Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Distinguishing Two Voices and Bitul

I always hate when a sefer has emblazoned all across the front, sides, and back: Do not take anything in this sefer as halacha l'ma'aiseh.  We are just kidding.  (Ok.. they don't usually add that last bit; but it's certainly implied.. or at lest inferred... at least by me.)  I would never do such a thing.  On the other hand, I am in no danger whatsoever of being taken seriously.  I guess that might make a difference...

Talking about hearing aids, there is an issue that has nothing to do with Shabbos or Yom Tov; namely, being yotzi one's obligation via the "shomei'a k'onah" (hearing is like saying) channel.  Minchas Shlomo, after a fair amount of pilpul and analysis, comes to the conclusion that hearing the sound generated by a hearing aid -- no matter how much it mimics and parallels the incoming sound -- just isn't the same sound that was generated from the source.  Bottom line, and as much as he appreciates the hardship and difficulties for someone who is hearing impaired, he cannot be yotzi with "shomei'a k'onah".  Minchas Shlomo is not the only opinion out there, but....

Suppose, however, one were to remove the device from one ear.  That way he would be hearing the direct voice as well as the electromechanically amplified voice.  Does that help or make things worse?  I might make things worse because there is a general principle of "trei kali lo mishtami" (two voices cannot be distinguished).  Hence, one is no better off; even a person who is not hard of hearing would not be yotzi (kiddush, for examle) in that situation.  However, for shofar and k'ri'as megilla, since those mitzvos are so beloved, we do say that two voices can be distinguished and one can choose to pay attention to the voice that will motzi him.  One small problem... the whole reason he is wearing hearing aids is that he can't hear very well.  Won't that render the whole issue moot since the direct voice will be overwhelmed by the amplified voice?

Not comes my chiddush.  In bitul, R' Yehuda has an interesting shita.  Whereas normally we say that a small quantity is negated by 60 times the volume (bitul b'shishim), that is, says R' Yehuda, is for min b'eino mino (two diferent flavors), but if the flavor of the two foods is identical (kosher and non-kosher wine, for example), then there is not bitul at all, not ever.  Moreover, the word used in the poskim to discuss the ability to tell the difference is "margish" (feel), not "to'em" (taste).  So... if you can apply the taste logic to hearing, then it comes out that R' Yehuda, who is usually the machmir, is meikel in this case and the half direct/half hearing aid advice would work out great.  In fact, it would even work for kiddush where we normally do say "trei kali lo mishtami".

You may not agree with this line of reasoning at all.  In fact, the people I have tried it out on so far were moved only so far as to say, "That's interesting" while slowly backing away.  Geniuses are never appreciated in their own time.  Neither are nuts, of course.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...

Thought for the Day: אוושא מילתא Debases Yours Shabbos

My granddaughter came home with a list the girls and phone numbers in her first grade class.  It was cute because they had made it an arts and crafts project by pasting the list to piece of construction paper cut out to look like an old desk phone and a receiver attached by a pipe cleaner.  I realized, though, that the cuteness was entirely lost on her.  She, of course, has never seen a desk phone with a receiver.  When they pretend to talk on the phone, it is on any relatively flat, rectangular object they find.  (In fact, her 18 month old brother turns every  relatively flat, rectangular object into a phone and walks around babbling into it.  Not much different than the rest of us, except his train of thought is not interrupted by someone else babbling into his ear.) I was reminded of that when my chavrusa (who has children my grandchildrens age) and I were learning about אוושא מילתא.  It came up because of a quote from the Shulchan Aru...