Volume 16 Number 44
Produced: Wed Nov 9 17:32:03 1994
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Coffee and tea on Shabbat
[Binyomin Segal]
Golders Green Beth Hamedrash ("Munk's") Leads the World On-Line
[Rafael Salasnik]
Modern Orthodox and Houston
[Steve Albert]
Parve
[Shalom Carmy]
Seeing Kiryat Arba, Me'arat Hamachpela -- and more
[Leora Morgenstern]
Shaving/razors
[Sam Kamens]
Tetrahedron and Modern Orthodoxy
[Jonathan Rogawski]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <bsegal@...> (Binyomin Segal)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 1994 23:21:55 -0600
Subject: re: Coffee and tea on Shabbat
chana stillinger asks about making coffee and tea on shabbos. with the
standard cylor disclaimer, here goes:
first, in regard to brewing coffee thru a filter - besides the cooking
issues addressed later in this note, there is the issue of "straining"
also a torah prohibition on shabbos. that makes the standard brewing
arrangement impossible. in fact this is (theoretically) an issue with
tea bags and the newfangled coffeee bags as well. in this case there are
2 solutions. solution 1 leave the bag in the cup till you are finished,
or 2 (less accepted) being sure _not_ to squeeze the bag, quickly remove
it and do _not_ hold it over the cup. allow whatever comes out of the
bag to be wasted.
now on to cooking. in mj 14:73 i discussed cooking solid foods on
shabbos there i mention the idea that once a solid has been cooked,
recooking has no (torah law) halachik affect. liquids however can be
halachikly affected by recooking if they have cooled down to room
temperature. also, although recooking can not affect solids, that is
only if the process is the same ie a bread that was "baked" is affected
by "cooking", but you cant affect a roast that was "cooked" by
re-"cooking"
next we have the issue of "kelim" or containers. in halacha we point out
that you can cook an object not just by putting it over a flame, but
also by putting it in contact with another hot object (like a hot food).
therefore to put a tea bag in a cup of hot water will under certain
circumstances be called cooking the tea.the ability of the hot water to
cook is dependant on 2 things. the most obvious is its temperature. in
halacha we say that something less than "yad soledes bo" is "cold" and
can not cook other things, but over "yad soledes bo" it can cook other
things. how hot is "yad soledes bo", you ask? good question. from
memory, most of the modern poskim say that its around 110 farenheit. the
second aspect of a liquids ability to cook other things is - the
container its in. ie how many containers has it been in since being
removed from the flame. the pot that was on the flame with it is called
the "cli rishon" -first container, what it is transferred into is called
a cli sheni - second and the next one is called the cli shlishi - or
third. for halachic purposes there is no "and so on" there are 3
containers that are discussed (later ones fall into the 3rd category)
note: although in a theoretical sense the "container affect" may apply
to non-liquids, practically speaking with solid foods we are more
concerned with the simple question - how hot is it - rather than what
container is it in
one last issue is "kalei habishul" - the rabbis recognized that some
things are cooked more easily than other things and were therefore more
strict about heating them. some things are clearly in this category some
are clearly not - but most fall into the nether region - we are not
really sure.
ok now lets put it all together. if the liquid is _not_ yad soleds then
it can not cook another object. if it is yad soledes then it cooks
ANYTHING when its in a kli rishon, but it only cooks kalei habishul if
its in a kli sheni. once its in a kli shlishi - well there are the
disagreements - rav moshe feinstein held that nothing can be cooked by
liquid in a kli shlishi. others (including i believe the mishna brura)
hold that kalei habishul can be cooked even in a kli shlishi.
the results:
instant coffee and tea are no problem (though to add milk and other
stuff it needs to be a kli sheini)
tea concentrate and coffee concentrate _that_are_above_room_temerature_
(ie you have kept them slightly warm) can be diluted with hot water even
in a kli rishon (though again to add milk et all you need it to be in a
kli sheini)
cold concentrates and tea bags can be added to a kli shlishi with water
already in it - according to rav moshe - but not according to many
others.]
well that was from memory, so it may not be exact, but i think its
relatively accurate. again cylor
byididus
binyomin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <Rafi@...> (Rafael Salasnik)
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 94 15:48:27 GMT
Subject: Golders Green Beth Hamedrash ("Munk's") Leads the World On-Line
Due to an error the message I sent about a UK Shul going online got truncated
(Vol 16 no.40) so here it is again:
As from the 1st of November, Golders Green Beth Hamedrash (popularly
known as "Munk's") has become the first shul in Great Britain (and
possibly the world) to offer electronic communication between the
members of a shul.
Called GGBH.ONLINE it has been set up by Yitzchok Katz, a member of the
shul who has long been involved in using the internet and especially the
"Jewish internet", when he realised that an increasing number of other
members of his shul had joined him on-line. The list has the following
aims:
- provide regular news, information, and other useful snippets.
- offer help for newcomers to internet/e-mail and share experiences
between Jewish electronic 'surfers'
- post requests for assistance, general information, visits to ill people,
hospitality or even work related matters. We may accept adverts at some
stage.
GGBH.ONLINE is a project of BRIJNET, the British Jewish Network, which
aims to create awareness of the internet in the community and help
organisations & individuals to participate in the Jewish internet.
Yitz Katz, who is also Chairman of Brijnet, stated that whilst
GGBH.ONLINE is for members, ex-members and friends of that community, it
was a model that other shuls and communities could copy.
######### B R I J N E T #########
- Creates awareness of the internet in the community
- Helps organisations & individuals to participate in the Jewish internet
- Creates/maintains a useful quality communal electronic information database
THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE COPIED OR TRANSMITTED ON CONDITION THAT THIS MESSAGE
###### (INDICATING THAT IT WAS PROVIDED BY BRIJNET) IS INCLUDED ######
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <SAlbert@...> (Steve Albert)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 1994 00:57:02 -0500
Subject: Modern Orthodox and Houston
I just read Yehuda Harper's "Modern Orthodox" post of Nov. 2, and feel
compelled to respond to his characterization of one Houston shul, UOS,
which he paints as not really being Orthodox. ("The attitude of the
shul to frumkeit is "do we really have to do this? What is the minimum
requirement?")
I live in Austin, not Houston, but I've visited on occasion over
the past four years. During that time the shul has gone from "mechitza
minyan meets in the chapel" to "mechitza by request in the main shul for
bar mitzvahs, etc." to "mechitza in the main shul unless requested
removed for a bar mitzvah, etc., with a mechitza minyan meeting in the
chapel." (That was more than a year ago; they may now just have a
"mechitza all the time" policy.)
I don't think it's fair to characterize the shul, or the rabbi, the
way Yehuda did, when to me it seems that there has been a serious effort
to "upgrade" observance there, and when there is a large range of
observance and viewpoint represented among the members. And I would not
agree that the rabbi goes by the most liberal opinion possible. (And if
he did, as long as that was a valid halachic opinion, I would not make a
critical point of it.
Didn't Moshe Feinstein, zt"l, say that it was easy to be machmir, but
the job of a posek was to figure out when one could be meykel?)
In fact, it seems to be lashon harah to denigrate both the rabbi and
the membership of the shul in that way. Which raises an interesting
question I haven't seen discussed before: do the list-owners of Jewish
lists like this one have any halachic obligation to seek to prevent
lashon harah? (If this has been discussed before, I'd appreciate
pointers.)
[A very difficult question. How does someone like myself walk the line
between discouraging lashon harah (which I try to do) and maintaining a
relatively open list discussion. Mostly I have to depend on you, the
readership, to examine what you are posting. Mod.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shalom Carmy <carmy@...>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 1994 11:42:00 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Parve
I suspect that Parve means "poor" from the Latin.
The Masora Gedola is called, in Latin, Masora Magna; Masora
Ketanna=Mesora Parva.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <leora@...> (Leora Morgenstern)
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 94 02:26:14 EST
Subject: Seeing Kiryat Arba, Me'arat Hamachpela -- and more
Nachum Chernovsky wrote movingly in m.j. v16n9 about his inspiring visit
to Kiryat Arba and (the outside of) Me'arat Hamachpela. Me'arat
Hamachpela is still closed -- the scheduled re-opening has been pushed
off several times -- but everyone who can visit, should. Going to
Kiryat Arba and Hevron and Me'arat Hamachpela is not only an uplifting
and moving experience for the visitor, it's also a way for us to show
our support for the people who live there.
Life in Kiryat Arba -- and the rest of Judea and Samaria and Gaza --
goes on as normally as possible, as conditions become more difficult.
It's tempting for us to forget about this part of Israel, and just think
about, and visit, the "safe" areas like Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. But the
fact is that there are 150,000 Jews living in parts of Eretz Yisrael
that are beyond the 1967 green line. One of the best ways to show we
care is to visit them in their communities.
The simplest way to visit these communities is probably through an
organized trip, though individuals can also arrange visits. (Many of
the larger towns, such as Ariel, have tourist offices that can be
contacted for details.) If anybody is interested in doing so in the
very near future, you might want to consider Operation Chizuk's trip to
Judea, Samaria, Gaza, and the Golan from Nov 21 - Nov 28, 1994.
Operation Chizuk has already made 2 such trips in the past year (one in
February and one in July). It is run by Rabbi Bruce Rudolph; it was
founded by Rav Eliezer Waldman of Yeshivat Kiryat Arba, and New York
State Assemblyman Dov Hikind. Security is very tight -- army escorts on
every bus -- and the cost is reasonable.
I can highly recommend this particular trip -- I went on the first
Operation Chizuk trip last February, and it was incredibly moving.
Whether you go with a group or as an individual, it's an eye-opening
experience. Seeing the people in their communities shatters all
stereotypes of settlers as wild-eyed bearded fanatics. (In fact, many
of the communities have a majority of non-religious inhabitants. But
whether religious or non-religious, what I saw were people who are
devoted to a cause, not fanatics.) More importantly, it's something we
can do to show our support for *all* the people of Israel.
(For more information on Operation Chizuk, you can contact
Rabbi Bruce Rudolph at 212-967-5300 ext. 223.
If you'ld like to ask me questions about the trip last year,
send me email at <leora@...>)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <snk@...> (Sam Kamens)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 94 07:56:32 EST
Subject: Shaving/razors
Can anyone give me some information on the Halachot of shaving,
especially with respect to the use of electric versus blade razors?
[I believe that the universally accepted position is that one does not
use a razor blade on one's beard. The Halacha forbids the use of a razor
blade on the "corners" of the face, but as there is disagreement about
where exactly the corners are, we do not shave with a razor. There are
various opinions about electric shavers, with the predominant opinion
being that if the shaver operates by cutting the hair between two
blades, then it is permitted. If the blade cuts against the skin, it is
forbidden. That is my understanding of the situation. Mod.]
Thanks,
Samuel N. Kamens E-mail: <snk@...>
TPS, Inc. Voice/Fax: (908) 632-3817
120 Wood Avenue South, Suite 404
Iselin, New Jersey 08830
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jonathan Rogawski <jonr@...>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 94 17:49:33 PST
Subject: Tetrahedron and Modern Orthodoxy
Stan Tenen wrote on Nov. 2 about the 4 mothers and 3 fathers, relating
them to the tetrahedron. I don't know how this affects your scheme, but
your claim that the tetrahedron has 4-axes of 3-fold symmetry and
3-mutually perpendicular axes of 4-fold symmetry is not quite
correct. The 3-mutually perpendicular axes each give rise to a 2-fold
symmetry, not 4 (the relevant symmetry flips over each edge in the
associated pair of edges and acting a second time flips each edge back
to its original position).
Also, a response to my friend Steve Bailey regarding modern/centrist
orthodoxy issue. Steve and I have discussed this in person, and I look
forward to hearing more of his views on internet. The main thrust of
Steve's posting was that centrist orthodoxy doesn't reject the
non-observant world or human creativity, but rather seeks to enhances
one's "intellectual, aesthetic, and spiritual life with the arts,
sciences, and literature of society". As nice as that sounds, I would
like to pose the question from the other side and ask about the tensions
between Torah and the secular world. I'm thinking more of philosophical
tensions than practical ones having to do with observance. At the very
least, the centrist must come to terms with the fact that the arts,
sciences, and literature that he or she wishes to be enhanced by is to a
large extent hostile to the Torah view and they have created an
astonishingly secular modern society.
I see centrist orthodoxy has having an obligation to address the
philosophical demands that involvement in the secular world make on the
orthodox Jew. But I think it's premature to consider the conflicts as
resolved, as Steve's description seems to suggest. I would be
interested to hear what Steve and others see as the task of centrist
orthodoxy; what are the issues, if any, that need to be addressed?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 16 Issue 44
