Volume 46 Number 60
Produced: Wed Jan 12 6:13:20 EST 2005
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Arba Kanfot made from Mesh (3)
[Carl Singer, J. Kaufman, Stephen Phillips]
Ba'er Heitev (2)
[Michael Goldrich, Jonathan Sperling]
If Rav Moshe were alive he would - When to disagree with a Gadol
[Russell J Hendel]
K'gavna
[Yisrael & Batya Medad]
Marriage & Beauty
[Jonathan Sperling]
Out of town Rabbi's destroying communities
[Anonymous]
Smoking Ban (3)
[Frank Silbermann, Batya Medad, Y. Askotzky]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <casinger@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:37:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Arba Kanfot made from Mesh
>> I pointed out that, to the best of my knowledge, R. Moshe
>> -- the Gadol HaDor -- had written that arba kanfot made from mesh
>> do require tzitzit
> Rav Moshe poskens very clearly that synthetics do not need tzitzis. The
> mesh garments, being made of synthetic materials are therefore patur.
> An added twist to this is that such garments would most likely
> constitute hotza'a in an area without an eiruv (just as do passul
> tzitzis).
> Avrohom
Mesh is a weave -- not a material. There is "cotton mesh"
Carl Singer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <D26JJ@...> (J. Kaufman)
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:54:28 EST
Subject: Re: Arba Kanfot made from Mesh
One Post -
> I pointed out that, to the best of my knowledge, R. Moshe
> -- the Gadol HaDor -- had written that arba kanfot made from mesh
>do require tzitzit
Another Post-
> Rav Moshe poskens very clearly that synthetics do not need tzitzis.
> The mesh garments, being made of synthetic materials are therefore patur.
I would imagine only one of the above is correct. Anybody have any
sources either way?
J. Kaufman
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stephen Phillips <admin@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:59:50 +0000
Subject: Re: Arba Kanfot made from Mesh
> From: Andrew Marks <machmir@...>
>> I pointed out that, to the best of my knowledge, R. Moshe
>> -- the Gadol HaDor -- had written that arba kanfot made from mesh
>>do require tzitzit
> Rav Moshe poskens very clearly that synthetics do not need tzitzis. The
> mesh garments, being made of synthetic materials are therefore patur.
> An added twist to this is that such garments would most likely
> constitute hotza'a in an area without an eiruv (just as do passul
> tzitzis).
I'd be interested to know your source for this. My understand of Igros
Moshe OH Chelek 1, Siman 2 is different to what you say about Rav
Moshe's psak on synthetics.
Stephen Phillips.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Goldrich <michaelg25@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 00:10:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Ba'er Heitev
Here is a note on your question in a Kuntras provided by someone in my
Yoreh Deah Chabura with attribution
"The Ba'er Heitev, an explanatory commentary by R. Zechariah Mendel
(Belz, Poland c.1670's) to sections Yoreh Deah and Choshen Mishpot of
the Shulchan Aruch. Usually this commentary is located on the inner
margin below the Taz and Biur haGra, though it may sometimes be moved
the bottom of the page. Please note that the commentary entitled Ba'er
Heitev found in sections Orech Chaim and Even haEzer of the Shulchan
Aruch was not authored by R. Zechariah Mendel of Belz. It was the work
of Rabbi Yehuda Ashkenazi (Germany 1700's), a later scholar."
From : The Gloss Guide
A guide to the major commentaries and commentators onShulchan Aruch
Yoreh Deah By Avraham Chaim Bloomenstiel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jonathan Sperling <jsperling@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:07:52 -0500
Subject: Ba'er Heitev
According to Machon Yerushalayim, the Ba'er Heitev as printed in Yoreh
Deah first appeared in 1778 and is a blend of material from three
sources: R' Zecharia Mendel of Belz, R' Yehuda Ashkenazi (author of the
Ba'er Heitev on Orach Chaim), and material from other sources compiled
by R' Avraham Oppenheim, Av Beit Din in Mannheim and author of the Eshel
Avraham on Yoreh Deah. Both R' Yehuda Askenazi and R' Zecharia Mendel
had each written works on Yoreh Deah which they named "Ba'er Heitev", as
had another author in between them, R' Moshe dayan of Zelkov. This
history is discussed at length at pp. 65-66 of Volume I of Machon
Yerushalayim's "Shulchan Arukh HaShalem" (aka the "Friedman Edition").
It would appear that R' Zecharia Mendel's last name is not known, as it
appears nowhere in the biographical material prepared by Machon
Yerushulayim, in the haskamot and introductions to the first edition of
his work (reprinted in the MY edition), or on MY's "shaar" page.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@...>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:33:52 -0500
Subject: RE: If Rav Moshe were alive he would - When to disagree with a Gadol
I have to disagree with the argument: 'If Rav Moshe were alive he would
have...'
First of all the literature in the early 60s addressed the 'proof'
issue. One cartoon shows a scientist drowing in a sea of reports: As he
sinks he says: 'Let us wait till we have proof.' So Rav Moshe had ample
proof already when he wrote his responsum.
Furthermore: Rav Moshe wrote a responsum. The gist of his responsum is
NOT that we dont have enough proof! In his responsum he gave reasons for
the permissability. He cited the 'excessive fruit' advice of the Rambam
(Character 4: 'A person should not eat excessively harmful
fruit'). Since, argued Rav Moshe, the Rambam did not prohibit the
harmful fruit it follows that we cannot prohibit smoking.
In my letter on smoking (Tradition, Vol 17 #3, 1978 pp 137-139) which I
mentioned in my last mail-jewish posting, I showed this reasoning faulty
and non-comprehensive. I cite the 'coin sucking' prohibition (Rambam
Murder 12) which prohibits, under penalty of lashes, the sucking of
coins.
I then point out that fruit has SOME physiological benefit and hence
cannot be prohibited because of its bad nutrients while coin-sucking,
which has no physiological benefit is totally prohibited. It
immediately follows that smoking is prohibited.
I think it more fruitful to discuss the idea that Rav Moshe was
wrong. Too often I have had conversations end because it seems to be
axiomatic that Gedolim cant make mistakes. But as pointed out above, Rav
Moshe's mistake in this case was very specific: He forgot to mention
another halachic precedent
I for one would like to see a thread discussing when we have the right
to disagree with the halachic decisions of Gedolim.(In passing the
prohibition of smoking did not come from me--as I pointed out last time
Rabbi B Sharfman, author of the Blue Chumash Rashi set, prohibited
it). But the defense of Rabbi Sharfman over Rav Moshe did come from me.
The criteria I used here to disagree with Rav Moshe is spelled out in
the laws of courts: Rambam explains (Courts Chapters 10) that although
we follow the majority when there is controversy, it is not the majority
of people: Rather it is the majority of reasons and arguments. In other
words: It is not authority or Gadlus that determines halacha but
reasoning In the smoking case Rav Moshe cited one law while I cited two
and gave a reasonable distinction between them.
I believe it is very important to discuss the criteria under which we
can confidently say that a Gadol is wrong
Russell Jay Hendel;http://www.Rashiyomi.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael & Batya Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 06:55:06 +0200
Subject: K'gavna
Gershon Rothstein asks:
> Does anyone know a source for who introduced the Ki'gavna prayer from
> the Zohar in the Friday night service in place of Bameh Madlikin? I
> would also like to know the date of the first Siddur when this appeared.
I think I've commented on this previously.
Moshe Chalamish asserts it was probably introduced by the Brody Kloiz
group by the 1770s. The first siddur to include it seems to be that of
Rav Asher of Brod, 1778.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jonathan Sperling <jsperling@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:36:16 -0500
Subject: Marriage & Beauty
Mark Steiner wrote:
> One of the great roshei yeshiva of Lithuania, is supposed to have
> remarked to his son, who refused a "shidduch" on grounds that,
> although the candidate was pious and of good lineage, she lacked
> physical attractiveness: "Vos iz dos, an esreg, vos hot a din hodor?"
This story is told by R' Nosson Kamenetzky in Making of a Godol
essentially as follows:
R' Baruch Ber Leibovitz apparently had a daughter who was not considered
the most beautiful girl. She became engaged to a top boy learning in
Kamenetz, where R' Baruch Ber was Rosh Yeshiva. R' Baruch Ber
considered it inappropriate for the young man to live in the same town
as his fiance during the engagement, so he encouraged him to attend
another yeshiva elsewhere, which the young man did. Once there, the
young man was wooed by the wealthy father of a beautiful young woman,
and he proceeded to break the engagement with R' Baruch Ber's daughter.
R' Baruch Ber is said to have remarked shortly afterward to a friend, "I
didn't realize that the bachurim learned out 'kicha kicha' [see
Kiddushin 2a] from 'u'lekachtem pri etz hadar'."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Anonymous
Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 18:32:25 -0500
Subject: Out of town Rabbi's destroying communities
I'm at a point where I want to scream
We have two shuls in my town and I go to the smaller one. We have a
school on our property that doesn't pay its rent even though it pays
it's Rabbi's very well (for teachers) and has two full time secretaries
(while our shul can only afford a part 1 part time one) They cry to us
that it is ossur to demand they pay their bills because if we evicted
them we would be closing a Torah institution.
Yet we we need their help, they aren't there for us. 2 out of 4 Rabbis
actually aren't there. . We've been starting a new early minyan, which
like any new minyan doesn't always get 10 men. We have 8-9 core men and
get by with 2-3 rotating drop ins. 95% percent of the time we get
minyan and with their help it would probably be 98%. The excuse we get
from one of the Rabbi's is that his out of town Rosh Yeshiva tells him
it is ossur to build our minyan until we have 14 other men there.
Guess what we'll never get 14 other men because, if everyone holds this
way, all our members who daven will go to the other big shul in town.
Indeed I know at least two Baal HaBatim who won't daven here because
they follow these Rabbi's. If they all came we'd have minyan.
Most important of all why is this out of town Rabbi, who never has been
to my town, answering any shilohs on this issue. Last time I checked
the Torah said follow your local Rav. This out to town Rabbi is
essentially spitting on our shul Rabbi.
I don't get the chuptza of these "Talmud Chachams" Would they have
wanted some out of towner telling people not to go to their yeshiva
until it had enough students/donors that it success was assured.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Frank Silbermann <fs@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:50:19 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Smoking Ban
Shlomo & Syma Spiro <spiro@...> V46 N56:
> In a recent survey in the US it was found that smokers are less obese
> than non smokers. Both obesity and smoking are killers, the former by
> heart attack and the latter by cancer. So it follows that people can
> choose their deaths. Cynthia Ozick once wrote an article about a
> hierarchy of refinement in diseases as perceived by society. In the
> nineteenth century dying of tuberculosis was a noble death. Today dying
> by a heart attack is considered more of a refined death than dying by
> cancer. Cancer is an ugly disease. So it's better to be fat than smoke!
Even without the cancer causing particles inhaled into the lungs,
nicotine is bad for the heart. My younger brother at age 45 was never
seriously overweight and his lungs are OK, but he has serious heart
disease now from 25 years of heavy smoking.
I've read that healthwise smoking is the equivalent of being excess 75
pounds overweight. Smokers do not tend to be that much lighter than
nonsmokers.
Frank Silbermann New Orleans, Louisiana <fs@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Batya Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:03:36 +0200
Subject: Re: Smoking Ban
> In a recent survey in the US it was found that smokers are less obese
> than non smokers. Both obesity and smoking are killers, the former by
> heart attack and the latter by cancer. So it follows that people can
> choose their deaths. Cynthia Ozick once wrote an article about a
Major difference is that the obese person only endangers himself, while
the smoker endangers all around the smoke. Statistics on second hand
smoke are really frightening.
Batya
http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/
http://me-ander.blogspot.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Y. Askotzky <sofer@...>
Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 21:04:52 +0200
Subject: Smoking Ban
Regarding R Moshe Ferinstein's letter to Rabbi Aaron Kirshenbaum (Igros
Moshe Yoreh Deah 2:49 ) about smoking cigarettes, Bernard Raab
<beraab@...> opines that "if R. Moshe were writing this letter
today, when the evidence on the many harmful effects of smoking is so
clear, his conclusion might be different."
Rabbi Dr. Abraham J. Twerski told me in 1989 that if Rav Moshe were
alive he certainly would have forbade smoking.
kol tuv,
Yerachmiel Askotzky, certified sofer & examiner
<sofer@...> www.stam.net 1-888-404-STAM(7826) 718-874-8220
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 46 Issue 60
