Volume 11 Number 95
Produced: Wed Feb 23 6:35:42 1994
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Eruv down and mitasek
[Michael Broyde]
Frozen Challah
[Laurent Cohen]
Hashgachah and politics
[Jan David Meisler]
headstone
[Daniel Kelber]
kippot and davening
[Saul Schwartz]
Lechem Mishneh - Frozen
[Ezra Rosenfeld]
Non-Wheat Matzot...
[Benjamin Rietti]
Office Ethics
[Shimon Schwartz]
Pastoral Care and Hospitals in Israel
[Michael Shimshoni]
Rashi's Descendants
[Susan Slusky]
slaves/ time related mitzvot
[Marc Warren]
Strangers?
[Ezra Rosenfeld]
Time-dependant Mitzvot
[Yacov Barber]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Broyde <RELMB@...>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 94 17:19:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Eruv down and mitasek
One of the writers when discussing the situation of a person who knows
that the eruv is down, analogizes this to the question of mitasek
(involved). I do not think that is correct. Mitasek is limited to
situations where the person does not even know that he is doing a
prohibited act, and not when they know they are doing the act, but they
do not know it is prohibited. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (teshuvot 8) asserts
that even in that situation there is a *mase'h avera* which is to be
avoided. This is argued with by Nitivot, Mekor Chaim 431:1, Rav
Soloveitchik, Shuirim Lezechar Avi Mori p.30, the Satmar Rebbi Divrie
Yoel 2:107 and many others. According to this analysis, a person who
did not even know he was carrying something, and the eruv is down need
not be told. In addition, the reference to Rav Auerbach is to Minchat
Shlomo page 549, where he limits the permissibility of mitasek to
situations of *pesik resha*, and not to direct actions. In my humble
opinion, most rishonim argue with Rabbi Eiger and rule that mitasek is
completely permissible (when the prohibited action is unknown; see
Meiri, Ramban and Rashi on Shabbat 72a and Chaya adam 9:8.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Laurent Cohen <cohen@...>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 94 10:45:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Frozen Challah
I had the same question some time ago that a frozen Challah can be used
for lehem mishneh. This is said in the hebrew second volume of Shemirat
Shabbat Kehilcheta of Rav Neuwirth. I think there is also something in
"Ase lecha Rav" of the chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv. It has to do with the
use of matsot for seudah shlishit of Shabbat Erev Pessah.
Laurent Cohen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jan David Meisler <jm8o+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 1994 12:53:35 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Hashgachah and politics
Just to clarify something....Janice Gelb mentioned about the Rabbanut in
Israel removed its hechsher from a yogurt product because its container
featured dinosaurs. The actual situation was a yogurt product (I don't
remember the company name), that had dinosaurs on the container (or
possibly dinosaur stickers). However, the hechsher that was to be
removed was that of the Badatz, not the Rabbanut. And, in the end, it
was not removed.
Yochanan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <XW0SDAK@...> (Daniel Kelber)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 94 06:43:07 -0500
Subject: Re: headstone
I would appreciate any information about the halacha regarding the
laying of the headstone for a grave.
Thanks
Daniel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <sauls@...> (Saul Schwartz)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 05:46:32 -0500
Subject: kippot and davening
As my sons have become bar mitzvah and gone on to yeshivot the
discussion of the need to wear a hat during davening has become more
"focused". Together, we have learned the Mishnah Brurah (91:12) where he
says that one needs to dress as one would to meet an important person
(i.e. with a hat - not a kippah). I am wondering if anyone has seen or
heard any recent "tshuvot", comments, etc, in regard to the
permissibility of wearing a kippah during davening, as is the practice
of my sons' father. :)
ProLine: sauls@pro-att
Internet: <sauls@...>
UUCP: crash!pro-att!sauls
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ezra Rosenfeld <zomet@...>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 1994 15:03:34 +0200 (IST)
Subject: Lechem Mishneh - Frozen
Rav Neuwirth in Shemirat Shabbat K'Hilchatta, Volume 2 (Ch. 55,12)
states clearly that one may use a frozen challa for Lechem Mishneh. In a
footnote, he quotes Rav Shelomo Zalman Auerbach that possibly
("Yitachen") if it is completely frozen "as a rock" and therefore not
edible, it may not be used, although if it will thaw during the meal
that would be o.k.
Ezra Rosenfeld
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <sales@...> (Benjamin Rietti)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 94 22:56:03 GMT
Subject: Non-Wheat Matzot...
Non-wheat Matzot have been available in Europe and the USA for some years
now - in the UK/Europe, call Rabbi Ephraim Kestenbaum on +44(0)81-455 9476,
and in the USA call Rabbi Dovid Kestenbaum in Lakewood, NJ on (908)-370-8460.
Hope this is of help.
Wishing everyone a Chag Kasher V'Sameach!
---------------------------
Benjamin Rietti
<sales@...>
---------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <schwartz@...> (Shimon Schwartz)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 05:46:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Office Ethics
Think of it this way. If you hired me to do landscaping at your house
for $20 per hour, would you mind if I spent some of that time on
Internet?
Many of us are paid by the month or week, not by the hour. It is
accepted practice to attend to some amount of personal affairs during
the workday, which varies in length. My employer has not lost my time,
since I must still accomplish the same tasks.
In particular, my employer specifically permits "occasional" personal
telephoning, as long as it doesn't interfere with one's work (it helps
to work for a telephone company :-) ). It is also accepted practice to
use the Internet for personal use. It would presumably be not-OK to run
personal mail (e.g. telephone bill payments ;-) ) through the postage
meter.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Shimshoni <MASH@...>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 11:07:14 +0200
Subject: Re: Pastoral Care and Hospitals in Israel
Nadine Bonner reported on hospitals in Israel and said also:
> I had one friend who was dying of cancer and when
>they stopped treatment they shunted him off to a side room and left him
>there. Even the doctors stopped coming in to check on him, and although his
>friends came as often as they could, after a while the number of those
>visits tapered off as people moved on with their own lives.
I obviously will not deny this story of Nadine, but would like to add
that in my experience this form of treatment is far from the norm in
Israeli "secular" (Nadine uses this term for those which are not
specifically Orthodox) hospitals. I have also some experience with
dying patients. They were not ignored or no longer checked by their
doctors. I could mention the "hospice" in the "secular" Tel HaShomer
hospital which houses terminal patients and the wonderful care they
get. Not all is as it should be in our hospitals, far from it, but
the impression Nadine might create in the mind of some readers had to
be addressed.
I could give more examples, but they would also only come from my,
luckily, somewhat limited experience.
Michael Shimshoni
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <segs@...> (Susan Slusky)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 94 13:07:27 EST
Subject: Rashi's Descendants
On Mike Gerver's project of figuring out how long it would take to have
all Jews be descended from Rashi:
I'm not a social scientist so maybe I missed this factor being included
in your model, but you seemed to have omitted the rabbinic/non-rabbinic
family issue from your model. High yichus families intramarry and don't
marry much with low yichus families. This is true today and was even
more true, I believe, in the past. Some of us have lists of rabbis from
whom we're descended and others of us are descended exclusively, as far
back as we know, from tradesmen. Rashi's descendents probably
intramarried extensively, so there are far fewer descendants than there
would be if marriage patterns were random.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <warren@...> (Marc Warren)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 05:46:17 -0500
Subject: slaves/ time related mitzvot
I quite clearly have a lousy memory when it comes to recalling things I
learned years ago in my Gemarrah. I made a very bad error when i stated
in my last posting that Jewish male slaves were not required to do time
related mitzvot. They are. And I would like to thank the people who
informed me of my error.
Marc Warren
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ezra Rosenfeld <zomet@...>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 1994 14:49:17 +0200 (IST)
Subject: Strangers?
The story told in the original posting by Malcolm Isaacs turned my
stomach. The idea that a person who enters an orthodox shul for minyan
should suffer the (public) humiliation of having his lineage questioned
seems foreign to Torah and contrary to Halacha, without even touching
upon the potential chillul HaShem aspect. In light of the recent posting
about the eruv and it's chazaka of being "up", one presumes that a Jew
who enters shul deserves at least the same consideration. On the other
hand, I wish that all Jews would show the same consideration for others
and their differing values as Alex Herrera.
Ezra Rosenfeld
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <barbery@...> (Yacov Barber)
Date: Wed, Feb 23 20:16:39 1994
Subject: Time-dependant Mitzvot
>It is commonly stated that women are exempt from positive commandments
>which are time-dependant because the obligations of the home fall on
>them. I just finished the section in the talmud on this subject, and
>could not find that rational stated. It is expressed as learned out
>from the verses. Can anyone give me a reference for the first time this
>rational is given.
The Kol Bo in Hil. Milah sect. 73 quotes the Baal Hamelamed (R' Yacov
Antuli) that since a wife has the responsibility to help her husband, if
she will have the added responsibility of performing a particular mitzvah
that has a set time to it, the husband will be left without help and this
could lead to conflict.
The Avudraham (p.25) explains the reason for exempting woman similarly
to the reason expressed by the Kol Bo. He adds that the Gem. says that the
name of Hashem is erased to make sholom between husband and wife.
For further ref. Sefer Chassidim sect. 1011. Sefer Hachaim (the brother
of the Maharal) perek 4.
There are Achronim who ask based on the Kol Bo and Avudraham what is the
Hal. concerning a single girl or a widow or divorced woman, or if their
husbands give them permission? Firstly if one will examine all the Poskim
on this topic there is no mention that in these situations the woman would
be obligated. I have seen various Achronim who explain it in the following
manner that the Kol Bo was only explaining the gezars hakosuv why woman are
exempt, however the Kol Bo was not saying that this is the very reason for
the hal. per say.
The Pardes Yosef ( Breishis 2,2 ) writes that it is to be considerd a "Lo
Plug" that the Chazal did not differentiate between a married woman and
others. The reason perhaps being since in the Torahs eyes the natural
state of a woman is to be married so the Hal. deals in that particular
situation
Rabbi Yacov Barber
South Caulfield Hebrew Congregation
Phone: +613 576 9225 - Fax: +613 528 5980
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 11 Issue 95
