It has been denied by most of his major Talmidim. The point is a very strong point though.
MMY sounds like it’s what she’s looking for. It’s very intensive learning-wise and the Hashkafa fits on the right-hand side of Dati Leumi. Either there or Michlala.
DY: Engagement is not a Kinyan. Don’t even joke about that.
DY: Long story short, there are two Dinim in Kitniyos brought down in the Rama. One is that it is something that you can make flour out of. The other is that it grows in fields close to Chametz grains and we are concerned for cross-contamination. I think that we can add things to the G’zeirah nowadays where there is a cross-contamination concern and that putting a Hechsher on it telling us there was no cross-contamination by this batch wouldn’t help.
My parents got very, very mad at me when I said that I thought quinoa was Assur because it’s Kitniyos.
My father says it’s okay, though, so the house has quinoa and I avoid those dishes.
Softwords: I am not defending women wearing Tefillin. Ad’raba. However, we must be honest about the Sugya. If Guf Naki means just not expelling gas, then there is little reason to prevent a women from wearing Tefillin on that consideration. And see the Mishnah B’rurah’s comment inside. He is clearly just referring to the fact that (in his time) women were less hygienic than men.
The issue of minimizing wearing Tefillin nowadays is the Derech that Rov Achronim take in the Rama. It’s quite a Pele, honestly, that the Mishnah B’rurah seems to explain the Rama as a hygienic issue. Nowhere does he mention minimizing Tefillin to just Sha’as Tefillah. Presumably this is because he holds that L’chatchilah people should wear Tefillin as long as they can (he makes a few comments that seem to go against the general Mehalach in the Rama, such as that one should wear Tefillin for a Seder of Limud after Davening).
And it is not Chazal who said not to wear it. It is a Shittah developed (well, starting with some references by Tosfos) by the later Ashkenazic Rishonim. The Minhag certainly follows these Rishonim. But it has no mention in Chazal and is not an actual Issur D’rabannan. We have to be honest when learning in explaining these Shittos.
And, by the way, because of this Rama and limiting Tefillin only B’sha’as Tefillah, I have on numerous occasions made it known that I think that someone who misses Shacharis (is sick, sleeps past Chatzos, has some sort of emergency) should only put on Tefillin when Davening Mincha, not at any other point in the day.
Charlie: R’ Ovadia wasn’t reversing any P’sak. He was just saying, as he always does, that he Paskens like the Mechaber over the Rama and the Rambam over Tosfos.
PAA: The Mishnah B’rurah already says that the Guf Naki issue is that women are generally less hygienic than men. I think everyone agrees that this is not true nowadays.