Volume 37 Number 02 Produced: Tue Sep 3 6:02:36 US/Eastern 2002 Subjects Discussed In This Issue: Asking a non-Jew to ask another non-Jew (2) [Ira L. Jacobson, Barak Greenfield, MD] Benefitting from non-Jew's work on Shabbat [Binyomin Segal] Eiruvin [Tzadik Vanderhoof] folding of tallit [Yisrael and Batya Medad] Grape juice [Leah S. Gordon] Grape Juice and Wine [Barak Greenfield, MD] Grape Juice vs. Wine at the Seder [Eitan Fiorino] Making Aliyah [Alan Friedenberg] Moses consulting G-d [Solomon Spiro] Third Perek of Eicha [Marsha Bryan Edelman] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...> Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 22:24:08 +0300 Subject: Re: Asking a non-Jew to ask another non-Jew Daniel M Wells <wells@...> made the following statement: 'Having you in mind ALSO' is davka the problem. He is turning on the light for YOU (as well as himself) and thus he is like your servant who is not supposed to work. According to this our Rav also holds that if a goy is walking by an unlit Jewish house and realizing that the lights have failed, and without asking he restores the power out of the goodness of his heart, the Jewish owner is not allowed to benefit. There is also a principle that the Jew is not required to leave his own house just to avoid benefiting from the non-Jew's work (MB 276:13, which notes that the Jew may derive benefit from the light as long as his activity would have been possible without the added light, albeit more difficult). For example, if the light coming in from outside would have made it possible to read, even with difficulty, then the Jew may read with the light that has just been turned on. > > No. Light by its nature is for everyone (ner l'echad ner lemae'ah) >Where is this stated as a halacha? Mishna Berura 276:8; Be'ur Halakha 276 D"H Ein bo sakana; D"H Im rov goyim. IRA L. JACOBSON mailto:<laser@...> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barak Greenfield, MD <DocBJG@...> Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 09:58:23 -0400 Subject: Re: Asking a non-Jew to ask another non-Jew > > But perhaps the mitzvah delayed and/or the public need dispensed with. > > Who says its a mitzvah or public need to turn the air conditioners back > > on after a power outage. Did people not daven 50 years ago w/o air > > conditioners? Regarding A.C.--see Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchoso 13:34 and 30:11 who permits it even not in shul. > > > No. Light by its nature is for everyone (ner l'echad ner lemae'ah) > > Where is this stated as a halacha? > It's a mishna in Shabbos with no opposing view. Masechtoh Shabbos 122a (mishnah and ensuing gemara), and Orach Chaim 325:11. Barak ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Binyomin Segal <bsegal@...> Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 15:48:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Benefitting from non-Jew's work on Shabbat > You spoke later in your post about the case of "tircha d'tzibura" > permitting a *direct* request (not hinting) but in other cases you > seem to imply that even hinting is forbidden. I definitely remember > that there are cases where hinting is allowed, but you seem to leave > hinting out entirely. I had avoided some of the details in previous posts because they were not relevant to the discussion (and I was perhaps a bit lazy). In halacha there is a distinction made between two types of benefit. The classic example is the difference between turning on a light and turning off a light. In the first case (turning on a light) there is a direct and constant benefit from the melacha done by the non-jew. This is forbidden even with hinting. In the second case however (turning off a light) halacha does not see the darkness in the room as a direct benefit of the melacha done. As a result, this is not seen as benefitting from the action of a goy. In this case one is allowed to hint. - One is required to hint in this case because the other prohibition of talking about melacha on shabbos still applies. Hinting avoids that prohibition. Sorry for the confusion I may have caused, and for the delay in answering. > 2 - tzarchei tzibbur. any time the need is a communal one, > benefitting from non-jewish melacha on shabbos is > permitted. hence, one can directly ask a non-jew to turn lights on > in the shul, but not in ones house. Sorry it has taken me so long to respond. When I mentioned it originally, I mentioned it from memory. It seems that many modern poskim rely on the baal haitur in this case. The baal haitur paskens that any mitzvah is sufficient (even private) for amirah l'akum. Most of the early poskim do not accept his psak, however the later poskim suggest that in the case of a community mitzvah, one can/should rely on the baal haitur. For a long discussion of this issue see "The Sanctity of Shabbos" by R Simcha Bunim Cohen in the footnote on page 56-57. He quotes Rav Sheinberg and Rav Aharon Kutler (among others) as allowing it in this case. A few places to look: mishna brura 276:25 where he allows amira to fix an eruv on shabbos yabia omer vol 3 #23 Hope this helps. binyomin Although I hope this does not become an annual event, my new email address is: <bsegal@...> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tzadik Vanderhoof <tzadikv@...> Subject: Eiruvin >When one is in a place without an eiruv - as happens most of the time >outside Israel Just for the sake of accuracy, I think that statement is becoming less and less true, especially in the U.S., where an Eruv has become more or less expected in any community outside of New York, even in relatively small communities. For example, here in Baltimore (admitedly not a small community), the eruv is pretty extensive and is taken pretty much for granted. I never hear of people not using the eruv here, whereas in Israel, it seemed to be a constant theme and, along with re-maasering, a beloved frum-ometer. [A quick note: In general, members of the Lubavitch community will not use Eiruvim, at least here in the US. The other main (but smaller group) that I know tend not to use Eiruvim are those who accept the psak by the Rambam on hilchot Eiruvim, as under those conditions, it is hard to find a kosher Eiruv. Very often, that will include people who follow the Brisk tradition. Mod.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Yisrael and Batya Medad <ybmedad@...> Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 19:50:27 +0200 Subject: folding of tallit In line with Steven White's reasoning:- The tallit is a garment with holy tzitzit, used specifically for prayer to Hashem, and I should treat it with respect. And part of the way I treat it with respect is to fold it and put it away properly when I am finished using it. as I always fold my tallit, I found it puzzling that there is an opinion that if one folds up the tallit *other* than in the already existing creases, it would be permissible but to fold it exactly along the previous creases is prohibited. My reasoning would have it just the opposite: that making a new crease is worse than simply folding along an old (already-made) crease. Can someone explain this reasoning to me? Yisrael Medad ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Leah S. Gordon <leah@...> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 15:56:22 -0700 Subject: Grape juice I recently noticed that Kedem grape juice (OU, standard stuff) has added vitamin C to its formulation. Does this make any difference in its halakhic usability for anything? (I sure hope not, as our extended family is more than 3/4 children, pregnant, nursing or otherwise unable/hesitant to drink wine.) --Leah ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barak Greenfield, MD <DocBJG@...> Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 09:58:25 -0400 Subject: RE: Grape Juice and Wine <Joelirich@...> (Joel Rich) writes: > Actually there is a line of thought that does differentiate between > grape juice and wine and thus discourages the use of grape juice for 4 > cups on passover. The line of thought is that "modern" grape juice > differs from talmudic grape juice, Talmudic grape juice was from freshly > squeezed grapes and had the capacity to eventually become wine. IIUC > modern grape juice is treated so that it can never ferment and thus some > hold it to be halakhically different from wine. This topic was discussed late last year and the above line of reasoning was presented to differentiate modern pasteurized grape juice from the squeezed cluster of grapes mentioned in the gemara. However, no halachic source for this differentiation was ever brought. Barak ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eitan Fiorino <tony.fiorino@...> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 18:58:44 -0400 Subject: Grape Juice vs. Wine at the Seder From: Shimon Lebowitz <shimonl@...> > However, I *have* heard of at least one opinion, which I unfortunately > do not remember the author of, but will attempt to track down, that the > four cups at the Pesach Seder must be specifically *wine*, and NOT grape > juice. Rav Soleveitchik zt'l held that wine is required at the seder. The following is excerpted from a summary of a hesped for the Rav given by Rav Parnes (see http://shamash.org/listarchives/mail-jewish/rav/rav_hespedim.txt), which explains the Rav's position: there are 2 dinim in the mitzvah of the 4 cups: the first is an inyan of bracha shel kos (the 4 brachot are kiddush, sippur yetziat mitzraim, birkat hamazon, and hallel). The second inyan is an independent din of shtiat arba kosot, related to the celebration of freedom. Thus, in a case where a person has no wine, one cannot be yotzei the din of shtiah -- that is a specific mitzva to drink wine -- however, one can use other liquids to be yotzei a bracha shel kos. -Eitan Tony Fiorino, M.D., Ph.D. Equity Research Analyst - Biotechnology Citigroup Asset Management, 100 First Stamford Place, Stamford, CT 06902 Phone: (203) 961-6238, Fax: (203) 602-6045 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Alan Friedenberg <elshpen@...> Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 12:16:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Making Aliyah Can anyone recommend any good, up-to-date reading on the initial steps a family should take when starting the process of making aliyah? Thanks, Alan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Solomon Spiro <spiro@...> Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2002 22:46:35 +0300 Subject: Moses consulting G-d BSD, yom sheni Ki Tetze Sandeye asks a good question: Why did Moses not consult G-d before giving Transjordania to the tribes of Reuben, GAd and half of Menasseh as he did on four other occasions--Tzelofkhod's daughers, Pesah sheni, the blasphemer and the gatherer of sticks on Shabbat. Settling two and a half tribes away from the mainstream was truly a momentous decision. This matter has puzzled me for a long time. One tentative answer I have thought about is: At the Covenant of Parts. G-d promises Abraham that his descendants will inherit "from the river of Egypt unto the great river Euphrates. The Kenite, and the Kenizzite and the Kamonite ( Gen 15:18,19). And in the next verse ( 20) G-d mentions the seven nations against which Joshua fought--The Hittites, the Perizzites etc. Rashi to 15:19 quotes the Midrash: Ten nations are mentioned here, but He gave them only seven nations, while the other three Edom, Moab and Ammon, which are the Kenite the Kenizzite and the Kadmonite, are destined to be an inheritance in the future. Edom, Moab and Ammon are in Transjordania. Therefore Transjordania was already part of the land given to the Jews, even though it was for the future, G-d's word makes it as if it were immediate. See also Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot Shoresh 3 that the prohibition against taking those three lands mentioned in the torah, was only temporary. So giving the land to Reuben Gad and half of Menasseh was not an issue. SThat was already settled from Abraham's time. It was just the potential discouragement that would ensue, the Jews not willing to cross the Jordan and possess that part of their inheritance that caused Moses' initial anger. And that's why he subsequently agreed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marsha Bryan Edelman <medelman@...> Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 12:29:14 -0400 Subject: RE: Third Perek of Eicha Regarding the alternative melody used for the chanting of Aicha, Perek Gimel: the practice indeed antedates the American experience. As with all Ashkenazic chant, there are variations between Eastern European and German practice, but these variations obviously emerged in Europe. Abraham Baer, in his encyclopedic "Ba'al Tefillah" ( first published in 1877) notates a German tradition consisting of a single line, apparently to be repeated among all subsequent verses (see No. 139, p. 42). The tradition of a three-part "tune" to correspond to the triple acrostic in Chapter Three is of Eastern European origin, and likely promulgated, along with the rest of Eastern European musical tradition, during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when American Jews imported primarily Lithuanian hazzanim to serve their musical (and other) needs. Joshua Jacobson notates a version of this tune in his new work "Chanting the Hebrew Bible" (JPS, 2002, p. 849.) Dr. Marsha Bryan Edelman Professor of Music and Education Gratz College, Melrose Park, PA ----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 37 Issue 2