Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 332

Thursday, February 3 2000

• Vay Lan D'Misnin - Death of Parent Not Told to Chatan
• Beit Yosef Wines
• Tefila for a Diagnostic Examination
• Re: Personal frustration
• Niddah and cooking
• Kissing children in shul
• FW: Death of parent not told to Chattan
• R. YY Ewinberg's Biography
• Re: Beit Yosef Wines
• mixed vs. separate seating at weddings
• Re: chalav akum, chassan question
• Re: Limits of histaklus?
• Making Aliya to Save Your Kids
• Re: Niddah and cooking
• Re: Personal frustration
• Administrivia
• Cause of formulation of TIDE
• Smoking Ban
• Re: Smoking Ban
• re: informing relatives of a death

This story is not exactly like Josh's scenario - but it may be relevant.

On the way to my cousin's wedding, her grandmother passed away.  P'sak given 
by Rav Yitzchok Kerzner (of Toronto) was that the kallah's father was not to 
be informed of the p'tirah until after the sheva b'rachos after bircas 
hamazon.

When that was unsuccessful, Rav Kerzner said that both the kallah's father 
and his sister should remain as full participants at the wedding so as not to 
interfere with the simcha of the chasan and kallah.  B"H - this worked, to 
the infinite and incomprehensible credit of the aveilim involved.

Meyer

> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 12:40:05 -0500
> From: "Ari Z. Zivotofsky" <azz@lsr.nei.nih.gov>
> Subject: Re: Bet Yosef Wine
> 
> Most wines are not diluted at all.
> In california it is illegal to add water.
> In NY it is not done.
> Certainly no place adds up to 50%.

Do you have a source for this statement? I recall when I lived in 
New Jersey hearing in the name of the Mashgiach for one of 
America's largest Kosher wineries that if you added ANY water to 
the wine (or grape juice for that matter), you could not say Borei Pri 
HaGefen, because it was already diluted to the absolute limit.

-- Carl


Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.

Carl and Adina Sherer
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 14:23:44 -0500 (EST)
> From: Kenneth Miller <kennethgmiller@juno.com>
> Subject: Tefila for a diagnostic examination
> 
> Carl Sherer writes:
> 
> <<< Baruch Yosef will be having an MRI IY"H on Thursday, January 27 between
> 12:30 and 2:00 P.M. Israel time (5:30-7:00 A.M. US Eastern time). Anyone who
> can say some Tehilllim for him then will be greatly appreciated. Thanks. ...
> Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son, Baruch Yosef ben
> Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  Thank you very much. >>>
> 
> Of course, Carl. Bli neder, I and many others will daven and say tehillim.
> But I'd like to use this occasion to open a discussion about such
> situations. Exactly what is it that we are davening *for*?

We are davening for the MRI to be accurate, for it to go smoothly, 
for it to be interpreted accurately (which sometimes doesn't happen 
immediately) and for it to show that he is free from illness. 

Three years ago when we first started with MRI's, I posted on mail 
jewish asking about davening for MRI's. The consensus there 
seemed to be that it should be permitted because of "ain habracha 
shora ela b'davar hasamui min ha'ayin." Then I went and asked my 
posek, and he said that we should be asking people to daven all 
the time, but the MRI is a good focal point and that we should 
especially ask people to daven during the MRI. 

Generally I go into the MRI with Baruch Yosef and stand next to 
the table saying Tehillim the entire time.

Thanks for the brachos. They should all come true IY"H....

-- Carl


Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.

Carl and Adina Sherer
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

In message , Rabbi Yosef Blau <yblau@idt.net> writes
>It is difficult to write this posting without sounding preachy but it is
>more an expression of my frustration than my criticizing the fine people
>who participate in Avodah.  When I have brought up problems facing the
>entire Orthodox community and which can only be solved through
>cooperative effort almost no discussion follows.  However when any topic
>which contrasts the modern Orthodox and the Charedim (or whatever other
>terms are preferred) and one group  can attack the other is introduced,
>the postings come fast and furious.

This is rather to be expected.  On matters on which we all agree,  there
is not much point debating.  Debate occurs when people disagree.

If everybody agreed with your post, you would expect to see absolutely
no comment (it is not considered to be netiquette, for good reason, to
add, "I agree" to the bottom of a post and post it again).

I, for one, and not sure what you hoped to achieve by your post.  What
sort of "co-operative effort" are you looking for, and what do you
expect to get from a discussion list of this nature.  Are you proposing
a support group to go and offer assistance (or to be available to offer
assistance and advice) in circumstances where somebody is thinking they
need to go to the secular authorities and don't know where to turn (a
precedent are the various "whistleblower groups" you find in the secular
world, where if somebody feels they need to blow the whistle on fraud or
corruption or such, they can get in touch with the group, and the group
will help them deal with the issues that will inevitably arise if they
do decide to blow the whistle, and provide some support (the kinds of
consequences for whistleblowers are as devestating as those for Jews who
go to the secular authorities, they generally find their lives distroyed
by the experience, despite being right, and they often never work again.
This is despite most civilised governments these days having passed some
form of a Whistleblower Act to give protection to such people).

If that is your plan, I think it is a good one, but I doubt that Avodah
is the right forum to set up such a group (too much a debate forum).


> Differences are real but the need for working together is critical.

The nature of a list like this one is debate and discussion and
clarification, it does not function, and it is difficult to see how it
could function as a mechanism to "work together".

>The Orthodox media are not helpful and unfortunately the model projected
>for gadlus is not Rav Shlomo Zalmen Aurbach ZTL who did not sign
>manifestoes or publicly support political parties.

This, of course, is a totally different issue.

>Sincerely,
>Yosef Blau
>

Regards

Chana


-- 
Chana/Heather Luntz

Can someone explain why a niddah can cook for her husband -- in our day and age it clearly is derekh hibbah.


            Zvi


MailCity. Secure Email Anywhere, Anytime!
http://www.mailcity.com

Once we're discussing appropriate behavior in shul, I'd just like to point
out that, for "bnei ashkenaz," it is asur to kiss one's children in shul.
OC 98:1 (Ramoh).  The Mechaber is silent on this issue.
> ===============================================
> From: sambo@charm.net
> Subject: Re: Histaklus BaNashim
> <snip>
> 
> I'm not sure I understand why she'd want to sit in the mens' section.
> When my daughter sits with me, all she gets is me next to her. We don't
> talk, she knows better. She can't read yet, and we're too fast for her
> to get the words. So she comes over for a kiss on the head or a smile,
> but there's no point in staying.
> <snip>
> ---sam
> 

Yes, this story was in the JO's obit.  If I remember it correctly,  R'
Ruderman's father died sometime after Succos.  The Alter of Slabodka decided
not to tell him about the death until Pesach (months later), because R'
Ruderman had planned to finish shas between Succos and Pesach, and the news
of his father's death would hinder this plan.

When the Alter was asked: "But you are depriving the father of the z'chus of
R' Ruderman saying kaddish for him!", the Alter responded "R' Ruderman's
finishing shas will be a greater z'chus for the neshama than kaddish would."

KT

Aryeh

================================================

Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 10:54:13 -0500
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Subject: Re: 	 

fwiw I heard that R. Ruderman was not informed of his father's passing until

after shloshim I believe so that he could continue learning and sit a
minimal 
shi'vo.  (I think the obit in JO has this story, but I'm not sure).

<snip>

Dear List,

I am currently reading Marc Shapiro's biography of Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg (ak 
Sridei Eish).  I am intending to review it a few weeks from now and to post that
review.  If anyone else is reading it or has read it and would like to chat on 
this offline, I would welcome some input, etc.

Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com 

I cannot give you chapter and verse, but several years ago I did research
into this and spoke to the California Wine Growers association and I am
basing myself on what they said.



Carl and Adina Sherer wrote:

> > Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 12:40:05 -0500
> > From: "Ari Z. Zivotofsky" <azz@lsr.nei.nih.gov>
> > Subject: Re: Bet Yosef Wine
> >
> > Most wines are not diluted at all.
> > In california it is illegal to add water.
> > In NY it is not done.
> > Certainly no place adds up to 50%.
>
> Do you have a source for this statement? I recall when I lived in
> New Jersey hearing in the name of the Mashgiach for one of
> America's largest Kosher wineries that if you added ANY water to
> the wine (or grape juice for that matter), you could not say Borei Pri
> HaGefen, because it was already diluted to the absolute limit.
>
> -- Carl
>
> Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
> Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
> Thank you very much.
>
> Carl and Adina Sherer
> mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

--
Ari Z. Zivotofsky, Ph.D.
LSR / NEI
National Institutes of Health
Building 49 / Room 2A50
Bethesda, MD 20892-4435

(301) 496-3446 (ph)
(301) 402-0511 (fax)
azz@lsr.nei.nih.gov (that is an L after the @, not an eye or a one)

There has been quite a bit of discussion recently about mixed seating at 
weddings, but the comments have focused on the reception and not the chuppah 
itself.  I think it's interesting to note that most folks who would not have 
a problem with mixed seating at the reception would be very uncomfortable 
with mixed seating at the chuppah.  Is there any reason why there should be a 
difference?  If a chuppah is held in a shul, does that have any bearing on 
why separate seating should be halachically required, even though a wedding 
is not technically a prayer service?  What about chuppahs that are not in a 
shul (hotel, etc.)--is there any difference between the requirement for 
separate seating at the chuppah if it's not held at a shul?  Is it possible 
that we virtually always have separate seating at the chuppah more for 
psychological comfort than for halachic reasons?

My parents were married in the summer of 1954, in a Conservative synagogue, 
with Rabbi Belkin and Rabbi Joseph Lookstein officiating, in front of a mixed 
seated group in the sanctuary.  (If you are surprised at that, you should see 
the sleeveless dresses the women were wearing!)  My, have times changed!

Obviously, the questions I've posed above are mainly directed at the folks 
who do not have problems with mixed seating at a reception (since those who 
hold by separate seating at the reception would obviously be consistent in 
their beliefs for the chuppah), although I welcome comments from both groups.


Michael Feldstein

>>>There was a gezeirah but there is a machlokes whether it was of the type
that needs a beis din (gadol beminyan) to matir it or the type that does
not apply if the reason does not. <<<

The logic of R' Moshe and others to be matir non-chalav Yisroel milk has
nothing to do with this. The gezeirah is based on the cheshash that the goy
will adulterate the cow's milk with tereifah milk; the threat of lawsuit/fine,
etc. by the USDA serves the same function of safeguarding against this that
a mashgiach does.

Re: Telling chasaon of death of a parent: isn't this a mefurash gemera in
kesubos 4? What is the debate?

In message , Daniel M Wells <wells@mail.biu.ac.il> writes
>Male histaklus (except for one's wife) is Forbidden - Verboten until the
>nth degree. There are no limits. And don't confuse with ri'ah which allows
>a male to 'see' a woman for marital purposes or for business interests.

I think the problem you are having is one of terminology.  You are using
the terminology:

ri'ah = mutar
histaklus = ossur.

Whereas, I suspect, others are using the terminology as follows:

histaklus (which after all is a synonym for ri'ah) = mutar
histaklus v'niskaven l'hanos (the Rambam's language) = ossur

Thus if you paraphrase the question using your terminology you would
understand that we are discussing what are the limits of ri'ah and the
distinctions and boundries between that and histaklus, as well as the
extent to which ri'ah should be limited in order to create a geder for
histaklus.  The Levush (whom i assume you would grant was an Orthodox
person) held that ri'ah was permitted in circumstances in which previous
generations had ossured, on the grounds that, in the society in which he
lived, it did not lead to histaklus, unlike in previous generations.  On
the other hand some communities today (I brought the example of some in
Meah Shearim) hold that ri'ah is almost never permitted because of the
risk of histaklus (not even in the cases you bring above as clearly
mutar, such as for business interests).
>
>Daniel
>

Regards

Chana

-- 
Chana/Heather Luntz

I'd like to raise an issue here that I have been debating on mail 
jewish for the last week or so (and am probably about to receive a 
whole issue of flames for my trouble :-) which in many ways is 
more of a hashkafic issue than a halachic one. I will briefly 
summarize the debate from that list, in the hope of generating a bit 
of discussion here. Since the percentage of "Israelis" on this list is 
much lower than it is on mail jewish (as far as I can tell) I figure I 
have a shot at offending a higher percentage of the people :-) 

Someone posted on mail jewish about their friend's son who could 
not get into a Yeshiva High School in the New York City area 
because the child has ADD/ADHD or some such learning 
challenge. Someone else suggested that the problem is that the 
state does not permit offering the types of educational services that 
child would need at a private, fruhm school, and in an ideal world, 
the child would be able to go to a fruhm school and get the 
services that he needs.

Never knowing when to keep my mouth shut :-) I wrote in and said 
that the ideal world already exists, and it is called the State of 
Israel, where for all its shortcomings, every child with R"L every 
type of problem under the sun is entitled by law to a fruhm 
education. I then added:

"I see parents, who are friends of ours, who have jobs that are 
nothing special, with incomes that are less than nothing special, 
with kids with very special needs that are ready to send their kids 
to public schools R"L or pay thousands upon thousands of after tax 
dollars in tuitions, but they would not even consider coming on 
aliya. Can someone on that side of the ocean explain why? I am at 
a loss to explain it."

Several people took a crack at explaining it. Their explanations all 
boiled down to one thing - money. It's here that my hashkafa issue 
comes in.

Forget for a minute that it's a mitzva to live in Israel, and that it's a 
mitzva that's gorer many other mitzvos after it. Forget that a Jew's 
parnassa is determined on Rosh HaShanna and there is nothing 
that any of us can do to change it except tshuva, tfilla and tzedaka 
(I hope we all believe in what we say in "unesaneh tokef" and aren't 
just paying lip service R"L). Forget that if you can find a school that 
will take a child with learning challenges in the US, you will 
probably pay so much of your after tax income in tuition that you 
might actually be BETTER off financially in Israel, despite our 
ridiculous tax rates (it is my understanding that tuition in an 
ELEMENTARY school of the type I have in mind can run upwards 
of $20,000 per year in the US). There's a basic hashkafa problem 
here.

IMHO our first responsibility in life is to our kids. If we can't find a 
school in cutz la'aretz that is going to take our kids because of 
whatever learning problems, physical limitations or whatever else, 
but there are schools in Eretz Yisrael that are mat'im for our kids - 
aren't we mechuyav to get on the next plane and go? Regardless of 
who or what we leave behind and regardless of what "sacrifices" we 
may have to make in a material sense? Why in so many other 
things is parnassa not an answer but to keep us in the galus - even 
in the extreme situation I've described, everyone thinks parnassa is 
a heter? 

I've tried to be very politically correct with this, and I'm not trying to 
start a flame war (it's great to be back from the last one :-). But it 
really bothers me how so many people think that any excuse for 
staying in galus is a good excuse. I'm waiting for responses....

-- Carl


Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.

Carl and Adina Sherer
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

On 1 Feb 00, at 10:01, zvi  brooks wrote:

> Can someone explain why a niddah can cook for her husband -- in our
> day and age it clearly is derekh hibbah.

I may be way off base here, but it seems to me that the only 
harchoka that is determined by whether or not it is derech chiba is 
touching. Cooking has nothing to do with touching. While most 
poskim will tell you that the wife should not serve the husband (i.e. 
put a plate of food in front of him) during niddus, it is my 
understanding that is not me'ikar hadin (it's a chumra, but a 
commonly kept chumra because it is relatively easy to keep), and 
me'ikar hadin the only food-connected thing that the wife is not 
allowed to do for the husband is to mix and serve him his favorite 
wine (possibly including other alcoholic) drink.

-- Carl


Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.

Carl and Adina Sherer
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

In a message dated 2/2/00 2:25:13 PM US Central Standard Time, 
Chana/Heather@luntz.demon.co.uk writes:

<< Are you proposing
 a support group to go and offer assistance (or to be available to offer
 assistance and advice) in circumstances where somebody is thinking they
 need to go to the secular authorities and don't know where to turn (a
 precedent are the various "whistleblower groups" you find in the secular
 world, where if somebody feels they need to blow the whistle on fraud or
 corruption or such, they can get in touch with the group, and the group
 will help them deal with the issues that will inevitably arise if they
 do decide to blow the whistle, and provide some support (the kinds of
 consequences for whistleblowers are as devestating as those for Jews who
 go to the secular authorities, they generally find their lives distroyed
 by the experience, despite being right, and they often never work again.
 This is despite most civilised governments these days having passed some
 form of a Whistleblower Act to give protection to such people). >>

Last week, the Chicago Jewish News published an "expose" of child sexual 
abuse within the Chicago Orthodox community, including allegations of 
repeated abuse of students by a young, respected rabbi teaching at a day 
school. No names were published, but a lot of details were. The newspaper 
opined (more or less) that the leading Orthodox rabbis in this area have long 
been aware of the problem, generally and specifically, but have found various 
ways to duck it. According to the newspaper, three leading rabbis have 
finally agreed to participate in a special "project" to combat such abuse, 
but no meetings have been held and none of the rabbis has spoken out publicly 
on the issue.

The newspaper reported that Illinois state child-protection officials are 
investigating the day-school teacher. Nothing was said about possible 
criminal charges, although the conduct imputed to the teacher would certainly 
warrant serious jail time if there should be a conviction.

The newspaper strongly implied that the day-school teacher and other alleged 
sexual offenders have been protected by the community's social and religious 
leadership. 

David Finch
 

Welcome back!

I took the liberty of sending those emails (or portions of emails) that
addressed those topics that I thought were worth reviving. It was a very
subjective decision, I apologize if I didn't include something of yours.
(I still have the email, if you need copies to send off-list.)

About the fiasco that brought us to this point...

I'm formalizing a new "Membership Agreement", based on lessons learnt from
past mistakes. I'll post it to the list once it's done.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  2-Feb-00: Revi'i, Mishpatim
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 108b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Melachim-II 15

On Tue, Jan 25, 2000 at 08:11:24AM -0800, Harry Maryles wrote:
: ... by the time (he) [RSRH] established (it) [TIDE], Haskala was the clearly
: defined enemy and he was better equipped to deal with it. If I am not mistaken
: TIDE was designed to counteract Haskala.

(RSRH- R SR Hirsch; TIDE - Torah im Derech Eretz, in Hirsch's sense of the
expression.)

I disagree. I think the connection of Haskalah to TIDE is not that of
action - reaction, but rather one of sharing a common cause. TIDE was a
logical response to the new opportunities of ghetto-less life.

TIDE somewhat fits (albeit imperfectly) my understanding of Yahadus during the
Golden Age of Spain. There too the world of DE was open to us, and many sought
the opportunity of giving that chomer the Torah's tzurah (to paraphrase the
S'ridei Eish). It would therefore seem that TIDE-like tendencies are a natural
consequence of having both T and DE available.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  2-Feb-00: Revi'i, Mishpatim
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 108b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Melachim-II 15

On Wed, Jan 26, 2000 at 11:48:18AM -0800, Daniel Levine wrote:
: This raises the fascinating and perplexing question of
: why such an issur has never been issued before on a
: communal basis (e.g., through the Moetzes).

I was in R' Nissin Alpert zt"l's shiur not long before his petirah. Bimchilas
kivodo, R' Alpert nearly chain-smoked cigars. Not during seder or shiur,
of course, for our sake. But from the moment we broke for lunch, R' Alpert
would open a window, sit near it and smoke. And when we returned for shiur,
the room stank. (I presume because of the price of good cigars vs the amount
we pay rabbeim.)

It bothered me that his petirah from lung cancer didn't motivate R' Moshe
to revisit the issue of smoking. The loss of a talmid muvhak and ben-bayis
must have been devistating. Had R' Moshe assured smoking back then, when
the US pretty uniformly followed his piskei halachah, we'd have a lot fewer
cigaret butts outside our batei medrash today.

The US lacks a halachic voice with that kind of authority today. I'm not
sure if your proposal is doable here.

-mi

--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  2-Feb-00: Revi'i, Mishpatim
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 108b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Melachim-II 15

On 3 Feb 00, at 6:51, Micha Berger wrote:

> It bothered me that his petirah from lung cancer didn't motivate R' Moshe
> to revisit the issue of smoking. The loss of a talmid muvhak and ben-bayis
> must have been devistating. Had R' Moshe assured smoking back then, when
> the US pretty uniformly followed his piskei halachah, we'd have a lot fewer
> cigaret butts outside our batei medrash today.

I think Rav Moshe did say that anyone who did not smoke should 
not start to do so. But my guess is that he feared making a gzeira 
she'ain ha'tzibur yachol la'amod bo (although if you can manage 
not to smoke over a three day Yom Tov - and I think most of EY's 
Charedi community has given up smoking on Yom Tov - I don't see 
why you can't give it up altogether. But then I never smoked so who 
am I to say?).

If I recall correctly, there is a Maadanei Yom Tov (I think) on the 
Rosh in Beitza that comes down quite hard on smoking 
(altogether). Pretty impressive given how long ago (I assume) he 
lived and how little was known about smoking then. It was cited in 
the Daf Yomi shiur a few months ago - if I can find the cite I will try 
to remember to post it to the list.

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.

R' Rich Wolpoe wrote <<< The gemoro suggests that being mesameiach
chosson kallah is greater than kovod hameis at a levayo.... Since the
Chevra was presumably taking care of the father, therefore it makes sense
to me for the chassuno to override the onenus/aveilus and to "let the
show go on". >>>

A wedding is not a "show".

R' Gershon Dubin wrote: <<< We learned Hilchos Aveilus in shiur some
months ago, and without specific sources, or having seen either the G"H
or the P"B, the conclusion was quite clear that there is no chiyuv to
tell someone,  particularly if there are extenuating circumstances as you
describe.  What I would do with conflicting psokim, I am at a loss. >>>

Is this a situation where the word "psak" is relevant?

R' Eli Turkel  writes <<< Of course the case of a chatan is different and
he was not referring to such a case. >>>

In what way is the chatan different?

I have not ever understood the ideas being mentioned in this discussion.
Yes, a woman might not say kaddish for her parent, and the chasan and
kallah would be unable to enjoy their wedding (or perhaps unable to have
the wedding at all?) -- and, more importantly, the chasan and kallah
would be unable to m'sameach the other properly.

But from my point of view, all these factors are secondary to the main
question, which is: "Would this person *want* to be informed? What will
his reaction be if he is told? What will his reaction be if the news is
hidden?"

These are things which are impossible to pasken on, from a cold halachic
perspective. How can any sefer or posek "pasken" that a person should or
should not be told, without mentioning that his feelings must be taken
into consideration?

I imagine that there are men in the world who would say, "Thank you for
not telling me that my parent died, because I would have missed a lot of
good learning, and now, since I don't have to observe shivah, my learning
can continue uninterrupted." And there are women who would say, "Oh, what
did you have to tell me that for? Where's the to'eles? I can't even say
Kaddish!" --- But I think that such people are very rare. Most would feel
very insulted at not having the opportunity to grieve properly.

There are many extenuating circumstances in cases like these. Some people
are close to their parents, and some are not. Some are truly pained by
not being able to learn, most are not. Sometimes, we must admit,
financial considerations do play a role. The bottom line is that each
case must be viewed in terms of this particular person, and how he feels.

I was very saddened by the story recently posted here, according to which
two rabbis at the wedding were debating whether or not to tell the
chasan. The way it was posted, the rabbis seemed to be paskening more
based on their personal shitah, rather than out of concern for the
chasan's feelings. Did I misread that story, or can someone explain to me
why such reasons are given so much weight in these cases?

Do we have any listmembers who have experienced these things firsthand?
Perhaps I am totally mistaken about my presumptions, Enlighten me,
please.

Akiva Miller

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

*********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]