Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf Request Leave
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
KASHRUT BULLETIN # 4 Whoever Guard His Mouth and His Tongue, Guards As Well His Soul from Suffering (Mishle 21:23)
BSD KASHRUT BULLETIN # 4 Whoever guard his mouth and his tongue, guards as well his soul from suffering (Mishle 21:23) There is no sin so severe as forbidden foods, since entire Jewish communities were lost and turned to evil ways because of eating treifos and neveilos. (Divrei Chayim-Yoreh Deah) THE PROBLEMS IN THE FIELD OF NIKKUR (PURGING ANIMAL MEAT FROM FORBIDDEN FATS) AN EXPLANATION ON THE ISSUR [PROHIBITION] OF EATING CHELEV [FORBIDDEN FATS] by the Chofetz Chaim, z.t.l. It is written in the Torah: Any fat of an ox, a sheep, or a goat you shall not eat. All species of kosher animals are included in these three general species, and whoever eats fat of an animal that died by itself or became taref, i.e., suffered a wound or an ailment from which it would die within twelve months, is liable for stripes both for eating fat and for eating neveilah or taref. Although the rule is that one prohibition does not fall upon another, this case is an exception, since the prohibition of neveilah or taref includes both the fat and the rest of the flesh of the animal. This is known as issur kolel, an all-inclusive prohibition. Since it falls upon the rest of the animal, it also falls upon the fat previously prohibited. The prohibition of chelev, the fat for which one is liable to Kares (excision) (termination of life): Heaven help us ... This refers to: • Fat on the innards. • Fat on the flanks • Fat on the kidneys. • Fat on 2nd or 3rd stomach (of t ' he ruminant, which is part of the "fat that is on the innards,") Fat on the membrane (located on the thick part of the spleen) 1 BSD In addition there are many other varieties of fat prohibited by the Torah. -
La Carne Y El Pescado En Sistema Alimentario Judío España Medieval
Espacio, Tiempo y Forma, Serie III, H- Medieval, t, 16, 2003 , págs. 13-51 La carne y el pescado en el sistema alimentario judío en la España medieval ENRIQUE CANTERA MONTENEGRO UNED RESUMEN ABSTRACT En este trabajo se ofrece una This work is a general description panorámica general acerca de la about thíe meat and the fisfi, as carne y el pescado como elementos fundamental elements of ttiejewish fundamentales de la alimentación de meal during the spanish l\Aiddle los judíos en la España medieval. Ages. For that purpose, several Para ello, se tratan diversas questions are deait, such as the food cuestiones, como las prescripciones prescriptions thatjewish religión alimentarias que la religión judía imposes in relation to the meat and impone en relación con la carne y el the fish; the rol that these food pescado, el lugar que dictios played in the daily meal of the alimentos ocupaban en la spanish jewish, and the public alimentación cotidiana de los judíos organization of the food stuffs fiispanos, y la organización pública concernig the meat and the fish, in de la alimentación en las the spanish hebraic community comunidades hispanohebreas de during the Middie Ages. época medieval en cuanto afecta a la carne y al pescado. PALABRAS CLAVE KEY WORDS Carne, pescado, kashrut, kasher, f\Aeat, fish, kashrut, kasher, puré animales puros, animales impuros, animáis, impure animáis, shehitah, shehitah, hamín o adafina, hamín or adafina, provisioning, avituallamiento, mercado, carnicería. market, butcher's shop. 1. INTRODUCCIÓN Cualquier aproximación ai estudio de la alimentación en el mundo judío medieval debe prestar atención a distintas facetas, que son el resultado más evidente de la especificidad de la minoría fiebrea en el seno de la sociedad mayoritaria en la que se insertaba. -
Justice, Mercy and a Bird's Nest
Justice, Mercy and a Bird's Nest ELIEZER SEGAL UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY T he pursuit of reasons for the laws (ta'amei ha-misvot) was normally Tviewed by Rabbinic Judaism as falling within the domain of Aggadah, which by its nature does not strive for definitive dogmas, but rather encourages an imaginative freedom of ideas. The practical outcome of this approach is that Jewish law frequently appears to be made up of an open-ended set of symbols, to which the individual may attach whatever meanings he feels appropriate. This openness, while constituting a source of strength and adaptability for a historical tradition, can also lead to some awkward theological consequences: if the precepts were revealed with specific purposes in mind, then are we justified in interpreting their purposes so freely and subjectively? Furthermore, is the concrete application of a law not ultimately determined by a conception of the aim or function of that law? Can the Halakhic and Aggadic aspects of Jewish legal theory truly be subjected to this sort of rigid polarization between the meaning and application of the laws? The present study begins with a problem in Scriptural exegesis, which became associated in the Talmud with basic questions about the scope of God's mercy and the rationality of the Jewish legal system. Owing to the unsystematic character of the Talmudic sources, the questions raised by them left a heritage of thorny theological problems that would be defined anew by the more systematic Jewish thinkers of the Middle Ages and subjected by them to their more rigid standards of analysis. -
Stem Cell Research
ETHICAL ISSUES IN HUMAN STEM CELL RESEARCH VOLUME III Religious Perspectives Rockville, Maryland June 2000 The National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) was established by Executive Order 12975, signed by President Clinton on October 3, 1995. NBAC’s functions are defined as follows: a) NBAC shall provide advice and make recommendations to the National Science and Technology Council and to other appropriate government entities regarding the following matters: 1) the appropriateness of departmental, agency, or other governmental programs, policies, assignments, missions, guidelines, and regulations as they relate to bioethical issues arising from research on human biology and behavior; and 2) applications, including the clinical applications, of that research. b) NBAC shall identify broad principles to govern the ethical conduct of research, citing specific projects only as illustrations for such principles. c) NBAC shall not be responsible for the review and approval of specific projects. d) In addition to responding to requests for advice and recommendations from the National Science and Technology Council, NBAC also may accept suggestions of issues for consideration from both the Congress and the public. NBAC also may identify other bioethical issues for the purpose of providing advice and recommendations, subject to the approval of the National Science and Technology Council. National Bioethics Advisory Commission 6100 Executive Boulevard, Suite 5B01, Rockville, Maryland 20892-7508 Telephone: 301-402-4242 • Fax: 301-480-6900 • Website: www.bioethics.gov ETHICAL ISSUES IN HUMAN STEM CELL RESEARCH VOLUME III Religious Perspectives Rockville, Maryland June 2000 National Bioethics Advisory Commission Harold T. Shapiro, Ph.D., Chair President Princeton University Princeton, New Jersey Patricia Backlar Rhetaugh Graves Dumas, Ph.D., R.N. -
Why Is Samaritan Bread Like Pork? a Neo-Structuralist Reading of Shevi’It 8:10
BENJAMIN J. ELTON Why is Samaritan Bread Like Pork? A Neo-Structuralist Reading of Shevi’it 8:10 Introduction IN 1873 R. E SRIEL HILDESHEIMER founded the Orthodox Rabbinical Seminary in Berlin. In his address at the opening R. Hildeshiemer declared: Areas that have been known for a long time, i.e., Bible commentary, demand investigation from a new point of view and require the usage of valuable linguistic materials. In our desire to engage in these areas as our own, we will attempt to work in them with absolute academic seri - ousness and for the sake of, and only the sake of, the truth. 1 In the following sixty five years, until the Seminary closed on Kristalnacht, R. Hildeshiemer and his colleagues learnt and taught Torah using the latest scholarly methods. R. David Tsevi Hoffman broke new ground in his studies of the composition of the Mishnah, R. Jacob Barth was an expert on Nevi’im and R. Yehiel Yaakov Weinberg combined the best of Eastern and Western scholarship in the study of Talmud and rabbinics in the final years of the Seminary’s existence. 2 The ideas I will discuss are presented in the spirit that R. Hildesheimer set out: investigation of well-known texts from a new point of view with absolute academic seriousness, and for the sake of the truth. This article will seek to cast new light on a Mishnah using the conceptual tools developed in the intellectual movement known as neo-structuralism. 3 BENJAMIN J. E LTON is an editor of Millin Havivin . He is a third year student at Yeshivat Chovevei Torah, and a Visiting Scholar at Columbia. -
1 Kashrut from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia, and Edited by Rabbi
Kashrut From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, and edited by Rabbi Plavin is the set of Jewish religious dietary laws. Food that may be ( ּות ְׁרשַּכ) Kashrut consumed according to halakha (Jewish law) is termed kosher in English, from meaning "fit" (in ,( ֵׁת ָּרש) the Ashkenazi pronunciation of the Hebrew term kashér this context, fit for consumption). Among the numerous laws that form part of kashrut are the prohibitions on the consumption of unclean animals (such as pork, shellfish and most insects, with the exception of certain species of kosher locusts), mixtures of meat and milk, and the commandment to slaughter mammals and birds according to a process known as shechita. There are also laws regarding agricultural produce that might impact on the suitability of food for consumption. Most of the basic laws of kashrut are derived from the Torah's Books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Their details and practical application, however, are set down in the oral law(eventually codified in the Mishnah and Talmud) and elaborated on in the later rabbinical literature. While the Torah does not state the rationale for most kashrut laws, many reasons have been suggested, including philosophical, practical and hygienic. Over the past century, there have developed numerous rabbinical organizations that certify products, manufacturers, and restaurants as kosher, usually using a symbol (called ahechsher) to indicate their support. Presently, about a sixth of American Jews or 0.3% of the American population fully keep kosher, and many more abstain from some non-kosher foods, especially pork. Philosophical explanations[edit] Jewish philosophy divides the 613 mitzvot into three groups—laws that have a rational explanation and would probably be enacted by most orderly societies 1 (mishpatim), laws that are understood after being explained but would not be legislated without the Torah's command (edot), and laws that do not have a rational explanation (chukim). -
Is Keeping Kosher in 21St. Century Dublin a Challenge for the Jewish Community?
Technological University Dublin ARROW@TU Dublin Other resources School of Culinary Arts and Food Technology 2013-4 Is Keeping Kosher in 21st. Century Dublin a Challenge for the Jewish Community? Diarmaid Murphy Technological University Dublin, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://arrow.tudublin.ie/tfschcafoth Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Murphy, D. (2013). Is keeping kosher in 21st. century Dublin a challenge for the jewish community?. Dissertation. Dublin Institute of Technology. This Other is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Culinary Arts and Food Technology at ARROW@TU Dublin. It has been accepted for inclusion in Other resources by an authorized administrator of ARROW@TU Dublin. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License Dublin Institute of Technology ARROW@DIT Research Theses Conservatory of Music and Drama 2013-04-08 IS KEEPING KOSHER IN 21ST CENTURY DUBLIN A CHALLENGE FOR THE JEWISH COMMUNITY? diarmuid s. murphy Follow this and additional works at: http://arrow.dit.ie/aaconmusthe Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Conservatory of Music and Drama at ARROW@DIT. It has been accepted for inclusion in Research Theses by an authorized administrator of ARROW@DIT. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. IS KEEPING KOSHER IN 21ST CENTURY DUBLIN A CHALLENGE FOR THE JEWISH COMMUNITY? An investigation into the difficulties faced by the Dublin Jewish community in following the dietary laws and food practices required to remain observant at table. -
THE ROLE of Philosophy and KABBALAR in the WORKS of RASHEA
THE ROLE OF PHILOSOpHy AND KABBALAR IN THE WORKS OF RASHEA BY DAVID HORWITZ A MASTER’S PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE BERNARD REVEL GRADUATE SCHOOL YESHIVA UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS AS OF JANUARY 1986 ~pr~ ABSTRACT Rashba, in the course of his discussions of the theological problems entailed in the phrases ‘olam ke— minhago noheg and em mazzal le—yisrael, was consistently sensitive to philosophic problems, and took pains to show that Jewish beliefs did not contravene the Law of Contradiction. On the other hand, he vigorously maintained the superiority of tradition over speculative reasoning, and he could not tolerate the fact that contemporary allegorists gave axiological supremacy to speculative studies. Rashba’s attempt to justify segulot within a natural framework demonstrates his sensitivity to the demands of the contemporary natural philosophy. He refused, however, to countenance the thought that the Rabbis of the Talmud would be mistaken concerning a scientific issue that possessed halakhic ramifications. Although Rashba possessed a good deal of scientific konwledge, we do not find him to be an advocate of the pursuit of the sciences in non—halakhic contexts. Rashba’s rejection of the supremacy of philosophic categories was not supplemented by a full—fledged kabbalistic interpretation of Judaism. The content of his Kabbalab was that of the Gerona school at a time when other forms were developing, and he chose not to expand its contours. The form of his writing was characterized by extreme esotericjsm. His Commentary On Aggadah contains both philosophic—allegorical interpretations and kabbalistic hints to the same passage; this feature of his work demonstrates that he must be classified as neither a kabbalist nor a philosopher, if either of these two terms dsignates an exclusive system of categories through which one views reality. -
FREEDOM of RELIGION VERSUS ANIMAL WELFARE the Compatibility of the Flemish Ban on Unstunned Slaughter with Freedom of Religion
FREEDOM OF RELIGION VERSUS ANIMAL WELFARE The Compatibility of the Flemish Ban on Unstunned Slaughter with Freedom of Religion Cheryl-Lynn van de Wiel - 2007475 Tilburg University - European and International Law Supervisor: J.S.V. Dubrulle Word count: 19.607 Table of content TABLE OF CONTENT ........................................................................................................... 2 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................. 4 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 5 CHAPTER ONE .................................................................................................................... 10 1.1 INTERPRETATION SLAUGHTER AND STUNNING REQUIREMENTS ................................................. 11 1.1.1 Religious framework applicable to Jewish and Islamic slaughter ....................................... 11 1.1.1.1 Kosher slaughter ........................................................................................................................... 11 1.1.1.2 Halal slaughter .............................................................................................................................. 16 1.1.2 Legal framework applicable to stunned slaughter in Belgium ............................................ 20 1.1.2.1 European law ............................................................................................................................... -
The Halacha in the Targum to the Torah Attributed to Yonatan Ben Uzziel
THE HALACHA IN THE TARGUM TO THE TORAH ATTRIBUTED TO YONATAN BEN UZZIEL Harris Samuel Freedman University College London PhD Thesis September 1999. 1 Dedicated to the Memory of Michael Weitzman my Teacher and Supervisor Scholar, Sage and Most Gentle of Men □tft? nnnK -its* rani an not? ABSTRACT The halachic interpolations and expansions in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan are derived either from the Targumist’s independent reasoning, or from his use of rabbinic traditions and compilations. All the halachic material can be classified in one of three ways: 1) that which is intended to clarify the meaning of the Masoretic text; 2) material which results from Midrashic and exegetical techniques; 3) material which explains how a particular law was carried out. The Targumist made significant use of Mshnah, Mechilta, Sifra, Sifrei Numbers and a text similar to Midrash Tannaim. There is also regular use of Halachic Targumic Traditions. There is no evidence of use of Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer. A few halachic comments were identified which cannot be attributed to any known rabbinic source, and which do not seem to have been derived independently. The number of these comments is no more than one would expect to find in a Palestinian work of this period. We suggest that when the Targumist used his independent reasoning, this was either because he did not have relevant rabbinic material available, or because he felt that the information presented by the sources was inadequate for his purposes. Once the Targumist’s techniques are understood, there remains no evidence which suggests a pre-Mishnaic origin of any of the halachic material in the Targum. -
Massekhet Hullin a Feminist Commentary on the Babylonian Talmud
Tal Ilan Massekhet Hullin A Feminist Commentary on the Babylonian Talmud edited by Tal Ilan V/3 Tal Ilan Massekhet Hullin Text, Translation, and Commentary Mohr Siebeck Tal Ilan, born 1956; 1991 Ph.D. on Jewish Women in Greco-Roman Palestine at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem; since 2003 Professor at the Freie Universität, Berlin. ISBN 978-3-16-155200-7 The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; de- tailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2017 by Mohr Siebeck Tübingen, Germany. www.mohr.de This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronicsystems. The book was printed by Gulde Druck in Tübingen on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Spinner in Ottersweier. Printed in Germany. Dedicated with love to my late mother, Shlomit Ilan And to my late cousin, Ronit Gan , " GAME .O>A7E5 Acknowledgement This book has now been almost ten years in the making. It is the second feminist commentary on a tractate from the Babylonian Talmud that I have written, but it is very different. My previous project – Massekhet Ta‘anit – was a concise composition of four mishnaic chapters on 32 folios. It was mostly aggadic in character, touched on issues of mo‘ed (which, in this case I would translate as ritual), which are usually easy to understand, and was in general very user-friendly. -
Download Full Text
journal of jewish studies, vol. lv, no. 2, autumn 2004 Dogs in Jewish Society in the Second Temple Period and in the Time of the Mishnah and Talmud 1 Joshua Schwartz Bar-Ilan University Introduction 1. The Biblical World ased on what is related in the Bible, dogs were not afforded a great deal B of respect or affection in Israelite or Judahite society in the Land of Is- rael.2 The term ‘dog’ was considered a derogatory appellation (I Sam. 17:43), the wording ‘dead dog’ (I Sam. 24:15; II Sam. 9:8; 16:9) expressed humilia- tion and contempt, and the term ‘dog’s head’ (II Sam. 3:8) apparently had a negative connotation.3 Nor did the dog’s usefulness significantly improve its image, even though the dog had already been domesticated in the Ancient Near East in the Mesolithic era (15,000–8,000 BCE),4 and from then on had been trained for 1 This essay marks the culmination of several years of study of the subject of dogs, conducted within the context of my research project, ‘Leisure-Time Activities in Ancient Jewish Society.’ The initial plan of this study called for an examination of dogs as pets, corresponding to the focus of the ‘Leisure-Time Activities’ project, but as the work progressed, it became clear that this subject required a more general study of the dog in Jewish society in antiquity. I have published several preliminary essays on this subject, with their findings summarised in the current article. See my previous publications on the dog in Jewish society: J.