[Avodah] Pregnant women's sakana brought on by sense of smell

[hankman]

> > CM wrote:
> > You write very logically on the subject, but with adr I do
> > not think this is what is going on in this Mishna. It is
> > discussing a very specific syndrome,
>

R'n CL responds:
> The Mishna says merely "a pregnant woman who smelled"  (with the
> explanation given by Rashi that she smelled the smell of a food and
> desired it and if they don't give it to her she will be in danger).  How
> do you know that this is necessarily a specific syndrome?  Why can you
> not read it as being effecitvely  "A pregnant woman even if she smelled"
> - ie even something so minor as to smell food and to have a strong
> desire for it it is enough in a pregnant woman to require breaking her
> fast.

CM responds:
Because everybody (including pregnant woman) smell all sorts of things all
day long. You can not shut off your sense of smell (unless you have a cold
with a blocked nose :-). So this would mean all pregnant women get a pass.
The mishna is talking about a circumstance where the risk of sakana is
raised above this normal everyday smell level if not satiated.

R'n CL continues:
>You don't need to be at the point of being rushed to the emergency
> ward for a state of sakana to exist.

CM responds:
Of course not, nor do I ever imply that. Even if there is a sfaik, sfaik,
sfaika of pikuach nefesh  that is enough, ie, even a low probability of risk
to life is enough. As you say, "You don't need to be at the point of being
rushed to the emergency ward for a state of sakana to exist." But
nevertheless, you do need for there to be some risk of pikuach nefesh to
exist as a resuilt of the unsatiated smell.

CM wrote:
> > BTW, it seems to be generally accepted that we already apply
> > the idea of nishtane hateva wrt to the menstrual cycle of
> > modern women as different from that in the time of chazal.
>
R'n CL responded:
> I don't know that this is "generally accepted".  I have heard a number
> of poskim say that it is not nishtane hateva, but better nutrition that
> has led to changes, and that if you look at (women in Jerusalem 50 years
> ago/women in poor parts of Africa) their cycle is much more consistent
> with that described by Chazal.  Depends who you talk to I guess.

CM responds:
I agree. Let me rephrase. Most will agree that the facts on the ground today
are different than they were in the time of Chazal. Some ascribe this to
nishtane hateva, while others ascribe this to better nutrition in modern
times.

Kol Tuv

Chaim Manaster