Volume 28 Number 87
Produced: Tue Jun 22 6:09:51 US/Eastern 1999
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Chalav Stam and Zoharic Thoughts
[Zvi Weiss]
Documentary hypothesis
[Joel Goldberg]
halichos Shadchanus
[Rachel Furman]
Keeping one's feet together
[Eisenberg, Lon]
Lo Titgodedu - Tefillin during Hol Ha-Mo'ed
[Elhanan Adler]
Mechitza at HAK'HEL
[Josh Backon]
Names
[Daniel Stuhlman]
Second Day Yom Tov - Biblical Eretz Yisrael
[Yisrael Medad]
Sleeping Fast and Pinkies
[Joshua Hoffman]
Two Days of Yom Kippur?
[Carl M. Sherer]
Vaykhulu on Leil Shabbat
[Seth Kadish]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Zvi Weiss <weissz@...>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 19:29:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Chalav Stam and Zoharic Thoughts
> From: Steve Albert <SAlbert@...>
> To add to the original question a more specific one: We have available
> here a "kosher" cheese (Brie or Camembert) from Denmark, but the
> hechsher specifies that it was made from unsupervised milk. (I think
> the company is Samson, if anyone happens to know of them.) Does anyone
> know anything about govenment regulation of milk in Denmark?
This is actually a bit more complicated. The Gemara in Avoda Zara
states that non-Kosher milk does not curd properly to form cheese. The
reason for prohibiting "Gevinat Stam" is because of OTHER concerns
(e.g., Rennet, coating the cheese with non-Kosher milk, etc.) Hence,
there is room to permit the use of "non-supervised milk" in the cheese
making process as long as the Cheese-making ITSELF is properly
supervised. I believe that in this country, Miller (or Migdal -- I am
not sure which) relies upon a similar leniency whiel HaOlam is careful
to use cheese that is made with "supervised milk"
> From: Russell Hendel <rhendel@...>
<snip>
> Take an idea like abstaining from Kiddush during the "reign of Mars"
> (from 6-7 on Friday night). This is a zoharic concept at best and is not
> found in normative halacha (like the gmarrah, mishnah...).
The Gemara at the end of Masechet Shabbat specifically raises issues
regarding the "danger" of doing actions during the reign of Mars.(129b).
Therefore, it appears to be incorrect to state that this is a "zoharic
concept at best". Note that the Gemara only permits this because of
"Shomer Peta'im Hashem..."
> The question I raised is the following: It is well known that sometimes
> the Zohar says things in symbolic form. It is also well known that the
> Zohar is a very esoteric book.
>
> By contrast there is an explicit Jewish Law (eg Rambam, Idolatry 11)
> that it is Biblically prohibited to decide what activites you are doing
> based on the position of astral bodies.
>
> How then can we risk violating a Biblical law based on a Zohar whose
> meaning may be symbolic?
According to the Gemara, this does NOT appear to be a "mystical
astral matter" -- but a well-accepted concern about the danger when "Mars"
is "reigning".
--Zvi
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joel Goldberg <joel@...>
Subject: Documentary hypothesis
Russell Hendel <rhendel@...> writes:
"As an example of a refutation: ELOKIM is used to denote God when He is
EXERCISING JUSTICE while the ineffable tetragramaton is used to denote
God when He is EXERCISING MERCY.
About ten or so years ago there appeared "The Book of J" (referring to
the J authour, the one who wrote the Jehova-tetragrammaton part of the
torah.) This book suggested that the J authour was a woman--because of
the merciful contexts where the J name was used.
I think that this is important, because it suggests that the analytical
tools that secular biblical scholarship use are not without merit, even
in a halachic framework. The difference is only the starting
suppositions. Ie. had secular analysis demonstrated a single writing
style, that would not be taken as evidence of divine authourship, only
of a single human authour.
Joel Goldberg
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rachel Furman <rsusselj@...>
Subject: halichos Shadchanus
B"SD, Shalom!
I am doing research on Halichos Shadchanus and Halichos Shmiras Lashon
as they pertain to Shidduchim. Can anyone on this list point me in the
direction of good sources? (English translations would be most helpful,
but I can manage with Ivrit).
Any and all help will be appreciated.
Thank you,
Rachel Furman
<Rsusselj@...>
ICQ me at 27415227
AOL IM id rsusselj
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eisenberg, Lon <eisenbrg@...>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 09:40:15 -0400
Subject: RE: Keeping one's feet together
> From: Ezriel Krumbein <ezsurf@...>
...
> What is also interesting it it does not seem clear that there is an
> explicit source requiring standing durring Kaddish. I do think it would
> be highly inappropriate not to stand. However the sources seem only to
> require standing if the Kaddish is said after something done while
> standing such as Shemona Esrei or Hallel.
Although there is no requirement to stand for qaddish
(I believe most Sephardim do not), I think this is with respect to the
listner. I have never seen anyone say qaddish without standing. So,
perhaps, there could still be a source (I don't know it) for keeping the
feet together.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Elhanan Adler <elhanan@...>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 07:51:17 +0300 (IFT)
Subject: Lo Titgodedu - Tefillin during Hol Ha-Mo'ed
With regard to the Tefillin on hol ha-moed - lo titgodedu question I
would like to add a few sources:
1) The mishnah brurah (siman 31) specifically mentions Tefillin off/on
during hol ha-mo'ed in the same shul as an example of lo-titgodedu
2) The rema (orah hayyim, siman 493) cites 2 different hair cutting
periods during sefira *in the same town* as a case of lo-titgodedu
3) Piske uziel (siman 2) suggests ("karov ha-davar lomar") that a mitzva
done in a "lo-titgodedu" manner is a "mitzva ha-ba'ah be-averah"
I would add that IMHO the concept of following one's unique family
customs (or halachic decisions) rather than common ones is to a large
degree a non-optimum (de'avad) situation caused by mass migrations which
led to separate congregations in the same cities and diluted the concept
of local practice (minhag ha-makom). Note igrot moshe (orah hayyim
1,158) in which New York is referred to as a place in which the customs
are STILL DIVIDED ("ha-minhagim adayyin halukim") - implying that this
is not an ideal situation and will perhaps be remedied in the future.
# Elhanan Adler #
# Coordinator, Israel Inter-University Library Network #
# Director, Israel Center for Digital Information Services #
# Email: <elhanan@...> #
# Tel.: 972-2-6585005, FAX: 972-2-6511771, Home tel.: 972-2-6515977 #
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Josh Backon <BACKON@...>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 10:58 +0200
Subject: Re: Mechitza at HAK'HEL
Look at the Sridei Eish Even ha'Ezer Siman 77 ["V'rak b'beit haknesset
yesh takana keduma la'asot mechitzot gevohot.... aval b'asefot shel
reshut, ke'gon b'sha'at hachnasat kalah l'chupa o b'shaat ne'umim
u'drashot lo hikpidu mey'olam la'asot mechitzot v'rak medakdekim she'lo
yeshvu anashim v'nashim yachad velo yitarvu zeh im zeh"] (MY
TRANSLATION: only in batei knesset was there an old takana to make high
mechitzot ... but in public meetings .. there was never an obligation
to make a mechitza: one only requires that men and women don't sit
togther or intermingle).
My guess is that during HAK'HEL the men and women stood on different
sides but there wasn't a physical mechitza separating them.
Josh Backon
<backon@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Daniel Stuhlman <ssmlhtc@...>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 09:47:20
Subject: Re: Names
>I just recalled something when I was very young. I attended the wedding
>of a woman who had adopted the name Brachah.
[snip]
When my sister was growing up her Hebrew teachers told her that she had
a man's name. Before her wedding she changed her name from a masculine
sounding, Mitel Elisha, to the feminine Michal Elisheva. My father went
to shul and had an aliyah. Either the rabbi or the gabbai announced the
name change (I wasn't there.) I never asked my parents how they chose
the name.
Daniel Stuhlman
Chicago, IL 60645
<mail to:<ddstuhlman@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael Medad <isrmedia@...>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 12:02:05 +0300
Subject: Second Day Yom Tov - Biblical Eretz Yisrael
Having just returned from "Book Week" in Jerusalem, may I point out that
I saw two fairly recent references in the last (23rd) Volume of
Entziklopedia Talmudit whose first entry is that subject and a long
responsa by Rav Shlomo Goren z"l in his new volume of collected
articles.
Yisrael Medad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joshua Hoffman <JoshHoff@...>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 10:10:11 EDT
Subject: Re: Sleeping Fast and Pinkies
Rabbi Wein,in a biography tape, quotes Rabbi Eliezer Silver as
saying,in reply to a questioner who asked how he survives on so little
sleep,that he sleeps fast.A friend of mine,in response to that
story,told me that HE sleeps slow!
As far as the minhag of pointing to to the sefer Torah with one's
pnky, I remember it as a well-known, well-established practice when I
was in Telshe Yeshiva in Cleveland in 1965.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl M. Sherer <csherer@...>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 14:03:44 +0300
Subject: Two Days of Yom Kippur?
Elie Rosenfeld asks:
> 2) Conversely, was there ever a time that even Yom Kippur was kept for two
> days outside Eretz Yisrael? Understanding that at a minhag-avosenu level
> we do not do it today because of the difficulty of fasting for two days,
> but back when there was a *real* doubt, did people outside of Eretz Yisrael
> have to do so? (Now *there's* a compelling reason for Aliyah!)
I don't have any real proof for this, but I am going to guess that with
the exception of some of the Jews who were in Kobe, Japan with the
Mirrer Yeshiva during World War II (a story which I trust others can do
a far better job of recounting than I can), the answer is no.
The Gemara in Beitza says that from the time of Ezra, it only happened
once that Elul was a 30-day month. Except for that one year, Elul was
always 29 days. Nevertheless, the Gemara in Rosh haShanna (forgive me
for not having exact cites - I don't have a Gemara at work) says that
"paam achas nishtahu eidim melavo, v'niskalkelu Leviyim b'shir." (Once
the witnesses came late and the Levites erred in saying the Chapter of
Tehillim that was to be said with the Nisuch HaYayin (wine
libations). Therefore, says the Gemara, a decree was made that Rosh
HaShanna should always be two days ("oso hayom kodesh ulemachar kodesh"
- that day was to be holy and the next day was to be holy). That decree
was not connected to Yom Tov Sheini, and had nothing to do with Yom
Kippur either. In fact, the Gemara in Beitza emphasizes that "paam
achas" is meant to be taken quite literally - it only happened once.
Therefore, the whole issue of Yom Tov Sheini never applied to Yom
Kippur.
Of course, you can say, that begs the question. For if no one knew for
sure when Rosh Chodesh was by the 15th of the month (Succos) they
certainly did not know it on the tenth of the month (Yom Kippur). I
think the answer to that is that since the whole idea of Yom Tov Sheini
was a Rabbinic decree to start, the Rabbis chose not to impose the
decree with respect to Yom Kippur.
Carl M. Sherer
mailto:<csherer@...> or mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il
Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Seth Kadish <skadish@...>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 18:43:49 +0300
Subject: Vaykhulu on Leil Shabbat
>Vayichulu during maariv on Friday night must be said with at least one
other individual. Why then, in every shul I have visited, does the
>Chazzan only wait for the Rabbi to take three steps back at Oseh Shalom?
>By the time the Rabbi finishes Shemonai Esrai, he will not be able to
>say Vayichulu with the Minyan!
First of all, though the Mishna Berura's influence made this stringency
very popular, it is far from clear that this is really required. See
the Hazon Ish (especially his rejection of the Mishna Berura's notion
that one should hurry his tefilla for this reason).
Second, even according to the Mishna Berura, the rabbi can simply repeat
it afterwards with someone else.
Bivrakha,
Seth (Avi) Kadish
Karmiel, Israel
(04)958-1553
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 28 Issue 87
