Avodah Mailing List

Volume 11 : Number 025

Sunday, June 15 2003

< Previous Next >
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 12:36:28 -0400
From: Mlevinmd@aol.com
Subject:
Re: Persian Era


RMLevin wrote:
> I recently came across an interesting site
> (http://chaver.com/Articles/TenWrd1.html) that claims a totally different
> arrangement than Chazal's for the 10 commandments on the luchos. To the
> question of why had the Chazal not learned that way, it gave the answer:
> because they were trying to hide from the minim the tri-partite structure
> imbedded into its text. I think that we should labor to understand Chazal,
> not to dispose of their words by such means.

AF:
> Well, don't dismiss this theory out of hand. It uses some of the same
> arguments as Abravanel against the Mekhilta's interpretation, and somehow
> I doubt you will give the same cold shoulder to RDYA.

I object to the disingiousness of claiming for chazal opinions contrary
to the ones that they actually recorded. It is better to say that a
different pshatis offered, as Abarbanel does often, with all due respect
due to our teachers. Doesn't dismissing someone's words with a shrug,
"they don't really mean it", disrespectful?

[Email #2. -mi]

In a message dated 6/3/2003 6:50:24 AM EST, turkel@post.tau.ac.il writes:
> The gemara in Horayot (6) states that in the days of Ezra they brought
> sacrifices to atone for their sins in the days of Zidkiyahu.
> Furthermore, the gemara proves that the majority of the people
> bringing the korban must have been chayav already.
> Since one needs to be at 13 years old to be chayav and over 70
> years had passed ( ...         ) these people were at least 83-85
> years old. Hence, according to this gemara the majority of the
> residents of Jerusalem at this point were over 83 and had either
> remained in Israel during the Churban or else has gone to Bavel and
> in their 80s made the trek back to Jerusalem.
> So when Ezra complains that very few people joined him on his return
> to Israel it is even worse as most that did come were in their 80s.

There is a possibility that these sins were committed during the exile
period and the people were much younger. May be bowing to the image
of Nebuchadnezzar?

I have just realized that the facts are incorrect. The actual time from
destruction of the Temple to Coresh's proclamation was only 52 years. The
70 years come form Yirmia 29 and Daniel 9 but in the former case it is
the period between Nevuchadnezzar's ascent to the throne and Coresh's
proclamation and the latter is between the churban and completion of the
work (see megilla 11b and Emunos vDeos, REDEMPTION, Ch. 4). From Ezra
3 it seems that the crying was at the time of Ezra. So, the majority of
the returness would have been in their 60s, which is quite possible.

Also, as the horaas shaa, even those just born before the churban could
have been a part of that generation and then they would be in their 50s.

M. Levin


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 18:52:08 +0300
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <cmsherer@fandz.com>
Subject:
Re: rasha ve ra lo


On 4 Jun 2003 at 15:30, Eli Turkel wrote:
> I agree that the thief will be punished in the next world. However, R.
> Schwab indicates that once a person's income is decided on Rosh
> Hashana he cannot increase it by theft. That is the part I find
> difficult to believe. It implies that the Mafioso living high on the
> barrel had that decreed for them each RH

Correct. And that he will lose an equivalent amount to what he steals
from whatever money he would have earned honestly (or will have to expend
his ill-gotten gains on matters that bring him no personal benefit -
like lawyers' fees :-).

-- Carl


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:29:32 +0200
From: Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: Persian Era


On Tuesday 10 June 2003 18:36, Mlevinmd@aol.com wrote:
> I object to the disingiousness of claiming for chazal opinions contrary to
> the ones that they actually recorded. It is better to say that a different
> pshatis offered, as Abarbanel does often,  with all due respect due to our
> teachers. Doesn't dismissing someone's words with a shrug, "they don't
> really mean it", disrespectful? M. Levin

Well, ordinarily I would agree with you, except ... the idea that
'Hazal are enigmatic in their aggadic pronouncements is well founded
among Rishonim, not only of the rationalist school, and ... I find it a
lot better to reinterpret 'Hazal than to be compelled to reject a maamar
that need not be rejected.

However, I will concede that as far as the paper you linked to is
concerned, let's just say that I find his suggested pshat attractive
enough to investigate it further.

BTW, in his attempt to assume that the Christian interpretation of
a particular matter is not necessarily wrong, but rather worthy of
consideration, he is not being radical either. Abravanel, among others,
did that hundreds of years earlier.

Arie Folger


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:23:36 -0400
From: MPoppers@kayescholer.com
Subject:
Re: Aliyos in Naso


From GDubin in Avodah V11 #24:
> I've seen the shorter version in some siddurim, not necessarily Chabad.

One of those siddurim is the Rodelheim print; the shorter
Shabbos-PM/Mon-AM/Thu-AM 3rd aliyah was the custom in Frankfurt and,
quite likely, other German communities and communities following Germanic
customs. Good thing I wasn't leining P'Naso my first year in Elizabeth,
else I would have been quite surprised on the Shabbos afternoon which
followed the community leining of P'B'midbar Sinai.

All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ


Go to top.

Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:35:50 -0400
From: "Gil Student" <gil@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: Women, talis & tefillin


Carl Sherer wrote:
>See the Ramo in OH 38:3.

Jonathan Baker wrote:
>I know that Ramo. It's of a piece with the Ramo in OH 88:1.

I don't see the connection. The requirement of a "guf naki" for tefillin
is universally acknowledged.

>First off, the Ramo cites these ideas in the name of "yesh
>omrim" or "yesh cotvim", but doesn't say what the real
>origin is.

Not in 38:3.

>I wonder if R' Bin-Nun is influenced by R' D. Sperber's
>(unpublished, but described in lectures) research on the
>origin of the Ashkenazi customs of women's avoiding
>contact with Sifre Torah and Tefillin, now largely
>(increasingly?) in abeyance.

I was told in an offline correspondence that R' Bin-Nun's reasoning is
that women are exempt from time-bound mitzvos because they are meshubados
to their husbands. Since today that is not the case women should be
obligated in time-bound mitzvos.

To me it sounds like faulty reasoning and, more importantly, doreish
ta'ama di-kra which we do not do.

Gil Student


Go to top.

Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 19:45:22 +0200
From: Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: rasha ve ra lo


RET wrote:
> I agree that the thief will be punished in the next world. However,
> R. Schwab indicates that once a person's income is decided on Rosh Hashana
> he cannot increase it by theft. That is the part I find difficult to
> believe. It implies that the Mafioso living high on the barrel had that
> decreed for them each RH

The Mafiosi don't hold like RSS, but rather like Moreh Nevikhim, so
they *can* increase their earnings in this world. (check for Rambam's
explanatino of hakol taluy bemazal)

Arie Folger


Go to top.

Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 19:45:56 +0000
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: rasha ve ra lo


On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 07:45:22PM +0200, Arie Folger wrote:
: The Mafiosi don't hold like RSS, but rather like Moreh Nevikhim, so
: they *can* increase their earnings in this world. (check for Rambam's
: explanatino of hakol taluy bemazal)

Ruba deruba of said Mafiosi aren't Jews, but what does the Rambam do
with ein mazalos beYisrael?

-mi


Go to top.

Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 22:59:48 +0200
From: D & E-H Bannett <dbnet@zahav.net.il>
Subject:
Re: 'aseres hadibros


Just a few comments on the postings. A more detailed discussion will 
probably appear on the Mesorah list sometime soon.

1. Heidenheim did not say that, in reading with ta'am elyon, the first 
dibbur should be read with ta'am tachton.  He said that the first 
dibbur is the same in both ta'am elyon and tachton - just as in the 
other dibrot there are some t'amim common to both.

2. The unidentified book Ta'amei Hamikra that was mentioned in postings 
probably refers to the book by R' Shmuel Weinfeld.  He is a son of the 
founder of the Eshkol publishing company in Jerusalem. He quotes many 
sources on the subject and also whether and when to read with elyon or 
tachton, including, among others, the Hizkuni, R' Wolf Heidenheim, R' 
Zalman Henne, and R' Ya'akov Emden who of course condemns every 
chiddush of RZ"H. 

Some time ago there were postings re: reading on Yitro and on Shavuot. 
(in Avodah or perhaps in Areivim).  I remember only what a poster from 
Efrat called Minhag Eretz Yisrael, and my comment that it is actually 
minhag haPrushim in Yerushalayim that the Prushim label minhag E"Y and 
it is not the minhag of most Ashkenazic or Sefaradic shuls in Israel.

3.  R' Mordekhai Breuer has done a masterful job in explaining not only 
the correct t'amim but he also reconstructs the history of the various 
errors and changes and how, when, or why they were introduced into the 
books.  

To summarize what RM"B considers the correct t'amim:
In ta'am elyon, the first sentence is Anokhi.... up to mibet 'avadim 
with t'amim as shown for ta'am tachton in most printed chumashim. So 
there are ten dibbrot, not nine, although the first two are in first 
person directly to us without intermediary.

The ta'am tachton is divided into "normal length" sentences. The first 
sentence starts with pashta on Anokhi, tevir on hotzeitikha and has an 
etnachta on 'avadim. it then continues, has tevir on l'kha and sof 
pasuk in 'al panai. The second sentence starts with lo ta'aseh l'kha... 

k"t,

David


Go to top.

Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 19:46:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Hershel Botnick <hpbotnick@yahoo.com>
Subject:
Source of 'Ein dovor she'aino oimed bifne horotzon'


There is a 'velt vort' that there is nothing that stands in the way of
a strong will. If you really want something badly, it will come about.

I was wondering whether there is a source for this in the torah, and
IMHO this is one :

When Hashem said to Kayin after rejecting his offering, and Kayin was
despondent: "V'atoh timshol boi". Rashi explains that this means that
if you really, really want to overcome the Yetzer Hora, you can. Rashi's
loshon: "Im tirtze tisgaber olov".

I would appreciate it if someone would come up with some other possible
Torah or rabbinic sources to this saying and post.

By the way, I will be in Elizabeth, NJ this Shabbos and I would really
like to meet fellow Areivim'nikes (after Davening of course !). I will
be the one with a sthreimel and bekitshe in Rabbi Teitz's shul.

Hershel Botnick


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 10:27:17 +0200
From: Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: Women, talis & tefillin


RCS wrote:
> Now if you ask me WHY the poskim hold that men can control flatulation
> and women cannot (or even whether that is physiologically correct based
> on the science known to us today), I cannot tell you. But it is clear
> from the MB in 38:13 that he took women's lack of control over flatulation
> as a given.

Suggestion of Rav Aryeh Klapper of Harvard Hillel & Maimonides (doing
great work in Talmud curriculum development there) is that it refers to
the fact that before the advent of running water, women would constantly
be soiled from handling leaky diapers.

BTW, nobody has yet given me a firm answer on this one: when touching
hidden parts of the body during a meal, one must wash hands. But since
babies typically eat with their parents or at least hang out at the
table, and since baby (definitely in warm weather) tend to be dressed
according to different standards and in stretching or loosely fitting
clothes (two sizes larger, because he'll outgrow it soon ;-)), it is
virtually unavoidable that one will touch the baby above the elbow or
on the leg. Does one need to wash, then? (will make most people eat at
the sink, needing to wash so often ;-))

Should those areas be considered mekomot hamegulim? Or are these places
worse, since babies are constantly dirtying themselves? How about shoes
and socks of a baby who doesn't walk yet? How about the kneecap area on
baby clothing of crawling babies, is that like their "shoes"?

I posed this question to a number of rabbanim, but got no definite
answers. The prevalent minhag of all women I have seen in action is
not to care about this, and in truth, so is the minhag of all men I have
seen in action.

Arie Folger


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 13:27:07 +0300
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <cmsherer@fandz.com>
Subject:
Re: Women, talis & tefillin


On 12 Jun 2003 at 10:27, Arie Folger wrote:
> BTW, nobody has yet given me a firm answer on this one: when touching hidden 
> parts of the body during a meal, one must wash hands. But since babies 
> typically eat with their parents or at least hang out at the table, and since 
> baby (definitely in warm weather) tend to be dressed according to different 
> standards and in stretching or loosely fitting clothes (two sizes larger, 
> because he'll outgrow it soon ;-)), it is virtually unavoidable that one will 
> touch the baby above the elbow or on the leg. Does one need to wash, then? 
...
> Should those areas be considered mekomot hamegulim? Or are these
> places worse, since babies are constantly dirtying themselves? ...

I would think that it is not an issue because the halachic problem with
mekomot ha'megulim seems to be that it's also a makom zeah and a baby
doesn't usually sweat.

When I lived in Passaic, one of the yeshiva bochrim raised this issue
because I was holding one of my infant sons in shul while he was wearing
shorts. Everyone else came to the conclusion that since the child doesn't
sweat it's not an issue. But we never asked a posek about it.

-- 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.


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 18:51:15 +0200
From: Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: Women, talis & tefillin


On Thursday 12 June 2003 12:27, Carl M. Sherer wrote:
> On 12 Jun 2003 at 10:27, Arie Folger wrote:
> > BTW, nobody has yet given me a firm answer on this one: when touching
> > hidden parts of the body during a meal, one must wash hands. But since
> > babies typically eat with their parents or at least hang out at the
> > table, and since baby (definitely in warm weather) tend to be dressed
> > according to different standards and in stretching or loosely fitting
> > clothes (two sizes larger, because he'll outgrow it soon ;-)), it is
> > virtually unavoidable that one will touch the baby above the elbow or on
> > the leg. Does one need to wash, then? (will make most people eat at the
> > sink, needing to wash so often ;-))
<snip>
> I would think that it is not an issue because the halachic problem
> with mekomot ha'megulim seems to be that it's also a makom zeah and a
> baby doesn't usually sweat.

Would you thereby permit touching your dry chest in the middle of a meal, 
assuming you just took a shower, for good measure? (methinks not) Would you 
say that there is no problem *from that perspective* when people are having a 
single gender pool party and eating shoarma in pita eish tanur? (but of 
course, making a brakhah is not straighforward in these circumstances. 
Perhaps they should imerse themselves up to their necks for that ;-))

Arie Folger
-- 
If an important person, out of humility, does not want to rely on [the Law, as 
applicable to his case], let him behave as an ascetic. However, permission 
was not granted to record this in a book, to rule this way for the future 
generations, and to be stringent out of one's own accord, unless he shall 
bring clear proofs from the Talmud [to support his argument].
	paraphrase of Rabbi Asher ben Ye'hiel, as quoted by Rabby Yoel
	Sirkis, Ba'h, Yoreh De'ah 187:9, s.v. Umah shekatav.


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 21:03:28 +0300
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <cmsherer@fandz.com>
Subject:
Re: Women, talis & tefillin


On 12 Jun 2003 at 18:51, Arie Folger wrote:

> On Thursday 12 June 2003 12:27, Carl M. Sherer wrote:
> Would you thereby permit touching your dry chest in the middle of a
> meal, assuming you just took a shower, for good measure? (methinks
> not) 

No, because my chest has a chazaka for sweating :-) A baby's legs 
have no such chazaka. 

Would you say that there is no problem *from that perspective*
> when people are having a single gender pool party and eating shoarma
> in pita eish tanur? (but of course, making a brakhah is not
> straighforward in these circumstances. Perhaps they should imerse
> themselves up to their necks for that ;-))

IIRC R. Bodner paskens in his sefer that (at least b'dieved) all that 
is required is that he not be in a situation of libo roeh es ha'erva, 
i.e. he should be allowed to make a bracha while clad only in a 
bathing suit. But perhaps bentching has a different status. 

-- Carl

Carl M. Sherer, Adv. Zell, Goldberg & Co.
Telephone 972-2-571-5030 Fax 972-2-571-5031 eFax (US) 1-253-423-1459

mailto:cmsherer@fandz.com      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.

It was a mistake to bomb the nuclear reactor in Iraq. 
Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon P, Haaretz, December 24, 1995


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 18:12:34 +0000
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: Women, talis & tefillin


On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 06:52:08PM +0300, Carl M. Sherer wrote:
: The explanation given by the MB in 38:13 is that women are not capable
: of keeping a "guf naki." This is clearly NOT a reference to menstruation;
: otherwise how would the concept apply to men? ...

Very weak argument.

My kids' room could be messed up with toys or with clothes. Proving
that in one context the problem couldn't have been one doesn't
mean it never is.

Both of the above are destracting effects of our physical limitations.
Why can't either be a lack of the necessary neki'us?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                     Life is complex.
micha@aishdas.org                    Decisions are complex.
http://www.aishdas.org                   The Torah is complex.
Fax: (413) 403-9905                                    - R' Binyamin Hecht


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:39:17 -0400
From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Subject:
Re: persian history


At 11:50 AM 6/3/03 +0000, Eli Turkel wrote:
(deleted)
>Some problems with Chazal's chronology
(deleted)

RET makes very interesting points about the difficulties with Tanach that
emerge from the traditional Seder Olam. Surely, however, the authors of
that history were aware of Tanach?

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


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:40:45 -0400
From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Subject:
Re: Persian Era


At 02:36 PM 6/3/03 +0000, Micha Berger wrote:
>I too was under the impression sod ha'ibbur referred to the results,
>not the algorithm used.

So what is the "sod?"

>It's pretty simple to take any molad and add multiples of
>29d 12h 44m 1ch'. Take any molad and you can create the
>rest.

But since KAt Yab Tashtzag is an average, it is not easily arrived at... 
That requires divine imparting.

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


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 18:07:38 +0000
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: Persian Era


On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 08:40:45AM -0400, Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer wrote:
: >I too was under the impression sod ha'ibbur referred to the results,
: >not the algorithm used.

: So what is the "sod?"

Already answered. Leshitas haRambam, it's the ability to check an eid
based on where the moon ought to be.

: >It's pretty simple to take any molad and add multiples of
: >29d 12h 44m 1ch'. Take any molad and you can create the
: >rest.

: But since KAt Yab Tashtzag is an average, it is not easily arrived at... 
: That requires divine imparting.

Or a mesorah and a few minutes of memorization.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                     Life is complex.
micha@aishdas.org                    Decisions are complex.
http://www.aishdas.org                   The Torah is complex.
Fax: (413) 403-9905                                    - R' Binyamin Hecht


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 18:09:35 +0000
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: Minhagim


On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 11:10:14AM -0400, Mlevinmd@aol.com wrote:
: In fact, however, we live in a"flat" society, whereas our ancestors lived
: in a very hierachical one. The minhagim were adopted by the talmidei
: chchomim and the elite; what the common people did did not count and
: did not persist.

The oft quoted (here) Rambam, in Mamrim 2:2 is clear that minhagim are
instituted by the beis din. Not a grass-roots from the masses.

-mi


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 16:59:42 -0400
From: David Riceman <dr@insight.att.com>
Subject:
Re: Persian Era


Micha Berger wrote:
> : >It's pretty simple to take any molad and add multiples of
> : >29d 12h 44m 1ch'. Take any molad and you can create the
> : >rest.
>
> : But since KAt Yab Tashtzag is an average, it is not easily arrived at...
> : That requires divine imparting.
>
> Or a mesorah and a few minutes of memorization.

In the absence of base 10 representation of numbers calculating future
moladot is not so simple. IIRC the Rambam devotes quite a lot of space in
H. Kiddush HaChodesh to describing the art of calculating the remainder
when dividing a large integer by seven. But he does emphasise that he
doesn't actually teach astronomy in H. Kiddush HaChodesh.

David Riceman


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 22:37:25 +0000
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Re: Persian Era


On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 04:59:42PM -0400, David Riceman wrote:
....
: In the absence of base 10 representation of numbers calculating future
: moladot is not so simple. IIRC the Rambam devotes quite a lot of space in
: H. Kiddush HaChodesh to describing the art of calculating the remainder
: when dividing a large integer by seven. But he does emphasise that he
: doesn't actually teach astronomy in H. Kiddush HaChodesh.

You can't bring a ra'ayah against the Rambam from the Rambam. (A qushya,
if that's your intent.)

It's the Rambam (Qiddush haChodesh 11:4) who says computing the molad
is easy, and that sod ha'ibbur is about knowing the math necessary for
figuring out where in the sky the molad would be for checking eidim.
RSG already quoted verbatum.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                     Life is complex.
micha@aishdas.org                    Decisions are complex.
http://www.aishdas.org                   The Torah is complex.
Fax: (413) 403-9905                                    - R' Binyamin Hecht


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 23:21:19 +0000
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Adv: "How To Do Mussar" -- an exploratory forum


HOW TO DO MUSSAR -- a day-long exploratory forum

On June 22, 2003 at the JCC in Manhattan, a day-long interactive
forum will address the question "How To Do Mussar." This is a big
question, maybe THE big question -- how do we take the wisdom of this
millennium-old Jewish transformative spiritual tradition and put it to
work as a practical discipline in our own lives? Every generation has
had to reinterpret the Mussar tradition and this meeting is devoted to
helping us do the same today.

Speakers include:
  a. Rabbi Yechiel Yitzchok Perr, Rosh Yeshiva, Yeshiva of Far Rockaway
  b. Rabbi Hillel Goldberg, whose books on Mussar -- like "The Fire
     Within" -- are among the most insightful on the subject of Mussar
  c. Rabbi Yaakov Feldman, translator of "The Duties of the Heart" and
     "The Path of the Just" for Aronson
  d. Rabbi Zvi Miller, a Mussar leader from Israel who has translated
     Rabbi Yisroel Salanter's "Ohr Yisroel" into English
  e. Rabbi Gavriel Bechhofer, Editor, Mishnah Series, Artscroll/Mesorah
     Publishers
  f. Mr. Micha Berger of the AishDas Society 
  g. Dr. Meir Levin, author of the book "Novarodock" on one of the main
     branches of Mussar
  h. Rabbi Craig Miller of the Jewish Community Relations Council 
  i. Dr. Alan Morinis, author of "Climbing Jacob's Ladder"
... and others to come.  

Cost for the day is $50 for pre-registration ($60 at the door) including
a kosher lunch, payable to the Manhattan JCC, 334 Amsterdam Ave. @
76th St. // New York, NY 10023. For information contact Susie Kessler
at the JCC's Makom Program: 646.505.5708 or skessler@jccnyc.org

Support for this event has been generously provided by the Nathan
Cummings Foundation.


Go to top.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 19:00:28 EDT
From: Joelirich@aol.com
Subject:
Re: Minhagim


In a message dated 06/12/2003 2:15:07 PM EDT, micha@aishdas.org writes:
> The oft quoted (here) Rambam, in Mamrim 2:2 is clear that minhagim are
> instituted by the beis din. Not a grass-roots from the masses.
 
However see Taanit 26b which implies certain minhagim were grass roots.

KT
Joel Rich


Go to top.

Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 10:55:31 -0400
From: "Gil Student" <gil@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Married Women Not Covering Their Hair


This is from the current Weekly-Halacha by R' Doniel Neustadt, sent out
by Torah.org:

"Many theories have been postulated as to why some women - although
meticulous in keeping other mitzvos - are lax in regard to covering their
hair. Some do not cover their hair at all and others do so partially.
It must be stressed that this practice is roundly condemned by all
poskim. There is not a single, solitary authority who finds a leniency
for married women to have their hair uncovered(6).

"6 There are some communities that have allowed women to expose the
small portion of hair that protrudes from beneath the head covering.
See Modesty, An Adornment for Life, pg. 236-240, who explains that this
custom has no basis in Halachah and should be discontinued. It must be
stressed, that even those who are lenient do not allow more then a total
of 2 tefachim by less than half a tefach of hair to show (a tefach is
approximately 3.5 inches). See Igros Moshe E.H. 1:58 and O.C. 4:112.

"Weekly-Halacha, Copyright  2003 by Rabbi Neustadt, Dr. Jeffrey Gross
and Torah.org."

I believe that the e-mail address for those who wish to set the record
straight is jgross@torah.org.

Gil Student


Go to top.

Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:00:48 -0400
From: "Gil Student" <gil@aishdas.org>
Subject:
Adv: Shiur on Eiruvin in Flatbush


Announcing an upcoming shiur by R' Yisroel Hirsch on the topic of
"Eiruvin in Metropolitan Areas and the Possibility of Having an Eiruv
in Flatbush"
Followed by a Question & Answer period

To be given 5-6 pm on June 21, Shabbos Parshas Beha'alos'cha

in Congregation Shaarei Shalom
in Yeshiva Ahavas Torah building
2961 Nostrand Avenue, near Avenue P
Brooklyn, NY

All men and women are invited to attend


Go to top.

Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 23:35:39 +1000
From: "SBA" <sba@iprimus.com.au>
Subject:
Fw: Shovuos


> Reply from Reb Gimpel

>> Off list correspondence re the Lubavitch minhag to celebrate Shvouos 
>> 50 days  post-Pesach

>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "G impel
>> SBA:[BTW, what about the rules that YT can't fall certain days etc.?]>

>> G: Is there such a rule concerning Shvuos?

>> See the Mechaber Hilchos Rosh Chodesh 428:1 & 3:
>> 1) Eileh hayomim sh'ein kovim bohem hamoadim...
>> velo Gehaz [Tuesday, Thursday, Shabbos] - Atzeres...
>> 
>> 2) Lik'vias hamoadim 'AT BASH'
>> ...beyom beis [Pesach] bo Shovuos..

----- Original Message ----- 
From:Gimpel
To: <sba@iprimus.com.au>

> I'm pretty sure that that "rule" has no connection to this issue (as may
> also be deduced by the fact, that all those that asked on the Rebbe's
> psak, didn't ask from there AFAIK), as the reason why Atzeres doesn't
> fall out on Gh"z is - because of the kvius of RH, YK, HR etc (as
> explained in that siman), since the SA is talking about an Atzeres that
> comes out on 6 Sivan and a specifis amount of days from RH etc., and if
> it would come out on Gh"z it would effect the later Yomim Tovim, unlike
> here.

> Likewise the second "rule" you quote...


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 >