Volume 61 Number 76
Produced: Mon, 15 Apr 13 11:11:49 -0400
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Chalav Yisrael
[Chaim Casper]
Chamets for Israelis on Shabbat if Seventh day of Pesach is Friday (3)
[Martin Stern Perets Mett Avraham Friedenberg]
Frumming (2)
[Martin Stern Menashe Elyashiv]
Matza, all-boys feeling
[Leah S. R. Gordon]
Metzitzah BePeh
[Steven Oppenheimer]
Orthodox Jews and the aliya crisis
[Martin Stern]
Selling Chometz
[Keith Bierman]
Spring Cleaning
[Martin Stern]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Chaim Casper<surfflorist@...>
Date: Tue, Apr 9,2013 at 11:01 PM
Subject: Chalav Yisrael
Sammy Finkelman (MJ 61#74) asked:
> Has anyone considered the question if any milk with an Jewish Orthodox
> supervision, like the OU, is, by definition, already, Chalev Yisroel!?
> Or close?"
According to the Daf Hakashrut [a newsletter that goes out to all OU
kashrut department employees, RCA members and other] (Kislev 5771), "In
general, the OU relies on Rav Moshe Zt"l who permitted Cholov Stam
(regular milk). However the OU supervises over 500 products which are
Cholov Yisroel as indicated on the label of the product...." The Daf
then goes on and lists the OU Cholov Yisroel products.
So point #1 is that the OU itself makes a Cholov Yisroel/non-cholov Yisroel
distinction.
Point #2 is that Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer, one of the 5-6 OU main office
point men who deal with dairy products, wrote an article for the Daf
Hakashrut (I regret that I cannot find it in my files) a number of years
ago where he concluded that Stam Halav today is more reliably kosher than
it was when Rav Moshe wrote his t'shuvot in the 1950s as the government
requirements are that much more stringent. Not that the OU has
increased its staff in the field. Rather, the government red tape and
other documentation has progressed to the point that it becomes very
difficult for any farmer to mix any non-cow milk with cow milk. Thus,
the OU acceptance is based on the reality that a consumer in the United
States (I assume it is the same in Canada) can be certain that s/he is
drinking 100% cow's milk (with Vitamin A and Vitamin D added, etc). [By
the way, the Pit'hei T'shuvah permitted stam milk that one is sure as
being 100% tahor (i.e. cow's milk) long before Rav Moshe did; it is not a
hiddush (a new interpretation) of Rav Moshe's.] However reliable this
process is, it is NOT cholov yisrael which by definition means a Jew has
to be watching the process from milking to shipment to the factory to
bottling it there. It is kosher but it is not cholov yisroel.
B'virkat Torah,
Chaim Casper
North Miami Beach, FL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Tue, Apr 9,2013 at 05:01 AM
Subject: Chamets for Israelis on Shabbat if Seventh day of Pesach is Friday
Leah S. R. Gordon wrote (MJ 61#75):
> For Israeli Ashkenazim, am I correct that they could cook kitniyot in their
> pesach dishes either during chol-ha-moed or with an eruv-tavshilin on
> Friday, and then eat that on the shabbat?
If done on Chol Hamoed this would involve hachanah [doing work for after Yom
Tov] and be prohibited, similar to when Simchat Torah falls on a Friday (and
even more so if it falls on any other day of the week).
Whether using the Eruv Tavshilin might be permissible is an interesting
suggestion but I doubt if it would get much support in rabbinic circles since
the food has to be suitable for consumption on the Friday which, for Ashkenazim,
is not the case. But it is possible that it might be permitted by analogy with
making an eruv techumin for a nazir with wine or a non-cohen with terumah since
it is permitted for others (i.e. Sefardim) even if the Ashkenazi may not do so.
> With the understanding that owning, cooking, and contact with kitniyot on
> one's dishes, are all theoretically ok.?
While owning and contact with kitniyot on Pesach may not be prohibited, I
doubt if this extends to cooking with them. However there should be no problem
with receiving, and consuming, kitniot provided by a Sefardi friend on Shabbat.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett00@...>
Date: Tue, Apr 9,2013 at 06:01 AM
Subject: Chamets for Israelis on Shabbat if Seventh day of Pesach is Friday
In answer to Leah S. R. Gordon (MJ 61#75):
There is no heter for an Ashkenazi, to whom kitniyos is forbidden on Pesach, to
cook on Shvii shel Pesach for Shabos something which he/she could not eat on the
same day. No eruv tavshilin can help top cook for Shabos that which cannot be be
consumed the same day. Indeed kitniyos are, in general, muktse for Ashkenazim on
the yomtovs of Pesach.
Cooking kitniyos on Chol Hamoed is a more interesting question, and requires
some analysis (which I have not studied in detail) of the basis on which one is
permitted to cook on Chol Hamoed for Shabos Isru Chag (whereas when Isru Chag is
on a weekday, one may not cook on Chol Hamoed for Isru Chag).
However, one may certainly be a guest of, or receive a gift from, our
kitniyos-eating brethern to consume on Shabos Isru Chag.
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Avraham Friedenberg <elshpen@...>
Date: Tue, Apr 9,2013 at 06:01 AM
Subject: Chamets for Israelis on Shabbat if Seventh day of Pesach is Friday
In answer to Leah S. R. Gordon (MJ 61#75):
You are correct; this is actually what we did last year. I was finally
able to enjoy my matza with humous. (And yes, we asked our Rav to make
absolutely sure it was OK.)
Avraham Friedenberg
Karnei Shomron
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Tue, Apr 9,2013 at 06:01 AM
Subject: Frumming
Yisrael Medad wrote (MJ 61#75):
> I have seen another example of the frumming phenomenon ...
> Now, as per here
>
http://www.frumsatire.net/2013/04/07/its-now-untznius-to-mention-a-kallahs-name
>
> it seems simcha announcements of engagements of Kollel students ignore the
> name of the woman.
This seems to be chassidic custom that has unfortunately spread to some
yeshivishe circles. Here in Manchester we have a simchah sheet, distributed
by a Gerer chassid every Friday, which always omits the girl's personal name.
I have remonstrated with him about this on numerous occasions but to no
avail.
On consideration, perhaps this has Torah support in that many of our nuptial
customs are derived from Lavan (e.g. not having a younger daughter marry
before her older sister and celebrating sheva berachot for a week). It is
likely that, when Lavan sent out invitations to his daughter's wedding to
Yaakov Avinu, he also omitted to specify which daughter would be getting
married. He probably wrote in all seriousness that the ceremony would be
followed by a "deception until daybreak" but which guests would no doubt
have treated as a misprint since dalet and reish look very similar!
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Menashe Elyashiv <Menashe.Elyashiv@...>
Date: Wed, Apr 10,2013 at 02:01 AM
Subject: Frumming
In MJ 61#75 Yisrel Medad wrote:
> I have seen another example of the frumming phenomenon. In the
> ultra-orthodox (haredi) press, female employees do not merit their first names
> being mentioned. Even Hilary Clinton was photoshopped out of a picture - And
> she was conservatively dressed.
That is correct...I receive all 4 (!) haredi newspapers (my library
subscribes to them for research). A female soldier who killed a terrorist
becomes a soldier, a policewoman becomes a citizen, Kafar Habad or
anything Habad is changed in Yated Ne'eman, the attack in Yeshivat Mercaz
Harav took place in a Jerusalem building. In obituaries of rabbis, some
years are missing because he taught in a dati leumi or habad yeshiva,
etc. ...
But they sometimes miss "correcting" the news ... they wrote the PM
of South Korea's full name
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Leah S. R. Gordon <leah@...>
Date: Mon, Apr 8,2013 at 03:01 PM
Subject: Matza, all-boys feeling
Regarding abstaining from eating matza, Martin Stern writes (MJ 61#74):
> In reply to Ari Trachtenberg (MJ 61#73):
>
> This is a minhag and not halachah. In fact, some people abstain from eating
> matza for a full 30 days, i.e. from after Purim. As far as halachah is
> concerned the ban only applies to Erev Pesach, though there is some dispute
> as to whether this includes the previous night.
In answer to this - my father always says that he is so careful as to
abstain from eating matza from the 23rd of Nissan until the next Pesach. ;)
> As the Gemara rather
> colourfully puts it "Eating matzah on Erev Pesach is like having relations
> with one's betrothed while she is still in her father's house (i.e. before
> the marriage ceremony)"!
I am sure Mr. Stern meant no offense, but this comment bothers me on three
levels:
1. The original gemara assumes that the agent, or person reading it and
eating matza, is by definition a man (and for that matter, a married man) -
but there's not much I can do about this issue, as it was historically
likely to be the case.
2. The original gemara uses sex as a metaphor for eating, objectifying the
woman (and with a not flattering object, if you feel the way most of us do
about matza).
3. Mr. Stern introduces this as being "colourful" which to me, adds tinder
to a smoldering of offense. I can't do much about what the gemara said in
its day, but I hope that a modern man, on a co-ed listserv, would
understand that this is not a great quote to bring and would empathize with
how his female readers might feel.
--Leah S. R. Gordon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steven Oppenheimer <steven.oppenheimer@...>
Date: Wed, Apr 10,2013 at 05:01 PM
Subject: Metzitzah BePeh
According to an article published today in the Israeli press (April 10,
2013) the Pediatric Medical Society and the Society of Neonatologists in
Israel have determined at least 1/3 of the cases of Herpes in newborns can
be directly linked to unprotected MbP. They are going to issue a letter
urging the use of a glass tube for the performance of metzitzah.
See here:
http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/459/447.html
--
Steven Oppenheimer, D.M.D.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Wed, Apr 10,2013 at 05:01 AM
Subject: Orthodox Jews and the aliya crisis
Haim Shalom Snyder wrote (MJ 61#74):
> The major difference between man and other animals is that man can
> rationalize. Martin's arguments are, again IMHO, rationalizations for not
> performing the mitzva of living in the Land of Israel.
This assumes that there is such a mitsvah at the present time, something
subject to dispute from the time of the Rishonim until the present day. For
example, the Rambam omitted it from his list of 613 mitsvot, which drew the
objection of the Ramban. From the beginning of the modern era, there have
been broadly three attitudes. The National Religious sector, following the
approach of the Chovevei Zion movement, see settlement in Israel as part of
the unfolding of the Messianic process and refer to the creation of the
state as "At'halta deGe'ula" [the beginning of the redemption --mod].
But this is not universally accepted though - a significant section of
religious Jewry did not agree with this basically because it viewed this
mitsvah as hilchata demeshicha, which would only become operative when
Divine intervention took place at the end of days.
As its extreme expression, Satmar Chassidim entirely oppose setting up a
state, considering it an act of rebellion against the Divinely imposed oaths
not to hasten the coming of Mashiach, leading them to reject any legitimacy
to the State of Israel and refusing to have any dealings with it as, in
their opinion, the work of the Satan.
The more moderate section distinguished between individual residence and
setting up a state but recognised the latter de facto while rejecting any
messianic significance. This is perhaps summed up by Natan Birnbaum's
classic description of it as "Golus beim Yidden [exile in the Holy land]",
i.e. that it is just another political entity under which Jews live, albeit
being run by people of Jewish extraction.
Whether the present state of Israel is part of the messianic process is
something that only time can tell and so there is, at the very least,
considerable doubt whether settling there is a mitsvah under current
circumstances. Haim's position is, therefore, more a political than a
halachic one.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Keith Bierman <khbkhb@...>
Date: Wed, Apr 10,2013 at 01:01 PM
Subject: Selling Chometz
Carl Singer wrote (MJ 61374):
> Now here is my issue / question:
> Normally when one engages an agent to do something
> ...
> Most shuls will announce the earliest time for the "repurchase"
> ...
I have always wondered about the rationale for the precise formulation we
use in these contracts. If the contract were written along the lines of the
non-Jew putting down a down payment, with the full amount due at the end of
chag, with a stipulation that if the payment isn't received on-time that
the transaction is null and void ... why would there have to be a
repurchase at all?
No doubt this is covered in the sources, so pointers to the appropriate
texts will be greatly appreciated.
Keith Bierman
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Mon, Apr 8,2013 at 07:01 AM
Subject: Spring Cleaning
Orrin Tilevitz wrote (MJ 61#74):
> AFIK, the source for the verse in Lecha Dodi that begins "hitnaari me-afar
> kumi" is Isaiah 52:2, where the trop punctuates it as hitnaari me-afar, kumi.
> You'd translate that as "shake yourself off from the dust, arise". That is not
> how the verse is conventionally sung (except by pedants like me) but it is how
> the Artscroll Siddur punctuates it, in both Hebrew and English, how JPS
> translates it ... and how the Koren Tanakh translates it. I recently noticed,
> though, that the Rinat Yisrael siddur punctuates it as "hitnaari, me-afar
> kumi" -- as does the new Koren siddur. Even odder, Rabbi Sacks's translation
> in that siddur is "shake yourself off, arise from the dust". Are both Rav Tal
> and Rabbi Sacks wrong?
Though R. Shlomo Alkabets has used a phrase from Isaiah 52:2, I don't think
he is obliged to stick to its punctuation. AFAIK such 'distortions' are not
uncommon among the composers of piyutim, often being used to attract the
reader's attention or to make a specific point. In this case either
punctuation makes sense ,so, despite also being a bit of a pedant, I feel
Orrin is being somewhat over-pedantic this time.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 61 Issue 76
