Volume 29: Number 23
Sun, 19 Feb 2012
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:45:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Tahara
The mishnah, Shabbos 23:5 and Semchos 1:1-3, as well as R' Yochanan and
Reish Laqish in Vayira Rabba 34:10, all assume meisim are to be washed
before qevurah. Similarly the Rambam (Aveilus 4:1). Seifer haChasidim 5:16
says that just as one is bathed when they enter the world, they are bathed
when they leave it. As in Qoheles (5:14), "kol umas sheba kein eileikh".
But that's all hadachah / reshitzah.
When did rechitzas hameis evolve into what we call today a
taharah? Nothing is becoming tahor, and yet we use a miqvah or a flow
of 9 qav of water. We are not just calling it "taharah", taharah defines
the matbeiah we're using. Also miqvah and 9 qav are metaharim different
kinds of tum'ah; I don't know a case of real taharah where a person who
doesn't have the ability to do one can become tahor through the other.
:-)BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy,
mi...@aishdas.org if only because it offers us the opportunity of
http://www.aishdas.org self-fulfilling prophecy.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Arthur C. Clarke
Go to top.
Message: 2
From: "Jay F Shachter" <j...@m5.chicago.il.us>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 13:02:31 -0600
Subject: [Avodah] Clear Thinking About Male Homosexuals
A number of significant points have been absent in the numerous,
numerous, recent articles in our sister mailing list Areivim
concerning our attitude toward male Jewish homosexuals. Otherwise
intelligent people, from whom one expects better, have stated, for
example, that if our attitudes were determined solely by the Torah,
and were free from foreign influences, we would feel no differently
about practicing male Jewish homosexuals than about shellfish eaters
or Sabbath breakers.
Apparently it is necessary to help people think more clearly about
this topic. Please do not take this article as any form of polemics,
nor as advocacy for any discernible position. I just want people to
think clearly before they write, for the same reason that I want
people to proofread their writing before they post, and for the same
reason that I want people to present the text to which they are
responding before presenting their response to it -- because it is
painful to read your articles, when you do not do these things.
The most important omission has been in the nature of the apologetics
that argue that male homosexual intercourse is worse than nearly every
other transgression. People have correctly pointed out that pederasty
is "yehareg v'al ya`avor" (a transgression to be avoided even at the
cost of one's life) for both the pederast and the catamite. And then
they stop. But they could go further. Sa`adya Gaon has ranked the
forbidden sexual relations into degrees of offensiveness, and he
classified pederasty as worse than, e.g., adultery (readers who do not
know Arabic will find this passage rendered into Hebrew by Avraham ibn
Ezra, in his comment on Exodus 20:13; there is a more cursory
reference in his comment on Leviticus 18:21). So even among
transgressions that are "yehareg v'al ya`avor", pederasty ranks toward
the bottom, and this may explain a tendency to display less tolerance
of practicing male homosexuals than of adulterers.
Still, I believe that this is all beside the point. The real reason
people are friendlier to Sabbath desecrators (even the ones who take
"pride" in being Sabbath desecrators, in the sense that they do not
conceal their Sabbath desecration, nor feel any reason to) than to
pederasts is that we are sympathetic to the Sabbath desecrators -- in
the sense that we understand them. We understand how decent people of
good will, who were raised without benefit of a Torah education, may
honestly lack the conviction that Sabbath observance in the sense we
define it is mandatory. We can picture such people -- misguided,
surely, and wrong -- but holding their convictions with their
integrity intact. After all, the Midrash asserts that our father
Avraham figured out even `Eruv Tavshilin on his own, but even if you
take this Midrash literally, we do not expect everyone to have the
religious genius of Avraham. And people do not have this same sense
of male homosexuality. With respect to male homosexuals, people have
the sense that "they ought to know that this is wrong -- they ought to
know, inside, on their own, without recourse to authority or to
tradition, that this is just wrong".
There is, in Halakha, a doctrine that corresponds to this sense. It
is the doctrine of the Seven Commandments of the Descendants of Noah.
Judaism believes that there are seven principles of conduct to which
all humans must conform. This means that God rightly expects certain
behavior even from people who have not had the benefit of God's
revelation. Some knowledge is built into the human condition. It is
a consequence of being human that you know -- you just know -- that
murder is wrong. It doesn't matter if you grew up in Harlem, or
Germany, or Kampuchea. You are still expected to know that murder is
wrong, and so you will be judged. Judaism teaches that the
prohibition of pederasty falls within the Seven Noahide Commandments.
In other words, it is an act forbidden not only to Jews, but also to
all human beings, which means that there is something intrinsic to our
nature that knows that it is forbidden. It is this, and not the fact
that it is "yehareg v'al ya`avor", and certainly not the fact that the
Torah calls it an "abomination", that people are really responding to
when they are less accepting of practicing male homosexuals than of
Sabbath violators.
(We could now get into a side-discussion concerning the proper
motivation for the fulfillment of the Seven Noahide Commandments.
I will grant in advance, since you cannot deny it in the face of the
rabbinic evidence, that the best motivation for observing the Seven
Noahide Commandments is that they are in the Torah. In other words,
all human beings are supposed to believe that the Torah is true, even
those people to whom the Torah was not primarily addressed. The
non-Jews are supposed to obey the parts of the Torah that apply to
them for the same reason that we are supposed to obey the parts of the
Torah that apply to us -- because so God commands. This is the ideal.
Still, even those non-Jews who have never studied Torah, or even heard
of the Torah, are expected to conform to the Seven Noahide
Commandments. They're just supposed to know, that's all.)
It must also be pointed out that (anticipating a likely reply) the
category of "yehareg v'al ya`avor" is NOT a subset of the Seven
Noahide Commandments. There are acts which a Jew must die rather than
perform, which are nevertheless perfectly permitted to a descendant of
Noah. My favorite example (because of its shock value) is sexual
intercourse with your daughter. A Jew must give up his life rather
than have sexual intercourse with his daughter. A non-Jew may have
sexual intercourse with his daughter as many times as the two of them
want, just for the fun of it. We do not possess any innate knowledge
that sexual intercourse with our daughters is forbidden. We know that
it is forbidden only because the Torah prohibits it (actually, the
Torah doesn't explicitly prohibit it -- another side-discussion).
Non-Jews are not required to act on this knowledge, because it is not
innate. Non-Jews ARE expected to know, innately, that sexual
intercourse with your mother is wrong -- just not sexual intercourse
with your father. There are all sorts of things that are "yehareg
v'al ya`avor" for us Jews, and yet permitted to non-Jews. There is
even an opinion in the Beyth Yosef (fortunately not restated in the
Shulxan `Arukh) that the rabbinic prohibitions keeping you away from
your wife when she is Nidda are "yehareg v'al ya`avor". (Now, that
would be a great side-discussion: the Beyth Yosef implies that a
Jewish obstetrician may not deliver his own child, even if there is no
one else to assist, even to save the life of his wife, who is dying in
childbirth. What do you say to that? I love this stuff.)
Another point. A few people have stated, and a number of others have
suggested, that homosexual impulses are innate, that they are
genetically determined, and that they cannot be changed. Presumably
this means that their homosexual impulses are as natural to them as my
heterosexual impulses are to me. The fact is that I don't even know
for sure that my heterosexual impulses are genetically determined, but
I assume that they are, because of the evolutionary advantage that
they confer (women with shapely breasts are better able to nurse their
young successfully than women with, e.g., shapely toes). So let us
now assume the existence of people with genes inside of them which
make them grow up into homosexuals. The Torah essentially says that
these people may not have sexual pleasure, ever, their entire lives.
A number of people, addressing what our attitude should be toward this
condition, have basically said, "well, life is tough". I agree with
this -- ultimately, the only answer we can give, although I would not
phrase it that way in practice, is "life is tough". But we should
clarify exactly what it is we are asking of these people. I assert
that the Torah is asking more of these people sexually than it ever
asks of anyone else.
It has been pointed out that the Torah requires abstinence of
unmarried heterosexual people too. This is an egregiously poor
analogy, to the point of insensitivity. Unmarried heterosexual people
can correct their condition. They can get married, and have sexual
intercourse ten times a night for the rest of their lives, with
relatively few exceptions (remember that in Torah-observant families
the woman is generally either pregnant or nursing for a good
proportion of her childbearing years). It would make as much sense to
point out that the Torah requires abstinence of married people. It
does, most of the time, but that isn't the point. Nearly every
married person reading this article is, I am certain, forbidden to
have sexual intercourse at this moment (else why are you sitting in
front of your computer monitor reading this?), whether because you are
at home and the only person with whom you may legally have sexual
intercourse is at work, or because you are at work and the only person
with whom you may legally have sexual intercourse is at home, or
because there are children in your home who have learned to speak, who
have not yet gone to sleep, and who are not deaf, or because of any
one of a hundred other reasons. The homosexual is in an entirely
different situation. The only other places where the Torah comes
remotely close to the situation of the homosexual are a few
pathological instances.
(Some people have spoken about mamzerim. Don't tell me about
mamzerim, or mamzeroth. A mamzereth can always find a mamzer, or a
convert. A mamzer can always find a mamzereth, or a convert. After
siring one son and one daughter with her, he can leave her and marry a
non-Jewish slavewoman, with whom he may live for the rest of his life,
and with whom he can legally sire other biological children who, upon
manumission, will be Jewish, and will not be mamzerim.)
One of these pathological cases is that of a widow of a High Priest,
who may not have sexual intercourse ever again, for the rest of her
life. And a widow of a king almost always finds herself in the same
situation, because a king's widow may only marry another king, to whom
she is usually forbidden for reasons of incest. Those are the only
situations I can think of where the Torah forbids someone to have
sexual intercourse for the rest of his life. An `agunah might find
her husband, or discover evidence of his death. Finally, these people
are all women, and women are allowed to masturbate. Jewish men are
not even allowed to masturbate. Just keep this in mind, the next time
you are trying to summon sympathy for a male Jewish homosexual, even
one, perhaps, who is not entirely sinless. It's like being told by
the Torah that you may not have sexual intercourse, nor even
masturbate, ever, for the rest of your life.
Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
6424 N Whipple St
Chicago IL 60645-4111
(1-773)7613784
j...@m5.chicago.il.us
http://m5.chicago.il.us
"The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house"
Go to top.
Message: 3
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:13:56 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Clear Thinking About Male Homosexuals
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 01:02:30PM -0600, Jay F Shachter wrote:
: The most important omission has been in the nature of the apologetics
: that argue that male homosexual intercourse is worse than nearly every
: other transgression. People have correctly pointed out that pederasty...
Pederasy and homosexuality are different things that usually have
very different etiologies.
:-)BBii!
-Micha
Go to top.
Message: 4
From: Lisa Liel <l...@starways.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:24:54 -0600
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Clear Thinking About Male Homosexuals
On 2/17/2012 1:02 PM, Jay F Shachter wrote:
> One of these pathological cases is that of a widow of a High Priest,
> who may not have sexual intercourse ever again, for the rest of her
> life. And a widow of a king almost always finds herself in the same
> situation, because a king's widow may only marry another king, to whom
> she is usually forbidden for reasons of incest. Those are the only
> situations I can think of where the Torah forbids someone to have
> sexual intercourse for the rest of his life.
Safek mamzer?
Lisa
Go to top.
Message: 5
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:33:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Clear Thinking About Male Homosexuals
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 02:24:54PM -0600, Lisa Liel wrote:
> On 2/17/2012 1:02 PM, Jay F Shachter wrote:
>> Those are the only
>> situations I can think of where the Torah forbids someone to have
>> sexual intercourse for the rest of his life.
> Safek mamzer?
Giyores.
Or: a safeiq mamzeres marrying a ger.
But what about a person who simply fails to find a mate?
:-)BBii!
-Micha
Go to top.
Message: 6
From: "Jay F Shachter" <j...@m5.chicago.il.us>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:40:07 -0600
Subject: [Avodah] Pederasty and Homosexuality
Micha Berger wrote on Fri Feb 17 14:13:56 2012:
>
> Pederasy and homosexuality are different things that usually have
> very different etiologies.
>
Etymologically, pederasty is related to pedophilia, because the
ancient Greeks tolerated male-on-male sexual intercourse only between
a man and a boy. But I meant that term in the modern English sense --
"anal intercourse (especially with a boy)" -- and, more specifically,
I was just looking for a succinct English word that described
male-on-male sexual intercourse, I had no intention of conveying the
connotations inside the parentheses. If my use of the term was
misleading, I apologize. The Hebrew term would have been clearer than
any equally succinct English term, and perhaps that is what I should
have used, but when I am writing in English, I stick to English
whenever possible (and one day, if I live long enough, I will write a
long article about that, I consider linguistic confusion to be a
serious, and dangerous, ill, though few people since Anshei Khnesseth
HaGdola have seen it the way I do -- but that is a topic for another
time). I would offer to rewrite the article, but it seems that it is
too late for that (I receive Avodah in digest form, so have not yet
seen my article, but since I got a reply to it from you, it must have
already been published, unless you are one of the editors). If you
think it will help clarify things, you may forward this to the mailing
list -- in fact, I think I will forward this to the mailing list
myself, and leave it to the sound discretion of the editors to decide
whether there is any benefit in posting it.
Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
6424 N Whipple St
Chicago IL 60645-4111
(1-773)7613784
j...@m5.chicago.il.us
http://m5.chicago.il.us
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"
Go to top.
Message: 7
From: Lisa Liel <l...@starways.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:35:26 -0600
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Clear Thinking About Male Homosexuals
On 2/17/2012 2:33 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 02:24:54PM -0600, Lisa Liel wrote:
>
>> On 2/17/2012 1:02 PM, Jay F Shachter wrote:
>>
>>> Those are the only
>>> situations I can think of where the Torah forbids someone to have
>>> sexual intercourse for the rest of his life.
>>>
>> Safek mamzer?
>>
> Giyores.
>
> Or: a safeiq mamzeres marrying a ger.
Mesurevet get. Agunah.
Lisa
Go to top.
Message: 8
From: Eli Turkel <elitur...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 20:52:14 +0200
Subject: [Avodah] R Elyashiv
<<
Similarly, li nir'eh:
It is our job to pray for life. Any further cheshbonos are Someone Else's
problem. >>
Doesnt answer the question from the example of Rebbe
On a somewhat different front a doctor from Shaarey Tzedek told me that the
floor where R. Elyashiv is hospitalized is filled with well wishers. Of
course they cant get in to see him but they disturb the treatment of other
patients by their huge numbers which impedes medical people who need to
rush through the crowds.
Is there any mitzvah to be closer to the sick person. Does praying in the
corridor have any more effect than praying in kikar shabbat?
--
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120218/dbd9dc48/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 9
From: "Prof. Levine" <llev...@stevens.edu>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 21:44:44 -0500
Subject: [Avodah] Asking your own shailos
At 02:28 PM 2/17/2012, Dovid Cohen wrote:
>R' Liron Kopinsky asked if one can rely on a shaila asked by another, or if
>"you always need to find out how your particular LOR paskens."
>
>I have heard the assertion made that one needs to pick one rav and follow
>him in everything, but I'm not sure what the source for that is.
I really do not see how one can rely on one rov for
"everything." Some sheilos require expertise in particular areas,
and I doubt that one rov will have expertise in all areas.
Let's take kashrus, for example. Many rabbonim do not have detailed
knowledge about kashrus. In fact, my experience has been that aside
from those rabbonim who are involved in kashrus, most rabbonim have
no more knowledge than the average consumer when it comes to
kashrus. If one wants specific detailed knowledge, then one has to
consult with a rov who is active in the field of kashrus.
YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120218/1b843588/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 10
From: "Danny Schoemann" <doni...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 11:41:11 +0200
Subject: [Avodah] Asking your own shailas
> At what point is one allowed to say "his or her Rav says it's ok so I'm
> going to do it" versus personally asking (and bothering) your Rav
> about every shaila you might have? For example, if you go to
> someone's house on Shabbat and you see them doing something
> that you think might be assur and they assure you that they asked
> this exact shaila and was told that it's fine, are you now allowed to
> do that as well, relying on the shaila they asked, or do you always
> need to find out how your particular LOR paskens?
From what I recall of Horiyos, if you suspect something isn't allowed then
you cannot rely on your "source" and you would be held accountable for
following such.
The only possible exception would if a Bet Din published a Psak for public
consumption.
But - I assume - if you have no reason to believe their Psak is wrong
("something that you think might be assur") then we have the general rule
that "one witness is believed for Issurim".
- Danny
Go to top.
Message: 11
From: "Danny Schoemann" <doni...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 12:15:32 +0200
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Terumos Umaaseros
From: Ilana Elzufon <ilanaso...@gmail.com>
>I'm not a farmer, but it seems to me that the only trees blossoming at tu
> bishvat (at least here in EY) are almond trees (hashkediah porachat....)
> and that they are still pre-chanata. That is why tu bishvat is a good
> cut-off, because there isn't much to get confused about. But I am open to
> correction by those with greater botanical/agricultural/halachic
knowledge.
According to my Magid Shiur (and confirmed by R' Google), peach and
nectarine trees flower during January and are a huge headache when it comes
to T"uM.
- Danny
Go to top.
Message: 12
From: menucha <m...@inter.net.il>
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 13:27:49 +0200
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Clear Thinking About Male Homosexuals
roa dam machmat tashmish?
menucha
> On 2/17/2012 1:02 PM, Jay F Shachter wrote:
>
>> Those are the only
>> situations I can think of where the Torah forbids someone to have
>> sexual intercourse for the rest of his life.
>
Go to top.
Message: 13
From: "Danny Schoemann" <doni...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 12:03:20 +0200
Subject: [Avodah] Tahara
>I therefore assume it is only a custom. I do not recall seeing
> it quoted in the Shulchan Aruch.
Try SA YD 352 and the Rambam in Sefer Shoftim ? Hil. Avel Ch. 4
But it?s already a Mishna in Shabbat: Ch. 23 Mishna 5 (on Daf 151)
???????? ???? ??????? ??????, ?????? ??????????? ??????, ????????? ???????
???????? ??? ?????.
- Danny
Go to top.
Message: 14
From: T6...@aol.com
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 22:41:47 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Tahara
From: Harry Maryles <_hmaryles@yahoo.com_ (mailto:hmary...@yahoo.com) >
>>(K'tzas Kasha: By doing Taharos they benefit the loved ones who can
return the favor. Also people doing Tahros will no doubt be more assured of
their own eventual Tahara by doing them for others when they were still alive.
So I'm not sure why it is always cited as the ultimate Chesed with no
expected return benefit. But I digress<<
HM
>>>>>
It is considered the ultimate not because the relatives can't thank you or
return a favor, and not because you don't get schar -- but because THE
PERSON YOU ARE HELPING can never help you or even thank you in any way.
It seems to me that the same level of chessed would occur if you helped a
person who was alive but completely incapacitated, mentally and physically.
--Toby Katz
=============
Romney -- good values, good family, good hair
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120218/eecff095/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 15
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 07:00:38 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Tahara
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 10:41:47PM -0500, T6...@aol.com wrote:
: It is considered the ultimate not because the relatives can't thank you or
: return a favor, and not because you don't get schar -- but because THE
: PERSON YOU ARE HELPING can never help you or even thank you in any way.
Does "chessed shel emes" mean "the ultimate chessed"?
It does seem to mean "with no expectation of personal gain", or more
literally "real chessed". And thus if you are willing to include people
who are not in a position to pay you back ("completed incapacitated",
is how you put it), then why aren't you willing to exclude cases where
living people know who did the taharah and think better of the chevrah
qadisha member for it?
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger It is harder to eat the day before Yom Kippur
mi...@aishdas.org with the proper intent than to fast on Yom
http://www.aishdas.org Kippur with that intent.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
Go to top.
Message: 16
From: David Riceman <drice...@optimum.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 10:38:09 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit of Reb Yisroel Salanter is this
RYL:
<<Rav Yisrael Salanter, despite his own antipathy for Haskalah>>
Do you have any evidence of this supposed antipathy?
David Riceman
Go to top.
Message: 17
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 11:28:17 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Terumos Umaaseros
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 12:15:32PM +0200, Danny Schoemann wrote:
: According to my Magid Shiur (and confirmed by R' Google), peach and
: nectarine trees flower during January and are a huge headache when it comes
: to T"uM.
Peaches, nectarines and almonds are related plants. The difference is
that while the almond ripens early, we wait for the fruit to dry up and
get leathery, split open and then harvest just the pit. Look a a peach
stone, and compare it to an almond in shell.
http://pavdevelopment.com/almond/harvest/Commercial-Almond-Harvest-P
rocess
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Mussar is like oil put in water,
mi...@aishdas.org eventually it will rise to the top.
http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507
Go to top.
Message: 18
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 12:12:51 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit of Reb Yisroel Salanter is this
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 10:38:09AM -0500, David Riceman wrote:
[Quoting, indirectly, from my blog:]
>> Rav Yisrael Salanter, despite his own antipathy for Haskalah
> Do you have any evidence of this supposed antipathy?
See the discussion at <http://lvov.judaica.spb.ru/salanter-en.shtml>.
Or, from Glenn's biography of RYS
http://www.yasharbooks.com/salanter%20excerpt1.html .
Or Etkes's bio, ch. 10.
It's unclear if he was against Englitenment, or simply believed that the
old-style yeshiva was the only way to produce rabbanim. He could, as many
in the YU world do today, have believed in academic study for those who
already "filled their stomachs" on classical learning to the point of
already knowing how to learn in the traditional style. His objection to
Haskalah may have been based on its being a replacement; and would have
been okay with Enlightenment as an enhancement.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Despair is the worst of ailments. No worries
mi...@aishdas.org are justified except: "Why am I so worried?"
http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507
------------------------------
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
End of Avodah Digest, Vol 29, Issue 23
**************************************
Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
avodah@lists.aishdas.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."