67,935 reputation
177222
bio website none
location Keser Elyon
age 41
visits member for 4 years, 3 months
seen Jul 28 '13 at 6:23
Graduate of Beis Medrash Oholei Torah and "Seven Seventy"; now a בעל הבית with ריחיים בצוארו but still trying to be עוסק בתורה

May
14
comment Kashrus Explained
OK, I see what you mean - they contrast "reflexive" ("to elevate the performer of the law") with "ethical" ("to ensure moral treatment of others"). Fair enough. On the other hand, the Rambam does go on to say (in ch. 48) that the Torah is concerned with animals' feelings as regards to אותו ואת בנו and שילוח הקן - i.e., that those are "ethical" rather than (or in addition to) "reflexive"; so maybe it's not so much of a stretch to interpret him that way about shechitah too.
May
14
comment Shavuos and Malachim(angels)
True, and I've edited accordingly. Nevertheless, since כל מה שתלמיד ותיק עתיד לחדש is included in the original Giving of the Torah, then their violation of this gezeirah is significant.
May
14
comment Kashrus Explained
I'm not so sure that I'd consider this to be twisting the Rambam's words. Of course it's true that Hashem doesn't "need" us to slaughter animals one way or another; ultimately, אם חטאת מה תפעל בו... אם צדקת מה תתן לו. But it seems that Rambam's position about meat-eating is much like his view (also in the Moreh) about sacrifices: in an ideal world they wouldn't be needed, but since they are needed (respectively, for nutrition and as a concession to the popular idea of Divine service), then G-d gave us rules to remove their most objectionable parts.
May
13
comment Shisha Ushloshim - mi yodeya?
Plus half of Tamid.
May
13
comment Shiv'a Ushloshim - mi yodeya?
Rashbam (to Gen. 24:65 and 37:19) states that indeed "laz(eh)" means "that thing (or person) far away over there." In the latter place he contrasts them using French terms: "halazeh" = "c'il," for something far away; "hazeh" = "c'est," for something right at hand.
May
13
comment Meggilas Rus - Leket, Shikcha, and Peah
Yes. I see now that Malbim (to Ruth 2:16) says exactly that.
May
11
comment Chamisha Ushloshim - mi yodeya?
The Twelve do actually count as separate books for purposes of writing them. Three blank lines of space are used to separate one book of Neviim from the next (when they're all written in one large scroll), and the same amount of space is used to separate each of the Trei Asar. (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 283:1)
May
11
comment Arba'a Ushloshim - mi yodeya?
And also the number of pesuchos (open) parashiyos in this book (Rambam, Hil. Sefer Torah, ch. 8).
May
10
comment Why is there a “Good” Type of Tzaraas?
To expand on your point 2, the "non-serious" type of tzaraas sometimes also requires a week or two of quarantine. This gives the sufferer a chance to be alone with themselves and their thoughts, to consider what they did, and to do teshuvah.
May
10
comment Last time for Kiddush Levanah
Be that as it may, though, there's no good reason to assume that the molad is given as solar time for a location that is on one of today's time zone meridians.
May
10
comment Last time for Kiddush Levanah
That seems to be implied by the Baal Hamaor's position (commentary to Rosh Hashanah 20b) that all times given in connection with Creation - including the molad of 1 Tishrei Year 2 (the day that Adam was created), at 6d14h - are relative to Jerusalem. (This has ramifications, too, as far as the placing of the halachic date line 90 degrees east of Jerusalem; in contemporary times the most noteworthy proponent of this opinion was the Chazon Ish).
May
9
comment Kel (Melech) Chanun V'Rachum — do you say Melech?
Chabad does say "melech." (Earlier printings of the Rav's Siddur omitted it, but R' Shalom Dovber Schneersohn, the 5th Lubavitcher Rebbe, states in his notes on the Siddur that this is an error, and that it should be said.) Sefardim - I'm not sure, although a quick perusal of some Haggadahs "keminhag Sefardim" on Hebrewbooks shows that they all have "melech."
May
9
comment Last time for Kiddush Levanah
The molad that we announce is calculated by adding a constant 1d12h793ch per month since Molad Tishrei of year 1 (which was actually mostly an "imaginary" year, before Creation, hence the name "molad tohu"). The time of that molad is given in the sources (for example, Rambam, Hil. Kiddush Hachodesh 6:8) as 2d5h204ch. That is obviously meant as solar time, for the simple reason that timezones as we know them didn't exist in the Rambam's times (they were defined in the 1880s). So yes, all molados calculated on that basis must necessarily be solar time too.
May
7
comment Tevilas Keilim for Glass
Yahu: Shach (120:5) says this about lead-plated dishes, because Rema (ibid. :1) says that these should be toveled without a berachah (and as Taz ibid. :3 explains, the reasoning is that the lead plating is only decorative). But I'm not aware of anyone who says this about glass dishes, since it's stated explicitly in the Gemara (Avodah Zarah 75b, Rav Ashi) that they do require immersion.
May
7
comment Last time for Kiddush Levanah
Also, I recall having seen an opinion (though I don't remember the source) that if there is a lunar eclipse that month, then Kiddush Levanah must be recited before that time, even if it's still within the 14d18h22m (or 15 full days) of the molad as announced in shul. The reasoning is that we can use those as approximations when we've got nothing better, but when there's an eclipse, by definition that is when the moon is full, and after that it's waning.
May
7
comment Last time for Kiddush Levanah
About the molad calculation: it is actually given as Jerusalem solar time, which is 21 minutes off from Israel Standard Time. Thus, in your example, Molad Sivan is on Thursday 4:39 PM and 15 Chalakim Jerusalem solar time = 4:18 PM and 15 Chalakim IST = 9:18 AM and 15 Chalakim EST (and then you have to correct for daylight savings).
May
7
comment Shnayim Ushloshim - mi yodeya?
Yeah, it's a good thing that the French "grad" or "gon" -en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grad_(angle) - never caught on! :)
May
6
comment Shnayim Ushloshim - mi yodeya?
I wonder whether that's the correct understanding of the Yalkut, though. It derives the extra "king" from the word "echad," but then that's repeated for each of the other kings too, not just the king of Yericho. And indeed, the version in Bereishis Rabbah (and the corrected version in Yalkut) both mention 62 (31 x 2) rather than 32.
May
6
comment Shnayim Ushloshim - mi yodeya?
Is there a source that lists these facts about the gematriaos of words in the various sefarim of Tanach (yours here, Chanoch's post in Shisha Ve'esrim about no 26-word in Esther)? I'm curious how you came across this.
May
6
comment Quorum for chazaras hashatz
That last sentence is of course true, and I didn't mean to suggest otherwise. I wonder, though, given that both of these sources seem to (uncharacteristically) ignore the M"A and Maharil, whether indeed the Mishnah Berurah really means that he endorses this position, or whether he's just using it as a limud zechus.