Volume 19 Number 22
Produced: Fri Apr 7 0:06:03 1995
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Charging Interest - Ribis - v19#7
[Yehudah Edelstein]
Converts
[Zvi Weiss]
Fish & Meat - Tzarat
[Yehudah Edelstein]
Fish and Meat together
[Rachel Rosencrantz]
Hashgachot
[Warren Burstein]
Kasheruth
[Lon Eisenberg]
Meat/Fish
[Zvi Weiss]
pate de fois gras
[Eliyahu Teitz]
Ribbis
[Samuel M Blumenfeld]
Ribbit
[Meylekh Viswanath]
Summer Courses for Baal Tshuva
[Rose Landowne]
Summer courses for Baalaat T'shuva
[Rachel Rosencrantz]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <yehudah@...> (Yehudah Edelstein)
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 14:32:45 +0200
Subject: Charging Interest - Ribis - v19#7
Charging interest would be an obviuos thing to do, just as stated in the post.
If you are renting out your apartment, house, store, car etc., why not receive
payment for it?
But to the contrary a Jew should help his fellow Jew and loan him money
to help him establish himself and stand up on his own two feet. We are
obligated to do this Chesed with our fellow Jews. From a non-jew, by all
means charge him as is accepted in the non-jewish world.
Yehudah Edelstein "<yehudah@...>" Raanana, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Zvi Weiss <weissz@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 1995 13:06:35 -0500
Subject: Converts
I suspect that revealing the status of a ger when there is no halachic
justification to do so is not only a violation of Lashon Hara but ALSO
of the prohibitions associated with "Ona'at Hager" -- "afflicting the
Ger". The prohibitions associated with "Ona'ah" -- in general -- are
pretty strict and the specific prohibitions associated with the Ger are
even more so.
I would add that "kidnapping one's children" because of an unfounded
accusation against a ger or giyoret ALSO consititutes (at least to my
uneducated mind) a blatant violation of this Issur.
As a personal statement to the poster who suffered such pain, I only
hope that G-d -- who is considered the protector of Last Resort for all
who are otherwise "powerless" [and that includes the "ger" who does not
have the benefit (usually) of any "family support system"] -- will
avenge your pain.
--Zvi.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <yehudah@...> (Yehudah Edelstein)
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 1995 23:44:21 +0200
Subject: Fish & Meat - Tzarat
In previous postings it has been discussed if fish and meat is permitted
to eat together. There have been posts arguing that no known cause of
health problems have been attributed to mixing fish and meat. Let us
accept what Chazal teach us, what has been handed down generation after
generation. If the Torah did not state explicitly what the reason is for
certain behavior, offering some explanations and accepting the
explanations as fact, may bring us to do away with certain prohibitions
think the reason no longer applies. Reading this week's portion of the
week with the explanations from Sefer Haparshiot by Harav Eliyahu Kitov,
vol #5 pg 223, Tzarat is mentioned just after the laws of a women after
given birth. The two are connected in that if wife and husband will be
careful of Nida (impurity), that is a preventive measure from
Tzarat. The causes of Tzarat are from eating non-kosher, not being
careful from Tumat Hamet (impurity from a dead body) and Nida, and
Lashon Hara, therefore these topics precede the topic of Tzarat. We
should know that Tzarat comes as a punishment and not as a natuaral
result of transgressing one of the items mentioned above.
Yehudah Edelstein "<yehudah@...>" Raanana, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <rachelr@...> (Rachel Rosencrantz)
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 11:14:48 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Fish and Meat together
> >From: "Lon Eisenberg" <eisenbrg@...>
> Ellen Golden wrote about "zara`ath" being leprosy, which has know
> causes, none of which is eating meat & fish together. I believe to
> conceive of "zara`ath" as leprosy is incorrect: Leprosy is a physical
> ailment; "zara`ath" is a spirit"ual ailment (for which a cohen's
> pronouncement is required). It is normally associated with speaking
> "lashon hara`" (evil talk about someone), but perhaps, there are other
> possible causes (eating meat & fish together?). Of course, we must also
> remember that our tradition states that today there is no "zara`ath",
> which brings us back to "why can't we eat meat and fish together?".
Ahh... well I would posit that the reason we shouldn't eat meat and
fish together is that it still causes the effect o f zara'ath.
Now wait! you say, we just said that zara'ath no longer happens.
But why doesn't zara'ath happen?
One explanation is that in the time of the Temple we were essentially
spiritually pure. When committed one of the averas(sins) that caused
zara'ath the zara'ath would occur because we would push the impurity to
the outside rather than internalizing it. Now that we are no longer at
the level we were at the time of the Temple, we have interalized so much
impurity (sort of like a spiritual version of air polution) that we no
longer have the reflex to push the impurity out to the outside (since we
already have impurity inside.) Thus the averas that would cause
zara'ath still affect our spiritual purity, but we no longer have the
physical symptoms.
So.... if meat and fish together causes this impurity (or acts like
poison to us in a spiritual way) even if we no longer have external
effects from the act we should still avoid it, since on the whole self
it still has effect.
-Rachel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <warren@...> (Warren Burstein)
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 1995 08:57:24 GMT
Subject: Re: Hashgachot
Shimon (Steven) Shore wrote:
>No kashrut certification can guarantee the food is kosher. In the end
>we rely on the honesty of the person in-charge that they will not try
>to deliberately break the laws of kashruth (usually in an effort to
>save money). If a person shows by his actions that he is unreliable
>(i.e. he hires belly dancers) then no kashrut certification should be
>given.
I understood the case to be that guests, not the catering hall owner,
brought in the belly dancer.
|warren@ an Anglo-Saxon." -- Stuart Schoffman
/ nysernet.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Lon Eisenberg <eisenbrg@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 1995 17:36:02 +0000
Subject: Kasheruth
David Charlap wrote that if the "mehadrin" standard were required, that
it would mean that all stringencies of the rabbi in charge and mashgiah
would need to be enforced. This is not true. "Mehadrin" implies a
certain standard, not including every stringency in the book. It
basically means that only products with "bedaz" supervision (from any of
the various different "bedaz" organizations) are used, not just plain
"rabbanuth" products (there exist people who will only eat things from
"their" particular "bedaz", a stringency beyond the typical "mehadrin"
certification).
When I originally stated that "mehadrin" means that the one certifying
it would eat it, that did not necessarily mean that the mashgiah would
eat it. What seems to be the case is that the vast majority of rabbis
working for the rabbanuth will not normally rely on rabbanuth
certification; the biggest problem is lack of knowledge about the
reliability of other rabbanuths (from other cities or locations), whose
products must all be accepted.
An example is the mashgiah in our cafeterias at work. He told me that
if he doesn't know the details of the kashruth in a place, he eats only
bedaz. He eats in our cafeterias (he certainly knows the details
there), but will not eat the meat or poultry. When I asked him why, he
replied that the rabbanuth relies on too many leniencies.
Lon Eisenberg Motorola Israel, Ltd. Phone:+972 3 5659578 Fax:+972 3 5658205
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Zvi Weiss <weissz@...>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 21:43:05 -0500
Subject: Meat/Fish
I deliberately did NOT translate Tzara'at because it is fairly clear
from the Torah (and probably the Gemara) that the current translation as
"Leprosy" is NOT correct.... Therefore, all I can say is that it is
SOME sort of disease and the Gemara stated (according to Rashi) that
there is a Danger (or risk) of this disease when eating meat/fish
together...
As the Gemara explictly states that this is a "Sakana" issue, it is
sort of difficult to treat this as a Mitzva given to us as a "Chok"..
--Zvi.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <EDTeitz@...> (Eliyahu Teitz)
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 15:09:24 -0400
Subject: Re: pate de fois gras
Richard Schwartz wrote questioning whether it is permitted to eat pate.
His concern was the suffering of the goose.
There is another concern as well, kashrut.
Pate is made from liver. Liver must be broiled in order to be eaten.
Pate, to the best of my knowledge, is not made from broiled liver, in
which case it might not be permissible.
Eliyahu Teitz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <blumenmo@...> (Samuel M Blumenfeld)
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 95 12:08:35 CST
Subject: Ribbis
In modern finance interest is essentially a payment for the "risk".
Does this mean that in modern times getting interest, including from the
bank in return for a deposit, is assur? I assume that this was the
primary motivation for the Free Loan associations that flourished in the
early part of this century. Do they still exist?
Can anyone comment on the connection between this and the Islamic custom
(rule?) regarding loan money interest free. It is interesting to note
that there are now a number of such Islamic banks who provide mortgages
under apparently interest-free conditions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Meylekh Viswanath <PVISWANA@...>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 11:15:02 EST5EDT
Subject: Re: Ribbit
Zvi Weiss says regarding lending money at interest:
> This is not comparable to renting a car where I actually "sell" the
> car for a limited periods of time ("Sechirut Memkar l'Yomei" --
> Renting is a sale for the day). Of course, I can sell my property to
> whoever I wish. But, even there there is an element of risk. If an
> "Ones" occurs (something not under the control of the renter -- an
> "accident") and there was no negligence on the part of the renter,
> then I will be out the item.
Whereas this is the halokhe regarding skhira (renting out for
consideration), I don't think our present day rental contracts work in
this fashion. Even if there is an "accident" that may qualify as an
'ones', the renter may be liable, and may need to buy insurance on a
separate contract. If Zvi's thesis is correct, and I am correct in my
assertions re modern day rental contracts, renting from jewish
individuals is forbidden (and maybe from jewish-owned/controlled
companies).
On a related issue, what about short-selling? In this case, A thinks
the price of a security (say IBM stock) is too high. He borrows the
security from B, sells it on the market at the high price and
(hopefully) when the price falls, buys it back and returns it to B. We
have a borrowing of a non-consumable, and (usually) compensation for the
facility of borrowing. Here, too, I don't believe 'ones' makes one
poter.
Of course, this is not a real problem in today's world for several
reasons. Usually a short-seller borrows the security from a broker who
has a blanket agreement with many customers allowing him to lend the
security to short-sellers. So, the identity of the lender of the
security is not known to the short-seller and vice-versa, and the
compensation is paid to the broker for his brokerage efforts. If an
individual trader entered into a short-sale agreement with another
individual, that would seem to be problematic, assuming both are jews.
Meylekh Viswanath
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <ROSELANDOW@...> (Rose Landowne)
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 1995 14:18:03 -0500
Subject: Re: Summer Courses for Baal Tshuva
Drisha institute has summer courses for women, full time and part time
during June and July. Their Email address is <drisha@...> I think.
If not, they can be contacted at 212 595-3070, or written to at 131
W. 86 St, NY 10024.
Rose Landowne
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <rachelr@...> (Rachel Rosencrantz)
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 1995 12:42:44 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Summer courses for Baalaat T'shuva
From: <MFRIEDERWITZ@...> (Moishe Friederwitzer)
> Last summer we met a young couple. The husband is a FFB while his wife
> is a recent BT. They live in Europe with very little contact with
> Yidishkeit. They are coming to Staten Island for the summer and she
> asked if we can inquire regarding "some courses in Yiddishkeit in
> N.Y. They are both interested in weekend seminars. She is a very bright
> young lady, any information will be forwarded to them. Tizku L'mitzvot.
The place that I would recommend is Machon Channa. It is a girls
Yeshiva in Crown Heights. If this couple is relying on public transit
take the Ferry to Manhattan, Then catch the 3 subway train (double check
the subway map for this, I don't have mine handy) You can catch this
train at the corner Wall Street and Williams, which is walking distance
from the Ferry. This will drop you off practically in front of Machon
Channah at the corner Kingston and Ocean Parkway. (The stop is called
Kingston.) Machon Channah has Sunday classes, chevrusas, and regular
weekday courses. The courses range from Intro to Observance to Talmud
and Tanya, to probably just about any level and subject one would like
to study (depending on the available chevrusas.)
-Rachel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 19 Issue 22
