The answer does seem to ignore the underlying question, which seems to be how the unique status of a wedding interacts with this blessing.
Suppose someone would answer this question by saying that R. So-and-So said that nowadays no one should ever eradicate Amalek. Would this be an equivalent situation?
@Alex the wedding question is clearly set in contemporary reality, so the impact of contemporary reality is relevant. The Amalek question is clearly set in a hypothetical reality for the purpose of isolating a particular issue, so reality not in evidence is not relevant.
@IsaacMoses if alicht had phrased the Amalek question as "Suppose one were to see an Amalekite while walking down 5th Avenue to [Contemporary Rabbi X]'s Shabbat afternoon Shiur. Would he be allowed to break Shabbos to fulfill the mitzvah of wiping out Amalek?" then @Alex's proposed answer would be valid since it is clearly set in contemporary reality?
Methinks you'd be reading too much into the story fluff people use to add color to their posts.
I noticed that this nutrition label:
says that it is both Kosher and Pareve, but it also says "may contain … milk,… crustaceans, shellfish".
How is that possible?
Like I said on the post, I recalled this from האדם על הירח, but apparently that was a different question. I thought I remembered it too but that’s I think what I was thinking of. @msh @alex
I noticed that this nutrition label:
says that it is both Kosher and Pareve, but it also says "may contain … milk,… crustaceans, shellfish".
How is that possible?
