Volume 12 Number 79
Produced: Sun Apr 24 10:58:44 1994
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Allegory and Interpretation
[Sam Gamoran]
Awaiting the Moshiach
[Yacov Barber]
Basar B'chalav
["Mitchell J. Schoen"]
Biblical Interpretation Shelo Al Pi...
[Moshe J. Bernstein]
Early Davening on Friday Night
[Jerrold Landau]
Embalming in New York: NO
[Freda Birnbaum]
Israeli vs. American Programs, Israel vs Galus?
[Mitch Berger]
Oats and Shibollet Shual
[Eli Turkel]
Oneg Shabbat
[David Sherman]
Threatener as Rodef
[Robert Klapper]
Women and Prayer
[Aryeh Frimer]
Women Davening
[Shmuel Weidberg]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: gamoran%<milcse@...> (Sam Gamoran)
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1994 07:34:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Allegory and Interpretation
As we have discussed there are "shiv'im panim laTorah" i.e. 70
interpretations (lit. faces or aspects) to the torah. This leaves open
the possibility of one scholar taking a certain aspect literally while
another treats it as allegory.
Notice, however, that there are 70 interpretations, not an infinite
number. This means that 'not everything goes'. Interpretations that
would violate the basic tenets of Judaism cannot be taken as valid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <barbery@...> (Yacov Barber)
Date: Sun, Apr 24 19:45:40 1994
Subject: Awaiting the Moshiach
>> How would you translate 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?
There are those who translate this "ani mamin" to mean that we need to
anxiously wait for Moshiach every day, however the actuall day of
Moshiach's arrival will be when ever it will be. If this is the true
understanding of the "ani mamin" then it should read "b'chol yom achake
lo sheyovo". Since it is written "achake lo b'chol yom sheyovo" this
teaches us that we are obligated to anxiously await Moshiachs arrival
everyday. The Griz Halevi Mibrisk explains that this ani mamin is the
only one which is written in a question answer form, to impress upon us
that even though he may tarry we still wait for his arrival every day.
He also writes that not only must we be m'chake every day but we must be
mcchake throughout the day, every moment of the day as it says "ki
lishuoscho kol hayom"
Yacov Barber
South Caulfield Hebrew Congregation
Phone: +613 576 9225
Fax: +613 528 5980
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Mitchell J. Schoen" <72277.715@...>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1994 06:04:56 -0400
Subject: Basar B'chalav
Israel Botnick wrote (quoting the Rema):
>If the milchig pot has not been used to cook milk in the last 24 hours,
>then a parve food cooked in this pot can be eaten Together With meat.
>(i.e. ben yomo)
I'm wondering why there should be almost ANY product marked DE (for
Dairy Equipment) in this case. The equipment used for the run of
kosher-supervised product should simply be that which is started on a
Monday after a plant was idle on the weekend. In practice, do kosher
supervision agencies avail themselves of the ben yomo "leniency"? Or do
they mark all items produced on equipment that has also been used for
dairy any time in the past as "DE" even if the equipment has been left
idle for the prescribed period of time?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Moshe J. Bernstein <mjbrnstn@...>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 13:40:18 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Biblical Interpretation Shelo Al Pi...
Regarding the discussion of the propriety of interpreting biblical
stories in a manner which differs from that of received tradition or its
evaluation of biblical figures, I refer the interested reader to an
essay by David Berger entitled (I think) "The Morality of the Patriarchs
in Medieval Jewish Exegesis"; the rest of the bibliographical data elude
me at present. My colleague David Sykes is in the course of preparing a
very long article on the same theme involving biblical interpretation
among the aharonim.
moshe bernstein
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <LANDAU@...> (Jerrold Landau)
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 11:54:12 EDT
Subject: Early Davening on Friday Night
If the only shul in one's area brings in Shabbat early, but does not
straddle plag hamincha for mincha/maariv, is it better to daven mincha
without a minyan earlier (and then to answer kaddish and kedusha with
the minyan), or is it preferable to enter into the bedieved situation
and daven mincha with the congregation?
Jerrold Landau
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Freda Birnbaum <FBBIRNBA@...>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 00:36:41 -0400
Subject: Embalming in New York: NO
In V12N70, Victor Miller asks:
>This past Sunday I went on a tour of Ellis Island. While I was there,
>the tour guide mentioned that because of the danger of AIDS, that NYC
>was requiring ALL bodies buried in the city to be embalmed. Supposedly
>they were worried about polluting the ground with tainted blood. This
>sounds a bit far-fetched to me. Has anybody else heard anything like
>this? This certainly has profound implications. If the law of the land
>requires embalming what are we to do?
I'm not aware of any such law, and I just yesterday paid a shiva visit
to a family where the person died on Shabbos and was buried on Sunday.
If there had been any hassles about embalming, I probably would have
heard about them, as the daughter-in-law of the person is on the chevra
kadisha and can be pretty scrappy in defending the rights of people to
do things in a halachic manner. The tahara was done in New York City,
tho I don't know where the burial was.
Also, I have been to a number of conferences on chevra kadisha matters,
and I don't recall this one coming up. The big problem is more likely
to be autopsies.
I think your tour guide was misinformed.
Freda Birnbaum, <fbbirnbaum@...>
"Call on God, but row away from the rocks"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <mberger@...> (Mitch Berger)
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 10:40:23 EDT
Subject: Israeli vs. American Programs, Israel vs Galus?
I finally had a chance to read some back issues. There was a discussion as
to whether attending an American Yeshivah in Israel was attending a pocket
of galus in Israel.
I disagree with the assumption being made here that being in Israel
means that one is not in galus. I never understood galus to be a
geographic situation. I thought of galus as primarily being about "galus
HaShechinah" [the exile of the Divine Presence]. It means living in a
time of "heter panim" [hiding of "The Face"] when the figurative Hand of
Gd can not be seen in daily events. De facto, since by nature the Jewish
people are incapable of holding on to Israel, it means on exile of
Israel also. When my kids do something wrong, sometimes a punishment is
in order. Sometimes, it may be appropriate to exercise self restraint,
and let them feel the consequences of their actions. (Perhaps, standing
behind the curtain, where you can't be seen, to make sure that the child
doesn't self-destruct.) Cause and effect is a much better teacher than
artificial punishments.
This mashal [metaphor] is how I always understood galus.
I don't see how being in Israel changes whether one is in galus.
| Micha Berger | (201) 916-0287 | On Torah, on worship, and | | | |
| <mberger@...> |<- new address | on supporting kindness | | | |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <turkel@...> (Eli Turkel)
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 94 10:44:43 +0300
Subject: Oats and Shibollet Shual
I just reread an issue of "halichot sadeh" 1989, put out by the
Institute for agricultural research according to the Torah. There is an
article there by Rabbi Efrati, one of the heads of the institute, on the
identity of shibollet shual.
He begins by quoting from Prof. Y. Flikes that shibbolet shual is
not oats (Quaker in hebrew). He then poses the question of what is the
halacha of oats with regard to Chadash (new grains) ans similarly
chametz, Pesach Berachot and Kilyaim (mixture of different plants). He
brings a number of rishonim that translate shibbolet shual (on the
Mishna in Kilyaim) by the Latin phrase for oats. However, Meiri seems to
translate it as rye. A recently discovered version of the commentary of
Rav Natan seems to translate it as some variant of barley. However, the
standard masorah from Rabbenu Gershom through the Maharil is that it is
oats. He then discusses in detail and refutes the various claims of
Prof. Flikes.
He quotes Hazon Ish that shibbolet shual is considered as oats
without any doubts (vadai not safek). Furthermore, he brings down
experiments conducted by Dr. Zaks who checked the fermentation of oats
and found that it differed from that of wheat but was similar to that of
barley. They then redid the experiment with oat flour rather than oat
kernels and found that the process of oat flour was almost identical to
that of wheat flour but quite different from ricreflour.
The response concludes with a quote from Rav Moshe Feinstein on
reacting to the claims of Prof. Flikes that another 1000 such proofs
would not change the tradition. Also Rav Eliashiv decided that shibbolet
shual is oats for all laws in the Torah without any kind of doubt.
<turkel@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <dave@...> (David Sherman)
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 16:54:47 -0400
Subject: Oneg Shabbat
> The "tradition" to eat meat and fish on Shabbat is connected to the
> mitsvah of Oneg Shabbat, which means that one should eat foods one
> enjoys. People enjoy eating meat (why??) so they eat it especially
> for Shabbat. There is no halachic status to this "tradition", in any
> case.
Indeed. Our kids eat regular breakfast cereals all week (Cheerios,
Shreddies, Corn Flakes), and on Shabbos they get to have "shabbos
cereal" -- the sweet stuff like Cocoa Puffs, Alpha Bits or Cap'n Crunch.
It's part of looking forward to Shabbos.
David Sherman
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <rklapper@...> (Robert Klapper)
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1994 05:16:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Threatener as Rodef
The sefat Emet to yoma, I think 82b, clearly authorizes killing someone
who utters a seriously intended threat, if I recall correctly. He
further distinguishes between talmidei chakhamim, who are presumed not
to mean their threats, and am Aratzim, who are presumed to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aryeh Frimer <F66235@...>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1994 02:14:05 -0400
Subject: Women and Prayer
IMHO, Janice Gelb erred in saying that women can't count for a
minyan or serve as Shlikhot Tsibbur because they are not obligated to
pray. They are obligated to pray; and I find it very hard to believe
that a Jewish Mommy who wants to daven can't possibly find 7 minutes
in the morning (birkhot ha-Shachar and Shmoneh Esrei with Kavanah) and
another 4 minutes in the afternoon to daven. What's more, halakha states
that since we rarely daven with kavana nowadays, better to daven without
kavana than not to daven at all.
The fact is that women can't serve as Shlikhot tsibbur or count for a
minyan because they are not obligated in PUBLIC PRAYER of which a Hazan
and minyan are a part. (Prof. Judy Hauptmann erred on this point - but
that is a different tale).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shmuel Weidberg <shmuel@...>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 13:48:54 -0400
Subject: Women Davening
The following is subject to errors in memory etc.
Women are obligated to daven. They are not obligated to daven with a
minyan or to daven regularly three times a day. The Bais Yaakovs
encourage their students to daven regularly. I know my sister davens
shacharis and mincha meticulously. As far as the philosophy behind it
the Baal Teshuvah books discuss it and say something like: Women are
like diamonds and men are like the rings without the diamonds. Diamonds
are complete on their own whereas rings need to be joined. etc. Look in
your local BT book for a more coherent explanation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 12 Issue 79
