Avodah Mailing List

Volume 06 : Number 011

Thursday, October 12 2000

• Re: b'etzem hayom hazeh
• Re: Birchos HaTorah
• Pri Eitz haDar
• Bread and Salt
• Re: Birchos HaTorah
• Yom Kippur Notes
• Re: Yom Kippur Notes
• Re: Yom Kippur Notes
• Re: Yom Kippur Notes
• RE: tinok shenishba
• Re: Yom Kippur Notes
• Leshannah haba'ah biYerushalayim
• RE: Fish on Rosh Hashanah/simcha
• Re: Yom Kippur Notes
• Re: "standing on the shoulders of giants"
• Maariv Motzoei Shabbos

R' EricS questions re: b'etzem hayom hazeh, <<I thought Rashi said
it appeared three times. This is a fourth. Am I missing something?
Does it appear in additional places?>>

My computer says it appears in the chumash 11 times and once in Yehoshua 
and twice in Yehezkel;  As follows:

Bresh. 7,13,  17,23, 17,26, 
Shemot, 12,17, 12,41, 12,51
Vik. 23,21, 23,28, 23,29, 23,30
Dev. 32,48

. יהושע פרק ה פסוק יא21  
[Yeshaia 5:11 -mi]
. יחזקאל פרק כד פסוק ב31  
[Yechezkeil 24:2 -mi]

Hag Sameach to all,
David

On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 11:41:19PM -0400, Gershon Dubin wrote:
:> Perhaps because the Jews before galus had Torah, but their Torah 
:> wasn't an ohr for them.

:         This is very nice.  Now,  as they used to say in the old days, 
: "fier ois": how do you explain the simcha, soson viykor, as things
: which they had but didn't appreciate?

It's a gemara in Megillah 16b. R' Yehudah associates each of the nouns
that the Jews acquired (laYhudim haysah orah visimchah visason viykar)
with a mitzvah, using pesukim to prove the connection.

Orah is torah, simchah is yom tov, sason is milah, and yekar is tefillin.

Rashi (sham) notes that torah, milah and tefillin were banned by Haman,
and they made a yom tov to honor the occasion. This might poke holes
into those divrei Torah that try to contrast Purim's physical persecution
with Chanukah's religious suppression. Purim had an element of religious
suppression too.

The obvious question is that if the pasuk wanted to tell us that the Jews
had these four mitzvos, why didn't it say so outright?

I'm suggesting that this connection was what was new. The Jews not only
had Torah, but now it was an ohr. They had yamim tovim, but they were days
to be waited out with those burdensome restrictions on what or where to
eat and all those issurei melachah. Now, YT was a real simchah. Vechulu.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halbserstam of Klausenberg zt"l

I often wondered why bedavka these four minim. (I invite the chaver
who sent me his article on the subject to post a summary.) You
might remember my asking this same question last year. See
<http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol04/v04n019.shtml#19>.

I found esrog the easiest of the four to explore because the pasuk's
description has so little to do with the halachah. Following RSRH,
I therefore would conclude that the expression "p'ri eitz hadar" decribes
the ta'am hamitzvah.

The attached is from the sixth chapter of an unfinished work. I don't
think I have even touched it in the past year. You'll notice the same
themes as in other quotes that I have posted -- the perspective is that
ta'amei hamitzvos can be understand as a guideline to proper "health",
given Nara"n as a model of what it is we're trying to keep healthy.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halbserstam of Klausenberg zt"l

From a legal perspective, something is lost in this wording. We need to
rely on Torah sheBa'al Peh to know that the pasuk refers to an esrog
in particular. The description, though, can tell us something of the
why. More is conveyed on the level of aggadah, instead of writing out
the halachic detail.

The gemara (Succah 35a) explains, "'P'ri eitz hadar' -- that its fruit
tastes like the tree." Aggadah makes a distinction between an "eitz oseh
p'ri", a tree that makes fruit, and when the two words are juxtaposed
to make "eitz p'ri" or "p'ri eitz". In the latter case, it refers to
either a tree or a fruit, respectively, where the fruit and the tree
share the same taste.

A famous medrash (Breishis Rabba 5:9) comments on the language of the
creation of trees. Hashem orders the earth on the third day to produce
"eitz p'ri oseh p'ri", fruit trees that bring forth fruit, yet the land
actually produces only "eitz oseh p'ri". Between the commandment and the
fulfillment, something is lost. Instead of the norm being that the wood of
the tree would taste like the fruit, this is now the exception. Somehow,
the earth "disobeyed".

What does this medrash mean? Does the earth have free will, that it can
choose to disobey G-d? Rav A.Y. Kook explains:

    At the inception of creation it was intended that the tree have the
    same taste as the fruit. All the supportive actions that sustain any
    general worthwhile spiritual goal should by right be experienced in
    the soul with the same feeling of elation and delight as the goal
    itself is experienced when we envision it. But earthly existence,
    the instability of life, the weariness of the spirit when confined
    in a corporate frame brought it about that only the fruition of the
    final step, which embodies the primary ideal, is experienced in its
    pleasure and splendor. The trees that bear the fruit, with all their
    necessity for the growth of the fruit have, however, become coarse
    matter and have lost their taste. This is the failing of the "earth"
    because of which it was cursed when Adam was also cursed for his sin.

    But every defect is destined to be mended. Thus we are assured
    that the day will come when creation will return to its original
    state, when the taste of the tree will be the same as the taste of
    the fruit. The "earth" will repent of its sin, and the way of the
    practical life will no longer obstruct the delight of the ideal,
    which is sustained by appropriate intermediate steps on its way
    toward realization, and will stimulate its emergence from potentiality
    to actuality.

		    Orot HaTeshuva 6:7 Translation by B. Z. Bokser,
		    The Lights of Penitence in "Rabbi Abraham Isaac
		    Kook," published by Paulist Press in the "Classics
		    of Western Spirituality" series.

To R. Kook, this enigmatic medrash defines the nature of kidushah. In
the metaphor of this medrash, "fruit" refers to the goal, and the "tree"
is the means. In the ideal world, the tree would share the taste of the
fruit, that is to say, the means for achieving a spiritual goal would
generate the same excitement as the goal does. The soul doesn't feel the
same spiritual high because the earth, the physical world, separated
itself from the soul. The "new earth and new heavens" (Yeshiah 65:15)
[a reference to RSRH's concept of meaning of the number eight developed in
chapter 3. -mi] of the messianic age will come when this rift is healed.

Returning to esrog, it by saying "p'ri eitz", the Torah is telling us
that the esrog is chosen in part because it exemplifies this ideal. It
represents the underlying unity of secular and sacred.

However, the gemara continues, this does not uniquely identify the
esrog! Don't pepper plants also taste like peppers? Interestingly, the
gemara elsewhere (Succah32b) ascribes the same property to hadasim. After
proving this point, the gemara looks to the next word, hadar, to provide
more stringent criteria.

Rav, after some clarification, indicates that the word should be read as
though it were "hadir", the stable. Just as a stable has large livestock
and small, so to an esrog tree bears both large fruit and small. This
describes the esrog, which continues growing on the tree from one season
to the next. At any time, there are young fruit as well as larger ones
that have been growing from previous seasons. Rav Avohu presents the
same idea slightly differently. He reads the word as "ha-dar", that
which lives, a fruit that lives on the tree from one year to the next.

"R. Yochanan haSandlar says: Any congregation which is for the sake of
heaven will end up being permanent." (Avos 4:14) "Any debate which is
for the sake of heaven will end up being permanent." (Avos 5:16) The key
to permanence is in using the day-to-day in service of the sacred. By
using means toward their intended ends.

The last opinion offered is Ben Azai's. He finds in "hadar" a reference
to the Greek "hador", water. (Cf. the English "hydraulic", "hydroponics",
etc...) The esrog requires far more water than other trees. "Water is
never anything but Torah". The way in which one learns how to properly
unify the secular and the sacred is the Torah. The entire concept of a
halachic lifestyle is to bring sanctity to our daily activities.

This provides two approaches to the concept of hadar. To Rav and Rav
Avohu, the esrog is more of a p'ri eitz than most because it shares more
properties with the thing a p'ri eitz represents. Hadar means that esrog
is a superior metaphor. To Ben Azai, what is important is not merely
the concept, what is hadar is that it carries an implied imperative --
that one should act to heal this flaw.

Rav Kook describes the relationship between chol and kodesh as a
consequence of the connection between the means and the purpose. Chol,
the physical world, exists to be the means for achieving kidushah. When
we looked at tum'ah and taharah, we spoke about freeing the ruach from
the influence of the nefesh. But being free is not enough. Freedom only
has value if we use it to seek some purpose. The ultimate purpose is
the spiritual, the drives of the neshamah.

Recently someone told me of a custom to bring bread and salt to a new
home.

Can anyone identify the source of the custom and it's meaning?

Shoshana L. Boublil

All work that is done, should be done out of love.
Then it ceases to be difficult, or boring, or embarrassing.
Even a cup or a plate can be washed with devotion until they shine,
out of aspiration for  perfection and completion.
                                Rav A.Y. HaCohen Kook

> I'm suggesting that this connection was what was new. The Jews not only had 
> Torah, but now it was an ohr. They had yamim tovim, but they were days to be 
> waited out with those burdensome restrictions on what or where to eat and all 
> those issurei melachah. Now, YT was a real simchah. Vechulu.
     
Don't forget the drasha on kiymu vekiblu.  Whatever it means, there was clearly 
a positive change in attitude towards Torah and observance at this time.

Recall also that there was already a contingent who had returned to Eretz 
Yisrael.  Not too many years after the events of Purim, Ezra went to EY with a 
larger contingent and revitalized that community's commitment to Torah.

Gil Student

Spending 12 hours in Shul, to help keep my mind off my rumbling stomach
I browsed quite a few sforim.

Some interesting points I came up with: (ie - those which I haven't
meanwhile forgotten)

1) Parshas Aroyos at Mincha. There are a number of reasons given why
we lein Parshas Aroyos at Mincha - the most popular being that just like
the Torah bans "legalos ervah" - similarly we implore to Hashem that he
should not be Megalo the ervah (aveiros) of Klall Yisroel.

However the 'Hame'asef' in the Otzar Hetifilos Siddur gives a very logical
pshat. As we know Yom Kippur (and 15th Av) was the day when Bnos Yisroel
were available for Shidduch offers. So it is also the correct time to
inform everyone of which relatives are forbidden in marriage..

2) BTW isn't Yom Kippur a strange time for wife-hunting? And when and
why was this minhag abolished? And the way the Mishna (or is it Gemoro)
describes how the maidens would call out to the passing young men:
"Bochur, Soh einecho etc etc", is this really the the ideal way for a
Bas Yisroel - Kol K'vudoh Bas Melech Penimoh - to find her match?

Any help would be appreciated.

3) Maftir Yonah.
In our Shul - and I understand many others world-wide - Maftir Yonah is
the most expensive Aliyah sold during the year. We have a tradition
(urban myth?) here which claims that being Oleh for MY is a segulah
to Parnosso (or indeed ashirus) Over the quite a few desperate souls
have bought it in that hope (I can't say that I know of any miraculous
results).

It would be interesting to hear from other Shuls and places on their
attitude to Maftir Yonah.

And what about P'sicha to Neilah?
In our Shul it belongs to the Rav shlit'a who also acts as Baal Tefiloh
for Neiloh - but in some other shuls here - I hear it goes for even a
higher price than Maftir Yonah. Comments please.

4) Amongst many - Hoshana Rabbo - is in some ways considered as an
extension of the Yomim Noroim. (Besides the extra Tefillos/Shir Hamaalos
Mimamakim/RH-YK nigun, with the Oberlenders here wearing their kittels
and the chasidim blowing shofar).

(I recall my bochur'ishe days in NY- the Satmar Rebbe zt'l used to davven
- with a tzibbur of thousands - till a few minutes before licht-tzinden)

I was therefore, not completely surprised to find in Tiferes Shmuel -
peirush on the Rosh, Brochos 12b, that the Maharam said Hamelech Hakodosh
and Hamelech Hamishpot on Hoshano Rabbo.

5) A worrying Sforno in Ha'azinu on the posuk Omarti Afeihem. Ayin Shom.

6) And BTW Haazinu is called a Shiroh - which begs the question - isn't
there a lot of similarities to the Tochocha in there?? Is that a Shiroh?
Someone answered me that Shiroh is lav davka pleasant and happy lines.
Maybe one of our learned chevrah can enlighten me further.

7) A further Mareh Mokom on the Vayigabah Hashem etc. See - the Maharsho
(Chidushei Agodos) Yevomos 49b (the 2nd DH Moshe) who also touches on
this posuk in connection with RH. Ayin Shom.

SHLOMO B ABELES
mailto:sba@blaze.net.au

On 11 Oct 2000, at 11:07, SBA wrote:

> 2) BTW isn't Yom Kippur a strange time for wife-hunting?
> And when and why was this minhag abolished?

It's brought down in the Gemara at the end of Taanis. I suspect that
it had to do with the fact that everyone wore white on Yom Kippur, so
one girl could not outdress the other to stand out in the crowd based
on something as mundane as clothing. But that's really just a guess -
I have no proof.

From here on, RMSB may want to take to Areivim.

[I did -mi]

> 4) Amongst many - Hoshana Rabbo - is in some ways
> considered as an extension of the Yomim Noroim.
> (Besides the extra Tefillos/Shir Hamaalos
> Mimamakim/RH-YK nigun, with the Oberlenders here
> wearing their kittels and the chasidim blowing shofar).

We don't say Mimamakim. In fact, most of the places I have been in
EY don't say Mimamakim (even on RH and YK). Anyone else with similar
experience?

> 6)  And BTW Haazinu is called a Shiroh - which begs
> the question - isn't there a lot of similarities to the
> Tochocha in there?? Is that a Shiroh?
> Someone answered me that Shiroh is lav davka
> pleasant and happy lines.
> Maybe one of our learned chevrah can enlighten me further.

Rav Nebenzahl in his Sichot l'Yom haKippurim refers to HaAzinu as
"Shirat haTikva." He goes through and finds a pattern which begins with
perfection, falls in Aveiros and returns to perfection. He compares it
to Adam haRishon at the briya, chet etz ha'daas and l'osid lavo, and to
Am Yisrael at Maamad Har Sinai, Chet ha'Egel and l'osid lavo.

-- Carl


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.

On Wed, 11 Oct 2000 15:28:33 -0400 Carl M. Sherer said:
>We don't say Mimamakim. In fact, most of the places I have been in
>EY don't say Mimamakim (even on RH and YK). Anyone else with similar
>experience?

I heard that al pi the Gra it was a hefsek. Those that do recite it say af
al pi chein, it is letzorech the tzibbur and that over-rides the hefsek.
Sorry I don't have the sources handy here...

Shalom and Regards,
Rich Wolpoe
pmsrxw@ibivm.ibi.com

Rich Wolpoe wrote:

> I heard that al pi the Gra it was a hefsek. Those that do recite it say af al 
> pi chein, it is letzorech the tzibbur and that over-rides the hefsek. Sorry I 
> don't have the sources handy here...
     
RYBS suggested saying it BEFORE Yishtabach when saying a perek of Tehillim is 
not a hefsek.

Gil Student

RYGB <ygb@aishdas.org> wrote:
> The term rasha you did not find in conjunction with the term TsN on a 
> CD-Rom search.
> Rasha you did not find because it is not a true category.
> What you need to look for is Mumar, Mechallel Shabbos, etc., in conjunction 
> with TsN.

It is not only that I did not find the linguistic term rasha. Rather,
the concept of rasha (in any term that you choose - mumar, mehallel
shabbat befarhesya, kofer, etc) does not apply to the TsN, and there
are tshuvot (I would have to reexamine them, for which I currently do
not have time, for exact citations) that deal specifically with all the
terms that you consider. All the discussion centered on the fact that
while the TsN does what are technically averot, and may believe in what
is technically kfira, he is not considered hayyav for them. Based on
the discussion on the gemara, htere is a machloket whether he has the
category of anus, and completely exempt, or whether he has the status
of shogeg, and bears some responsibility. However, the pettur is in
all halachot, meaning that he just can not be classified as a mehallel
shabbat beharhesya (MSB) or a mumar. However, because he does not
fulfill certain positive aspects, his status is not identical to someone
shomer mitzvot. This is formulated clearest in the Avne Nezer I cited,
which specifically does use the language of rasha - he is not a rasha,
but he is also not a tzaddik.

By the way, quite a few tshuvot do discuss the concept of rasha,
in reference precisely to the halachot that you cited about our
relationship to reshaim, and those that do, specifically exempt TsN.
Some even say that the entire concept of rasha is inapplicable in our
time, as someone is only a rasha if he remains a rasha after tochecha,
and we no longer know how to be mochiach)

The sole source that comes close to your position is  RSZA, but his position
is quite different.  He argues that as a TsN has a din of shogeg, someone
who will live all his life beshogeg as a goy (as he will not believe us that
he is Jewish), perhaps (efshar) eyn ma'alin velo moridin.  However, if the
TsN could possibly do tshuva, I don't thinkt that this would apply, and my
understanding is that RSZA, who holds that hilonim have the status of TsN,
requires one to me mehallel shabbat for them.  For someone who has many
positive mitzvot (involving saving am yisrael) this would apply even less.

For those who hold that a TsN is anus and not shogeg, even this reduction in
status wouldn't apply.

Given the TE who is very clear that his averot are not considered averot
and that he is hare kiyehudi kasher, I really wonder how you can say that
"all" sources agree with your understanding of the status of a TsN. 
  
Again, while there are many poskim who assur kibbudim to reshaim , I don't
know any one except the bet yehezkel who would extend this status to TsN.
If the TE says that they are kiyehudi kasher, how can one say that this is
universal?

With regard to dinners, a complex issue, but why does the fact that persons
are only honored for their funds a petur?  Members of the knesset are only
honored for their activities for am yisrael.  what is the difference??

Your statement was that there was an issur of extending any kavod to
reshaim, and that this extended to a TsN, and therefore extended to most
members of the Israeli knesset, and that this was essentially a universally
agreed upon position (thus not requiring explicit support).  Given the many
gdolim who have shown public respect to leaders of the knesset, I find this
a highly surprisimg position, and one requiring documentation.

KT 
Meir Shinnar
ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

> 6) And BTW Haazinu is called a Shiroh - which begs the question - isn't
> there a lot of similarities to the Tochocha in there?? Is that a Shiroh?

The tochacha/kelala of HaAzinu is nevuah; that of Ki Tavo is expressed
conditionally. Shirah is characterized by content (prophetic vision of
the future as opposed to narrative or conditional schar/onesh), by the
arrangement of pesukim with unique breaks instead of the usual parsha
structure, and by the fact that shirah was literally meant to be sung
rather than read. (See Ramban 31:19, also Abarbanel).

-CB

I have long been under the impression that the pshat of the phrase used
at the end of the seder and our Yom Kippur tefilot was directed towards
the future, and that the grammatically correct pronounciation was
"haba'ah" with the accent on the last syllable.  We thereby express the
desire to participate in and witness the completion of those mitzvot
that we can, at best, only do partly or symbolically today.  On Yom
Kippur, we do as best we can, the avodah shebelaiv.  The real avodah
described by the Torah requires a bet hamikdash.  We, therefore, make
the prayerful suggestion that next year at this time we will merit to
perform or witness the real avodah in the rebuilt bet hamikdash.
Similarly, at the end of the haggadah we say "chasal siddur pesach
kehilchoto..ka'asher zachinu lesader otoh, keyn nizkeh la'asotoh".  The
above quoted sentences really refer to a poetic composition that
describes the details of the day and night of the pesach sacrafice.  At
the conclusion, we express the wish that we may actually merit to bring
and eat the korban pesach next year at this time in the rebuilt bet
hamikdash.  Ken yehi ratzon.

Yitzchok Zlochower

R' Gershon Dubin quoted Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky's sefer on Shulchan Aruch
as saying that <<< even if someone does not enjoy meat, still the mitzvah
of simcha can only be done with meat >>>

Let's set aside the questions of whether this is a mitzvah or a chiyuv,
whether it is d'oraisa, d'rabanan, or whatever. Regardless of the nature
of the inyan to eat meat and/or to have simcha, the question I want to
focus on is the following:

Isn't it a tartay d'sasray, an inherent contradiction? How is it possible
to accomplish simcha with something which one does not enjoy?

I would have thought that if meat (of whatever species) is me'akev, and a
person does not enjoy it, then perhaps he is patur, since he has no way
to accomplich this simcha in the required manner.

Does anyone discuss this aspect of the question? Personally, my family
makes it a point to have at least one milchig meal each Yom Tov,
especially if it is a "3-day" Yom Tov, and/or when we get home late on
Simchas Torah night. We do this simply because an overabundance of meat
is tiring (to us), and there are many milchig things which we do enjoy. 

Akiva Miller

On 11 Oct 2000, at 16:12, Richard Wolpoe wrote:
> >We don't say Mimamakim. In fact, most of the places I have been in
> >EY don't say Mimamakim (even on RH and YK)....

> I heard that al pi the Gra it was a hefsek. ...

Well, I flipped through Maaseh Rav last night and did not find it. 
Anyone have a source?

-- Carl

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.

On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 05:32:31PM -0700, Harry Maryles wrote:
: This very same phrase, "standing on the shoulders of
: giants"...

: "Niskatnu Hadoros" OTOH, has the exact opposite
: connotation. It implies that we "generationally
: challenged" in that we are: 

: a) further away from Sinai and (therefore)

The two expressions agree on that point to my view. Niskatnu hadoros
literally says we're midgets. We have much less halachic reach than
they did.

As to being on the shoulders of giants... R' MM Shneerson uses it to
answer the question of how the ge'ulah could possibly come to a bunch
of spiritual chamorim when the mal'achim didn't merit it. We're adding
little to their foundation, but we're still adding.

(FWIW, lehavdil, the original Christian usage of the expression was to
address their parllel dilemma.)

: b) not as knowledgeable in Torah or as able
: intellectually as the previous generations to change
: Halacha. 

I disagree here on more than slogan. I think the difference is in mimetic
knowledge, in culture, value, mesiras nefesh, ahavas and yir'as shamayim
-- but not in textual knowledge. The discussion between R' Papa and Abayei
(Berachos 20a) make it clear that they believed their generation knew
more, but had less commitment to live al kiddush Hashem.

In fact, it's that textual knowledge that is the shoulders we're standing
on. Measurably so, if you actually look at the number of texts.

: Hence, Amoraim can't argue against Tanaim, Rishonim
: cant argue against Amoraim, and Achronim (except for
: Rabbi Kramer) can't argue with Rishonim. 

As noted a while back, these changes in era share two things in common:
1- there was a catastrophic break in Jewish culture (note the mimetic
connection); and 2- a concurrent acceptance of some guide as the epitomy
of halachic textualism of the previous era.

As Moshe Koppel put it, each was a major step in moving away from a
native's intuitive view of halachic behavior to a foreigner's reliance
on formalized rules.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 When you come to a place of darkness,
micha@aishdas.org            you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org       You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287                  - R' Yekusiel Halbserstam of Klausenberg zt"l

From: MPoppers@kayescholer.com
> This is done in "Breuer's" (i.e. in shuls which follow minhag Frankfurt),
> and I might as well add that a special melody (which "drags" this section
> out even more!) is employed by the SHaTZ from the night of the day that
> s'lichos will be said through the yomim noaro-im.

In our main Shul which roughly follows minhogei Pressburg and Oberland
the Borchu Motzoei Shabbos before the first selichos is said in a Yomim
Noroimdige niggun.(I think it used to be called 'di lange vehu rachum' and
BTW motzoei pesach is called the 'chometzdige borchu(!)')

Similarly Rosh Chodesh benchen for Ellul is in the YN nigun.

SBA

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


[ 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         ]