Volume 12 Number 60
Produced: Fri Apr 15 8:43:32 1994
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
gibrokts
[Percy Mett]
Halacha and Drugs
[David Charlap]
Less dangerous substances
[Joshua W. Burton]
Mallika Leya
[Joey Mosseri]
MJ 12:14 Basar B'chalav
[Benjy Kramer]
Sheva Merachef Following Prefix Letters
[Arthur Roth]
ve'af al pi sheyismame'ah
[Mitch Berger]
Youth Minyanim
[Susan Slusky]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <P.Mett@...> (Percy Mett)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 20:18:20 -0400
Subject: gibrokts
<leora@...> (Leora Morgenstern) writes:
>
>As I understand it, the word gebrockt, referring on Pesach to foods
>that consist of matza or matza meal which has come into contact
>with liquids, comes from the German word brocken, the infinitive
>verb form, meaning to break. (The original gebrockt food was probably
>matza broken into soup.) The past participle is gebrockt, and is
>used as an adjective. The noun form is created by adding an e and an s
>(since the noun is a neuter, neither masculine nor feminine);
>thus we have das gebrocktes. (Gebrocktes has three syllables.)
>
>My question is: In newspapers, letters, and speech, I keep coming
>across the word "gebroks" -- no t, no e, just 2 syllables, and often
>used as an adjective as well as a noun, e.g., gebroks cooking.
>Is this the correct Yiddish form, or is this just a mistake in
>spelling, pronunciation, and usage that has become common?
>If this is the correct Yiddish form, what are the Yiddish rules of
>derivation from the original German word that result in the form gebroks?
>Is there perhaps another etymological source that would explain
>the word gebroks?
I have always understood the Yiddish word 'brokkn' as meaning to dunk, but
Leora's etymology is supported by Weinreich: English/Yiddish Dictionary.
The noun form in Yiddish is formed by addid "s" e.g gebeks (baked food)
gibrotens (roast). I suppose the "ts" in gibrokts easily becomes
assimilated to "s". What happens in the German is really of no consequence.
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <david@...> (David Charlap)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 94 10:39:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Halacha and Drugs
<XW0SDAK@...> (Daniel Kelber) writes:
>
> Rabbi Fruendel talks of why drugs are Assur according to Halacha,
>reasons number one and four being that they couse bodily harm and are
>addictive. I was wondering if anyone can tell me why so my frum smoke
>so much when it causes these exact things.
Until recently, the dangers of smoking were unknown, or at least
unpublicized. As a result, there is a minhag (or something like one)
of permitting tobacco.
Because of this, there are many tobacco addicts who got started before
the dangers were known. Many rabbis feel that to force an addict to
go cold turkey will impair Torah learning (actually, any learning that
the person tries), make the person irritable (and hence, destroy
respect for his fellow man), and have ill side-effects (like weight
gain and sleeplessness). For these reasons, many rabbis have declared
that it is prohibited to start smoking, but one who is already
addicted will be permitted (grudgingly) to continue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <burton@...> (Joshua W. Burton)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 94 00:28:35 EDT
Subject: Less dangerous substances
>Absolutely correct. When I stated that there were some opinions who
>didn't completely ban drugs, I was referring to less dangerous
>substances, such as tobacco.
Uh, not to join in the '90s wave of smoker-bashing or anything (like all
addicts, tobacco-abusers deserve compassion and patience, and like many
drugs, nicotine does not make every user an abuser). But heart disease,
cancer, stroke, and emphysema are #1, 2, 3, and 7 on the CDC list of
things most likely to cause you to see the coming of Mashiah the hard way.
Even if you are comparing it to some other substance that causes motor
vehicle accidents, diabetes, suicide, AIDS and firearm mishaps, tobacco
is still not going to qualify as `less dangerous'.
_._ _ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _._ ___ _
Joshua W. Burton | |( ' ) |.| . | ( ' ) | | | | | | \ )( ( ) | | |
(401)435-6370 | | )_/ | |___|_ )_/ /|_| | | __)/ \_)/ || |
<burton@...> | .. . - `. :
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <JMOSSERI@...> (Joey Mosseri)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 1994 04:41:44 -0400
Subject: Mallika Leya
P.V. Viswanath asks about his daughters name.
First I'd like to say congratulations.
Now I checked into this name in a book called Shem Hadash by Rabbi Mass'oud
Hai BenShim'on (Cairo 1917) on the names for Gittin.
The book is split into two sections male and female then by letter of the
Hebrew Alphabet then into 3 catagories , Hebrew names , European names, &
Arabic names. The name MALKAH apears in the Hebrew section . And in the
Arabic section he mentions the name MALOUKAH as a nickname for MALKAH.
As far as I know the correct Arabic word for queen is maleka and to the best
of my knowledge it is not used by the vast majority of Arabic speaking Jews.
Joey Mosseri
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <sl14402@...> (Benjy Kramer)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 07:41:01 -0400
Subject: MJ 12:14 Basar B'chalav
There is another aspect of Basar B'chalav (BBC) that might be relevant
to the prohibition or the lack thereof of working or owning a McDonalds.
The Gilyon Maharsha at the beginning of the laws of BBC in Shulchan
Aruch Yoreh De'ah 87 points out that there is a disagreement among the
Acharonim regarding "tzli" of BBC. In the laws of BBC "tzli" refers to
placing a hot piece of Cheese on a hot piece of meat (in the simplest
case). Some say it is a Rabbinic Prohibition in BBC while some maintain
that it is Torah law. If it would be Rabbinic then it would also be
only forbiden to eat, not to derive pleasure from it.
I never worked in McDonalds but I do not think that they actually cook
BBC they probably only do "tzli". (Even frying is has the same
disagreement)
Benjy Kramer (the same one)
<sl14402@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <rotha@...> (Arthur Roth)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 09:13:42 -0500
Subject: Sheva Merachef Following Prefix Letters
>From Mechy Frankel (MJ 12:51):
> 2. Incidentally, I've noticed that a prepositional "bais with a chirik"
> almost invariably results in a sheva merachef situation while this is
> not true for the other prefixes, e.g. a prefixed lamed will result (a
> reasonable fraction of the time) in the next letter taking a dagesh
> chazak-indicating that the sheva under the second letter is
> unambiguously (at least to me) a na - however i have no idea why the
> bais prefix should have such different statistics than a lamed or mem
> prefix - any ideas?
The mem is easy to explain: it takes a chirik (not a sheva) in its
NORMAL form, followed by a dagesh in the next letter, whether or not
that letter has a sheva under it. When the second letter is one of
those (aleph, heh, chet, ayin, resh) that cannot take a dagesh, the
chirik becomes a tzeireh (e.g., meirosh) because the syllable cannot be
closed by a dagesh and hence must take a long vowel. In any case, the
mem prefix should NEVER lead to a sheva merachef situation. The other
prefix letters are fundamentally different, as follows.
The lamed (and the kaf, for that matter) should be exactly analogous
to the bet. All three prefixes normally occur with a sheva (e.g.,
behar, lehar, kehar). When they occur at the beginning of a word that
ALREADY begins with a sheva, the first sheva becomes a different vowel
(usually, but not always, a chirik depending on a number of conditions)
in order to avoid having a word that starts with two shevaim, leading to
a sheva merachef situation, as Mechy points out. For example, bid'var,
lid'var, kid'var, which I pronounce with a sheva na under the dalet as
does Mechy (and for most of the same reasons that he stated so nicely),
but which (as Mechy and I both understand) most grammar "experts"
pronounce with a sheva nach. So I guess I don't understand Mechy's
assertion that the lamed behaves differently from the bet. Mechy, can
you give an example of a word for which a bet prefix and a lamed prefix
are not structured identically?
When any of the above four prefixes (including mem) appears before a YUD
with a sheva, the prefix takes a chirik and the sheva under the yud drops out
altogether, leaving no shevaim at all! Before the word y'mei, for example,
these prefixes form the words bimei, limei, kimei, and mimei, all of which
appear numerous times in Tanach.
Arthur Roth
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <mberger@...> (Mitch Berger)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 20:18:44 -0400
Subject: ve'af al pi sheyismame'ah
Thanks to Gedalyah Berger for putting this line into his
.signature file, and starting me to think about this.
How would you tanslate the twelfth "ani ma'amin"? (The famous
one about mashiach.)
..ve'af al pi sheyismame'ah - and even though he tarries
im kol zeh achakeh lo - with all that I'll wait for him
b'chol yom - every day
sheyavo - that he will come
Does this mean we expect him to come today? If so, what
is the part about 'sheyismame'ah'? Does it mean every day I
wait?
We clearly find people preparing for a future in golus. Rabannim don't
stop building mosdos [institutions] out side of Israel. Yet you're
investing that kind of time, effort and money into a building, yet you
hope the mashiach will take you away from its environs before the
construction is complete.
On the other hand, the Chofetz Chaim was known to literally have his
bags packed, ready for ge'ulah [the final exodus] at any moment.
Is it a distinction between what the mind realizes (vi'af al pi
sheyismame'ah) and what the heart feels (achakeh lo b'chol yom sheyavo)?
| Micha Berger | (201) 916-0287 | On Torah, on worship, and | | | |
| <mberger@...> |<- new address | on supporting kindness | | | |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <segs@...> (Susan Slusky)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 94 10:37:56 EDT
Subject: Youth Minyanim
Marc Meisler asked for pointers on youth minyanim. Here are a few things
I've seen work well.
For an 8-12 age group :
Make up laminated cards for the different parts of the service. Give
them out to kids as they arrive. Early birds get to choose the 'best'
parts. (Who knows what those will turn out to be?) Then the kid with
the card gets to lead that part of the service.
Be sure to feed them afterward in addition to whatever they get at
the grown up kiddush. Food encourages attendance.
For a younger story telling group :
Make up a routine that you'll use every week. Post it in the room. Kids
love predictable routines. Possibilities for the agenda include songs,
story, game, torah service, kiddush.
Include things that let the kids get up occasionally, like songs with
motions, games with standing up and sitting down, handing out food,
napkins, cups, and drinks (one job per kid). A torah service described
below also lets them move. So does acting out the parshah.
I've seen a great 'torah' service with young kids that included a
pretend torah, ark, parochet, and torah ornaments. Each week the kids
got to put to 'torah' and ornaments together, then one kid held the
'torah' while the other 'torah' dressers walked in back of him, and they
went around the room shaking hands in a very shul president fashion.
Then yet another kid opened the ark and they put the 'torah' away and
sang Etz Chaim.
Make up lotto cards with Jewish symbols or buy them. Play lotto.
Serve food at the end such that you can teach shehakol, mizonot, and
hagafen, and lead the kids in the appropriate brachot together. Here,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 12 Issue 60
