Avodah Mailing List

Volume 10 : Number 104

Sunday, February 16 2003

• Re: rambam discussion
• Devash
• Re: Half a pasuk
• RE: Sefardi sefer torah
• Chassidus and Misnagdus
• IdT; IdE
• Re: Fanaticalness
• Finding a Good Yeshiva
• Junto Vaad
• Three Berachos
• RE: History, Truth, Memory: Nemonus of Baalei Mesorah
• Re: Chassidus and Misnagdus
• Re: Finding a Good Yeshiva
• Re: Chassidus and Misnagdus
• Re: Half a pasuk
• Re: Half a pasuk
• Vilozhin and Mussar
• Re: IdT; IdE
• Re: Finding a Good Yeshiva
• Re: Vilozhin and Mussar
• Re: Vilozhin and Mussar
• Re: talking/tfillin
• Re: Vilozhin and Mussar
• Doctors taking money
• Re: fanaticism
• Re: Fanaticalness

In a message dated 2/14/03 7:06:53 AM EST, syraymon@012.net.il writes:
> The
> Ramban in Toras Ha'adam (pg. 44 in Kisvei Ramban of Mossad HaRav Kook)
> states that a doctor may receive compensation for his time (i.e., he
> could been engaged in his "real job") and for s'char tircha, i.e. the
> labor value of his services, but he may not demand payment for s'char
> limud, i.e. his expertise, since healing is a mitzvah.
> 
> Why does the talmud torah issue interest us so much more?

Because the Rambam's Yad Hachazakah, and the legitimacy of being medayeik
in that sefer, interests the world so much more than the Kisvei HaRambaM,
let alone the Kisvei HaRambaN!

Raffy

I had a thought I liked about why there's no devash in the qetores. When
learning Mishlei w/ Bi'ur haGra I found:

Mishlei 25:16: Have you found honey? Eat only your limit of it lest
you fill yourself and vomit it.

Gra: The issue: do not get overly clever and do not pursue things that
are great or more wondrous than you, lest you sin and vomit up all you
studied and learned. Devash [honey, but also an acronym of the next the
key words] is de.ah [knowledge], binah [comprehension], and seichel
[insight]. If you find it, do not chase after things greater or more
wondrous than you, for you may go to a place that is not appropriate
for you and fall from there.

Notice that devash is being described just as in "pitum haqetores", as
something that ein adam yachol la'amod ba.

Comments?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 "The most prevalent illness of our generation is
micha@aishdas.org            excessive anxiety....  Emunah decreases anxiety:
http://www.aishdas.org       'The Almighty is my source of salvation;  I will
Fax: (413) 403-9905          trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya

On Sun, Feb 09, 2003 at 11:55:07AM -0500, Gershon Dubin wrote:
: I had commented a few weeks ago concerning the minhag of hakafos at the
: levaya of Rav Landau z"l. One thing that I noticed is that they said
: only part of the pasuk "ki ata Hashem machsi" (in the shir shel pegaim).

: Could this week's daf yomi wherein it seems that they did so during
: hosafa al ha'ir be a makor for this?

Can the qulah we suggested for "vayhi erev ... Yom haShishi" in qiddush
be used? It was suggested that legabei this din, a "pasuq" could could
be up to an esnachta.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 "The most prevalent illness of our generation is
micha@aishdas.org            excessive anxiety....  Emunah decreases anxiety:
http://www.aishdas.org       'The Almighty is my source of salvation;  I will
Fax: (413) 403-9905          trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya

> But since my kid would correctly identify the letter, is it a pesul?

Why would that make a difference? We only rely on a tinok test when
there's a suffek about the letter. If we *know* that it's missing
something required by halacha (depending on which community you are
writing for) then it doesn't help if we recognize what it is.

Everyone would recognize a sephardi yud as a yud -- but it's missing an
ikkar part according to Ashkenaz psak.

Akiva
=================================
"We took risks, we knew we took them; things have come out against us, and
therefore we have no cause for complaint."
Robert Falcon Scott

> Despite all claims to the contrary, I do not see Nefesh HaChayim as being 
> the antithesis of Tanya in particular or of Chabad Philosophy in general. 
> It seems to me that in only one (important) area do the two differ: 
> The concept of focusing on G-d as being Soveiv Kol Almin as well as 
> Memalei Kol Almin. (Imminent and transcendent.) 

While it is overly polemical, it is worth reading the new Gra biography
by R' Eliach on the C/M divide - among the many interesting issue are
Yiras ho'Romemus vs. Yiras ha'Onesh, the role of a Tzaddik and the use
of segulos.

KT, 
YGB 

At 08:52 PM 2/11/03 +0000, Micha Berger wrote:
>I thought that anything initiated by man is IdT, and anything
>initiated by Shamayim that man is to respond to is IdE.

>It's all in who (or Who) initiates the man-G-d encounter. For
>example, man creates the calendar, and therefore the yamim
>tovim, but HQBH sets Shabbos and man responds to the day.

If Hashem sends the inspiration to man that is IdE: "Hashiveinu Hashem
eilecha v'nashuvah."

If man is inspired on his own that is IdT: "Pischu li pesach k'pischo
shel machat."

It can be argues, however, that since the neshama is a chelek eloka
me'ma'al that at some level everything is an IdE; the question is at
what level of the neshama the IdE/IdT dichotomy becomes meaningful.

At 12:05 PM 2/14/03 +0000, Micha Berger wrote:
>: RSW's frumkeit is an inner drive that is excessively uncritical and
>: overly enthusiastic...         It does not seem to me to be at all in
>: the category of mitzvas anashim melumadah as you seem to indicate.

>I got my definition from that bit of Alei Shur we learned in preparation
>for the ve'adim program. Cheileq II, "Limud Mussar", pereq 2.

But so did I!

Kol Tuv,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org  or  ygb@yerusalmionline.org
essays, tapes and seforim at: www.aishdas.org;
on-line Yerushalmi shiurim at www.yerushalmionline.org

I'd like to share my response with a third-year Beis Medrash in EY
bochur who asked me how I would define a good yeshiva for him to seek
in the US (I excluded Mussar from the criteria because I know he will
not find that):

>>         I'm basically determining it based on good guys reporting back high
>>levels of learning and hasmadah. How would you define it?

>Acquiring more tools for lomdus; being mechaddesh on one's own; writing 
>and delivering chaburos - refining all those skills in both Gemara and 
>Machashovo based areas.

About a month ago I proposed to organize an online Vaad in which members
addressed each other via e-mail on a weekly basis (I now think monthly
more realistic) on questions similar to the 1727 Junto Friday evening
meetings’ questions formulated by Benjamin Franklin, his "Standing
Queries."

This is my initial attempt at making the Queries relevant. Input
appreciated.



Have you met with any thing in the author you last read, remarkable,
or suitable to be communicated to the Vaad? Particularly in areas that
will lead to common growth in Torah, Avodah and Gemullus Chasodim?

What new story have you lately heard agreeable for telling in
conversation?

Hath any individual in your knowledge failed in his Avodah lately,
and what have you heard of the cause?

Have you heard of any individual’s thriving in his Avodah, and by
what means?

Do you know of any individual, who has lately done a worthy action,
deserving praise and imitation? Or who has committed an error proper
for us to be warned against and avoid?

What unhappy effects resulting from a lack of character development have
you lately observed or heard? of imprudence? of passion? or of any vice
or folly?

What happy effects of character development? of prudence? of
moderation? or of any other virtue?

Do you think of anything at present, in which the Vaad maybe serviceable
to mankind? to Am Yisrael, to Eretz Yisrael, to their country, to their
friend, or to themselves?

Do you know of any deserving potential Ovdim, whom it lies in the power
of the Vaad in any way to encourage?

In what manner can the Vaad, or any of them, assist you in any of your
honorable designs?

Have you any weighty affairs in hand, in which you think the advice of
the Vaad may be of service?

Is there any difficulty in matter of opinion, of justice, and injustice,
which you would gladly have discussed at this time?

Do you see any thing amiss in the present customs or proceedings of the
Vaad, which might be amended?

All members of theVaad are asked to reconsider and affirm their responses
to the following queries:

Have you any particular disrespect to any present members? Answer. I
have none.

Do you sincerely declare, that you pursue the benefit of Jewry in
particular and mankind in general? Answer. I do.

Do you pursue the fulfillment of Ratzon Hashem for its own sake, and will
you endeavor impartially to find and receive it yourself, and communicate
it to others? Answer. Yes.

KT, 
YGB 

My son asked me what is the significance of the three berachos in SE
that begin with Atah: (Attah Gibbor, Attah Kadosh, Attah Chonen) and
all in a row. Comments?

Kol Tuv,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org  or  ygb@yerusalmionline.org
essays, tapes and seforim at: www.aishdas.org;
on-line Yerushalmi shiurim at www.yerushalmionline.org

From: mgofman@zahav.net.il:
>> Who crowned historians with the laurel of objectivity? More often
>> than not, any particular historian is attempting the forward his
>> own interpretation of events. Under the guise of "historic truth," he
>> attempts to prove justify and uphold his own philosophies. 
>> Your argument could equally be reversed. Perhaps those who are seeking to 
>> show that our gedolim were "less charedi than we think" are seeking to find
>> a haskama for their own lifestyles through history. 

"Feldman, Mark" <MFeldman@CM-P.COM> wrote:
> Absolutely! There is no question that historians often have an agenda.
> But that doesn't mean that history should not be written or studied.
> Rather, it means that students of history must vigorously investigate
> these issues. Debate should be encouraged, not stifled.

Let me second that "Absolutely!". If one were to read only one author's
version of history, no matter what the reputation, or objectivity that
author might enjoy, then there is no doubt in my mind that one cannot
not know with any degree of certainty what the truth of hisory really
is. One can only use one's own perspective to see history. In ordeer to
appraoch the truth ( and I question whther one ca ever really acheive
a completely objective truth about history), one needs to read as many
respectable histories as one can. The more perspectives one gets,
the closer he comes to the truth, although even then, an individual's
perception of history is biased by his own perspective.

So, for example the question in matter's biographies of great religious
figures in Jewish history: who's truth does one put more credence in,
Daas Torah's version or a secular historian's version... I would have
to say neither one is too reliable by itself and would grant neither
greater weight. Daas Torah's version will be sanitized and the secular
historian even if he tries to be "unagendized" will only have the
perspective of an outsider without the necessary understanding of our
cultural and religious histroy. I would need to read both and try and
find the truth somewhere in betweeen their words.

HM

In a message dated 2/14/03 12:12:51 PM EST, sbechhof@casbah.it.northwestern.edu writes:
> > Despite all claims to the contrary, I do not see Nefesh HaChayim as being 
> > the antithesis of Tanya in particular or of Chabad Philosophy in general. 

> > It seems to me that in only one (important) area do the two differ: 
> > The concept of focusing on G-d as being Soveiv Kol Almin as well as 
> > Memalei Kol Almin. (Imminent and transcendent.) 

> While it is overly polemical, it is worth reading the new Gra biography
> by R' Eliach on the C/M divide - among the many interesting issue are
> Yiras ho'Romemus vs. Yiras ha'Onesh, the role of a Tzaddik and the use
> of segulos.

You see, you listed many things.  I think that it boils down to one issue.  
If I had the time, I would explain how the first two relate to my thesis.  I 
think that segulos is a side-issue, and irrelevant in the wider scheme, 
except for the hisnagdus to Chassidus qua perceived Shabtai-ism. 

Raffy

"Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" wrote:
>  writing
> >and delivering chaburos

Torah sheb'al peh i atah rshay l'amro b'chtav.

David Riceman

RaphaelIsaacs@aol.com writes on Fri, 14 Feb 2003 12:33:20 EST: 
> You see, you listed many things.  I think that it boils down to one issue. 
> If I had the time, I would explain how the first two relate to my thesis.  I 
> think that segulos is a side-issue, and irrelevant in the wider scheme, 
> except for the hisnagdus to Chassidus qua perceived Shabtai-ism. 

I also think it boils down to one thing - but not tzimtzum.

The dveykus vs. shleymus divide (R' Eliach has a similar mahalach).

How to react to tzimtzum is a function of the difference in approach,
and that is a real difference, but each of the systems could exist with
whatever real or, mostly, pereciived, differences in shittah exist.

BTW, I am still waiting for proof that there ever was anyone who actually
believed in "Tzimtzum k'Peshuto."

YGB 

Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> writes on Fri, 14 Feb 2003 12:17:50 +0000: 
> Can the qulah we suggested for "vayhi erev ... Yom haShishi" in qiddush 
> be used? It was suggested that legabei this din, a "pasuq" could could 
> be up to an esnachta. 

A number of years ago I adopted the minhag of just starting from "Yom
HaShishi" as I believe there is a leniency for less than three words.

YGB 

In a message dated 2/14/03 12:12:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
micha@aishdas.org writes:
> : Could this week's daf yomi wherein it seems that they did so during
> : hosafa al ha'ir be a makor for this?
> 
> Can the qulah we suggested for "vayhi erev ... Yom haShishi" in qiddush
> be used? It was suggested that legabei this din, a "pasuq" could could
> be up to an esnachta.

I am sure it has been pointed out that notwishstanding RYBS's objection
and numerous chiddushim that revolve around the concept, the minhag is
NOT to worry about this, and understand the maamar Chazal to say that
one may not divide the psukim differently WHEN READING FROM THE TORAH.

Both the GR"A and the Alter Rebbe start their Kiddush with "Yom Hashishi".

Gut Shabbos,
Raffy

It seems to me that there's a side-parashah that could be tacked on to
the "forks" taxonomy.

The Gra had two talmidim I want to contrast.

The first, RCVilozhiner, describes his agenda for sheleimus ha'adam in NhC
sha'ar 4. Self-perfection lies in learning the "Mind" of G-d, limud Torah.
So that the effects of learning are in mystical terms. Knowledge of any
of any portion of Torah brings one closer to G-dly perfection. Sheleimus
could be pursued by learning Qodshim. And even more so from Qodshim,
as that's pure learning lishmah, for the sake of knowing His "Thought",
without al menas la'asos. Which is what you see in classic yeshiva
curricula.

Contrast with the line in the intro to Chovos haLvavos where RBiP
ridicules learning arcane corners of halachah that would never come up
as not bringing one to emunah and mitzvos. ChL calls for direct study
and work on sheleimus. Not a mystical sheleimus, but a fully rational
definition revolving around middos, emunah, bitachon -- ie mussar,
the approach of R' Zundel.

LAD the seed of mussar was the Gra's peirush on Mishlei and elsewhere.
It germinated underground under the care of R' Zundel until R' Yisrael
stood over the seedling and cried "Grow! Grow!" Finally, the seneh bo'eir
ba'eish found its trunk in Kelm, branching into Navordahok, Slabodka,
Mir, etc...

But the nequdah over which R' Chaim and R' Zundel diverged was the Gra's.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 "The most prevalent illness of our generation is
micha@aishdas.org            excessive anxiety....  Emunah decreases anxiety:
http://www.aishdas.org       'The Almighty is my source of salvation;  I will
Fax: (413) 403-9905          trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya

In a message dated 2/14/03 12:13:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu writes:
> If Hashem sends the inspiration to man that is IdE: "Hashiveinu Hashem
> eilecha v'nashuvah."
> 
> If man is inspired on his own that is IdT: "Pischu li pesach k'pischo
> shel machat."
> 
> It can be argues, however, that since the neshama is a chelek eloka
> me'ma'al that at some level everything is an IdE; the question is at
> what level of the neshama the IdE/IdT dichotomy becomes meaningful.

See the introduction to "Shaarei Orah" by R' DovBer of Lubavitch, the
"Mittler Rebbe". There, he explains this complicated concept, stating
that (, while both Purim and Chanukah were IdT events,) Purim was IdE
while Chanukah was IdT. I understand his point in the same light RYGB
pointed out:
If the IdT comes as the result of a perception of a "secret" signal sent
from above through the Nefesh Haelokis, it can be classified as IdE.

Gut shabbos,
Raffy

David Riceman <dr@insight.att.com> writes on Fri, 14 Feb 2003 12:40:40 -0500: 
> "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" wrote: 
>>  writing and delivering chaburos 

> Torah sheb'al peh i atah rshay l'amro b'chtav. 

Reb Tzadok in severl places rejects Reb Nosson Adler's contention that
the issur applies still ba'zman ha'zeh; Reb Tzadok holds that today the
mitzvah of Kisvu appliesa also to TSBAP.

Speaking of l'amro b'chtav, the new Bigdei Shesh on Shoftim contains
contributions both by list member R' Yitzchok Zirkind and list member R'
David Riceman (from his essay "Samson's Other Eye").

YGB 

Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> writes on Fri, 14 Feb 2003 17:50:55 +0000: 
> It seems to me that there's a side-parashah that could be tacked on to 
> the "forks" taxonomy. 
> 
> The Gra had two talmidim I want to contrast... 
> nequdah over which R' Chaim and R' Zundel diverged was the Gra's. 

I must quibble! 

R' Zundel was a talmid of R' Chaim's, IIRC, one of the founding talmidim
of Volozhin. So I imagine the kernel of his shittah came from the Gra
via RCV.

YGB 

On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 12:06:58PM -0600, sbechhof@casbah.it.northwestern.edu wrote:
: R' Zundel was a talmid of R' Chaim's, IIRC, one of the founding talmidim
: of Volozhin. So I imagine the kernel of his shittah came from the Gra
: via RCV.

So then is it RCBrisker who first really articulates the other side of this
split?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 "The most prevalent illness of our generation is
micha@aishdas.org            excessive anxiety....  Emunah decreases anxiety:
http://www.aishdas.org       'The Almighty is my source of salvation;  I will
Fax: (413) 403-9905          trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya

Joel Rich wrote:
>The trumat hadeshen based on the gemorah menuachot 36a holds 
>that even on chol hamoed if you put on tfillin without a bracha 
>you still can't talk between putting on the shel yad and rosh. Does 
>anyone know if this is the generally accepted rule? Would it apply 
>if you put on tfillin before the zman in the AM?

I believe the answer to both is yes.

Gil Student

At 06:24 PM 2/14/03 +0000, Micha Berger wrote:
>: R' Zundel was a talmid of R' Chaim's, IIRC, one of the founding talmidim
>: of Volozhin. So I imagine the kernel of his shittah came from the Gra
>: via RCV.

>So then is it RCBrisker who first really articulates the other side of this
>split?

Could be, but I seem to recall the Beis Halevi having said something earlier.

Kol Tuv,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org  or  ygb@yerusalmionline.org
essays, tapes and seforim at: www.aishdas.org;
on-line Yerushalmi shiurim at www.yerushalmionline.org

The parameters on how and for what doctors are permitted to receive
financial compensation are delineated in Yoreh Deah 366:2-3 and in the
Nosei Keylim there. The Nishmat Avraham YD 366 (who is also an internist)
devotes 3 pages of mareh mekomot on the subject.

Josh (whose boss at the hospital says,"Ehr iz a dokter, ehr farshteyt
a krenk)

RYGB wrote:
>The definition [of fanaticism]: (Note: the American Heritage Dict. does
> list fanaticism as the noun form of fanatic)
> marked by excessive enthusiasm and often intense uncritical devotion

> What should make us leery of any phenomenon is the association with it
> of excesssively enthusiastic and often intensely uncritical devotees.

> Fanatic anti-medinah, fanatic pro-medinah.
...
> Fanatic Chassidic, fanatic Brisker.

The ultimate crime in today's world is being a fanatic. However, why do
you assume that Judaism agrees with that assumption. Moral relativism
automatically tars fanaticism as being politically incorrect. However,
if there is an absolute truth, does fanaticism have no place? Is it wrong
to be "excessively enthusiastic" about the truth? I believe that what
makes us uncomfortable about fanatics is that they do not let us rest
with our established philosophies. If the fanatic is actually right that
would force us to change. The "I'm OK. You're OK" theory of living is less
threatening. The fanatic may be incorrect, but rather than dismiss him we
must be willing to investigate his arguments and grapple with ourselves.

The Rambam's derech hamemutza is refering specifically to middos and
not to hashkafos. The Rambam did not propose that all hashkafos, whether
right or wrong, should be incorporated.

motya

In a message dated 2/10/2003 3:08:46 PM EST,
sbechhof@casbah.it.northwestern.edu writes:
> Certainly, it would seem, not by sheer emotional approaches.

> Emotion is a ready maidservant of excessive enthusiasm and often intense
> uncritical devotion.

> So what is the eitzah? 

> I am formulating ideas. 

I heard a cute vort on this
when brain comes before hared then the Mem {moach} precedes the lev
and you are a Melech

OTOH when Leve comes first you get the Lamed first and you become
a Lemech!

Lhavdil, Albert Ellis advocated "Rational Emotions" Emotions should
respond to a proper perceptoin and response. I think Koheles ch. 3
is quite a parapell, there is a proper time {and possibly place} for
each emotion.

A bachur from Chofetz Chaim explained me this, Middos are like medicine,
you have to use them in proper dosages and for the right "disease"
Teaching more self-respect to a ba'al gaavah is probably a waste of
time and teaching humility to a person who is already self-effacing is
also misguided.

Maybe the goals of deveikus, yir'as shamayim, self-perfection, etc. can be
"Fanatic" but the means should be moderated or at least balanced.

Consider this case. Let's say steak was your favorite food. Would you
eat it every day? And if you did would that be healthy from a physical
OR emtoional point of view?

Kol Tuv - Best Regards
Richard Wolpoe
<A HREF="RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com">RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com</A>

--part1_37.341c9cd2.2b806218_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">In a message dated 2/10/2003 3:08:46 PM Eastern Standa
rd Time, sbechhof@casbah.it.northwestern.edu writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Certainly, it would seem, not b
y sheer emotional approaches.<BR>
<BR>
Emotion is a ready maidservant of excessive enthusiasm and often intense<BR>
uncritical devotion.<BR>
<BR>
So what is the eitzah? <BR>
<BR>
I am formulating ideas. <BR>
<BR>
But not for now, perhaps if this goes onto Avodah. <BR>
<BR>
YGB <BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
I heard a cute vort on this<BR>
when brain&nbsp; comes before hared then the Mem {moach} precedes the lev an
d you are a Melech<BR>
<BR>
OTOH when Leve comes first you get the Lamed first and you become a Lemech!<
BR>
<BR>
Lhavdil, Albert Ellis advocated "Rational Emotions" Emotions should respond

to a proper perceptoin and response.&nbsp; I think Koheles ch. 3 is quite a

parapell, there is a proper time {and possibly place} for each emotion.<BR>
<BR>
A bachur from Chofetz Chaim explained me this, Middos are like medicine, you
 have to use them in proper dosages and for the right "disease"&nbsp; Teachi
ng more self-respect to a ba'al gaavah is probably a waste of time and teach
ing humility to a person who is already self-effacing is also misguided.&nbs
p;&nbsp; <BR>
<BR>
Maybe the goals of deveikus, yir'as shamayim, self-perfection, etc. can be "
Fanatic" but the means should be moderated or at least balanced.<BR>
<BR>
Consider this case.&nbsp; Let's say steak was your favorite food. Would you

eat it every day?&nbsp; And if you did would that be healthy from a physical
 OR emtoional point of view? <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Kol Tuv - Best Regards<BR>
Richard Wolpoe<BR>
<A HREF=3D"RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com">RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com</A></FONT></HTML

--part1_37.341c9cd2.2b806218_boundary--

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


[ 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         ]