Volume 38 Number 63
Produced: Sun Feb 16 10:21:25 US/Eastern 2003
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Book - "Responsa on Contemporary Jewish Women's Issues"
[Rabbi Y. H. Henkin]
Hashgacha
[Rabbi Edward F Goldstein]
Kashrut Question
[Douglas Moran]
Kiddush clubs
[Mordechai Horowitz]
Lo Sisgod'du
[Bernard Raab]
Mazel Tov and Simon Tov (2)
[Ben Katz, Shaya Potter]
Neckties & Tuxedos
[Joel Rich]
Origin of phrase "Shabbat Shalom" (2)
[Gilad J. Gevaryahu, Mark Steiner]
Problem with "Legends" URL
[c.halevi]
Tefillin on Hol Hamoed
[Mark Steiner]
Terach's death
[Alex Heppenheimer]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rabbi Y. H. Henkin <henkin@...>
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 20:49:38 +0200
Subject: re: Book - "Responsa on Contemporary Jewish Women's Issues"
Shalom,
"Responsa on Contemporary Jewish Women's Issues" just
published by Ktav. Available at the YU Sefarim Sale. Twenty-four
translated responsa, including four hitherto unpublished.
In honor of the occasion:
Three volumes of Bnei Banim together @ $40, individual volumes @ $15
each.
Plus mailing: $4 per volume sea mail, $12 per volume air express.
With Torah blessings,
Rabbi Yehuda Henkin
1 Nurock Street
96109 Jerusalem, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <BERNIEAVI@...> (Rabbi Edward F Goldstein)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 08:50:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Hashgacha
I agree in general with the principle of not discussing hashgachot.
However, Tablet K has a practice (I have found this in several stores)
of permitting Dairy Equipment items to be labeled as purely pareve which
is clearly not the case.
I don't think DE is a mere chumra.
Rabbi Edward F Goldstein
982 E Broadway
Woodmere NY 11598
v/f 516 569 0384
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Douglas Moran <dougom@...>
Subject: Kashrut Question
I was reading a novel ("The Cobweb," by Stephen Bury, in case you're
interested) and a couple of questions came to mind:
What is the rule regarding (sorry) road kill of kosher animals? Say one
was driving one's flock of sheep across a road, and a car got a couple;
does one have to donate the meat? What's the rule?
When folks were pioneering during the westward expansion of the US (and
in other earlier times in history, presumably), and there isn't a kosher
butcher along, what was done to ensure kosher meat? Did the pioneers bring
along their own kosher animals which they then slaughtered
themselves? Does anyone have any info?
Thanks,
Yitzchak
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mordechai Horowitz <mordechai@...>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 11:27:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Kiddush clubs
>We are having a problem with Kiddush clubs at out shul. The board
>banned them but at least one kiddush club continues to meet during the
>haftorah and Rabbi's D'var Torah. The Rabbi is opposed to Kiddush Clubs
>in principle but does not believe that they can be eliminated by
>legislation and he will not ban them. Any thoughts or suggestions.
My simple solution.
Strip them of their membership in the shul and ban them from getting any
honors. Walking out of shul to drink during the Haftorah is no more
acceptable than walking out to have a ham sandwich.
You should also give them the address of the local AA. Anyone who
"needs" to drink in the morning is an alcoholic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bernard Raab <beraab@...>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 15:50:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Lo Sisgod'du
>From: <kennethgmiller@...> (Akiva Miller)
>To me, it seems that the separation of
>these groups is EXACTLY what the Torah is warning us against when it
>says "Lo Sisgod'du - do not divide yourselves into separate groups".
In my former shul, I sat next to a former talmid of "the Rav" (R' J.B.
Soloveitchik) who is himself a Rabbi, and adamantly insisted that that
the Rav's opinion was the one expressed above. I was hoping that one of
the respondents would confirm that for the list, but in any event he was
very clear about it and was very upset when anyone tried to shoo a
t'fillin wearer behind the mechitza, for example, in our majority
non-t'fillin minyan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ben Katz <bkatz@...>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 09:04:25 -0600
Subject: Re: Mazel Tov and Simon Tov
>From: <JFreed515@...> (Bernard Freedman)
>But what do these words mean? Maze (mazalim) refers to the
>constellations, he stars of the Zodiac. Simon, or sign, refers to the
>location of the planets in the Zodiac that is used by astrologers, from
>ancient times, to predict the future and to concoct their silly
>pseudoscientific horoscopes.
>
>It seems to me that this activity is strictly forbidden in several
>places in he Torah. So why do we continue to sing Mazel Tov V'Simon Tov?
>Of course, I am sure that only "good luck" is intended, without giving
>any thought to meaning of these words.
As a Maimonidean, the issue raised by Mr. Freedman bothers me a
lot too. (I for example did not tolerate a red bendel on any of my
children's cribs, and I believe it borders on avoda zara to wear the red
band for the wrist that is commonly given out at the kotel .) The fact
of the matter is that chazal believed in astrology, as did many great
medieval authorities. Rambam was one of the few medievalists of any
persuasion to reject it. Still, today, the phrase mazal tov means
congratulations - I don't know of any other way to say it in Hebrew. (I
have more of a problem with siman tov, for the reasons outlined by
Mr. Freedman, but it is hard to sing one without the other.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shaya Potter <spotter@...>
Subject: Re: Mazel Tov and Simon Tov
the references list from a friends shiur on the concept of mazel.
http://yucs.org/~jyuter/shiurim/mahshevet_hazal/MazalMekorot.doc
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <Joelirich@...> (Joel Rich)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 08:00:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Neckties & Tuxedos
Actually if you think about the rules of chukat hagoyim, anything that
makes no sense whatsoever (eg ties:-) are much more problematic than
versions of basic clothing
KT
Joel Rich
> What makes an ordinary suit and tie any less "goyish" than a tuxedo?
> Unless you dress Hassidic, most of the orthodox world dresses just like
> gentiles to some extent. There is alot of flexibilty in what is defined
> as "dressing goyish." The Minchas Elozor, for example, held that wearing
> a necktie is forbidden (i assume mideoraysa) because it serves no
> function other than to resemble goyish fashion. I dont think that is the
> commonly held opinion, but the point is that the definitions are not
> clear, and I dont see how tuxedos are any more goyish than ordinary
> suits or ties.
> Dov Teichman
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <Gevaryahu@...> (Gilad J. Gevaryahu)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 09:54:19 EST
Subject: Origin of phrase "Shabbat Shalom"
David Curwin (v38n60) asked:
<<Does anyone know the origin of the phrase "Shabbat Shalom"? I couldn't
find it anywhere in the Bar Ilan Responsa CD until this century.>>
Shabbat Shalom, a word coming into Hebrew world in the Haskalic period,
~270 year ago, is indeed an anomaly. [Source for period is Even Shoshan
and Gur dictionaries]. Gur dictionary cites the Shela"h (Isaiah Horovitz
1565?-1630) book as an early use, with the possibility that it is based
on Shabbat 12b, at the top, where it is written "ve'Shivto be'Shalom".
Since the Shela"h was first published in Amsterdam in 1649, that is ~350
years ago, one can sense that there is an ambiguity as to the origins.
There are a couple of possibilities to explain this term. One that it is
a shortened form of "Shabbat shel Shalom" where the "shel" fell out with
use. A second explanation is that when "Shalom" became the standard form
of greetings, those who wanted to acknowledge the Shabbat in their
greetings just appended the modifier "Shabbat," without regard for the
lack of grammar.
A possible midrashic explanation can be found in the Haftarah: II Kings
4:23.
Gilad J. Gevaryahu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mark Steiner <marksa@...>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 14:24:20 +0200
Subject: Re: Origin of phrase "Shabbat Shalom"
On the (nonexistent) expression "shabbat shalom."
(1) The Talmud states that when one comes to visit a mourner during
shivah on shabbos one does not recite the usual formula of consolation,
but explains that it is shabbos and one cannot offer consolation, then
ends "veshivtu beshalom." (When using a search program one needs to use
a little creativity!)
(2) I'm quoting from memory (always dangerous), but I believe that
"shabbas sholoym" appears in the famous little poem by Bialik (who wrote
in the Ashkenazic pronunciation) about shabbes, that starts "Hachamoh
meroysh ho-ilonoys nistalkoh...". I believe that he even wrote "shabbas
sholoym umvoyrokh," which has been accepted in Israeli Hebrew, though
nobody really knows why the masculine gender is used. Presumably if we
go back to Bialik's text we will know the answer, Bialik certainly knew
about gender in Hebrew! Anyhow, it is possible, to answer the question,
that Bialik made it up!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: c.halevi <c.halevi@...>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 09:41:03 -0600
Subject: Problem with "Legends" URL
Somehow, when I e-mailed the URL of the "The Legends of the
Jews," your readout (and a couple others) got truncated at
http://www.nalanda.nitc.ac.in/resources/english/etext-project/fairytales,
thereby putting the vital last part -- "/jews/" on another line.
The correct URL is:
http://www.nalanda.nitc.ac.in/resources/english/etext-project/fairytales/jews/
Yeshaya (Charles Chi) Halevi
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mark Steiner <marksa@...>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 14:32:42 +0200
Subject: Re: Tefillin on Hol Hamoed
In Eretz Yisroel, all the historic founders of the Jewish
communities (namely the disciplines of the Vilna Gaon, the disciples of
the Baal Hatanya, and the Sefardim) refrain from donning tefillin on Hal
Hamoed. Thus, those who visit (or even come to live) may NOT wear
tefillin then, certainly not publicly. It is customary even to request
visitors not to put on their tefillin. This (rare) agreement of all of
the "Exiles" creates an iron clad minhag [custom]. Interestingly, all
three traditions (or at least the Gaon and the Baal Hatanya, I have to
recheck the Sefardim) mentioned above agree that the "day" begins at
sunrise and ends at astronomical sunset (against Rabbenu Tam and most of
the rishonim and poskim), which produces unusual agreement on questions
like when Shabbos ends, which we do not have anywhere else.
This "psak" on lo sisgodedu does not apply anywhere else but the
Land of Israel.
Mark Steiner
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Alex Heppenheimer <aheppenh@...>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 09:45:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Terach's death
In MJ 38:60, Danny Skaist <danny@...> wrote:
>> From: Avi Rabinowitz
>> (according to Chazal the Torah took the extreme step of making the
>> story deliberately misleading about Terach's death, implying it was
>> before Avram left)
> You are referring to the upsidedown nun (which does not
> exist).
> The Torah reports the deaths and burials of both Avraham and
> Yitzchak long before they actually happened, so this is not by any
> means an "extreme step". Which is why the perush is on the nun and
> not on the story.
The "nun hafuchah" in Bereishis 11:32 most certainly does exist - Rashi
and Rabbeinu Bechayei, at least, refer to it as an established fact, and
Minchas Shai there discusses various opinions on what "hafuchah"
means. (Although it is true that he concludes that it should not be
upside down.) Granted that most present-day Sifrei Torah don't have this
letter written any differently - I would assume that this is due to the
uncertainty as to which opinion should be followed - the concept itself
is not thereby invalidated, much less any drash based on it.
But in any case, this has nothing to do with the idea that Avi cited.
The Midrash (Bereishis Rabbah 39:7) states that Avraham was henceforth
exempt from honoring his father and could therefore leave Charan with a
clear conscience; it derives this from the juxtaposition of Terach's
death with Hashem's call to Avraham, and makes no reference to the "nun
hafuchah." (Ramban and Rabbeinu Bechayei note the difficulty that the
Torah often reports on people's deaths out of historical sequence. They
explain that the "extreme step" here is the fact that Terach's death is
recorded at all, unlike the preceding generations from Shem onwards.)
Rashi, too, cites the Torah's report of Terach's death and the "nun
hafuchah" as two different ideas, each with its own lesson and purpose.
Kol tuv,
Alex
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 38 Issue 63
