Thursday's Parsha Tidbits - Parshas Acharei Mos Kedoshim

The following is a brief summary of a thought said over by R' Frand in his shiur this evening. I have attempted to reproduce this vort to the best of my ability. Any perceived inconsistency is the result of my efforts to transcribe the shiur and should not be attributed to R' Frand.

In Vayikra 19:15 the Torah states the words "B'Tzedek Tishpot Amisecha." Rashi learns from this pasuk that one should judge others "l'kaf z'chus" which is literally translated as "towards the scale of merit." To use an English expression, Rashi is stating that one should give his friend the benefit of the doubt.

The Gemara in Shabbos teaches that if one indoctrinates the principle of giving others the benefit of the doubt into his own life, Hashem will do the same when He judges that person. Rabbi Frand then asked in the name of the the Chafetz Chayim - how can Hashem give us the benefit of the doubt when He knows our thoughts?

Indeed, when one sees another take a questionable action, the viewer does not know the history behind the action. For example, the overwhelming majority of Subway restaurants are not kosher. If one sees another person eating a Subway sandwich on the train there are two possible assumptions: (1) the person went to one of the two kosher Subway stores in the New York area and purchases a kosher sandwich, or (2) the person is eating a not kosher sandwich.

As we do not know where the sandwich was purchased, we can give the person the benefit of the doubt and assume that the sandwich was purchased at the kosher Subway. However, Hashem knows exactly where the sandwich was purchased, so how does He give the person the benefit of the doubt?

Rabbi Frand answered by making reference to an expression about teachers - that some teachers are lenient graders. While one teacher may give full credit for an answer, another teacher might give partial or even no credit for an answer which is not 100% correct. Rabbi Frand then applied to this within the context of a Shmoneh Esreh where the person only had kavanah for the first two berachos and modim. Hashem could give the person who davened this tefillah credit for 3/19 of a Shmoneh Esreh. Or in the alternative, Hashem could give full credit for davening the Shmoneh Esreh, even though the kavanah was not 100%. If we are lenient in our grading of the acts of others, then we can be zocheh to have our acts graded on a lenient scale as well.

As part of his discussion of giving the benefit of the doubt, Rabbi Frand made reference to a story he had read about a Rabbi Sternhill who used to live in Baltimore. Many years ago there was a Rabbi who gave the hashgacha on a store in Baltimore. When the Rabbi passed away, Rabbi Sternhill attended the funeral. After the funeral, Rabbi Sternhill approached the owner of the store and asked whether Rabbi Sternhill could assume the role of providing the hashgacha. The owner of the store was taken aback - it was so soon after the funeral of the Rav Hamachshir, why is Rabbi Sternhill running to take over this position?

Ultimately, the store owner assented to Rabbi Sternhill's request. Some time later, the store owner approached Rabbi Sternhill to pay him for giving the hashgacha on the establishment. However, when he tried to give Rabbi Sternhill the money, Rabbi Sternhill told him to give it to the widow of the previous Rav Hamachshir.

At this point, the store owner understood why Rabbi Sternhill had been in such a rush to get the hashgacha job. Rabbi Sternhill was not looking to jump on new business. Instead, Rabbi Sternhill was trying to preserve a source of income for the widow before someone else came and tried to take the business for himself. Had the owner stayed with the assumption that Rabbi Sternhill was jumping on new business and not judged l'kaf z'cus, the results could have been devastating to the widow. However, since the man did give Rabbi Sternhill the benefit of the doubt, he was able to later see that Rabbi Sternhill's request was not motivated by avarice and instead was made for the right reason.

If you have seen this post being carried on another site such as JBlog, please feel free to click here to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!

Tuesday's Thoughts on the Daf - Bava Metzia 3

Midway through the first amud of Bava Metzia 3, the gemara discusses a case from a gemara in Shavuos 45a and in so doing sheds light on the concept of why a person can be forced to accept the shavua of another.

The discussion I am referring to takes place within the analysis of R' Yosi and the Rabanan's positions in relation to two people who are contesting a sum of money. In R' Yosi and the Rabanan's initial dispute (found on Bava Metzia 37a) two people claim that they deposited money with a third person. In reality, one of them deposited 100 zuz while the other deposited 200 zuz. However, each person claims that he was the one who deposited the 200. Meanwhile, the third person does not know who gave him the 200 zuz. The Rabanan state that each person takes 100 zuz and the remaining 100 zuz is left until Eliyahu comes and tells us who it belongs to. R' Yosi states that all 300 zuz is left for Eliyahu to explain. The gemara explains that R' Yosi is looking to punish the "trickster" since the one who is being untruthful is now being deprived of even the 100 zuz which is rightfully his. By deferring judgment on all 300 zuz, it is hoped that the trickster will admit that his claim is false.

The gemara later asks whether the dispute between R' Yosi and the Rabanan can be applied to the scenario in Shavuos 45a. In the Shavuos gemara, a shopkeeper is told by an employer that the shopkeeper should pay the employer's employee and that the employer will reimburse the shopkeeper. Later, the employee comes to the employer and says - where's my money. Meanwhile, the shopkeeper also demands reimbursement. The gemara in Shavuos states that in this situation, the employer must pay both people, even though one is lying.

The gemara in Bava Metzia 3a asks - why pay both - shouldn't the money be left for Eliyahu to determine? The gemara answers in the negative and in so doing sheds light on the concept of shavua. The gemara explains that the storekeeper can argue "I did what you asked me to do, what connection do I have to this employee, I don't have to believe his oath." Rashi explains that a person is not required to accept a shavua of another unless he originally trusted the person. For example, if the storekeeper lent money to the employee because he trusted him, the storekeeper would be required to accept the shavua since there was a relationship between them initially.

In our situation, the shopkeeper never had a relationship where he relied on the employee. As such, the shopkeeper is not required to rely on the employee's honesty and cannot be bound by the oath of the employee. Additionally, Rashi explains that the shopkeeper can turn to the employer and say - you trusted him since you instructed me to pay him without requiring witnesses to the transaction. Therefore, I should not have to wait for Eliyahu to find out whether I should be paid.

Meanwhile, the employee has the identical argument. The employee can say to the employer - I had no connection to the storekeeper. I worked for you because you were going to pay me. Although you later told me go to the storekeeper for payment, he is not trustworthy to me and since I never relied on him, I should not have to accept his oath or wait until Eliyahu comes for payment.

If you have seen this post being carried on another site such as JBlog, please feel free to click here to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!

Monday Musings on Sports - NFL Draft and Timing

As regular readers of this blog are aware, the Monday post was usually devoted to sports with highlights and analysis of the Max Kellerman show which formerly aired on 1050 ESPN Radio. As Max has resigned from 1050 and has not yet resurfaced on the NY area airwaves (although, I see that Robin Lundberg has rejoined 1050 as the host of the "Around the Herd" segment) I have decided to continue the tradition of linking sports to Torah which I believe was an undercurrent of the Max Kellerman show.

Yesterday afternoon, the NFL finished its annual dog and pony show known as the NFL draft. For months leading up to the draft, players are poked and prodded, their histories analyzed and anyone from their parents to their eighth grade phys ed teachers are quizzed about the players propensities. When the analysis is complete the teams then begin a massive misinformation campaign where they leak information to the media about players who they might or might not be interested in. This is done to throw off other teams and prevent lower drafting teams from trading up and grabbing the player the team covets.

I always find the draft circus to be a humorous event. Invariably, certain prognosticators will predict that xyz player was a "reach", meaning that he was not worth being selected at (for example) #18 of the first round because the commentator believes that the player was really the twenty-fifth best player in the draft. The problem with this logic is twofold: (1) the commentator has no clue how the player will perform relative to the other two hundred and fifty four players in the draft and (2) the value the team places on a player is also in relation to that team's needs at the time. To illustrate the second point - if a team has two solid quarterbacks, but the player touted as being the best remaining player on the board is a quarterback - does that mean that the team has made a mistake by not drafting him? On the other hand, if that same team desperately needs a pass rusher, but the highest rated DE/OLB is rated four slots lower, should the team pass on their need?

In the end, the only way to truly evaluate a team's performance at the draft is to look back five years later and see how many of its picks are still with the team or are even still playing professional football. Only with the benefit of hindsight can one truly understand whether the decision made on draft day was correct.

The controversy over whether a player has been picked in his proper slot - whether the team reached for him or whether the player "fell" and the team which eventually drafted him got "good value" for the pick, reminds me of a story I heard Rabbi Zev Cohen tell in Chicago over Pesach.

Rabbi Cohen told a story (which Rabbi Cohen was able to confirm through conversations with the author) about a man who was diagnosed with a brain tumor. The best doctors in his country told him that there was nothing which could be done for him. The man and his wife then travelled to America to meet a Dr M who was the only doctor who could perform the surgery. When they got to the Dr's office, his receptionist told them that the man must wait his turn in line for surgery as the Dr had many other patients who needed surgery and each patient was required to wait for his turn, regardless of condition.

The man's wife was unsatisfied with this result so she followed the doctor to learn his routine. She then showed up with her husband at the Dr's parking garage and blocked his car when he tried to get out. The Dr exited his car and asked - who are you and why are you doing this? The woman told the Dr her name and he recalled that an appointment had been made. He told the woman that she and her husband should go back to their country as there were many fine doctors there. The Dr then looked at her husband and said - come in on Tuesday and I will do the surgery.

The Dr asked the man - do you recognize me? The man answered in the negative. The Dr told the man about how years earlier the man was praying on a bus with his tefillin while the Dr (then a medical student) was seated next to him. They began to talk and the Dr gave him his tefillin which the medical student wore and began to use in prayer while the man dozed off. When the bus reached its destination, the man awoke and was startled as he could not find his tefillin. He spent a week trying to track down the medical student but was unsuccessful.

Years later, the Doctor now saw the man who he had taken the tefillin from in Israel so many years before. Aware of his debt to the man, the doctor agreed to take the man for surgery immediately rather than make him wait his turn on the list.

If one were to have asked the man twenty years prior - were you in the right place at the right time when your tefillin was stolen, how would the man have reacted? However, knowing now that the Doctor who stole his tefillin would be saving his life, would the man have answered the question the same way?

If you have seen this post being carried on another site such as JBlog, please feel free to click here to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!

Sunday Night Suds - Lakefront New Grist

Tonight's Sunday Night Suds beer review looks at "kitniyos" beer - Lakefront's New Grist - a beer brewed from sorgum and rice.

I am not familiar with the demographics, but a minority of the world population is afflicted with celiac disease. Celiac.org explais that:

Celiac Disease (CD) is a lifelong, digestive disorder affecting children and adults. When people with CD eat foods that contain gluten, it creates an immune-mediated toxic reaction that causes damage to the small intestine and does not allow food to be properly absorbed. Even small amounts of gluten in foods can affect those with CD and cause health problems. Damage can occur to the small bowel even when there are no symptoms present. Gluten is the common name for the proteins in specific grains that are harmful to persons with celiac disease. These proteins are found in ALL forms of wheat (including durum, semolina, spelt, kamut, einkorn and faro) and related grains rye, barley and triticale and MUST be eliminated.

Enter, Lakefront Brewery - a Milwaukee, Wisconsin craft brewer (their beers are even available at Miller Park where the Brewers play) with a wide variety of brews including the New Grist. As explained on their website "New Grist is brewed from sorghum, hops, water, rice and gluten-free yeast grown on molasses. These ingredients are carefully combined to form a crisp, refreshing “session ale” brewed for those with Celiac Disease and anyone with an appreciation for great tasting, handmade beer." The website also explains that Lakefront tests each batch of New Grist before shipping it out to make certain that no gluten has gotten into the process.

So can you drink it on pesach of you eat kitniyos? Although the Star-K gives the hashgacha on New Grist, there is no pesach certification. A few years back, Ramapo Valley Brewery did produce a Passover Honey Gold lager which did have a pesach certification as they used no grain in the process. Unfortunately, the Ramapo Valley Brewery does not make it anymore (I don't think that they have produced any beer for the last three years).

So what does it taste like? Well, it does not taste like a lager, its probably close to a really thin wheat beer. Having said that, its not an unpleasant drink, especially when cold. My one unresolved question is the alcohol content as neither the Lakefront website nor BA have quantified New Grist's abv.

Lakefront Brewery New Grist is under the kosher supervision of the Star-K. Although the LOC on the Star-K site http://www.star-k.org/loc/kosher_letter_8197_lakefrontbreweryinc.pdf says that this (and about 15 other varieties) are kosher, but only with the Star-K on the label, I was unable to find a Star-K on the label of any of the varieties that I purchased. This seems common with the Star-K as many of the Sam Adams beers that are listed as under the Star-K do not have the symbol on the label. Concerned that I had wasted my money, I contacted the Star-K last year and they confirmed that Lakefront brews are permissible without a Star-K on the label.

For the experts' take on the New Grist please click here http://beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/741/26368 . As always, please remember to drink responsibly and to never waste good beer unless there is no designated driver.

Finally, if you've tried this beer or any others which have been reviewed on the kosher beers site, please feel free to post your comments (anonymous comments are acceptable).

If you have seen this post being carried on another site such as JBlog, please feel free to click here to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!

Thursday's Parsha Tidbits - Parshas Tazria Metzora

The following is a brief summary of a thought said over by R' Frand in his shiur this evening. I have attempted to reproduce this vort to the best of my ability. Any perceived inconsistency is the result of my efforts to transcribe the shiur and should not be attributed to R' Frand.

In Vayikra 14:4-7, the Torah discusses the sacrifice brought by a someone afflicted with tzara'as. As part of the atonement process, the Metzora takes two birds - one is slaughtered and used in the cleansing process, while the other is set free.

Rashi on Vayikra 14:4 comments that the reason why birds are used is that they are constantly tweeting which is a reminder that the tzara'as punishment comes about because the person spoke loshon hara - evil speech which he prattled on about another person.

R' Frand asked - why is that one bird is killed while the other is released? He answered by making reference to one of the premiere examples of one who guarded his mouth from loshon hara - the Chofetz Chaim. R' Frand asked - would you have expected that the Chofetz Chaim was a "big talker" or a quiet person? He answered that those who knew the Chofetz Chaim recalled that he liked to shmooze. Why? To teach that a person does not need to sit mute in order to be properly mikayaim shmiras halashon.

R' Frand then brought a proof from the releasing of the second bird. The Klei Yakar explains that the bird which is killed is symbolic of the negative speech (which brought about the tzara'as) which needs to be cut off. However, people are also capable of positive speech and the bird which is released teaches us that we can make positive use of our power of speech.

R' Frand closed this thought by citing to a Minchas Asher which discussed a gemara about a peddler. When the peddler (in the term of the gemara a "rochel") came to the middle of the city he got up and announced - who wants the elixir of life? When the townsfolk approached, the peddler said who wants life - keep your mouth from speaking evil - making obvious reference to the pasuk in Tehillim. The gemara relates that Rav Yanai was touched by the episode. This is surprising as the peddler did no more than relate a well known line from Tehillim. However, the Minchas Asher explains that Rav Yanai was impacted not by what was said, but by who made the statement. The prohibition against tale telling is known as "rechilus" and it derives its name from the word "rochel" since the peddlers use to repeat gossip about people which the peddlers had learned in their travels. Since this peddler had not only managed to overcome this problem, but was actively encouraging others to avoid loshon hara, he made a great impact on Rav Yanai.

If you have seen this post being carried on another site such as JBlog, please feel free to click here to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!

Sunday Night Suds - Samuel Adams Cream Stout

The last Sunday Night Suds before Pesach (and the last Kosher Beers post until April 20, 2009) looks at the Samuel Adams Cream Stout.

As explained by the experts at Beer Advocate, a cream stout is somewhat like a traditional stout, however,

Milk / Sweet Stouts are basically stouts that have a larger amount of residual dextrins and unfermented sugars that give the brew more body and a sweetness that counters the roasted character. Milk Stouts are very similar to Sweet Stouts, but brewers add unfermentable sugars, usually lactose, to the brew kettle to add body and some sweetness.

Some milk/cream stouts actually do contain lactose or milk byproducts. The CRC notes on its kosher liquor list (http://www.crcweb.org/kosher/consumer/liquorList.html ) that Mackeson's Triple Stout contains dairy ingredients (and is otherwise not recommended, although the reasons are not specified). The Kosher authorities in New Zealand (http://www.kosherkiwidirectory.co.nz/ ) indicate that all New Zealand beers other than the ones specified on their website should be assumed to be kosher dairy). I am unsure why the chazakah there is that beers are brewed dairy, but perhaps one day I will find out.

Not all milk/cream stouts are dairy. The Samuel Adams Cream Stout bears a star-k without any form of dairy disclaimer. Additionally, the LOC (http://www.star-k.org/loc/kosher_letter_6635_bostonbeercompany.pdf ) on the Star-K website indicates that all beers produced by Samuel Adams which are under hashgacha are pareve. Having said that, before the first time that I had the SA Cream Stout, I called the company's quality assurance line just to confirm that there was no dairy involved in the brew.

The Samuel Adams Cream Stout certainly qualifies as one of the lighter stouts. Unlike regular stouts and the "harder" stouts such as dark chocolates or imperials, the Samuel Adams cream stout does not require sipping and is quite drinkable either on its own or with shabbos leftovers after a hard day of Pesach cleaning and little league games.

Samuel Adams Spring Ale is under the Kosher Supervision of the Star-K. To see what the experts on Beer Advocate think about the White Ale, please follow this link - http://beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/35/1879.

As always, please remember to drink responsibly and to never waste good beer unless there is no designated driver.

If you've tried this beer or any others which have been reviewed on the kosher beers site, please feel free to post your comments (anonymous comments are acceptable).

Finally, as this will be my last post before Pesach, I wish everyone a chag kasher v'sameach. I will (b'n) be posting next on April 20, 2009.

If you have seen this post being carried on another site such as JBlog, please feel free to click here to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!

Thursday's Thoughts on Bircas Hachama

Tonight the TCN broadcast a shiur given by R' Dovid Heber on Bircas Hachama in place of the usual Rabbi Frand shiur. I would like to briefly recount a vort which R' Heber said as part of the shiur. Any perceived inconsistencies are the result of my efforts to transcribe the shiur and should not be attributed to R' Heber.

To briefly review the inyan of Bircas Hachama - this is a special blessing which is said every 28 years when the sun is in the same position which it was in at the time of the creation of the world. The source for this blessing is a Gemara in Berachos 59b which states that one who sees the sun in its tekufah should recite the blessing "oseh ma'aseh beraishis." As explained by R' Heber, the date for the blessing in the Twentieth and Twenty First centuries is Wednesday April 8th.

R' Heber quoted the Adnei Paz who stated that the proper time for saying the blessing is during the third hour of the day, when the sun is in the tekufah of Shabsa'i. R' Heber then asked why is it specifically on Wednesday near Pesach?

R' Heber answered by invoking the famous gemara that the week is divided into two parts, the part of the week which belongs to the prior shabbos (Sunday, Monday and Tuesday) and the part which belongs to next shabbos (Wednesday, Thursday and Friday). This delineation can be seen in the laws of havdalah as one who was preventing from reciting havdalah on Saturday Night may still make havdalah through and including Tuesday of the following week. This also can be seen in Wednesday's daily prayer said after aleinu which includes "Lechu Neranena" an allusion to the psalm which commences the kabbalas shabbos prayer on Friday night.

R' Heber explained that during the week of creation, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday had no connection to Shabbos as there had not been a shabbos during the prior week. Thus on Wednesday during the tekufah of Shabsai we invoke the shabbos for the first time and remember the first shabbos in history.

R' Heber closed the vort by asking the famous question - why does kiddush on Friday night contain a remembrance of the creation of the world and of the exodus from Egypt?

The answer given was that the reference to creation of the world is to remind us that Hashem created the world and shabbos was the completion of creation. The reference to the exodus from Egypt is to remember that just as Hashem created the world, He continued to direct the operation of the world by taking the Jews out of Egypt.

The twining of creation and exodus from Egypt is seen in the presence of the Bircas Hachama at this time of year. By making the blessing we remember that Hashem created the world from nothing. At the same time we see that the previously barren trees are now starting to bud and blossom and are reminded that He continues to be involved in the operation of the world. By remembering the exodus from Egypt we remember that Hashem is the manhig of the world and continues to be involved in our daily lives.

If you have seen this post being carried on another site such as JBlog, please feel free to click here to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!