Avodah Mailing List

Volume 03 : Number 166

Monday, August 16 1999

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 07:06:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com>
Re: Avodah V3 #162: Software Piracy

--- Hershel Ginsburg <ginzy@netvision.net.il> wrote:
> >From: "Feldman, Mark" <MFeldman@CM-P.COM>
> >Why then are people moreh heter to copy these programs?
> a) Greed.
> b) Not recognizing the validity of copyright laws or any laws of
> the
> Tziyonisha Medina.
> c) There is no Issur to rip off a "treiff" organization like Bar
> Ilan
> (stealing from goyim is also muttar).
> d) Insufficient income or hope of ever attaining a sufficient
> income
> potential to be able to afford expensive software.

While your answer is tongue-in-cheek, someone did tell me off-line
that a certain rav does permit copying casette tapes in a situation
where the copier would otherwise not buy the tape (because then there
is no hefsed to the author of the tape).  Any thoughts about this?

> e) It's heimish.
> f) Dina d'malchuta does not apply to the State of Israel.

There are those who permit a violation of Dina D'malchuta where the
law is generally not followed by a large percentage of the populace. 
Perhaps in Israel, where software copyright laws are not respected by
many [most?] Israelis (at least with regard to home software), dina
d'malchuta may not apply.

> g) The same reason it's muttar to rip off the government (US or
> Israeli) if
> you are doing it for the noble purpose of spreading Torah.
> h) Frumkeit is not measured in terms of "bein adam l'chavero".
> i) etc. etc. etc.
> Let's face it...  the emperor hath nary a stich....
> hg

Kol tuv,
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 07:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com>
Re: Repeating verses for uncertain vocalization / Breuer's chumash

--- "Jonathan J. Baker" <jjbaker@panix.com> wrote:
> R' Mechy Frankel noted in v2n176 (yes, February was a long time
> ago) that
> repeating zecher/zeicher a/m/a/l/e/k/ only dates to the widespread
> use
> of the Mishneh Brurah in this century.  Do people repeat other
> verses
> with uncertain vocalization?  For example, our baal kriah (the rav
> was
> on vacation) decided, after comparing several chumashim, to repeat
> the 
> phrase in this week's parsha of "dam/dom naki" (19:10). Some
> chumashim say 
> dam-patach (including the Massorah notes in my mikraot gedolot),
> others
> say dom-komatz (including the Koren chumash, generally considered
> very
> reliable).  Is this normal?  Was it OK?  (The last, I suppose is a
> question
> for the LOR).

Is "dam" vs. "dom" m'shaneh et ha'inyan?  I would think not--that
it's just an issue of smichut--is dam naki a single phrase (with a
meteg between dam and naki)?  If it is just an issue of smichut, I
would think that you shouldn't repeat the word.

BTW, thanks for pointing me to R. Mechy Frankel's old post. 
Question: Is Breuer's chumash, which is based on keter 'aram tzova
(at least starting in the middle of sefer dvarim), clearly the most
correct?  I understand that in the charedi community in Israel there
is now a big argument on this issue.  Does anyone know what the
svarah is of those who are against Breuer's chumash?  What about his
methodology (described in his hakdamah) of deciding based on a
majority of manuscripts for the majority of chumash, for which he
does not have the keter 'aram tzova?

Kol tuv,
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 10:32:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: micha@aishdas.org (Micha Berger)

I unsubscribed the user who is not in the office this week. Sorry for
all the spam.

I'm trying to convince our ISP to install a well-known patch into Majordomo
that would limit the number of quoted lines to be n% of the posting. (I could
then manually approve exceptions, not to worry.) This would allow me to
throw away copies of entire digests.

Just wanted to let you know I'm working on it.


Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 16-Aug-99: Levi, Seitzei
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H O"Ch 357:4-358:2
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 23b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Nefesh Hachaim I 7

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 11:21:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eli Turkel <turkel@icase.edu>

> Apparently matan toyre had six hundred thousand people though admittedly
> it didn't make it to the local press. But then
> again that probably doesn't count since the eyrev rav were amongst the
> crowd whereas here the crowd was whiter than white. 
In terms of people present at har sinai it must have been several million.
The 600,000 does not include women, children and the eruv rav.

Eli Turkel

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 18:58:59 +0300
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <csherer@netvision.net.il>
Large Gatherings

David Herskovic writes:

> Shlomo Abeles writes:
> > 90,000! Amazing !
> Apparently matan toyre had six hundred thousand people though admittedly

I think he was referring to gatherings in "modern" times :-) 

> it didn't make it to the local press. Probably hated chareidim. But then
> again that probably doesn't count since the eyrev rav were amongst the
> crowd whereas here the crowd was whiter than white. 

Actually, if you want to get technical about it, the 600,000 did not 
include the Eyrev Rav. See Shmos 12:37-38.

Another recent large gathering was the levaya of R. Shlomo Zalman 
Auerbach zt"l which according to the local press drew some 
300,000 people.

-- Carl

Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461

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.

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 18:58:59 +0300
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <csherer@netvision.net.il>
Brushing Teeth on Shabbos

Russell Hendel writes:

> Here are the laws
> - ---It is prohibited to cause bleeding on shabbos--this is an av melacha
> - ---It is prohibited to do any act which inevitably leads to bleeding
> (Psik Rayshay)
> Here is the medical situation
> - ---There is a dental disease whereby PLAQUE builds up between your gums
> and teeth. This
> PLAQUE calcifies and allows bacteria to breed. It also expands causing
> Gum irritation. If you
> look in a mirror you can see the space between your Gums and teeth.
> - ---A person with PLAQUE disease will ALWAYS have MINOR bleeding from
> brushing teeth
> You can PHYSICALLY SEE THIS by looking in the mirror after brushing
> around some teeth...you
> can see the drops of blood
> - ---A person who has maintained hygiene will not see bleeding. In fact
> healthy gums will not
> bleed even if you pick at them a great deal.
> SO---If you have plaque disease it is a psik rayshay to brush your teeth
> since you will cause 
> bleeding and you must bring a Chatath.
> - ---If however you are healthy you can brush without using toothpaste

I think the point of those who are matir to brush with toothpaste 
has nothing to do with the health of your teeth. It has to do with the 
fact that the bleeding gums are a psik reisha d'lo neecha lei, and 
therefore according to some rishonim it is mutar. 

I don't have Nefesh HaRav in the office, but that's what I recall as 
being the basis for the heter.

-- Carl

Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461

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.

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 12:13:11 -0400
From: "Richard Friedman" <rfriedma@os.dhhs.gov>
Bounced digests

	I was on vacation for about 10 days, and set my email system to send 
an automatic response to incoming messages.  A result was that entire 
digests bounced back to the list.  I apologize for the inconvenience and 
confusion I have probably caused to others on this list.

		Richard Friedman 

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 12:21:26 -0400
From: Michael.Frankel@dtra.mil
Satmar and Klausenberg; reply to DDG

After I wrote: < And then I got it, I think. It must be that the good dr
glasner took a passing reference connecting me to "bais Satmar" - whatever
the substance of the remark - as a slur. While i had thought that david had
gotten all that stuff out of his system, >>> 
My distinguished friend, DDG, responded with:  <What on earth would have
given you that idea? >  
Just a reflexive but perhaps misfired impulse to don likaf zichus. 

On a more substantive vector - though possibly of interest only to the two
of us - David continued his response to my en passant remark as follows:
<<< it is true that some of my revered ancestors of certain persuasions did
make the odd attempt to ride some of DDG's revered ancestors out of the
occasional town on a rail, >>> That's what you say, I have yet to see any
evidence that any of your ancestors (underline ancestors) ever tried
(whatever their ideological differences with the Dor Revi'i) to do any such
thing. Would you care to cite chapter and verse? 

At first i figured, why pick at old wounds? - but hokay.  I was specifically
thinking of two incidents when citing the above. (and I assume that I need
hardly add that nobody ever tried to physically ride anyone out of town on a
rail.  They would have been quite satisfied to see david's ancestors buy a
ticket and depart by train).    The first involves the bans issued by the
satmar rebbe zt"l against the klosenberger rov's pisaqim, bais din,
shichitoh, etc.  In short, a rather emphatic dissing and dismissal of the
rov's position in town. I know that david is familiar with this since he
referenced this unpleasantness in a footnote to his Tradition article on the
Dor Rivie. (BTW, I fear there is an error in that footnote which asserted
that the satmar rebbe during this period was living in satmar without yet
having assumed an official position there.  In fact, the future satmar rov
(for he was not just a chassidic rebbe but the town's elected chief rabbi)
was at this time living in Ourshvah. where he was serving in official
capacity as chief rabbi.  After a few more years there he moved to Carolyi ,
again as the chief rabbi.  He didn't actually return to Satmar until 1934. -
where he had indeed lived for a few years at a much earlier time as a
younger avreich - when his older brother the atzei chaim inherited the real
family job in Sighet - and was clearly subservient to the then satmar rov,
R. Y. Greenwald . there was also another quite brief interlude in satmar
during his ourshvah rabbonus in a WWI retreat).  The other incident I had in
mind involves a slightly earlier ancestral pairing.  When the Dor Rivie's
father, R Avrohom Glasner originally got the nod for chief rabbi in
Klausenberg it was not without virulent opposition.   The focus of those
unhappy with the choice was R Glasner's ostensible 'modernizing" ways, in
particular his knowledge of, and willingness to darshen in, the german
language.  The "conservative' opposition in particular was led by R. Hillel
Lichtenstein (along with his son-in-law-henchman Akivoh Schlesinger) who
wrote a simultaneously pleading and disrespectful letter to the Kisav Sofer
begging him to use his influence with his nephew (by marriage) to get him to
decline the klosenberg job which under no means was he ro'ui to assume
because of R. Glasner's violation of the Chasam sofer's issur (in his
tzavo'oh) directed against rabbonim who might darshen in european languages
- though r. Lichtenstein opined that perhaps he might still be suited to
serve as an aide to the kisav sofer in Pressburg.  Tthis was not meant as a
compliment to either man. Now, providing ostensible legal basis to sustain
this attack on R.Glasner's fitness to assume the job was the "pisaq din" of
Mikhailovitch, where, again organized by R. Lichtenstein, a self constiuted
"bais din" issued a "pisaq" that shuls which had such german language
diroshos were assur to enter into (this was the first in a list of nine
other chato'im - bimah in center, weddings in shul, choirs,  etc.  i.e the
range of Hungarian yeihorig ve'all ya'avors).  This pisaq din was circulated
and endorsed by seventy one (get it)  hungarian rabbonim  amongst the most
prominent being my great great grandfather, the Yeitiv Lev (R. zalman leib
teitelbaum) of Sighet .  This pisaq was issued in 1866, not coincidentally
the same year R. Glasner assumed the Klosenberg job and thus should also be
considered as my ancestor's contribution to the campaign against R.Avrohom

<<< and - closer to modern times - the continued lack of civil discourse (at
least according to the one-side report -guess that would have been the dor
shishi) >>> though your syntax habitually tends toward complexity, I can
usually divine your meaning, but now I'm lost <<<
I believe no syntax should remain untortured for very long.  In the long run
it, it is a powerfully creative force catalyzing and energizing new literary
forms and expressiveness which greatly enrich our language. However, I
suspect the confusion here may have been amplified not just by my syntax but
a slip of my pen, which is to say I should have written the dor chamishi,
not shishi, in the above paragraph since it was indeed david's grandfather
(successor to the dor rivie in kloisenberg) who rode that fateful kastner
train with the satmar rebbe.

Mechy Frankel				H: (301) 593-3949
michael.frankel@dtra.mil			W:(703) 325-1277	


Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 12:04:04 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Re: Satmar and Klausenberg; reply to DDG

On Mon, 16 Aug 1999 Michael.Frankel@dtra.mil wrote:

> not shishi, in the above paragraph since it was indeed david's
> grandfather (successor to the dor rivie in kloisenberg) who rode that
> fateful kastner train with the satmar rebbe. 

As usual, fascinating history. Could I ask, however, please, to have my
memory refreshed? The Kastner train, if my dim recollection serves, was
the subject of the book "Perfidy". But I recall little more. How were the
Klausenberger and Satmerer involved?


Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 20:57 +0200
From: BACKON@vms.huji.ac.il
Re: Public health and the gemara

The chairperson of the History of Medicine Dept. at Hadassah-University
Hospital Medical School in Jerusalem (a frum pediatrician from Strassbourg)
has written a number of short articles on public health in the gemara in the
Israel Journal of Medical Sciences. The papers may be abstracted either in
MEDLINE  //ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed  or on RAMBI  telnet aleph.huji.ac.il
login as aleph  LD   then access the RAMBI database.


Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 14:34:37 EDT
From: Yzkd@aol.com
Re: Public health and the Gemara

In a message dated 8/16/99 9:11:47 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
bergez01@med.nyu.edu writes:

> Can anyone recommend a study of public health as viewed in the Gemara (if 
> such a thing exists)?
You might want to start with Rambam Hil. Nizkei Momon chapter 14, (C"M 409, 
414, 417, see also S"O Horav Hil. Nizkei Momon 16-25), see also Rambam Hil. 
Deios 4:23, see also first mishne of Shkolim.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 20:44:19 +0100
From: Rafael Salasnik <rafi@brijnet.org>
Re: Bracha For Eclipse (Avodah V3 #164)

>From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@juno.com>
>Subject: Bracha For Eclipse
>I am surprised no one answered this yet---it is OSEH MASAY BRAITSHIT 
>(applies to all natural wonders).
>For those into chilukim my understanding is that
>	OSEH MASAY BRASHIT--applies to natural wonders
>	COCHO OOGVARTHO--applies to manifestations of power
>Russell Hendel; Phd ASA

I question this on two grounds:

Firstly since there are dangers involved in looking at the eclipse, except
at totality, should we make a bracha where this may cause damage? Secondly
the advice given to prevent damage was to view it indirectly, surely we
shouldn't make a bracha on something where the benefit is indirect?



Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 20:42:30 +0100
From: Rafael Salasnik <rafi@brijnet.org>
Plea with regard to posting & responding

This is a plea to posters to consider

1. For some time I have noticed that some digests I receive are cut short.
On examination (by looking at the archives) I found this was only happening
where people where putting ".." in the first 2 columns to indicate that
they were snipping out a section from a posting they were replying to. this
only happens with mail coming via a list. I don't know whether anyone else
suffers from this but it is annoying. Could people please, please use
another method as in eg "<snip>"

2. Could people who use an automatic responder please exclude their Avodah
mailings from it - or could the moderator look at the possibility of the
reply-to address going to an error list so that such mails do not go out to
the entire readership?



Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 16:15:00 -0400
From: "Clark, Eli" <clarke@HUGHESHUBBARD.COM>
Kol kore

R. David Bannett writes:

>Does the trop definitely say,  Kol korei:  Bamidbar panu derekh haShem?.

>A glance at the ta'amim shows a zakef katan on korei and a zakef gadol on
>[snip] According to the trop, then, there are two strong commas or breaks in
the first half of
>the sentence.

>		 Kol korei,  bamidbar,  panu derekh haShem...

>So, basically, it appears that there is no clear decision made to which side
the word
>bamidbar should be connected.

I am afraid that I am not 100% persuaded that the perush of the trop is
ambiguous.  It is true that the two zekeifim are ta'amim of equal
weight, but I am not certain this proves that ba-midbar can be related
equally to the preceding or succeeding clause.

I am sure we all agree that in many pesukim which quote a message or
speech, the speech may be preceded by a melekh, and the quotation itself
is punctuated with an etnakhta.  Similarly, I can think of examples of
two successive zekeifim, where the first introduces the speech and the
second punctuates it.  See, e.g., Deut. 1:25.  The question is whether
anyone can identify an example in which a pasuk introduces and quotes
speech, and two mafsikim of equal weight appear in the language
introducing the speech, one indicating a pause within the phrase and the
other to conclude it and serve as a colon.  Anyone?

>So why argue?

If you have to ask . . .



ve-khen lekha,

Eli Clark

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 23:36:10 +0300
From: D & E-H Bannett <dbnet@barak-online.net>
Re: incandescent vs. fluorescent in #163

In the explanation that an incandescent is one glowing element and a fluorescent has 
two such glowing elements, one at each end of the tube, the following sentence 

	Do you prefer to turn on one capelet she mantelet or two separate ones.

It obviously, or not so obviously, should have read "... one gahelet shel matekhet or 
two separate ones.


Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 23:36:12 +0300
From: D & E-H Bannett <dbnet@barak-online.net>
Re: kol kore and trop

in #163 RYGB writes re: the kol kore thread:
"Could we get a brief but comprehensive history of trop, please?"

Toward the end of #162 I wrote about the trop in the kol korei sentence and its 
significance. For more information, given concisely,  I recommend the supplement at 
the end of Volume 20 of the Encyclopedia Talmudit. 

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 14:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com>
Re: Kol kore

Russell Hendel wrote:
<<STEP 3:
Now simply REPEATEDLY break down the verse using the following two
	STEP 3a: Break down using higher level cantillations first
	STEP 3b: If you have 2 equal level cantillations break on the FIRST
(Right parsing)

4a) We have two halves based on the EMPORER cantillations
	A voice cries in the wilderness make a path for God
	Pave in the swamp lands a hiway for the Lord

Notice how the two halves correspond to the emporer cantillations.

4b) Now break up each half sentence at the FIRST KING Cantillation
	A voice cries
		In the wilderness Clear a path for God
	Pave in the swamp lands 
		A hiway for God

I just wanted to point out that Russell's explanation is based on R.
Mordechai Breuer's book on Ta'amei Hamikra (which I studied with

Kol tuv,

Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 17:58:14 -0400
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Chazal had access to advanced technology (?)

If so, shouldn't there be some physical evidence of it?  After all, we know a lo
about the Romans' advanced technology (aqueducts, etc.) from surviving 
artifacts. (The old joke comes to mind: we know the Israelites had wireless 
telephones because nothing has been found underground...)

Maybe what is meant is not technology, nor even science, but (as was suggested b
someone else earlier, I forget who) a heightened empirical perception?  

Or maybe -- and here's my opinion --  Chazal had access to no superhistorical in
llectual or cognitive abilities, and Mesorah is their claim to fame?  This last 
aim requires no extraordinary proof -- the first two do.  

Sholem Berger

Silly, we DO have access to their advanced technology it's Chazals statments on 
all kinds of things re: Sakkono, refuo, etc. (and possibly maggots too!)  We 
just choose to dismiss them as incredulous!

Go back about 110 years ago, and heavier than air flight was pooh-poohed by many
"know-it-alls" as simply impossible (even though birds did it!)

Chazal's access to advanced technology is not so much different then Da Vinci 
illustrating helicopters or the science fiction of Jules Verne.  It's closely 
related to intuitve foresight, of extrapolating what life COULD be, etc.  It's 
also about mysticism which we consider to be "magical".  As my friend R. JJ 
Baker informed me "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable 
from magic" which he described as Clarke's Law.  I have been struggling to make 
the point that kabbolo IS such a form of advanced technology which we mistake 
for magic!  This isn't just my thesis, Profess I. Agus said much the same idea. 
I believe that Aryeh Kaplan, Maharla, and Gro would have held similar views.

Disclaimer: I do NOT mean to assert that EVERY pronouncement of Chazal is 
accesing this wisdom.  I am merely syaing that they often are, and it is 
difficult to distinguish one statment from the other.  (I think the Gro or 
someone on that level could intuit this, but others would probably have trouble 
distinguishing them).

I am also NOT saying that Chazal were aware of all the nuts and bolts of this 
tehcnology. If we were studying under Da Vinci we might be aware that helicopter
flight was feasible, but we mind not be sophisticated enough to fully appreciate
the tehcnology it would require.  EG, Kabbalists have told me that the Zohar 
refers to wireless telecommunications, but the mystics might not have known what
it took Marconi to acutally pull it off, just that it COULD be pulled off.
EG, Chazal Might have known the actualy danger in combining fish and meat 
together, or they might have only been aware that it is dangerous.   I am aware 
been that combining bleach and amonia can produce toxis fumes, but I am clueless
as to the underlying chemical reactions.  Simlarly, Chazal might have been aware
of the WHATS and not the HOWS.  And given some fuzzy mesorah, even that might 
have become losse around the edges or our understanding of what they really 
meant might be loose around the edges.

Also, not all old wive's tales are baseless.  I undrstand that chicken soup DOES
help clear up sinus congestion, although not as well as say Claritin.  Simlarly,
Chazal's may have passed down some valid folk wisdom or folk medicine which has 
a solid basis, even if tehcnically inferior in some way.

Rich Wolpoe

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 18:16:03 -0400
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Chazal technology

>>Thus, I think that it is extraordinarily difficult to determine the extent
of ChaZaL's "advanced" knowledge.  However, I would note that -- given the
fact that we DO know that they ere the "giants" of our Mesorah, I owuld
tend to accept -- at the least the POSSIBILITY -- that they DID have this
advanced knowledge and be VERY VERY cautious about "overturning" anything
because MY understanding differs from theirs...

- --Zvi<<


Rich Wolpoe

Go to top.

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 18:32:25 -0400
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com


From: RWERMAN@vms.huji.ac.il

I have heard several drashot over the years about the 
special relationship we have with haShem in the month 
of Elul.

Can anyone please point me in the right direction to 
find sources?

Thank you and a successful month of tshuva.

__Bob Werman
Jerusalem                        rwerman@vms.huji.ac.il<<

Ani Ledodi V'dodi Li

Roshei Tesiovs Elul.  This implies Elul as a time of closeness to Hashem.  
See KSA who according to my edition is quoting Pirkei D'rabbi Eliezer

Rich Wolpoe

Go to top.


[ 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         ]

< Previous Next >