Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 216

Sunday, December 26 1999

• Re: Avodah V4 #213
• Re: Orthodoxy and return of land
• Re: Avodah V4 #215
• re: limud hatorah and elitism
• Re: concern
• re: the Dulberg sisters case
• RE: Slap in the Face
• re: Kollel support
• re: Beis Din
• Moshe Rabbeinu's Free Will
• Re: Slap in the Face
• Re: Orthodoxy and return of land
• Re: concern
• Re: Moshe Rabbeinu's Free Will
• Re: Kollel support (was problem kids)
• Summary of Sources on Living Agunoth
• Re: Slap in the Face
• Re: Avodah V4 #214

In my days in Telz, the kollel, of which I was part to be a proud member of, 
was limited to a maximum of four years. Our Roshe Yeshiva made sure that all 
kollel yungerlite did not stay beyond the four-year limit, irrespective of 
one's financial capabilities from their extended families.

RYGB wrote <<< Can you prove that granting them the inevitable statehood
... >>>

I presume that the honored rabbi had intended to refer to an "almost"
inevitable statehood. Even if the probability of a political event is
very high, I think we should avoid absolutist language unless one has
given up on Hashem's help.

Akiva Miller

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

Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 02:43:13 +0200
From: "Mrs. Gila Atwood" <gatwood@netvision.net.il>
Subject: Re: Slap in the Face

> >
> > > otherwise Rabbis So;oveitchik and ylctv"a Yosef
> > > would not have held that "returning" land is permissible.
> >
> > In exchange for a *true* peace.


>Can we please get in touch with what we're talking about here?  Can we
>please just look at our sidurim and see what we're davenning for?  One
>of the worst aspects of galus is that we don't even realize how deep we
>are. The kelim aren't just pieces of metal -  they are remnants of an age
>of superior spiritual consciousness. If we don't believe that, then we're
>really in trouble.  Would anyone allow the remains of a loved one to be
>disturbed by a hostile party-  even as much as a fingernail, because, hey,
>it doesn't have any chius anymore so why object?  Intellect is great, but
>we have to operate with ten unified sephirot, not with just two or three.
Mrs. G. Atwood.

Actually, halachah operates on very rational, purely logical terms. My
grandfather, TZK"L, when presented with 'halachic' questions based on
'nistar', would usually reply 's'nit dor azah gemora'.
As a talmid chochom, he could discuss these issues, but as a posaik  he used
Arbah Chelkai Shulchan Aruch, precisely as RYGB has done here.
Obviously, there are other HALACHIC opinions, but in order to enter into the
realm of consideration, they too would have to be based on shas and poskim.

Simcha Klagsbrun

Rav Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote: <<

I must, however, provide what I believe is called a "wet towel".

When I was in Sha'alvim, the Rosh Yeshiva told us that he once asked RSZ
Auerbach if he was required to maintain in the Sha'alvim Kollel avreichim
that would put in their "9-5", but were not exemplary scholars nor destined
to become such. RSZA answered in the affirmative, that in our day and age it
is necessary to provide near universal access to Kollel (to those who seek
it) "kdei she'la'rechov yihyeh tzura".  >>

Remarkable.  Here we are, breaking our heads and writing our
respective contributions to this forum, trying to come up with the proper
Torah stance on this problem, and Rav Bechhofer weighs in with a
simple quote from the fifth chelek of Shulchan Aruch:
"kdei she'la'rechov yihyeh tzura"  !!!   For me this is very humbling
and makes me wonder sometimes what exactly we are doing here (i.e.,
we can quote gemaras right and left and cite the sociological
and economic literature,  but, aside from a few shutim and
a few anecdotes like the above, most of us have no access to that
fifth chelek, unless we drop our hypothesizing pens and go and ask
a gadol batorah).

KT,
Shlomo Godick

<< When I said concern, I did not mean to preclude our theoretical and
 emotional interest. I meant practical expression and involvement >>

Is yishuv ha'aretz just a theoretical issue like learning hil kodshim, or is 
it halacha l'ma'aseh of the existance of am yisreal b'eretz yisreal?  

Why not become involved in dealing with the issues on a practical level if 
you truly care about them?  Sitting on the sidelines and groaning with 
emotional concern isn't going to accomplish anything.  

  

Good news! The Italian appeals court vacated the custodianship
decision of the Italian juvenile court regarding the Dulberg sisters.
The full text of the appeals court decision should be published shortly.

Someone recently posted on Avoda the URL of the original juvenile
court decision.   That was a one-sided  presentation of the
"facts" by the court itself, vigorously disputed by the girls and the
mother.   The following URL gives an in-depth analysis of the case
from a Jewish point of view:

http://www.ou.org/public/statements/1999/dulbergcaseinbrief.htm

Please daven for Nitzan Dvora bat Tali and Danielle bat Tali, who
are suffering severe psychological trauma because of their separation
from their mother and harsh handling by their father.

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick

--- Akiva Atwood <atwood@netvision.net.il> wrote:
> 
> I remember a Gemara that basically says we don't
> have to be concerned with
> how they (non-Jews, but I suspect the same ruling
> applies to non-Observant)
> mis-interpret Torah teachings.


I think there is a major difference between how we
feel about how Non-jews interpret the Torah and how we
feel how non-obsevant Jews interpret the Torah.  In
the latter case this is a matter of major concern. It
behooves us all to try and be Mekarev non-observant
Jews and to the extent that we do anything that "turns
them off" is to the extent that we are liable for our
actions.  Instead we should do our utmost to try and
correct misinterpretations by the non-observant.

I was at the Greater Midwest NCSY conclave over the
weekend and this is excaxtly what the advisors and all
involved in this great Kiruv organization do.  They,
at all times, try to correct misconceptions and
prejudices that these teenagers bring with them.  And
they are pretty successful at it.

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

I recall learning once that a city has several obligations, including the
support of ten "batlanim", defined as people whose do nothing but
full-time Torah learning. Where can I find the sources for this?

Also, do those batlanim have any obligations to the community? Is their
learning purely lishmah, or are they expected to serve as teachers or
poskim in any way?

Akiva Miller

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

S Klagsbrun wrote <<< one who was aware of the situation would be
required to refrain from advising anyone to bring a case to a 'bais din'
unless they had first hand knowladge that this particular bais din was
the exception to the rule. >>>

I wrote <<< If I ever need to go to a Beis Din for something, I would go
to one recommended by my rav, or one led by some well-known rav/posek.
What other options would I have? >>>

S Klagsbrun responded <<< Again, you make my argument for me. If we
cannot depend on the leadership to keep the system honest, we must demand
a change. >>>

I think I'm missing something. Aren't "the leadership" and "the batei
din" the same people?

First (R'? Mr? Mrs?) Klagbrun accuses virtually all batei din of
corruption ("unless they had first hand knowladge that this particular
bais din was the exception"). Okay, I understand that the libel laws make
it difficult to accuse anyone of corruption, but can you suggest any
batei din which are NOT corrupt? The RCA? Agudah? My local shul? Anyone?
Such blanket statements suggest that you do not trust anyone. If this is
so, then which leaders remain untainted? Exactly who are asking to make
these changes?

Akiva Miller

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

The Meshech Chachmah (Hakdamah to Shemos) asks how HaShem could say, 
regarding Moshe, "veGam Becha Yaaminu LeOlam." How can HaShem give Moshe's 
words the authority of law in advance, if Moshe has the right to decide one 
day that he wants to leave it all behind?

The Meshech Chachmah resolves the problem by saying that Moshe achieved the 
highest heights of purity, and so HaShem removed his Bechirah; thus, every 
time Moshe spoke from then on, it was without Bechirah, and HaShem could be 
sure that Moshe would not mis-speak.

So here's the question - how did Moshe come to hit the rock?

Mordechai
Cong. Ohave Shalom, YI of Pawtucket, RI http://members.tripod.com/~ohave
HaMakor! http://www.aishdas.org/hamakor Mareh Mekomos Reference Library
WEBSHAS! http://www.aishdas.org/webshas Indexing the Talmud, Daf by Daf

----- Original Message -----
From: Mrs. Gila Atwood <gatwood@netvision.net.il>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 1999 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: Slap in the Face


> When you know that part of the surgical team are convicted murderers with
> very incomplete charata,  I wouldn't want to be under the knife.  And here
> we are. I trust you are keeping up to date with the news here.
>

I do. I do not think, however, that your extension of my mashal is accurate.

> I agree that it is possible to treat the kotel as an avodah zara. It is
also

Actually, I do not think anybody treats the Kosel as an AZ, and I think
Leibowitz was an apikores. I find, however, that extreme attachments to the
land qua land to the dismissal of more important values has the potential to
make one sympathetic to some of Leibowitz's viewpoints.

> possible to gain a historical and spiritual perspective on Eretz Israel,
> Jerusalem and Har haBayit and understand their true value in Yiddishkeit.
> Our tefilas are filled with references. Surely we all agree on this. When
we
> daven with any kavana,  do we take these as allegorical or abstract? Of
> course we should care about these places.
>

Agreed.

> Yes,  of course we agree that we should behave with the highest standards
of
> derech eretz and ahavas habrios in all these issues. We should also expect
> the same standards from our Arab cousins if we are truly together in a
peace

I am really not concerned with our Arab cousins (that much). I am concerned
more about our image in the eyes of our Jewish brethren.

> process. We're not suggesting we should behave obnoxiously and dismiss the
> reaction of the goyim- . We're suggesting we should act with the utmost
> wisdom regarding pikuach nefesh and not worry that that may not be PC.

> According to the midrash on the Megillah,  the vessels from the Beis
> hamikdash were used for wine without measure at Achashverosh's party.  We
> can say intellectually that, OK, the vessels weren't kodesh anymore
anyway,
> so why should that bother us? Doesn't  it touch us at all anywhere?
>

Emotionally, yes. But that was not what R' Akiva asked, was it?

> Can we please get in touch with what we're talking about here?  Can we
> please just look at our sidurim and see what we're davenning for?  One of
> the worst aspects of galus is that we don't even realize how deep we are.
> The kelim aren't just pieces of metal -  they are remnants of an age of
> superior spiritual consciousness. If we don't believe that, then we're
> really in trouble.  Would anyone allow the remains of a loved one to be
> disturbed by a hostile party-  even as much as a fingernail, because, hey,
> it doesn't have any chius anymore so why object?  Intellect is great, but
we
> have to operate with ten unified sephirot, not with just two or three.
>

Yes, we need to be holistic. But intellect over all else. And, intellect
should dictate that there are certain battles that are not going to produce
the desired result.

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

Perhaps. I am resigned to what I perceive to be inevitable. I am no longer
sure it is a bad thing, and that we should beseech Hashem to help avoid it
occuring.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: Kenneth G Miller <kennethgmiller@juno.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 1999 7:23 PM
Subject: Re: Orthodoxy and return of land


> RYGB wrote <<< Can you prove that granting them the inevitable statehood
> ... >>>
>
> I presume that the honored rabbi had intended to refer to an "almost"
> inevitable statehood. Even if the probability of a political event is
> very high, I think we should avoid absolutist language unless one has
> given up on Hashem's help.
>
> Akiva Miller
>

----- Original Message -----
From: <C1A1Brown@aol.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 1999 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: concern


> Is yishuv ha'aretz just a theoretical issue like learning hil kodshim, or
is
> it halacha l'ma'aseh of the existance of am yisreal b'eretz yisreal?
>

It is kind of like the following:

You are of the opinion that simchas yom tov requires basar. You are mesupak
if one is yotzei b'basar of. The basar beheima you have in front of you,
however, is of dubious hashgocho (definitely not glatt). Which do you
choose?

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

His bechira was only deprived him when he acted as "mouthpiece".

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

----- Original Message -----
From: <Pawshas@aol.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 1999 9:42 PM
Subject: Moshe Rabbeinu's Free Will


> The Meshech Chachmah (Hakdamah to Shemos) asks how HaShem could say,
> regarding Moshe, "veGam Becha Yaaminu LeOlam." How can HaShem give Moshe's
> words the authority of law in advance, if Moshe has the right to decide
one
> day that he wants to leave it all behind?
>
> The Meshech Chachmah resolves the problem by saying that Moshe achieved
the
> highest heights of purity, and so HaShem removed his Bechirah; thus, every
> time Moshe spoke from then on, it was without Bechirah, and HaShem could
be
> sure that Moshe would not mis-speak.
>
> So here's the question - how did Moshe come to hit the rock?
>

--- DFinchPC@aol.com wrote:
> hmaryles@yahoo.com writes:
> 
> <<  If we
>  support less thean the best we are going to reap
> less
>  than the best.  We don't need second rate poskim
> any
>  more than we need second rate doctors, or second
> rate
>  anything. >>
> 
> The problem is not merely whether weed out all but
> the best and brightest. 
> The problem is overcoming the vast secular
> attractions the best and brightest 
> face. Had they been born in America in this era, the
> great Gedolim of the 
> past -- the Vilna Gaon, Rambam, Rashi, etc., etc. --
> might well have ended up 
> running Wall Street law firms, or teaching at Yale,
> or doing brain surgery at 
> (literally) $75,000 a crack.

I don't think so... at least not any more than
Einstein might not have been attracted to his area of
study and instaed studied, say, medicine.  

It is my personal belief that each Human being has a
particular talent where, given the opportunity, will
be able to reach the greatest heights whther it be
medicine, law, theoretical physics, or learning Torah.
To insure that the best minds that are oriented to
Torah learning are not sidetracked and enticed away
from learning, I believe the present system is a good
one.  Everyone should go through the system until he
has completed at least one or two years of Torah study
post high school.  It is at this point where a
"correction" in the system need be applied.  

If someone has desire to study a discipline other than
Torah, say, medicine, after having spent his entire
life up to this point doing so, then he should be
encouraged to follow that goal instead of continuing
in Kollel.  Eventhough he has a brilliant career in
learning Torah, It will probably not be as brilliant
as a career in medicine would be.  And his
continuation of full time Torah learning would not be
as productive as someone whose overwhelming desire is
to know Torah (not medicine).  

In other words, we, as a Torah society need brilliant
doctors, too.  And we shouldn't sacrifice those with
such talents. Instead, Roshei Yeshiva and Kollelim
should be guiding certain students into a lifetime of
learning and certain students into the disciplines
which are geared more to their naturlal talent.

HM


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

> From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@juno.com>
> Subject: SUMMARY OF SOURCES ON  LIVING AGUNOTH

> 7) To answer Carl;s questions such prayers should
> be allowed ON ANY INCIDENT similar to witholding
> wages, loan payments, or anguishing widows. ALL
> I am saying is that a witheld get should not be
> INFERIOR to a WITHELD loan or wages (How can
> Carl or anyone disagree with that?!--I concede that
> I don't know all cases that such prayers are allowed
> but that is irrelevant.

I will concede that a withheld get is not inferior to a withheld loan or 
wages. But that is beside the point because you haven't proven 
that one may daven for the death of someone who withholds 
payment on a loan or payment of wages either. And even if you 
don't know all the cases in which such prayers are allowed (your 
words, not mine), you ought to be able to articulate a principle as 
to WHEN it is permitted to daven for someone else's death R"L 
before you go about advocating doing so. Chazal have articulated a 
principle that says that one may NOT daven for the death of one's 
enemy.

> 8) To answer Richards question (and Carls)---the person
> praying is not JUDGING the man rather she is praying FOR
> JUDGEMENT!!

Which is precisely what Chazal have told us is prohibited lest we 
cause Hashem to be m'ayen in our own deeds.

> Ultimately it is God who is judging the man. To further
> answer Carl's question this woman has been
> - ---deprived of legal aid
> - ---deprived of basic rights of marriage
> It is not OUR right to tell he not to pray also. 

It would also be putting her in mortal danger to tell her to pray for 
the scoundrel's death.

Furthermore
> to prohibit her from praying for death would be to violate
> an EXPLICIT biblical permission.

Which one is that?

> 9) Finally any statements in Rishonim or acharonim about
> not encouraging certain types of hostile prayer DO NOT
> IN ANY CASE apply to the cases the Bible enumerated
> above (loan default, withold wages). 

On what basis? Forgive me for saying this, but you keep making 
these very definitive statements for which you claim to have 
support, but I haven't seen an iota of support for them other than 
your saying so. Does anyone else see a source for RRJH's 
argument?

Consequently we
> are not justified in overriding something explicitly allowed

Where is it explicitly allowed????

> In conclusion I would urge Richard and carl to read what
> I said before citing me out of context. 

Citing you out of context? I've just quoted you, which was what I 
think I did all the previous times I answered you.

-- Carl


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

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

> From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
> Subject: Re: Slap in the Face
> 
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: Akiva Atwood <atwood@netvision.net.il>
> To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
> Sent: Sunday, December 26, 1999 11:59 AM
> Subject: RE: Slap in the Face
> 
> 
> > > Yes. That "returning" land causes lives to be lost instead of
> > > saving them is not a demonstable point,
> >
> > And once it *is* demonstratable, countless lives will have been lost.
> >
> > > otherwise Rabbis So;oveitchik and ylctv"a Yosef
> > > would not have held that "returning" land is permissible.
> >
> > In exchange for a *true* peace.
> >
> 
> I do not believe that was or is part of the basis for their position. There
> is no way to know if a peace is true or not when you sign the dotted line.
> One is permitted to risk an operation that is experimental and potentially
> fatal if it may save the patient's life (a famous teshuva by R' Chaim Ozer
> Grodzhenski in the Achiezer). Hu ha'din b'nidon didan.

I don't have that tshuva in front of me, but I think the Achiezer only 
permitted such an operation after exhausting all other alternatives. 
That is definitely NOT what happened b'nidon didan. We took an 
organization that was on its deathbed and revived it, and now we 
continue to go forward in a "process" in which it has yet to fulfill a 
single commitment. Something is VERY wrong here.

Also, it is my understanding of both RYBS zt"l and lehavdil bein 
chayim lechayim ROY that they both hold that it is permitted to 
give up land only to save lives of persons who might otherwise be 
killed R"L in the event of war. It appears to me that either of them 
would at least require some reasonable basis for at least having a 
hava amina that giving up land would save lives - something which 
has been sorely lacking up to now.

> > And there is *no* evidence that the PA is interested in such a peace.

Do I gather that RYGB has no answer to this contention?

> > > What is this business of Kedushas har Ha'Bayis? Is it because
> > > of the issur of Me'ilah?
> >
> > The *dirt* isn't the question -- the *artifacts* from the eras of Bayis
> > Rishon/Sheni are what people are upset about.
> >
> > Isn't it *possible* that those kelim *do* have kedusha?
> >
> 
> Actually, I belive the sugya in Nedarim 54 states that all kelim in the Beis
> Ha'Mikdash are subject to the halacha of "ba'u ba peritzim va'yechaleluha",
> i.e., unlike the actual karka of the HhB they lose their kedusha when seized
> by Goyim. So, no.

Where in Nedarim 54?

See Mikdash Dovid Siman 1 S'if Katan 6, and numerous mekoros 
there where (if I understand it correctly) he is saying that the klei 
shares, and the stones of the mizbeach, the heichal and the azara 
require gniza and have a din of m'eila l'achar m'eila. So why do you 
say that they lose their kdusha when they are seized by goyim?

-- Carl


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

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

> Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 14:23:28 -0600
> From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
> Subject: Re: Orthodoxy and return of land
> 
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: <C1A1Brown@aol.com>
> To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
> Sent: Sunday, December 26, 1999 12:04 PM
> Subject: Orthodoxy and return of land
> 
> 
> > << I believe it is not for Orthodox Jewry to concern itself with the
> "return"
> >  of land to the Arabs. Certainly not if that concern leads the
> non-Orthodox
> >  to the slightest aversion to Torah Judaism. >>
> >
> > If kedushat ha'aretz, yishuv ha'aretz, lo techaneim, etc. are not our
> > concern, then what is?  Aside from the technical halachic parameters must
> we
> > be blind to the political meaning that the Old City and other areas have
> to
> > to our national identity?
> >
> 
> Of course they are our concern.
> 
> The Galil is just as kadosh as Yehuda v'Shomron.

No question, but neither has the kdusha of Yerushalayim (which is 
what started this discussion).

> I am curious as to how you would like to apply "Lo Techaneim" here. They are
> choneh already. Can you prove that granting them the inevitable statehood
> enhances the extant chanayah ba'karka to the extent that it would constitute
> an additional prohibition? 

I think the question is how much more land the government will give 
them before granting them "inevitable statehood." If they were to 
get statehood based on what they have now, it would not be viable 
which is the only reason they aren't pushing their self-styled 
declaration of independence in the first place.

If anything, since the State of Israel has no
> intention of "transferring" its Arab population, it probably would diminish
> its "aveirah" of Lo Techaneim" by relinquishing the areas of Arab population
> so that the State would not be in the position of having Goyim "tachas
> yadam" and allowing their continued residence.

Yes, except the PA is demanding that we also "transfer" all of the 
Jews out of any adjacent areas, i.e. turn the land over to them. 
Additional "lo sechaneim?" 

> As to the Old City, so far as I know, this was not an Old City issue but a
> Har ha'Bayis issue. Since the '67 war the State of Israel has consistently
> refrained from asserting its authority over the HhB. Ma ha'yom me'yomayim?

Because, at least in the early days, Israel allowed the Arabs to 
control access to the mosques on the Har HaBayis, but the Arabs 
did not do anything to change the physical status quo up there. 
Now, that has changed too. What you do not see is that the goal of 
the Wakf is to deny any Jewish connection to Har HaBayis and to 
tell the big lie often enough and loud enough to convince the rest of 
the world of its validity.

-- Carl


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

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

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


[ 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         ]