texts: What was the purpose of the hora'as sha'ah to burn the goat?

texts:
After Nadav and Avihu died, Moshe told Aharon to eat the mincha and shelamim brought that day even though he was an onein.  Aharon and his sons burned a chatas, Moshe got angry, they gave a cryptic explanation, and Moshe was satisfied.

Coming off of Pesachim 7:9, which discusses when you burn korbanos that become invalid for different reasons, the Gemara discusses various explanations of this story.  The most famous ones are the ones quoted by Rashi in Chumash - either it was the chatas of Rosh Chodesh and was burned because nobody could eat it, following one interpretation of R' Yochanan ben Berokah in the mishnah, or it became tamei.

Another explanation in the Gemara is that it was a hora'as sha'ah, a temporary exception to the normal halacha.

Typically, hora'os sha'ah are needed to send a message.  Probably the most dramatic example is Eliyahu bringing an offering outside of the Beis Hamikdash on Har Hakarmel.  It's obvious why he needed to do that - he had to run his experiment to discredit the Baal's prophets, and they wouldn't have agreed to do it inside the Beis Hamikdash.

Why was an exception needed here?  Why, according to Tana devei Rabba bar Avuha, couldn't they just burn it the following day?


texts:
My partner is Jewish from the Boston area. We just bought a fixer upper house.

I would like to get her a mezuzah for our new place but there are so many to choose from.

Can you help?


texts:
How much alcohol does one need to consume in order to be halachically drunk or intoxicated?

A Kohen can't do any avoda or bless the Israelites after consuming a certain sum of wine. Another problem would be with giving someone punishment through a beis din (lashes, stoning, etc), and the defendant claims he was intoxicated when the witnesses warned him.


texts:
Throughout all of Yoreh Deah Chelek Alef and Hilchos Pesach (and perhaps other places in Shulchan Aruch as well) we see the idea of "blias" ("absorptions") by celim. That is to say there is a "taste" that is left in a pot or pan after cooking in it. Therefore if someone would cook meat in a pot, then within the same day cook milk in it (even though there is no meat in the pot now), still there is a "taste" of meat that was left inside of the pot walls when it was first cooked. That taste will now come out of the pot when cooking milk in it and will prohibit the milk.

This is all true of a metal pot. However, a glass pot, according to the Machaber, doesn't take in any taste at all. On the other side of things, if one has a pot made of "cheres" (earthenware), he would never be able to expunge taste from it once it was cooked in (not like a metal pot which one could kasher by making ha'galeh on it).

I'm having a difficult time understanding how this din (rule) is still relevant to today's pots. Is there really a taste left inside of a metal pot? Once upon a time a metal pot that was cooked in over time would slowly become dirty, grimy, filthy, covered in black, clearly used. One could look at this and understand that there is a "taste" left in the walls of the pot. However, I don't see how this is true of a normal metal pot in today's market, which is smooth, finished off, and more or less retains it's original color and look and stays clean over time. Where is the "taste" in the walls of this pot? If someone would cook milk or meat in it and then cook water in it, would the water have any taste to it (assuming the pot was cleaned in between)? While I don't see any posek (halachic decisor) using this argument even as a "tziruf" (argument in combination with other leniencies) to be lenient in a question of issur v'heter (forbidden combinations), still, I'm looking for any poskim that perhaps spoke about this or entertained the possibility. Maybe today's "metal" pots are more like a glass pot, which the poskim say doesn't retain any taste of what's cooked in it.


texts: Torah and Non-Believers, a/k/a, Scientists and Atheists

texts: Is there evidence in the Torah of people who did not believe in Hashem or any other god(s)? I am specifically inquiring of those who believed in what today would be called science or atheism/secularism. It seems that the bible refers only to believers of faith whether monotheistic or polytheistic. In other words, when did total rejection of faith and acceptance of scientific or atheistic belief exclusive of G-d or gods develop? Since it is said that Adam believed in G-d, it appears faith was part of creation. By whom and when (if ever) was faith rejected according to scripture?


texts: Are there different types of fasts from a Torah/halacha perspective?

texts:
Generally speaking, when people think about fasting in terms of Torah, they are thinking about the type of fasting associated to the 9th of Av or Yom Kippur, meaning neither eating nor drinking. This is related to the idea of rising above the physical/material plane of existence.

In the context of a one day fast, or even a two day fast, that is possible, but is also a severe strain on the body.

However, in the context of making a tikkun over past transgressions, the number of fasts prescribed in Torah is often many more days than simply a day or two. See for example the references in the Tanya in Igeret HaTeshuvah at the end of chapter 1 to Sefer Rokeach and Mishnat Chassidim and also in chapter 3 there.

Medically speaking, fasting, meaning abstinence from eating, is something that can be done for many, many days consecutively. The longest consecutive fast from eating on record is over a year. While a total fast, abstinence from both eating and drinking can only be survived three to five days. The abstinence from water is the critical factor.

Does the Torah make a distinction between types of fasts? The Aramaic word for fast is תענית from the Hebrew ענה. The Hebrew root has a connotation of to respond or to answer (as in answering for improper actions) and also to deprive, or to delay, or to submit/become humble or to become poor. All of these relate to the idea of depriving oneself of food in humility and an act of submission to G-d's will.

The consequence being that one burns their excess body fat, which is compared to burning the fat of an offering on the altar brought in the Temple, like is mentioned in the Tanya for example.

So the focus seems to be about the burning of body fat, which relates to the eating of food only.


texts: Keeping your own community's dinim vs. yuhara

texts:
My chosen community--like every community, I suppose--has its own body of distinctive minhagim, horaos, chumras, hiddurim, and normative halachas. All, including the hiddurim, are observed with a high degree of commitment by a substantial cohort who see this as a matter of loyalty and love. People do not tend to deviate from them because of travel, convenience, or the minhag hamakom.

But I am trying to learn more about the halachos of yuhara, according to which it seems that it may be forbidden to go above and beyond the basic halacha in public if others are not doing the same.

From here it seems that in at least one case, a non-Torah-scholar may do an "extra" practice in public as long as all the Torah scholars and some of the balabatim are doing it. And from the Rema cited here, he may do an "extra" something if he is involved in "prishus and chassidus" in general. Of course, he may (must?) do what is correct l'chatchila even if others are doing only b'dieved or less. Other deviations from the norm, however, would seem to be discouraged.

Is it really yuhara to keep, say, your kashrus standards all the time? I read a source saying that not drinking cholov stam is not yuhara, perhaps because this "act" is completely passive. But when it's a matter of requiring CY keilim--or, very complicated, refusing the meat of your Satmar Shabbos hosts--you are going to stick out. And yet I can't imagine allowing or requiring yeridah in a matter like kashrus just because "other people are doing it."
What is a general guideline for what types of practices are doche and not doche hilchos yuhara? (Personal hachlatos/nedarim/chazakos? Things that you have genuine spiritual pleasure from, or a strong spiritual need to do? Communal and family minhagim? Explicit directives of the religious leader(s) of your community? Rulings of the poskim of your community? Chumras which everyone in your community keeps?) I'd appreciate "canonical" sources if they exist.

Related: When should one change one's Minhag with one's Makom (and when should one not)?

Chaba''d doesn't follow minhag hamakom?


texts: After the Men of the Great Assembly established the 'Amidah', was it an obligation to recite it before the destruction of the Temple?

texts:
On Megillah 17b : Rabbi Yochanan said, others say it was taught in a
Beraita, that 120 elders including many prophets
established the eighteen blessings in the order
that we have today.

Before the destruction of the Second Temple, was there an obligation to recite the Amidah like there was after:
 "Shimon HaPekoli arranged the order of eighteen
benedictions before Rabban Gamliel at Yavneh. (Brachos 28b) ?

According to R. Berel Wein " ... the leaders in Babylon
codified a system of prayer that substituted for the Temple service. They based this on the prophetic
verse, “Our lips will substitute for sacrifices” (Hosea 14:3)." After the exile (Babylonian) would this formula (The Amidah?) have been obligatory since there was a new Temple?

Regarding the seeming contradiction of the Amidah being instituted twice, from Wikipedia: In order to remove the discrepancies between the latter and the former assignment of editorship, the Talmud takes refuge in the explanation that the prayers had fallen into disuse, and that Gamaliel reinstituted them (Meg. 18a)


texts: What was the main job duty of Sar Hatabahim?

texts:
The word Tabah means to cook. In modern Hebrew, a Mitbah is a kitchen. In Arabic, Tabaha means "he cooked".

And yet, from what I can find, nearly all Biblical commentators, Jewish and gentile, by the way, assume that Potiphar, the Sar HaTabahim, was the king's chief executioner, a play on words from what is assumed to be the "literal" meaning, which is "chief butcher".

I cannot find a single source that explains this latter assumption, the one about the literal meaning, though there are many who make it, dating all the way back to the earliest Rabbinical commentators, including Onkelos.

If this assumption is correct - that is, if the "literal" meaning of the word is "butchery" - then, either Hebrew (and Arabic) made some leap from butchery to general food preparation, or the reverse (I guess).  I know there must be something I'm missing here.  What did the Sar HaTabahim actually do (alt., what does his title actually suggest)?


texts: Seeking examples of various gematria methods

texts:
Wikipedia lists various methods of calculating gematrias.

  Mispar Hechrachi (absolute value) that uses full numerical value of the twenty-two letters. Sometimes its also called Mispar ha-Panim (face number), as opposed to the more complicated Mispar ha-Akhor (back number).
  Mispar Gadol counts the final forms (sofit) of the Hebrew letters as a continuation of the numerical sequence for the alphabet, with the final letters assigned values from 500 to 900.
  The same name, Mispar ha-Gadol, is also used for another method, which spells the name of each letter and adds the standard values of the resulting string.
  Mispar Katan calculates the value of each letter, but truncates all of the zeros. It is also sometimes called Mispar Me'ugal.
  Mispar Siduri (ordinal value) with each of the 22 letters given a value from one to twenty-two.
  Mispar Bone'eh (building value) uses the sum of each letter added to the next letter within the word to total the value of the word. Therefore, the value of the word "Achad" (one) is 1 + (1 + 8) + (1 + 8 + 4) = 23.
  Mispar Kidmi (triangular value) uses each letter as the sum of the all the standard gematria letter values preceding it. Therefore, the value of Aleph is 1, the value of Bet is 1 + 2 = 3, the value of Gimmel is 1+2+3=6, etc. It's also known as Mispar Meshulash (triangular or tripled number).
  Mispar P'rati calculates the value of each letter as the square of its standard gematria value. Therefore, the value of Aleph is 1 × 1 = 1, the value of Bet is 2 × 2 = 4, the value of gimmel is 3 × 3 = 9, etc. It's also known as Mispar ha-Merubah ha-Prati'.
  Mispar ha-Merubah ha-Klali is the square of the standard absolute value of each word.
  Mispar Meshulash calculates the value of each letter as the cube of their standard value. The same term is more often used for Mispar Kidmi.
  Mispar ha-Akhor The value of each letter is its standard value multiplied by the position of the letter in a word or a phrase in either ascending or descending order. This method is particularly interesting, because the result is sensitive to the order of letters. It's also sometimes called Mispar Meshulash (triangular number).
  Mispar Mispari spells out the standard values of each letter by their Hebrew names ("Achad" (one) is 1+8+4=13 etc.), and then adds up the standard values of the resulting string.
  Mispar Shemi (also Millui letter "filling"), uses the value of each letter as equal to the value of its name.[11] For example, the value of the letter Aleph is (1 + 30 + 80) = 111, Bet is (2 + 10 + 400) = 412, etc. Sometimes the same operation is applied two or more times recursively.
  Mispar Ne'elam (hidden number) spells out the name of each letter without the letter itself (e.g. "Leph" for "Aleph") and adds up the value of the resulting string.
  Mispar Katan Mispari (integral reduced value) is used where the total numerical value of a word is reduced to a single digit. If the sum of the value exceeds 9, the integer values of the total are repeatedly added to produce a single-digit number. The same value will be arrived at regardless of whether it is the absolute values, the ordinal values, or the reduced values that are being counted by methods above.
  Mispar Misafi adds the number of the letters in the word or phrase to their gematria.
  Kolel is the number of words, which is often added to the gematria. In case of one word, the standard value is incremented by one.

I have never seen many of these methods used before.  What is an example of each type?


texts: Did Abraham know that Lot Survived the Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah?

texts:
In last week's Parasha, we all know the story of Abraham arguing with God to have God spare the cities on account of the righteous. However, I haven't heard much about the end of the story.

  Genesis Chapter 19

  24 Then the LORD caused to rain upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone
  and fire from the LORD out of heaven;... 27 And Abraham got up
  early in the morning to the place where he had stood before the LORD.
  28 And he looked out toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward all the
  land of the Plain, and beheld, and, lo, the smoke of the land went up
  as the smoke of a furnace. 29 And it came to pass, when God destroyed
  the cities of the Plain, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out
  of the midst of the overthrow, when He overthrew the cities in which
  Lot dwelt. 30 And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain,
  and his two daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar; and he
  dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters. ... 36 Thus were both the
  daughters of Lot with child by their father. 37 And the first-born
  bore a son, and called his name Moab--the same is the father of the
  Moabites unto this day. 38 And the younger, she also bore a son, and
  called his name Ben-ammi--the same is the father of the children of
  Ammon unto this day.

The way i interpret this story, Abraham awakes the next morning and witnesses the destruction of the cities, and must therefore conclude that Lot is dead. The story picks up with Lot hiding in a cave, and stuff happening that discusses the heritage of certain peoples, but it never answers the questions as to whether or not he ever leaves the cave, or if he ever reunites with Abraham.

So my questions are: Did Abraham think Lot died with Sodom and Gomorrah, and did he ever find out Lot was alive after the fact?


texts: Tefillin on top of a wig if someone can only wear Tefillin once a day

texts: As a rule, there shouldn't be anything that is a separation between a man's head and the tefillin, so seemingly a wig would be a problem. In Igros Moshe Orach Chaim Chelek 4 Siman 40 Ois 18, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein addresses the question of someone who wears an easily-removed wig at all times and would be embarrassed to remove it in the synagogue. He says that such a person should put on the head-tefillin in the synagogue, while wearing the wig, without saying the bracha, and that later, at home, he should put on tefillin without the wig and with the bracha. Are there any makilim (lenient halachic decisors) in this matter that permit someone to put on the tefillin lichatchila, with a bracha, over a wig, in a case in which asking the person in question to do this double wearing may be asking too much?


texts: Did Albert Einstein really say he wished he would have "studied the Talmud?"

texts:
In Rabbi Aaron Parry's "The Complete Idiot's Guide to The Talmud,"   Rabbi Parry writes in the introduction:

Is this a true statement, and if so is there a legitimate source where this statement can be attributed to?   (ie biography, close family member, etc)


texts: What did Moses learn during the second ascent?

texts:
If I understand right Moses spent the first 40 days, from 7 of Sivan to 17 of Tamuz studying the "whole Torah". The Gemora (Nedarim 38a) says he learned and forgot until G-d gave Moses the Torah as a present.

After the Golden Calf accident, Moses comes up for another 40 days round and to receive the second pair of Luchos.

What did Moses learn in those second 40 days as different from the first ones?


texts: Obligation to circumcise and repeatedly regenerating foreskin

texts:
From this related question, we can see that someone who deliberately stretches out the skin of their penis to appear uncircumcised is required to undergo a new pseudo-circumcision, and that, in the case of someone whose foreskin regrew not through their own actions, they may need to undergo a new circumcision to avoid issues of Mar'it Ayin

Would someone whose foreskin repeatedly regrew be required to
undergo a new circumcision each time it regrew (and if so, at what
point during the regrowth), even if that means being circumcised many
times a year for the rest of their life?

Would there be any difference if the foreskin first regrew as an
adult (and thereafter started regrowing immediately after healing),
vs the foreskin starting to regrow immediately after healing as an
infant?

If one isn't obligated to immediately recircumcise the infant, when might they start being obligated to be recircumcised? As a Bar Mitzvah?

For the former, whilst the argument about Mar'it Ayin would still apply, it's unclear to me that there isn't a point at which other concerns become more relevant. For the latter, the likelihood of someone who does not already know the details of the circumstances seeing the foreskin seems much lower for an infant than for an adult, so the balance of Mar'it Ayin seems like it may be different


texts:
Seeing the ocean warrants the recital of a blessing. (Assume for this question like the opinions that the proper bracha is שעשה את הים הגדול as opposed to עושה מעשה בראשית.) It is only recited if one has not seen the ocean in 30 days. (Shulchan Aruch OC 224:13 and 228:1 and Mishna Berura there)

Do the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans count as separate for the purposes of the 30 day break between sightings necessary to warrant a new blessing?


texts:
In much of our liturgy, we say:

הודו לה' כי-טוב כי לעולם חסדו
Turkey for G-d because it is good, because [His/its] loving-kindness is everlasting.

Also:

טוב להודות לה
It is good to turkey G-d.

I have a number of questions on this ancient practice which, were this not Purim, I'd break into separate questions.

What does this look like? Does it involve sacrifice?
When did this practice emerge?
Are there communities that still practice it?
Is this the source for the minhag of turkey on Thanksgiving? on Christmas? (maybe out of scope for this forum)

I'd love sources for this.
This question is Purim Torah and is not intended to be taken completely seriously. See the Purim Torah policy.


texts:
I am looking for a 28-line tikkun sofrim for Ester which has the 10 b'nei Haman written within the same amud as either the prior, or subsequent text, rather than alone. Does anyone know where I could find such a tikkun?

I will be in Jerusalem later in the month, so if someone knows a store in J-lem where I could get one, it would also be a good answer.


texts: Sources used by Maimonides in Mishneh Torah-Avodat Kochavim 1:1

texts:
In Mishneh Torah-Avodat Kochavim 1:1 Rambam states:

"During the times of Enosh, mankind made a great mistake, and the wise men of that generation gave thoughtless counsel. Enosh himself was one of those who erred.
Their mistake was as follows: They said God created stars and spheres with which to control the world. He placed them on high and treated them with honor, making them servants who minister before Him. Accordingly, it is fitting to praise and glorify them and to treat them with honor. [They perceived] this to be the will of God, blessed be He, that they magnify and honor those whom He magnified and honored, just as a king desires that the servants who stand before him be honored. Indeed, doing so is an expression of honor to the king.
After conceiving of this notion, they began to construct temples to the stars and offer sacrifices to them. They would praise and glorify them with words, and prostrate themselves before them, because by doing so, they would - according to their false conception - be fulfilling the will of God.
This was the essence of the worship of false gods, and this was the rationale of those who worshiped them. They would not say that there is no other god except for this star.
This message was conveyed by Jeremiah, who declared (10: 7-8): "Who will not fear You, King of the nations, for to You it is fitting. Among all the wise men of the nations and in all their kingdoms, there is none like You. They have one foolish and senseless [notion. They conceive of their] empty teachings as wood; " i.e., all know that You alone are God. Their foolish error consists of conceiving of this emptiness as Your will"

The following statement from the Talmud Bavli should be a Maimonides's source:

"R. Chiya bar Abba said in R. Yochanan's name: One who observes the Shabbat according to its laws, even if he practices idolatry like the generation of Enosh, he is forgiven "(Shabbat 118b)".

However, I have not been able to identify the other sources from which Rambam draws to affirm that the specific  type of idolatry practiced by the generation of Enosh is substantiated in the adoration of the stars , but always recognizing in HaShem the Supreme Power to Which all the other realities of the universe are subjected.
Could you please indicate these sources to me?


texts: How essential is it to accept the reliability of the text of the Torah?

texts:
(Related to Are Muslims fit to be Noahides?. ) The question came up there, are the Muslims heretical (in our view) because they reject our Torah as we currently have it?
This is based on a gemara Sanhedrin 99a, quoted by the Rambam in Hilchos Teshuvah:

It is taught in another baraita: “Because he has despised the word of
the Lord”; this is a reference to one who says the Torah did not
originate from Heaven. And even if one says the entire Torah
originated from Heaven except for this verse, i.e., any one verse,
claiming that the Holy One, Blessed be He, did not say it but Moses
himself said it on his own, this is included in the category of:
“Because he has despised the word of the Lord.”

My question: We know that there are disagreements on various versions of our Sefer Torah, an extra or missing vav here or there, an aleph in place of the hey there. How far can one disagree with the current version (say, in the Aleppo Codex) without falling afoul of this gemara?
After all, the text of the gemara is "but Moses himself said it on his own" (אלא משה מפי עצמו). That isn't what I'm asking here. I'm asking, if someone says, "For sure the entire Torah is exactly what G-d gave Moshe. Not one letter was made up or added by Moshe, ח"ו. But I think that posuk was a copying error later, by mistake."
Obviously this kind of thing lends itself to outrageous abuse and people playing games. I've heard that the Muslims claim that we switched Isaac and Ishmael in the Akeidah, ח"ו! [This example illustrates that someone doing this is likely to run afoul of some other issues, like trust in our Sages and their transmission.] I'm asking about an honest sincere Bible critic, say, if there is such a thing.
(This came up because I heard today that some secular scholars make exactly such claims about the Ibn Ezra; I know nothing about the details, maybe others do. But I just heard a chareidi chacham reject such claims because, "Chas Vashalom!, the Ibn Ezra wouldn't believe something heretical!" So that would go into my question: Is it possible someone could believe that because there's nothing really wrong with it?)
Added: I am assuming here that the answer to the related question How can the Rambam's Eighth Principle of Jewish Faith be believed in light of Hazal? is the one given there in the name of Rav Yaakov Weinberg z"l: The Rambam's Eighth Principle is not concerned with the accuracy of our current text.


texts: Is there a penalty under the law for attempted adultery?

texts: If a married man or woman propositions sexual misconduct to a person, or a man or woman propositions a person they know is married, is there a prescribed penalty according to the law, i.e. would a a court of law apply any punishment, in practice?


texts: Going from an nonreligious reform Jew to a religious one?

texts:
I turned sixteen a couple of weeks ago and the real world is starting to open up to me. My father is a Christian, but my mother is Jewish which makes myself and my siblings Jewish. We went to synagogue sometimes when I was a lot younger and we stopped about when I turned 12.

At the time, I didn't really think about it. I lived my normal life. I have only celebrated mainly two Jewish holidays: Chanukkah and Passover. I did go to Hebrew school, but only for a little while. I never had a Bar Mitzvah, I do not know the Hebrew language. I cannot read the Torah in Hebrew. I don't know many Jewish traditions and holidays such as Yom Kippur, Rosh Hashanah, Sukkot, Shavuot, etc.

I've just had some sudden urge to get closer to G-d, learn Jewish Law, and learn Hebrew, but I only have a little experience. What are some ways that I can fit in with a Jewish Community? What are some ways a person my age can become more religious? I have been thinking that I could maybe even shift over to a little less reform and more Orthodox.


texts: Is it greater to refrain from doing an aveirah than to perform a mitzvah?

texts: Given the opportunity to do a mitzvah or to refrain from doing an aveirah - which would place you in a better situation on the scale of heaven with regards to a person's level of righteousness?


texts: Can a non-kohen touch non-kosher animals (dead or alive)?

texts:
Is this correct: Non-kohanim may touch non-kosher animals (live or dead), including שרצים, but must avoid doing so when going to the Beis Hamikdash (for the holidays or otherwise).

Are kohanim always required to especially refrain from touching non-kosher animals (dead or alive) if they are not serving in the temple?
Is there any difference between kosher and non-kosher animals in these laws with regards to kohanim or Non-kohanim?


texts: When do Sefardim start mourning in a year that Tisha B'av is postponed until Sunday?

texts:
As mentioned here, Sefardim observe the mourning period known to Ashkenazim as "The Nine Days" only during the week that Tisha B'av occurs.

Tisha B'av falls out on Shabbat this year (5772), and the fast is postponed until Sunday.

Do Sefardim observe the mourning period during the week the 9th day of Av occurs, or the week that the fast occurs?

In other words, do they end up having no days of mourning this year, or does the mourning period start from sunday, the 3rd of Av?


texts: Why does Pirkei Avos 3:1 divide the three things into three statements?

texts:
In Chapter 3 of Pirkei Avos, the first Mishnah says:

1 Akavia the son of Mahalalel would say: Reflect upon three things and you will not come to the hands of transgression. Know from where you came, where you are going, and before whom you are destined to give a judgement and accounting. From where you came—from a putrid drop; where you are going—to a place of dust, maggots and worms; and before whom you are destined to give a judgement and accounting—before the supreme King of Kings, the Holy One, blessed be He.
א)
עֲקַבְיָא בֶּן מַהֲלַלְאֵל אוֹמֵר: הִסְתַּכֵּל בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה דְבָרִים, וְאֵין אַתָּה בָא לִידֵי עֲבֵרָה. דַּע מֵאַֽיִן בָּֽאתָ, וּלְאָן אַתָּה הוֹלֵךְ, וְלִפְנֵי מִי אַתָּה עָתִיד לִתֵּן דִּין וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן. מֵאַֽיִן בָּֽאתָ: מִטִּפָּה סְרוּחָה. וּלְאָן אַתָּה הוֹלֵךְ: לִמְקוֹם עָפָר רִמָּה וְתוֹלֵעָה. וְלִפְנֵי מִי אַתָּה עָתִיד לִתֵּן דִּין וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן: לִפְנֵי מֶֽלֶךְ מַלְכֵי הַמְּלָכִים הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא.

The question is:
Why does the Mishnah divide itself into three parts, first telling us "Reflect upon three things", without specifying what they are, then it specifies what they are in a basic way, but not in detail, and only then does it specify them in detail, why doesn't it initially simply specify them all in detail, something like:
Akavia the son of Mahalalel would say: know from where you came -- a putrid drop, where you are going -- a place of dust, maggots, and worms, and before whom you are destined to give a judgment and accounting -- before the supreme King of Kings, the Holy One, blessed be He -- and you will not come to the hands of transgression
?


texts:
In Devarim, 13:12, the text reads "יִשְׁמְע֖וּ וְיִֽרָא֑וּן וְלֹֽא־יוֹסִ֣פוּ לַעֲשׂ֗וֹת " which is translated (on Sefaria) as "will hear and be afraid, and such evil things will not be done again". The Stone translation is "shall hear and fear, and they shall not again do such an evil thing". [The former has yosifu translated into the passive and the latter, in the active but that's a question for another day.]

But no one I have found seems to explain why the middle verb, yira'un has a final nun appended to it. In Shoftim, (19:20) the text reads " יִשְׁמְע֣וּ וְיִרָ֑אוּ וְלֹֽא־יֹסִ֨פוּ לַעֲשׂ֜וֹת ע֗וֹד" which the Sefaria/JPS translates as " will hear and be afraid, and such evil things will not again be done". The loss of the final nun (turning the middle verb into yira'u) does not seem to have affected the meaning.

Shoftim 17:13 has another set of 3 verbs and the third (y'zidun) is the only one with a terminal nun. Yosifun appears only once in Tanach (Melachim 1, 19:2)

What does a final nun do to a verb which would explain its use or non-use? Are there any commentaries which place any explicatory significance on the use or non-use of the nun?


texts:
Would this be shehakol or boreh pri since the chia seeds are visible in the water even though they are very small? Would the concentration of chia seeds in the water matter?
For those unfamiliar:


texts:
When is the most recent documented occurrence in Jewish history of a beit din carrying out the death penalty?  Or if historical documentation is lacking, when is the most recent time in Jewish history that capital punishment could plausibly have occurred?  Also, are there perhaps more recent times when a beit din gave a death sentence but did not have the ability to carry it out?

Note:  The execution of Adolf Eichmann does not count for this question, as this was not a religious court.


texts: question about "es sheim" in kriash shma

texts:
I've always been a little confused by the way that the blessings before the shma are broken up. In case youre not aware, the section "es sheim" is the second half of a sentence that belongs to the section right before it. In most siddurs that i've used, there is a section break and an indication to wait for the chazzan in between.

why was this done this way? its just confusing to cut a sentence in half, so why do we do this?


texts: Would Noahides be required to eat kosher meat?

texts:
Would Noahides be required to eat kosher meat because one of the Noahide laws is not to eat blood?

Since non-kosher meat isn't soaked and salted to get the blood out, wouldn't that by default obligate Noahides to only buy kosher meat if they wanted to eat meat?


texts: Dairy hechsher but no dairy ingredients listed

texts: Suppose that a food product has a dairy hechsher (say, OU-D) but does not have anything obviously dairy in the ingredients list, and does not have "contains dairy" or something similar written below the ingredients list. May one eat this product immediately after eating fleishigs?


texts:
In Masheches Berachos daf 61b, the gemara mentions various body parts and their respective functions. It seems that the gemara is referring to human body parts, based off the gemaras premise (on daf 61a) that the two kidneys provide good and evil advice, respectively.

Within the list, the gemara mentions the kurkavon (the 3rd stomach of birds that grinds food). Why does the gemara mention an animal organ when the gemara implies that it's only talking about human beings?


texts: How do we get Parshot and Sefarim within the Chumash?

texts: Aside from the numbered chapters introduced by Christianity, what is the source for dividing the Torah into parshot (weekly Torah reading) and the 5 volumes (Bereishit, Shemot, Vayikra, Bamidbar and Devarim)?


texts: How did Hevel offer an animal sacrifice, wasn't it forbidden to kill animals?

texts:
In Bereshit 4:4, Hevel offers his choicest sheep as a sacrifice to G-d.

However, in Bereshit 1:29-30, Adam is told he is only allowed to eat vegetables, and Rashi explains that he was forbidden to kill meat (There are different opinions about what exactly is forbidden, but the Mizrachi explains that Rashi is saying that Adam was forbidden to kill living things - see here as well). Later, G-d gave Noach permission to kill and eat meat.

If Hevel was not allowed to kill meat, how was he allowed to offer an animal as a sacrifice?


texts: Anywhere in Torah speak about specific professions being praiseworthy and why?

texts: Are there any professions the Torah considers praiseworthy and why?


texts: I am looking for an algorithm to calculate Molad Tishrei for any given year

texts:
I am using MS Excel together with VBA (Visual Basic for applications) to write macros to calculate Molad Tishrei.

I have located information in various web sites that explain how to calculate Molad Toshrei for 1 year if I know the Molad of the previous year. However, I cannot use a fixed calculation for determining the Molad of a random year, since I don't know how many leap years occurred since that random year, and the result comes out incorrectly.

I found some web articles that explain the overall concepts, but I need a step by step algorithm or math formula that works. I.e. - if I know when Molad Toshrei for 5774 was, and I want to find out Molad Tishrei for 5790, how do I do that?

Ideally, if someone has written VB code or done this in Excel, that would be great. However, even if I have a "simplified" stepwise English-explained algorithm, that would work as well.

You don't have to answer with code, of course. A link would be fine. If you have tested the code yourself and verified that it works, even better!


texts: Why is "communal" mishloach manot allowed?

texts:
I thought that to fulfill the mitzvah of mishloach manot each person must give two gifts to his friend, as it says, Esther 9:19

ומשלוח מנות איש לרעהו

Last night, I got a large basket from my shul with a paper lsiting several names of people who pooled together and donated to the shul's mishlo'ach manot "fund". I understand that this has become a popular activity in many communities. The shul gets a percentage of the fund collected, and it saves people the effort of packing packages, themselves.

Is such "pooled" mishlo'ach manot acceptable, in light of the verse mentioned above. Also, it seems that the shul is the one delivering the mishlo'ach manot, not the people themselves.

Edited based on "repetitive comments:

1 - My shul gave these baskets out at night, to SOME people, i.e. - those that showed up last night and, partially, b/c they knew there would be snow on Purim so it would be harder to get it to them. I'm aware that doesn't fulfill the mitzvah. For the answer, ignore this aspect. I just mentioned that fact incidentally.

2 - Several Orthodox shuls in my neighborhood are doing this seemingly with the intent that this shoul dbe "acceptable" mishloach manot, and many of them deliver it during the day time like postmen - neither rain nor snow... (and boy, is it snowing, now!) So, is the shul fulfilling the mitzvah o rno one is fulfilling the mitzvah this way?

3- Some of the comments, so far, seem like they would be better as answers. Move them to answers if you feel that way!


texts: Shouldn't each of the 38 melachos ALSO be considered "מכה בפטיש"?

texts:
It seems to me that one could argue that every melachah has an element of "מכה בפטיש" (final hammer blow/ completing an object by applying the finishing touches) to it.

As OU Torah explains:

  The melacha of makeh b’patish literally means the strike of a hammer but it refers to an act of completion. Any act of perfecting an object or rendering it fit for use is considered makeh b’patish even if it doesn’t involve a hammer (or any other tools).

It would appear that each of the other 38 melachot seem to contain an element of makeh b’patish to them.  For example:

Erasing (מוחק)- if one erases a whole sentence, right as they finish erasing it should be a violation of erasing and the final hammer blow
Sanding (ממחק)- if one sands a doghouse, they should be in violation of sanding and (upon completion of the house) the final hammer blow
Sewing (תופר)- if one sews a garment they should be in violation of sewing and (upon completion of the garment) the final hammer blow
Selecting (בורר)- ex: if one separates the desirable portions from the undesirable portions and thus making an inedible food become edible,   they should be in in violation of selecting and the final hammer blow

Why isn't one ALSO violating makeh b’patish whenever they violate any of the other 38 melachot?


texts: Angels Eating: The case of Avraham Vs Lot

texts:
I came across a fascinating Tanna D'Vei Eliyahu Rabbah (12:1) which states:

וכל האומר לא אכלו מלאכי השרת עם אברהם אע"ה לא אמר כלום אלא בצדקתו של אותו צדיק ובשכר טורח שטרח בשבילם פתח להם הקב"ה את פיהם ואכלו ולכך נאמר והוא עומד עליהם תחת העץ ויאכלו
And all who say that the ministering angels did not eat with Avraham is talking nonsense (lit. nothingness), rather due to the righteousness of the Tzaddik (i.e. Avraham) and the reward for all the effort/bother he expended, Hashem opened their mouths and they ate. Therefore it says, "And he stood over them under the tree and they ate."

So it would seem that ordinarily angels do not eat and it was only because of the fact that they were in a tzaddik's presence, that Hashem made them eat.
This all makes perfect sense....
However, when we get to the episode with Lot and his hosting of the malachim, the pasuk in Bereishis 19:3 writes:

וַיִּפְצַר־בָּ֣ם מְאֹ֔ד וַיָּסֻ֣רוּ אֵלָ֔יו וַיָּבֹ֖אוּ אֶל־בֵּית֑וֹ וַיַּ֤עַשׂ לָהֶם֙ מִשְׁתֶּ֔ה וּמַצּ֥וֹת אָפָ֖ה וַיֹּאכֵֽלוּ׃
But he urged them strongly, so they turned his way and entered his house. He prepared a feast for them and baked unleavened bread, and they ate.

So how come in this instance they ate? Lot was not exactly a tzaddik1 - How come with him they ate too?
I haven't seen any sources that say that they didn't really eat. In fact, Rabbeinu Bachya and the Ohr HaChaim both contrast their eating with Lot and Avraham by noting how they specifically ate bread/matzos by Lot as opposed to meat like in the case of Avraham - but they still ate?!

1 Refer to Bereishis Rabbah 41:7 which interprets the words "וַיִּשָֹּׂא לוֹט אֶת עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא אֶת כָּל כִּכַּר הַיַּרְדֵּן" - "And Lot lifted up his eyes and he saw the entire plain of the Jordan" (Bereishis 13:10) as a reference to immorality, and that he settled there despite looking at many other cities as he found it the most attractive option. Or, alternatively note the Midrash Tanchuma Buber Edition - Vayeira 21:4 that says out of the five jusdges in Sodom, Lot was the most wicked.


texts: If Ai became a reality and self-aware, able-bodied robots akin to humans were commonplace, would it be pious to convert the AI's to Judaism? Essentially, if a non-human wants to become Jewish, can we allow him?


texts: Do any Jewish sources give a non-literal interpretation of the census in Bamidbar?

texts: Are there any classical commentators that state that "elef" didn't literally mean 1 thousand, or something else to that effect, that would result in a smaller number? I am reading Ani Maamin by Rav Joshua Berman, which makes this case on logistical grounds, as well as various statements that indicate that the Canaanim had a larger population than us and several other things, and then says that the text can be read non-literally through linguistics, but do any Rishonic sources corroborate this or are open to such readings?


texts: What was the Halachic base for establishing the inheritance of the Great Sanhedrin Presidency?

texts:
In the line of Nesi'im from Hillel to Gamliel IV, the position passed from father to son even if the son wasn't the brightest sage of the Sanhedrin (see R' Gamliel's testimony to R' Yehoshua).
Of course, this contradicts Rambam’s ruling (Hil Sanhedrin, 1.3) that:

The greatest sage among them all is appointed their presiding officer, who also serves as head of the academy. He is designated by the sages as Nasi (president), who occupies the position of our teacher Moses.

So what was the Halachic base for establishing the inheritance of the Great Sanhedrin Presidency?


texts: Weapon used to punish sleeping mikdash guards

texts: The very start of mishnayos maseches Midos mentions that the l'viyim guarded the bes hamikdash in various locations, and that, if the captain of the guards caught a guard asleep on the job, he'd hit him with a stick. The Rambam's commentary to the start of chapter 5 of mishnayos maseches Sh'kalim says that this punishment was carried out with a strap. How do we explain the contradiction between the mishnayos, or why or on what basis does the Rambam explain Sh'kalim as applying to the sleeping-guard case, which Midos clearly says featured use of a stick?


texts:
Does cloth retain meat and milk after it is washed?

I was thinking that instead of ceramic or plastic plates, we could eat off of woven disks.


texts: May one make a siyum on a day he is fasting?

texts: If a person accepted a personal fast, is he allowed to make a siyum on that day even though he is fasting and won't eat? Also, is there something special about a personal fast day (other than not eating) that precludes someone from making a siyum?


texts:
Must one pray in the Beis Medrash he learns or in any Beis Medrash (and the practical difference would be if there's an advantage in the other Beis Medrash, such as if it's further  away and there's Schar Pesiyos)

The Gemara says

  אמר ליה רבא לרפרם בר פפא לימא לן מר מהני מילי מעלייתא דאמרת משמיה דרב חסדא במילי דבי כנישתא אמר ליה הכי אמר רב חסדא מאי דכתי' אוהב ה' שערי ציון מכל משכנות יעקב אוהב ה' שערים המצויינים בהלכה יותר מבתי כנסיות ומבתי מדרשות

Rav Chisda said that the verse "Hashem loves the gates of Zion more than all the dwelling places of Yaakov" teaches that Hashem loves the gates of Halacha more than the synagogues and study halls.

Which implies that one should pray where people study (Halacha).

והיינו דאמר ר' חייא בר אמי משמיה דעולא מיום שחרב בית המקדש אין לו להקב"ה בעולמו אלא ארבע אמות של הלכה בלבד.

  Rabbi Chiya said that since the Beis Hamikdash was destroyed, Hashem only had the four cubits of Halacha (which implies that one should pray where people study)

On the other hand,

ואמר אביי מריש הוה גריסנא בגו ביתא ומצלינא בבי כנישתא כיון דשמענא להא דאמר רבי חייא בר אמי משמיה דעולא מיום שחרב בית המקדש אין לו להקב"ה בעולמו אלא ארבע אמות של הלכה בלבד לא הוה מצלינא אלא היכא דגריסנא.

Abaye said that he used to learn at home and pray at the synagogue, but since he heard Rabbi Chiya's teaching, he only prayed where he studied.

Which implies one should pray where he studies

רבי אמי ורבי אסי אף על גב דהוו להו תליסר בי כנישתא בטבריא לא מצלו אלא ביני עמודי היכא דהוו גרסי

So if there are two Batei Medrash, one (in which he learns) close by and the other a distance away, where should one pray?


texts: Aruch Hashulchan's moon-distance estimate

texts:
Aruch Hashulchan (1829–1908), Orach Chayim 397:1, says that a מיל is the same as a Russian верста (verst) or 500 сажен (sazhen), which comes to 1066.8 meters. In 426:2, he says the distance to the moon is about 43,000 פרסה. A פרסה is four מיל, so 43,000 פרסה come to about 183,500,000 meters.

In fact, though, the distance is about 384,400,000 meters (as had been known, at least approximately, for millenia by his day), which according to the Aruch Hashulchan is 384,400,000÷4267.2 פרסה, or about 90,000 פרסה.

His estimate of 43,000 is off by a scale factor of 2! What gives?


texts: I'm always inspired how people are able to get up in front of a crowd (big or small) and deliver a drasha or dvar Torah that is really good. How does one go about preparing a drasha? What's a starting point? Do you pick something from the parsha, something from inyunei d'yoma. How can one make it "geshmack" (tasty) to listen to for other people? Obviously a breadth of knowledge in Chazal, Halacha, Sifrei Drush, chassidus, musar, medreshim, etc will be a tremendous help. However sometimes even with this or the ability to find this information easily it's difficult to put something together that people will enjoy and not be bored from or not interested in. I'm talking about short to medium length drashas, not long ones and not "shiurim" in a certain inyun. Ranging from 5 min to 20-30 min. Where does one begin?!


texts:
The reason given for the issur of beged ishah/beged ish is because it's a "toeivah" before Hashem (Devarim 22:5). The Gemara (Nazir 59a) learns from this that the issur is only for a man to dress up like a woman in order to mingle with women, or for a woman to dress like a man to mingle with men.

However, the Gemara in Makkos (20b) and Shabbos (94a) regarding plucking white hairs from amidst black ones seems to imply that one can violate lo silbash without having intent to mingle with the other gender - only that it's something that the other gender would do in terms of appearance. This also seems to be how the Gemara earlier in Nazir (39a) seems to hold, with regard to men shaving hair from underarms and beis ha'ervah.

My question is twofold. First, how is this contradiction resolved? Second, halacha l'ma'aseh, what do the poskim say about this? Do they pasken like the first Gemara, or do they say one may never dress like the other gender?


texts: Can you take and post pictures of people online without their permission?

texts: Realizing that there is some concern with having one's picture taken in the first place; according to those who allow pictures of people to be taken, is there any halachic reason which would prevent one from taking pictures of people in public (ie in a way which breaks no civil law) and sharing those pictures either online or in print without getting the expressed permission of those in the picture?


texts:
What's the difference between ציון and ירושלים?

Initially I thought that they are just synonyms but after reading some phrases in the bible I doubt whether it's correct or not.

The phrases that caused to me this doubt are:

1)

  "אָז יַקְהֵל שְׁלֹמֹה אֶת זִקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת כָּל רָאשֵׁי
  הַמַּטּוֹת נְשִׂיאֵי הָאָבוֹת לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶל הַמֶּלֶךְ
  שְׁלֹמֹה יְרוּשָׁלָ‍ִם לְהַעֲלוֹת אֶת אֲרוֹן בְּרִית ה' מֵעִיר
  דָּוִד הִיא צִיּוֹן."

It seems that ציון was a difference place from ירושלים, hence they wanted  לְהַעֲלוֹת אֶת אֲרוֹן בְּרִית ה' מֵעִיר דָּוִד הִיא צִיּוֹן to ירושלים.

2)

  "וְחָפְרָה הַלְּבָנָה וּבוֹשָׁה הַחַמָּה כִּי מָלַךְ יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת
  בְּהַר צִיּוֹן וּבִירוּשָׁלַ‍ִם וְנֶגֶד זְקֵנָיו כָּבוֹד."

Also from here it seems that they are two difference places, maybe next to each other.


texts: According to the rambam that unlike all other prohibitory mitzvos there are 3 that one must give up one's life for rather than be forced to commit. Does the requirement to give up one's life rather than commit then include suicide if one's has a compulsion to do these three things?


texts: Establishing the relative order of Rashi's commentaries

texts:
In learning Masekhet Ketubot, I encountered Rashi's definition of בי שמשי on daf 103a. There, since the passage is clearly referring to twilight on erev shabbat in particular, Rashi explains why so generic a term is used by suggesting that we most often think of twilight in relation to Shabbat: this is the time by which all of our Shabbat preparation needs to be completed, and it's therefore a more important twilight than any other.

Interestingly, in Masekhet Shabbat, Rashi gives a different explanation. There, on daf 86b, Rashi says that twilight on erev shabbat can simply be referred to as "twilight", not because of its importance but because of the frequency with which the Talmud mentions that particular twilight specifically.

Most interesting to me is that Rashi also addresses this issue in a third masekhta, Masekhet Taanit! And there, on daf 25a, he says that he has no idea why twilight on erev shabbat is just called "twilight"!!

It would seem to me that Rashi's peirush on Taanit must have been written before his peirushim on Shabbat and Ketubot, since he seems to have come up with two different explanations for the same phenomenon in the time since declaring that he didn't have even one.

My question is: I found these passages using liqqutei rashi, which is printed in the margins of my gemara. Has anybody done anything similar, working out a broader order in which Rashi's peirushim would have been written? It would be interesting to get a sense as to the relative order in which he compiled them, and the extent to which his opinions and interpretations changed over that time.


texts: Does the vav hahipuch also mean "and"?  Do all those extra "ands" belong in the Bible?

texts:
I know that in Biblical Hebrew, take a word like "Vaydaber."  "Yedaber" = "He will speak"; the "v" flips the word from future tense to past, so it's "he spoke."

Most translations understand the "v" ALSO means "and"; so in most translations of the Bible (Jewish included), you'll see:

  And the Lord spoke ...

Though R' Aryeh Kaplan's translation leaves out the "and"s.  (Is that him just making it more readable in common English?  Or that the vav's were never intended as "ands"?)

I suppose one could hold "the vav sometimes means and" instead of "always does" or "never does" too.

What are our sources on this?


texts: Was Avraham really in the right going to sacrifice Yitzchak?

texts: If someone says, "Hey, you. You go kill _______ or i'll kill you," you are not allowed to go kill that person. That's an extreme case. But in the case with Yitzchak, there was no 'Or i'll kill you.' So why did Avraham go to sacrifice Yitzchak? Was it because it was a direct commandment from Hashem? (Remember, Avraham also pleaded on behalf of the people of Sodom, who were Rasha'im. All the more so, he should plead on behalf of his son, who was also a Tzaddik!)


texts: It is declared that Torah were given to nations, only Jews were willing to receive, therefore Jews became special persons before HaShem. Accordingly, does HaShem require different responsibility(ies) from Jews than gentiles? What is the special responsibility? Does this mean gentiles are free from these responsibility(ies), such as learning Torah, tikun olam, Kosher and Shabbat, Mitzvot in general, since they don't have Torah?


texts: Why do the last words in psalms 119:11 seem superfluous?

texts:
Psalms 119:11 in the Koren Jerusalem Tanakh appears (in English) to say:
"Thy word have I hid in my heart, that I might not sin against Thee".

         I was writing this beautiful verse down in my notepad, when I had to switch lines at the last two words.  Since the last thing I was writing at the bottom of the page(s) was just the last two words, and those words where "against thee",   I had to stop writing because it's common for someone to end the last line of a statement they wrote by writing their name, and it was as if I was signing off as "against thee"...  So I immediately wondered why does it even say "against thee"?  Every sin is a sin against God (directly or indirectly), right?

         We know Chazal extrapolate incredible truths from Tanach once they find a verse that says something seeming to be superfluous. Thinking about them and writing this verse makes me wonder...  Is it necessary to end psalm 119:11 with the words "against thee" when it could have just simply said: "Thy word I have hid in my heart that I might not sin"...

...what is the (extra) meaning of the words "against thee"?


texts: What was the biggest miracle in the time of the Megilla?

texts:
There were many miracles in the time of the Megilla. What was the biggest one?
This question is Purim Torah and is not intended to be taken completely seriously. See the Purim Torah policy.


texts: Why Doesn't Rasag Mention Olives In The Five Fruits From Eretz Yisrael?

texts:
In his siddur, Rav Sa`adya haGaon (Rasa"g) mentions only four of the five species of peroth ha-ilan which are special to Eress Yisrael, leaving out zethim ("olives"). He does so in two places. Further, he does not simply list the other four and leave out olives, rather he precedes his listing of them with the words huss me-arabaah dhevarim ("except for these four things"). This seems to indicate a volitional (i.e. shitah-based) reason for doing so.

Question: Why does Rasa"g not mention zethim in his list of the five peroth ha-ilan which Eress Yisrael is known for and which require Birkath Me-En Shalosh (i.e. al ha-ess we-al feri ha-ess)?


texts: Is Mashiach going to come in Nissan/Tishrei, or can he come at any time?

texts:
The Gemara in Rosh HaShanah 10b-11a says:

  תניא רבי אליעזר אומר בתשרי נברא העולם בתשרי נולדו אבות בתשרי מתו אבות בפסח נולד יצחק בראש השנה נפקדה שרה רחל וחנה בראש השנה יצא יוסף מבית האסורין בר"ה בטלה עבודה מאבותינו במצרים בניסן נגאלו בתשרי עתידין ליגאל ר' יהושע אומר בניסן נברא העולם בניסן נולדו אבות בניסן מתו אבות בפסח נולד יצחק בר"ה נפקדה שרה רחל וחנה בר"ה יצא יוסף מבית האסורין בר"ה בטלה עבודה מאבותינו במצרים בניסן נגאלו בניסן עתידין ליגאל

Focusing on the boldfaced portions: According to R’ Eliezer, Mashiach will come in Tishrei; according to R’ Yehoshua, Mashiach will come in Nissan. It’s clear that this refers to the coming of Mashiach specifically from the explanation of R’ Eliezer’s opinion brought on 11b:

  בתשרי עתידין ליגאל אתיא שופר שופר כתיב הכא תקעו בחדש שופר וכתיב התם (ישעיהו כז, יג) ביום ההוא יתקע בשופר גדול

  In Tishrei we will be redeemed - he learns out a Gezeirah Shavah of “Shofar” “Shofar.” It says here [by Rosh HaShanah] “blow the Shofar in the month,” and it says there [regarding Mashiach], “and it will be on that day a great Shofar blast will be blown.”

Compare Sanhedrin 98a:

  אמר רבי אלכסנדרי רבי יהושע בן לוי רמי כתיב (ישעיהו ס, כב) בעתה וכתיב אחישנה זכו אחישנה לא זכו בעתה

  Says R’ Alexandri: R’ Yehoshua Ben Levi poses a contradiction. It says [regarding the coming of Mashiach] “in its time” and it [immediately] says “I will hasten it.” [Is it in its time, or is it hastened to come early?] If they merit, “I will hasten it.” If they don’t merit, [Mashiach will still come] “in its time.”

Considering this latter Gemara, is the former intended to be understood as a prediction of when he is actually going to come, and R’ Yehoshua Ben Levi refers to the year of Mashiach (or just flat-out argues on R’ Eliezer and R’ Yehoshua), or are R’ Eliezer and R’ Yehoshua predicting Mashiach’s “time,” which R’ Yehoshua Ben Levi says isn’t necessarily when he will come?


texts: Why aren't there nittle nachts for other holidays?

texts: As I've heard it the reason for not learning Torah on nittle nacht it to avoid supporting the forces of evil which are more prevalent(?) at that time. I am wondering why those Jews don't avoid learning Torah before every non-Jewish holiday?


texts: What is the definition of death for a fish?

texts: If a fish is considered shechted when it is taken out of the water, what is the status of that fish when it is placed back in the water and it swims away?  If it was dead, surely it cannot come back to life, so is it considered already dead even though it is swimming around and living like any other fish?  If so, what are the practical implications of the swimming fish being considered dead (such as with respect to eating it "alive" and tza'ar ba'alei chaim, unnecessary pain to animals)?   If it is not considered dead when it is taken from the water, what is the definition of death for a fish?


texts: Why does medical marijuana need a kosher supervision?

texts:
Today, NY State joined several others in opening clinics to dispense medical marijuana. Distribution of this is restricted to patients who have severe illnesses such as Parkinson's Disease, epilepsy, HIV, and IBS (Irritable bowel syndrome).

I understand that OU has issued its supervision on medical marijuana.

Is kosher supervision necessary on such a product? What non-kosher items could be mixed into the marijuana during processing?

Even if there were non-kosher substances, considering that a typical patient would be taking this to relieve or, perhaps, cure a serious medical condition, wouldn't it be permissible for someone to take this?

(My doctor recommends that I take fish pills that have non-kosher fish ingredients in it. He checked with his rav before recommending it, and I checked with my rav after he recommended it. Both agreed that for medical necessity, I was permitted to take it.)


texts: Why is there an apparent "high priority" on reciting all 7 Consolation Haftarot?

texts:
Last week, I looked at the back of my shul's Tiqun Kor'im (I forgot which version it is, offhand) and noticed a long paragraphs explaining the different customs of what happens when Shabbat parshat R'eh coincides with Rosh Hodesh Ellul or Machar Chodesh (1st day of Rosh Hodesh on Sunday) Ellul. Some customs say to read the parshat R'eh Haftarah and others say to read the Rosh (or Machar) Chodesh Haftarah.

It seems that the most common Nusach Ashkenaz practice that I have seen is to read the Rosh Hodesh haftarah on R'eh. The haftarah from R'eh is made up together with the reading of the Haftarah of Ki Tetze - i.e. Ki Tetze is read first followed by the haftarah of R'eh, as the two texts are next to each other in Yeshayahu.

I'm curious as to why high priority is given to asserting that all 7 haftarot should be read and why there is a debate about it at all? The only other conflict that I am aware of that has a similar debate is if Breishit coincides with Rosh Hodesh or Machar Chodesh.

There are other times when Rosh (or Machar) Chodesh coincides with other haftarot, such as:

Chanukah
Parshat Sheqalim
Parshat Hachodesh
Mas'ei or Matot/Mas'ei (2nd week of Haftarot of "Punishment". This is a rare occurrence as this would happen when 1st day Pesach was on Sunday.)

In these cases, from what I have seen, Rosh or Machar Chodesh haftarah is eliminated and the haftarah for the special day is said. (Though, I have seen some congregations include the 1st and last verses of the Rosh / Machar Chodesh haftarah at the end.)

For those that decide to override R'eh with Rosh Hodesh, what would be so bad about skipping one of the 7 Consolation Haftarot? Why is there this minhag to try to make it up? And, if, in fact, these haftarot are so important, then, why not follow the predence set by the others and just not do Rosh Hodesh?


texts:
In studying the history of Christianity, and therefore, the historical context of the early Jesus Movement, which was obviously a Jewish context, I have been led to understand that in the first century, there was a popular form of Judaism now referred to as apocalyptic, or eschatological, Judaism.

Generally speaking, eschatological Jews believed the following:

The universe was a sort of cosmic battleground, and the forces of darkness, death, sin, and wickedness were doing battle with the forces of light, life, virtue, and righteousness.
God was still in control of this world in some ultimate sense. But for unknown and mysterious reasons he had temporarily relinquished his control to the forces of evil that opposed him.
This state of affairs would not go on forever.  Soon - very soon - G-d would intervene directly.
He would soon send his emissary, occasionally referred to as the "Son of Man", but more often as the messiah.
The messiah  would arrive in the world and usher in the Kingdom of G-d;  he would then sit in judgment over mankind, both living and dead;  the wicked would be laid low, and the righteous would be richly rewarded for their piety.
The Kingdom would be established, with its capital in Jerusalem, and Israel would take her place as the greatest of all nations.
The forces of darkness, death, sin, and wickedness would be crushed once and for all.

For a more comprehensive definition of apocalyptic Judaism, see the document linked here or here

At long last, we come to the point of all of this:

Does apocalyptic Judaism still exist today?


texts: Does anyone know what is the source of the Yiddish word Cholent?


texts: Is the lemon slice added to a soda in many bars a problem kosher-wise?

texts:
Many bars (and hotel lobbies) will add a lemon wedge to the top of a glass of soda; often it's used to differentiate between Diet Coke (gets the lemon) and regular Coke (no lemon).

Does this pose a kashrus problem?


texts: Do we make a bracha on a talis, the night of Yom Kippur?

texts:
The mitzvah of tziztit does not apply at night, so when we wear a talis all of davening on Yom Kippur, starting this year on Friday night for Maariv, do we make a bracha when we put the talis on?

Is it better to put it on closer to mincha time to avoid any such issues?


texts:
I know next to nothing about Chabad shlichus other than the fact that the last Lubavitcher Rebbe would send people to various locations on "shlichus" to set up some sort of Jewish outpost where, perhaps, none existed.

I would imagine that such a thing would require various halachic compromises such as not being able to daven with a minyan, not having meat for yom tov, or perhaps not having a lulav and etrog on sukkot etc.

I would like to know

Am I correct that sometimes shlichus involves halachic compromises? And if so how is a person allowed to go on shlichus?
Is shlichus permanent? Can a person who has agreed to go on shlichus ever leave that post?


texts: Combined Torah/College programs for women in the NYC area

texts:
What learning programs are available for women in the New York City metro area that provide a curriculum in both Jewish studies and a bachelors and/or associates degree in secular topics? I'm thinking of a program specifically with an Orthodox Jewish approach, not something that has a Judaic Studies department.

In any answers, I would appreciate an overview of what the Torah part of the curriculum covers and what type of student background it expects.


texts:
According to some commentaries that I have read, Cain was rejected by Hashem in Genesis 4 because he did not offer the first or choice of his field, but rather the dregs or at least standard fare. The way in which Hashem exiled Cain, however, strikes me as similar to the treatment of an idolater, which makes me wonder:

Was Cain an idolater (that is, did he actively worship an idol or indicate an express intent in doing so), or was his sin in being an ineffective monotheistic worshiper (e.g. his theology was right, but his praxis was wrong)?


texts: Does Kelayim apply to road cantaloupe/courgette?

texts:
A neighbour of mine, on the American east coast had a fire hydrant replaced in front of the house, right at the curb, and the fill used settled leaving a hole. He filled it with compost.  Alas he now has road cantaloupes and courgettes (a type of small squash also called zucchini).

So is that Kelayim?  (Clearly unintended, since he did not expect the compost to actually grow something).

And is he required to do something about it?

Would he be allowed to eat the fruit (ignoring whether it would be 'wise' to eat street fruit)?


texts:
During Purim I notice that kids (and adults, but mainly kids) eat a lot of chazzir rye. To me it looks like junk food rather than bread (usually, when I think of "rye", I think of rye bread), and since I see all types of religious families who keep a kosher home and are strict what children eat, I assume that they are eating kosher food.
But considering that chazzir is pig and pigs are not kosher, why would the rye that comes from pigs be kosher? Or is this type of rye similar to bees' honey where even though bees aren't kosher, the honey is?

This question is Purim Torah and is not intended to be taken completely seriously. See the Purim Torah policy.


texts: Are "dog tags" Begged Isha?  Can men wear them?

texts: Is a man allowed to wear a "dog tag" type of thing?  Is it beged eesha?


texts:
If a woman converts to Judaism while pregnant, will her child be eligible to marry a Kohen?

Case #1 -- Assume her husband is a Jew by birth.

Case #2 -- Assume her husband converted to Judaism prior to the child's conception. (I know the kohanim have assumed an extra stringency against marrying the child of two converts. However, would there be a Biblical prohibition in the case I describe?)

Case #3 -- Assume her husband was a non-Jew at the time of conception. (Again, would there be a Biblical prohibition? --I know there would be rabbinical prohibitions as discussed here.)


texts: Laying Tefillin on Chol HaMoed Prior to the Shulchan Aruch

texts:
As a continuation to my question regarding why the Beit Yosef apparently deviated from his normal method of ruling in the case of laying teffilin on Chol HaMoed, I'm curious what the practice was prior to the Sh"A?

I don't mean immediately prior, but in earlier generations, the Rishonim, Geonim, etc...


texts:
I am having a hard time in understanding these biblical verses:

  And the sons of Reuben the first-born of Israel—for he was the first-born; but, forasmuch as he defiled his father's couch, his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of Israel, yet not so that he was to be reckoned in the genealogy as first-born.  For Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came he that is the prince; but the birthright was Joseph's—
  ― 1 Chronicles 5:1–2 (JPS)

If [as I understand], one of the rights of being a first-born meant the King and eventually the Messaiah was to be descended from the first born, and this passed from Rueben to Judah, skipping Simeon, Levi, what then did Joseph get with his being given the birthright? What does "birthright" really mean [in Judaism]?

The best and correct answer will correct any misunderstanding on my part.


texts: Are "things we don't do because of danger" also dangerous to non-Jews?

texts:
There are some things that we don't do because of the danger. Things we do not do because of Danger has a list of some of them.

Are these things dangerous to non-Jews as well?


texts: We know The rainbow is a bad Omen. Is one allowed to tell a friend when he sees one, in order to allow him to make a Bracha or should he hold back as it is a bad sign?


texts: Loshon Hora: Chafetz Chaim & Dissenting views

texts:
The sefer "Chofetz Chaim" is accepted worldwide as the leading authority in the Hilchos Shemiras Haloshon arena. However, as with every area in halacha, there are specific details which are subject to debate among the poskim. (See this answer, for example)

Can anyone cite examples (with sources, if possible) of contemporary Poskim who disagree with some of the Chofetz Chaim's conclusions - either l'chumra or l'kula?


texts:
Some use a very wide gartel. A friend of mine mentioned an inyan (Judaism-sourced idea) that the gartel should be wider than one tefach. Can someone source this inyan that the gartel should be (more than a tefach) wide — or the lack thereof?

Interestingly, the priestly gartel was slightly less than a tefach.


texts: Jewish significance of being an uncle or aunt?

texts: Is there any Jewish significance to the relationship between an uncle/aunt and their nephew/niece? Meaning to say, are there any special things (opportunities, responsibilities) about being an uncle/aunt which Torah recognizes? Are there any classical (or contemporary) Torah works which touch upon this?


texts: Blessing on blossom twice in a year – in N and S hemispheres. What is involved?

texts: Someone made the blessing on blossom in the Northern hemisphere in Nissan and then went to live in  the Southern hemisphere (where it is possible to make the blessing in Elul (see here ). Do the sources explain whether and why he can make the blessing in  the Southern hemisphere?


texts: Is it forbidden to benefit from milk and meat being mixed together in a compost, for example, or is it okay to benefit since the meat and milk were not cooked together?


texts: Why the mismatch between the Haggada's Dayenu and its summary?

texts:
In the Haggada in the part of Dayenu it ends off with

אִלּוּ הִכְנִיסָנוּ לְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְלֹא בָנָה לָנוּ אֶת־בֵּית הַבְּחִירָה
דַּיֵּנוּ.

If He had brought us into the land of Israel and had not built us the 'Chosen House' [the Temple; it would have been] enough for us.

and in the summary it ends off with

וּבָנָה לָנוּ אֶת־בֵּית הַבְּחִירָה לְכַפֵּר עַל־כָּל־עֲוֹנוֹתֵינוּ.

and built us the 'Chosen House' [the Temple] to atone upon all of our sins.

Why does it add in the part with the Karbonos in the summary and it doesnt mention it in the main part?


texts:
One may not measure on Shabbos.
Measuring time is also not allowed.
May one use a watch that has a rotating bezel, to time?


texts: My mother went to Israel and just came back. She's Catholic and went to Israel to see the Holy Land. She came back and gave me a star of David. She said it was blessed. I am Catholic myself and wearing it simply because she says it's blessed. Is it wrong to wear it? Would people get offended?


texts:
According to one book tearing paper towels on Shabbat is not allowed.
However, tearing a tea bag to open it for use is permitted as long as one
does not destroy any letters and as long as the tearing is done in a destructive way so
no mending would be possible. Why doesn't the same reasoning imply that one should be able to tear paper towel as long one does not tear along the perforation?


texts:
Yehoshua 2:1:

וַיִּשְׁלַח יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן מִן הַשִּׁטִּים שְׁנַיִם אֲנָשִׁים מְרַגְּלִים חֶרֶשׁ לֵאמֹר לְכוּ רְאוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ וְאֶת יְרִיחוֹ וַיֵּלְכוּ וַיָּבֹאוּ בֵּית אִשָּׁה זוֹנָה וּשְׁמָהּ רָחָב וַיִּשְׁכְּבוּ שָׁמָּה

Rashi adopts the opinion of the Targum, not that she was literally a zonah, but rather:

תרגם יהונתן פונדקיתא מוכרת מיני מזונות

But later, in 2:11 and 2:15, we find that Rashi adopts the opinion of the Gemara, that Rachav was indeed an actual zonah:

ולא קמה עוד רוח באיש - אפילו לשכב עם אשה אמרו אין לך כל שר ונגיד שלא בא אל רחב הזונה ובת עשר שנים היתה כשיצאו ישראל ממצרים וזנתה כל ארבעים שנה
ותורידם בחבל בעד החלון - באותו חבל וחלון היו הנואפים עולין אליה אמרה רבונו של עולם באלו חטאתי באלו תמחול לי

Why the inconsistency?


texts: Did Jewish Men Always Have Beards Throughout History

texts:
When did Jews start keeping their beards? Did Moshe's generation have beards?

What is the historical development behind this phenomenon?


texts: Why is it neccesary to have an Oral Law?

texts: Why was it necessary to have an oral law? Couldn't we have avoided inaccuracies and machlokot in the mishnah, gemara and etc by writing it down originally?


texts: When were tefillin worn prior to the "standardization" of Tefillat Shacharit?

texts:
I'm making a few assumptions in asking my question. If they're incorrect, please comment.

Tefillat Shacharit is a substitute for the Shacharit sacrifice that was brought in the Temple. I have also heard that there was a time when people wore Tefillin the entire day, and at some point, this was scaled back to wearing it during the Shacharit prayers.

During the time of the Temple services, when did people wear tefillin? Was it the entire day, then? Does this mean that Cohanim wore tefillin while they were offering the sacrifices?

Between the time of the Temple destruction and the standardization of a Shacharit service as we have it, today (i.e. a specific order of prayers that we are currently saying),  (by "destruction, I include the period between end of 1st and completion of the 2nd as well as after destruction of the 2nd.) when did people wear tefillin?


texts: May I drink water while wearing tefillin?

texts: If I am wearing Tefilin, and I feel very thirsty, should I take off my Tefllin to drink, (if I am even allowed to interrupt) or am I allowed to drink water while wearing Tefilin?


texts:
My employer has asked me to move to as close as possible to their main office in Bramley, Hampshire (between Basingstoke and Reading). However, I do wish to live in a place with some orthodox Jewish presence, among other reasons, because I have two pre-school children.

Living in Greater London is not an option as the commute would be too much.

What orthodox communities exist in the area, or between there and London?


texts: if a person accidentally slurred their words or made a mistake in the amidah on the part that says "He who makes peace in His heavens, may He make peace for us and for all Israel; and say, Amen.", do they have to recite the amidah again? or just that part?


texts:
Throughout Chumash, the Ramba"n goes after the ibn Ezra. The Ramba"n says in his introduction to the Chumash that his attitude toward the ibn Ezra is "תוכחה גלויה ואהבה מסותרת". In the introduction to the Yam Shel Shlomo, the Maharsha"l excoriates the Ramba"m for respecting the ibn Ezra, saying about the ibn Ezra: "לא היה בעל תלמודו".
Is there an authoritative text that identifies why the ibn Ezra receives all this flak? Was he considered a relative עם הארץ who wrote his perush based on his poetry rather than a mesorah or Chaza"l?


texts:
I was having a discussion with someone in Shul and he said that many big rabbis believe that he failed the test.

Because:

He should have said no to gd when asked to kill his son,
and he lost communication with gd and other members after the whole fiasco.

What is the general Orthodox (Kabbalistic) answer?

My view is that of course he didn't fail the test.


texts: What happened to the Nile in the week following the first plague?

texts:
According to the tosafist R' Yosef Bechor Shor, as cited in answers here and here, the Nile turned to blood only long enough to kill all the fish and then it turned back to water (which was now fouled by dead fish).  I had been under the impression that the river stayed as blood for a week, which led me to ask where the magicians got water for their trick, and from answers there, R' Shor's view isn't universal.
If the Nile turned to blood only briefly and then turned back as R' Shor says, then what happened in the following week, where the text tells us (Shemot 7:25):

וַיִּמָּלֵא, שִׁבְעַת יָמִים, אַחֲרֵי הַכּוֹת-יְהוָה, אֶת-הַיְאֹר.
And seven days were fulfilled, after that the LORD had smitten the river.

It doesn't seem to be saying merely that seven days passed uneventfully; the text says וַיִּמָּלֵא, which JPS translates as "were fulfilled", rather than something more passive like וַיְהִי.  It sounds to me like something happened at the end of the seven days.
What was it that happened?  According to the R' Shor view, did it take seven days for the dead fish to clear so the water was usable again?  Or does the text just mean that seven days passed before preparations for the next plague began, and in fact it is more passive (just that time passed)?  Or does the text mean that the river stayed as blood, contrary to R' Shor?
R' Shor doesn't comment on that verse and the person who provided one of those answers didn't know how he handles this.


texts:
I remember hearing that one should stand for the entire Kabbalas Shabbos. This book brings several customs regarding what parts of Kabbalas Shabbos to stand for, and he brings such a custom, but does not bring a reason or a source for it.

What is the source and/or the reason for this custom?


texts: Story between Rabbi Elazar ben Shimon and Rebbi

texts:
I'm now learning Bava metzia and I've come across a story between Rebbi and Rabbi Elazar when they were young.
It says that they used to sit on the floor until the teachers made benches for them etc.. but One of the rabbis put them back on the floor...
then it goes on to say that Rabbi Elazar used to preempt his questions with answers... i don't really get this part can somebody please explain it better please?

Bava metzia / hasocher es hapoalim / chapter 7 / 84(b3)


texts: Is there a reliable on-line source for finding the brerachot for commercially prepared breakfast cereals?


texts: Suffering of the righteous - kabbalistic interpretation

texts:
There is one concept in kabbalah that always have bothered me, the concept of suffering of the righteous for the purpose of "cleansing" the soul for olam habah.
The question often comes up in the discussion of the holocaust and other horrible events, and the inner meaning of those.

My problem with this is that how can this "cleansing" be of any good? I mean, for example, lets say my soul deficiency is that I have a problem with keeping faithfulness to my wife... will me being subjected to something terrible really fix this? Dont i need to do the same tikkun from where my original sin was in? How can me being subjected to terrible evil be helping me of my specific need of correction and then also of any good?


texts: What is the derech halimud in Mir Yeshiva (Jerusalem)? As far as I know it is not the Brisker derech. What commentaries or chiddushim are learned there?


texts:
Isaiah 53:4-6 is strange enough:

  4 Surely our diseases he did bear, and our pains he carried; whereas we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
  5 But he was wounded because of our transgressions, he was crushed because of our iniquities: the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his stripes we were healed.
  6 All we like sheep did go astray, we turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath made to light on him the iniquity of us all.

Why would God punish anyone for others' iniquities? Irrelevant of whom this so-called servant refers to, why would God crush one object/nation/person/creature for others' "iniquities". What's the Jewish perspective on that?

Related: Giving your z'chus to someone else


texts: Origin of myth about the hole in the sheet?

texts: There is a widespread myth (as far as I know it is a myth) that orthodox Jews must have marital relations through a hole in a sheet. What is the origin of this myth and does it have any actual basis in halacha?


texts:
I understand that the world is very much into learning Gemara via the Brisker method. I was told that Rav Yosef Engel had a different approach to learning Gemara etc. However, I wasn't told how his approach was different.
Therefore, my question is: does anyone know Rav Yosef Engel’s approach to learning Gemara?


texts: Concern for liquidy finished product only

texts:
"Meat and Dairy—A Kosher Consumer's Handbook", by the Star-K, indicates:

  Uncovered dairy in a clean fleishig [=meat] oven — If one cooks fleishig in an oven and ensures it remains clean (i.e. the oven has no meat residue), one may bake an uncovered dry dairy product in the oven. This may be done as long as there is no uncovered meat product in the oven at the same time as the dry dairy product. "Dry" means the finished product has little or no liquid.

From what little I know of the rules of milk and meat, the reason for requiring that the dairy food be dry is that otherwise it raises steam when baking: the steam, and the food abutting it, thus re-absorbs the meat taste that got absorbed into the walls of the oven the last time liquidy meat was baked. But that would seem to be a concern any time the dairy food is liquidy while baking (once the oven is hot), whether it is liquidy when put into the oven, when removed, or any time in between. Why does the Star-K specify that the finished product must be dry?


texts: Why not cease מוריד הגשם at שחרית according to רמ״א?

texts:
The rabbi spoke today during prayer services and made the following points (inter alia; and I've no citations for most of them):

The time to cease saying "מוריד הגשם" and start saying "מוריד הטל" is the first day of פסח.

We'd switch as soon as that time arrived, namely at מעריב; the reason given for not doing so is that many people are not in the synagogue for מעריב and won't know to switch.
We'd switch at the next opportunity, at שחרית; the reason given for not doing so is that we want to announce, before the עמידה, that people should say "מוריד הטל", and can't do so during שחרית as it would constitute an interruption between גאולה and תפלה.
So we switch at מוסף.

רמ״א says not to say "מוריד הטל" at all. He also says not to announce "we stop saying 'מוריד הגשם'", as it is like praying for no rain. Thus, the community switches only after the שליח צבור does so in his repetition of the עמידה of מוסף, and there's never a pre-עמידה announcement. (This is מנהג נוסח אשכנז outside of Israel.)

It seems then that according to רמ״א the reason to switch at מוסף and not שחרית is nonexistent. So why not switch at שחרית?


texts:
I heard from a Rosh yeshiva that there is a commentary from the Tosofos on Chumash that is not widely discussed. Wondering if anyone here is well versed in manuscripts and might be able to comment.
Thanks!


texts: Rishonim regarding murder/suicide during the crusades

texts:
I heard there are Rishonim who dealt with the murder suicides that took place during the crusades, that there was disagreement whether those who committed these acts were correct  or not. I was not provided the actual sources. Where can these discussions be found?
Related to this and this.


texts: What do commentaries say about the different version of "Honor Thy Parents"?

texts:
Regarding the mitzva of Honor Thy Father and Mother, the reading of the Aseret Hadibrot in V'etchanan is slightly different than the previous reading in Yitro.

The words "because God has commanded you" and "so it will be good for you" have been added.

What do the commentaries say about this? Why were these words added? Was there a specific context in which is was important to say it differently this time?

Here is a side by side comparison, with Yisro on the left and V'etchanan on the right. (taken from here)


texts: How many Mitzvos does the Mishnah cover?

texts: How many (out of the 613 Deoraytah) Mitzvos are explicitly discussed in the 6 Sdarim of the Mishah (not including those that are only mentioned tangentially, like Kibud Av at the beginning of Peah)?


texts: Before someone goes on a trip, there is a custom to give that person a dollar to give to tzedakah when they arrive at their destination. I have heard that the reason for this is that no harm comes to a person who is on his or her way to do a mitzvah. What is the origin of this custom? Additionally, what is the source for the claim that a person on their way to do a mitzvah will not be harmed?


texts: Caged hens, and other seemingly cruel farming methods

texts:
My local kosher store sells eggs from caged hens which probably means that there no halachic prohibition of eating these eggs.

As it seems cruel to keep hens in such a manner:

Is it forbidden to actually farm eggs this way? (Is keeping chickens in cramped conditions "cruel" therefore forbidden. Or are the only prohibitions the ones mentioned in Torah / Shas) -
If so, is it forbidden to non-Jews too. (Again, does their prohibition of Eiver Min Ha-Chai extend to cover all cruelty to animals, and thus this).
Should it be at least discouraged, if not forbidden, to make use of these products? (If it is forbidden to farm them, then buying them would potentially be Lifnei Iver, putting a stumbling block, as you are creating business for the person doing it).


texts: What is a good mussar/personal growth sefer for women?

texts: Most mussar sefarim are very oriented towards men, with lessons on things such as how to treat your wife, the dangers of pursuing women, or the importance of learning. Also, many sefarim I've seen written for women are very generic and watered down hashkafa sefarim, lacking originality or deep insight. What is a good, intelligent, well-written mussar sefer with female perspective?


texts:
Are you allowed to read prayers (to catch up) while kaddish is being said?
How about in between amens, yehey shemey raba and the ending amens?


texts: Not eating from the Lechem Mishnah, rather from the incomplete bread

texts:
If someone only has one broken piece of bread, can he borrow from his neighbor two whole challas and make ha'motzei on everything together (the 2 challas and the piece of bread); however not eat from the challas and give them back to the neighbor?

I'm essentially asking if there is any "advantage" of making the bracha of ha'motzei with lechem mishneh even though one will not eat from the lechem mishneh at all.

Relevant information: We find in Hilchos Pesach (Shulchan Aruch Siman 482 Sif 1 in the Rema) that one who only has 3 whole matzas to use for both nights of Pesach he should break one of them and make all the brachos however only eat from the broken piece of matzah, leaving the whole ones for the 2nd night. Could this apply the whole year? Or perhaps Pesach is different since according to some Rishonim (at least one, the Rif?) a person makes ha'motzei on the broken piece of matzah.


texts: Where can I get dark blue Techelet for my tzizit and talit?

texts:
I want to buy some techelet and white tzizit.  I want the techelet to match the color in this picture and to be made by Ptil Tekhelet foundation. However, when I try to contact them on their website I get no response. (I've tried 3 times now)

Does anyone know where in Northern Israel I can buy this, or a better way to contact the company?

Most improtantly, I want the techelet to be this color, and not the lighter blue that many people buy.  Because this fabric is from Masada during the 1st centruy and to me, leaves all doubt as to what color techelet is supposed to be. (it hasn't changed color in 1900 years)


texts: Are there any halachot related to the position of a toilet seat?

texts:
Devarim 23:14 states that when you camp during a battle, you should keep a spade with you so that you can use it to cover up your excrement.

Since the Torah mentions the importance of "bodily cleanliness" when you're out in the field in battle, I wonder if there is any halacha learned from this verse or otherwise specifically regarding the position of a toilet seat after you are finished in the bathroom. Offhand, since the verse mentions "covering", to me it seems proper to close the toilet seat cover as a sense of cleanliness.

Is there any ruling that can be extracted from this verse, or is there any other recommendation cited by anyone even if it doesn't use this verse?


texts:
For instance, say that I text someone "I promise I'll do X." Does that have the same status as if I said out loud the same thing?
The same question can be asked with respect to Shevuos (as in oaths, not the holiday). If someone says "Swear to me that X happened," for instance, and you text him "Amen" (this exchange is cited in the third perek of Maseches Shevuos as being a form of an oath), do I have to bring an Oleh v'Yoreid if it's false and meets the various criteria brought down in Shevuos?
One other possible nafka minah: one could ask regarding Hein Tzedek (BM 49a), the obligation to keep one's word, even if not phrased in terms of a neder.
WHAT THIS IS NOT
Just to clear things up before anyone brings it up.
This question is not applicable to Lashon Hara, which just requires spreading the rumor, regardless of how it's done. At the moment I don't have the source for this claim, though I have heard it many times from my Rebbeim; if someone could provide a source, that would be great. I could make a chiluk between this and the above cases, though, where the issue is the speech, not the bad name.
This question is also dissimilar to halachos such as Virtual Kaddish or Answering Amein on the phone or even Havdalah on the phone in which the question is on the listener. My question is whether the texter has fulfilled any form of speech.
Also related, as this is about texting or emailing, this is not similar to התראה by phone which involves actual speech.
I'm also aware of this question about chat contracts, which is more of an issue of the legal status of the contract, not about whether it's a type of speech.
Finally, there is also this question about Hamapil which is highly related and I know someone's going to call duplicate. So I'd like to emphasize that my question is much, much broader. Maybe, for instance, that, which is only a d'Rabbanan, might be permissible, whereas by Nedarim, which is d'Oraisa, may require us to be stringent and force him to abide by his vow.
In conclusion
Is texting, essentially a written form of spoken conversation that hardly ever follows proper grammar (or spelling) considered speaking across Halacha, or in limited circumstance, or nowhere at all?
As a springboard, this discussion about whether digital text is considered written text l'halacha may be relevant.


texts:
How is one supposed to pray for something he needs?

Is he/she supposed to request it from God once or repeat the request over and over, or make arguments why he deserves it or something else?

It says for example that Isaac and Rebeca prayed years for a son. Did they just sit in a corner and repeat the request over and over again?

(update: looking more for a source from books that instructs on how to do this rather than the experiences of an individual in tanach)


texts:
I looked around the site for this question, and couldn't find it, so apologies if it's a dupe.

Many communities we have the Minhag to say or learn Pirkei Avos on Shabbos afternoon from Pesach to Rosh Hashana (i.e. the summer months) (see here and here, for example).

Why specifically Avos, and why specifically this time of year?  Is it just because it is a good thing to learn, and Shabbos afternoon is longer?

PLEASE GIVE SOURCED ANSWERS ONLY. THANKS.


texts: Is there a problem with wearing clothing inside-out for Purim?

texts:
In general, one should not wear clothing inside-out, as per Shulchan Aruch, OC 2:3:

  ידקדק בחלוקו ללובשו כדרכו שלא יהפוך הפנימי לחוץ

  One should be particular with his cloak to wear it properly, that the inside not be flipped outside.

As the Magen Avraham explains (§3):

  ויראו התפירות המגונות

  And they will see the disgusting stitches

May one wear his clothing inside-out on Purim, as (a part of) his costume, where the whole point is that one should not be dressed as he normally is?


texts: Why things in the Torah are "caused" by dreams but on Purim by insomnia?

texts:
Frankly this question was asked by my Chevrutah today.

We see that many things in the Torah are caused or moved by sleeping and dreaming - Yaakov dreaming of the Ladder, Yossef having fights with his brothers over his dreams, Pharaoh having dreams and starting the Egyptian Exile etc.

However, in the Purim story, it is exactly the opposite - Achashverosh having sudden insomnia and being unable to sleep and have dreams and things started to roll.

Why would that be?


texts: Why does 'sharpening' depend on effort, and memorization on divine assistance?

texts:
The Bavli, M'gila 6 amud 2:

  ואמר ר׳ יצחק אם יאמר לך אדם יגעתי ולא מצאתי אל תאמן לא יגעתי ומצאתי אל תאמן יגעתי ומצאתי תאמן הני מילי בדברי תורה אבל במשא ומתן סייעתא הוא מן שמיא ולדברי תורה לא אמרן אלא לחדודי אבל לאוקמי גירסא סייעתא מן שמיא היא

In my own translation:

  And Rabbi Yitzchak said:If a man tells you 'I have toiled but not attained', do not believe; 'I have not toiled and have attained', do not believe; 'I have toiled and attained', believe.These words speak of Torah: but business is help from Heaven. And [even] about Torah, they speak of nought but sharpening: but to establish text is help from Heaven.

Rashi:

  לאוקמי גירסא — שלא תשתכח ממנו / to establish text — so it not be forgotten by him

Seemingly, one gets help from Heaven (or doesn't) in memorization; a more keen, penetrating comprehension depends on one's effort.

Why? Effort can be expended on memorization; as one example of many, people would study mishnayos with a tune in order to more easily memorize them (per Tosafos to M'gila 32 amud 1). And divine assistance can aid keen comprehension, of course. So why does memorization depend on divine assistance, and keen comprehension on effort?


texts:
According to this Midrash there were Jews and

  They had favored positions among the Egyptians and could not dream of giving up their wealth. Therefore, they died in the plague of darkness.

(Translation Here)

Do we have any background information about the fact that this midrash says that there were Jews in favored positions? Are we led to believe that there were Jews that were not enslaved? Or perhaps they developed these positions over the period of the 10 plagues? Or perhaps they weren't wealthy and the midrash is metaphorical and it means they lived "as if" they were wealthy, meaning they had gotten comfortable in Egypt and didn't desire to be redeemed?


texts: Who wrote the introduction to the Pesach Sacrifice printed on Pesachim 57b

texts:
There is an introduction to the Pesach Sacrifice that takes up the majority of Pesachim 57b. An excerpt is reproduced below.

סדר והלכות קרבן פסח ראשון בקצרה
מצות עשה לשחוט קרבן פסח בי"ד בניסן  אחר חצות בכל מקום  בעזרה . ואיש
ואישה  חייבין במצווה זו  (פסחים צא עמוד ב') . ובא מן הכבשים או מן
העזים זכר בן שנה  . ומי שביטלה  במזיד  והוא טהור ובדרך רחוקה לא היה
חייב כרת (פסחים צב עמוד ב') : ולא יהיה כזית חמץ  בבית שום א' מהמתעסקים
ואם היה חמץ ברשות אחד מהם לוקה והפסח כשר (פסחים סג עמוד א')  . לכתחילה
צריך לשחוט אותו אחר התמיד של בין הערבים  והקטרת והטבת נרות (פסחים נט
עמוד א')  ובחול נשחט התמיד בז' ומחצה ונקרב בח' ומחצה  ובשבת נשחט בו'
ומחצה ונקרב בז' ומחצ

Does anyone know who wrote it?


texts: Whoever is greater than his friend has a greater inclination

texts:
Sukkah 52a has an interesting story with Abaye (translation from Sefaria.org)

  כי הא דאביי שמעיה לההוא גברא דקאמר לההיא אתתא נקדים וניזיל באורחא אמר איזיל אפרשינהו מאיסורא אזל בתרייהו תלתא פרסי באגמא כי הוו פרשי מהדדי שמעינהו דקא אמרי אורחין רחיקא וצוותין בסימא

  It is like this incident, as Abaye once heard a certain man say to a certain woman: Let us rise early and go on the road. Upon hearing this, Abaye said to himself: I will go and accompany them and prevent them from violating the prohibition that they certainly intend to violate. He went after them for a distance of three parasangs in a marsh among the reeds, while they walked on the road, and they did not engage in any wrongful activity. When they were taking leave of each other, he heard that they were saying: We traveled a long distance together, and the company was pleasant company.

  אמר אביי אי מאן דסני לי הוה לא הוה מצי לאוקומיה נפשיה אזל תלא נפשיה בעיבורא דדשא ומצטער אתא ההוא סבא תנא ליה כל הגדול מחבירו יצרו גדול הימנו

  Abaye said: In that situation, if instead of that man it had been one whom I hate (a euphemism for himself), he would not have been able to restrain himself from sinning. (After becoming aware of so great a shortcoming) he went and leaned against the doorpost, thinking and feeling regret. A certain Elder came and taught him: Anyone who is greater than another, his evil inclination is greater than his. (Therefore, Abaye should not feel regret)

What does this principle mean? It can't be understood literally, it defies logic. The more righteous a person is, the more lusts he feels for women and murder and stealing etc.? Usually we see the opposite...

I once heard an explanation that "greater" means more sophisticated. Instead of immature desires like food and pleasure the temptations are more refined. The problem is it doesn't fit the context of the story and Abaye's realization about himself


texts: Which side was the Llama of Yetziat Mitzrayim on?

texts:
I am wondering about the role of the Llama in Yetziat Mitzrayim.
Shmot 5:4:

ויאמר אליהם, מלך מצרים, למה משה ואהרון, תפריעו את-העם ממעשיו לכו, לסבלותיכם
And the King of Egypt said to them: Llama, Moshe, and Aharon, you are disrupting the people from their work! Go to your burdens.

This paints a picture of the Llama as an ally of Bnei Yisrael. However, after Bnei Yisrael's workload is harshened, Pasuk 15 states:

ויבאו, שטרי בני ישראל, ויצעקו אל-פרעה, לאמר:  למה תעשה כה, לעבדיך
And the (Israelite) officers of Bnei Yisrael came, and they cried out to Pharaoh saying: "A Llama has done this to your servants!"

How are we to solve this contradiction? Was the Llama Pro-Bnei Yisrael, or Pro-Pharaoh?

As a side point, the Pasuk (Shmot 32:11) seems to imply that the Llama somehow poisoned Moshe:

ויחל משה... ויאמר למה
And Moshe fell sick... and he said, "(It was the) Llama!"

This question is Purim Torah and is not intended to be taken completely seriously. See the Purim Torah policy.