Volume 39 Number 39
Produced: Wed May 21 5:59:08 US/Eastern 2003
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Candles and Danger
[Binyomin Segal]
Covering of hair
[<Smwise3@...>]
Ikkarim
[Saul Mashbaum]
Looking for kosher hotel/guest-house in NW London
[David Ziants]
The Meitcheter
[Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer]
Minimum Wage Law
[Michael Kahn]
Rav Kook and Sacrifices
[<Moesch2@...>]
Scope of Psak
[Michael Kahn]
Shas on the Internet
[Charles Hafner]
Size of Kezayis, Candles, Danger
[Gershon Dubin]
Sources on Workers
[Yisrael Medad]
Tachanun on Pesach Sheni
[Yisrael Medad]
Takanot
[Yisrael Medad]
Vegetarianism
[Levy Lieberman]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Binyomin Segal <bsegal@...>
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 15:54:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Candles and Danger
Akiva Miller asks about candles and safety
> This makes me wonder: Did our ancestors never notice fire hazard?
...
> It seems to me that a very simple solution was available to
> them. Several posters here have recommended tea lights. This is an
> extremely low-tech solution to the problem of falling candles. Why did
> no one in the past 3000 years think of this?
...
> Why is there no custom or decree that a candle (Shabbos or otherwise)
> must be shorter than a certain height?
> Why is there no custom or decree that a certain amount of the candle
> must be stuck into the candleholder?
> When a candle is four inches tall and only the bottom half-inch is stuck
> in the candleholder, is this not a recipe for disaster?
I don't have lots of documentary evidence, but it is my distinct
impression that the common use of candles is fairly recent. My
understanding is that most people used oil for their shabbos "candles".
So while they would still have had the minimal danger that exists from
any open flame, they would not generally have had the danger associated
with the height of a candle.
Can anyone confirm or deny my impression here?
binyomin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <Smwise3@...>
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 19:32:34 EDT
Subject: Re: Covering of hair
<< Now it's one of the things the girls look forward to as part of
marriage.
Batya >>
Why do they look forward to covering their hair? It would seem they
still prefer to show off their natural hair--unless they have bad hair.
My wife covers her hair all the time, but a shaitel can be uncomfortable
and some of the alternatives don't always look good
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Saul Mashbaum <smash52@...>
Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 23:31:09 +0300
Subject: Ikkarim
The Ari is known to have opposed including the poem Yigdal, which is
based on the 13 ikkarim, in the service. The Rov, Rav Yosef Dov Halevi
Soloveitchik, is quoted by Rav Hershel Shachter in Nefesh HaRav, p 231,
as saying that this opposition is based on the prohibition of Hukot Akum
(non-Jewish practice). Catholics include a recital of the cathecism,
which summarizes the elements of their faith, in their service; thus, it
is improper for Jews to do so.
Clearly, this relates to including the ikkarim as part of our prayers as
being non-Jewish, not the ikkarim themselves.
Saul Mashbaum
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Ziants <dziants@...>
Subject: Looking for kosher hotel/guest-house in NW London
We (wife, myself and 18 month old baby) are looking to stay for a couple
of nights, at the end of June, in a kosher b&b hotel/guest-house in NW
London (Hendon/Golders Green etc.) not too far away from one of the
underground stations.
Having received a list of hotels in this area, it seems that none of the
"kosher" hotels have kashrut supervision. (I phoned the one hotel that
was advertised as under supervision, but they told me that they are
kosher without supervision).
I want to find out if any of the Jewish places are run by people who are
shomrei shabbat and maintain an acceptable standard of kashrut for us to
feel comfortable in booking and/or eating breakfast. (We rely on the
Rabbanut in Israel and LBD etc. in England).
If any one can advice me, I would be happy to hear.
Please reply privately, unless there are comments which might be of
general interest on the principle of eating in unsupervised
establishments. (Is it relevant distinguishing between a family guest
house and a hotel - where do we draw the line between the two?)
David Ziants
<dziants@...>
Ma'aleh Adumim, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 08:05:56 -0400
Subject: The Meitcheter
>From: Chaim Mateh <chaim-m@...>
>Just for the historical record, the grandson of the above Ilui, whose
>name is also Shlomo Polatchek, lives here in Rechovot Israel, and I had
>the pleasure of working in the same company/department with him for at
>least 10 years. It seems that illui-ness runs in the family.
Are you sure about that? I think the Meitcheter only had daughters
(two). BTW, one of his son in laws (Mowshowitz) was a Conservative
rabbi in Queens, whose daughter became a C rabbi as well - I remember
that the Meitcheter's daughter took pride that her daughter was
following in her father's footsteps < insert deep sigh and groan here
:-) >
Kol Tuv,
YGB
<ygb@...> or ygb@yerushalmionline.org
essays, tapes and seforim at: www.aishdas.org;
on-line Yerushalmi shiurim at www.yerushalmionline.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Kahn <mi_kahn@...>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 19:37:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Minimum Wage Law
What does halacha say regarding minimum wage law?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <Moesch2@...>
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 12:18:05 EDT
Subject: Re: Rav Kook and Sacrifices
Frank Silbermann writes:
"In a previous post I reported having heard that Rav Kook was a
vegetarian. A private e-mail sent to me contested this, saying
that Rav. Kook most certainly was _not_ a vegetarian, but that
some of his followers were. Reviewing a translation of some of
his writings, it did _not_ indicate that Rav Kook was a
vegetarian, but did suggest that we will become vegetarians in the
Messianic era, and that restoration of the Temple sacrifices will
not include animal sacrifice. (So vegetarians need not fear
Moshiach.)"
I do not have the writings of Rabbi Kook, but I don't understand how he
can make such a statement which seems to contradict one of Maimonides 13
principles, namely the eternity of the Torah. Furthermore Rambam writes
specifically in chapter 11 of kings that all the laws of the Torah will
be restored during the Messianic era,including the sacrificial order in
all its details. In addition in our Musaf prayer services of Shabbos and
all the Holidays, we mention all the sacrifices brought on that day with
the prayer that we be able to perform them. Is it possible that Rabbi
Kook was referring only to private voluntary sacrifices where one would
certainly have the option of bringing a flour offering instead of an
animal sacrifice?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Kahn <mi_kahn@...>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 19:44:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Scope of Psak
>After all psak (Jewish legal decision) is normally associated with which
>items may be eaten, whom you can marry etc.
Is that so? Doesn't hallachos of guarding ones eyes dictate what one may
view? Doesn't Shulchan Aruch discuss what types of books one may read on
Shabbos. Simmilarly, Hilchos Talmud Tora discusses when one may study works
on the pardes (Interpreted as kabballa or secular wisdom) by the
commentators.
Most of all, didn't the Rambam start his Yad with Hilchos Daos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Charles Hafner <rebcharles@...>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 10:22:22 -0400
Subject: Shas on the Internet
I'm involved with a small group to enhance and expand www.e-daf.com.
The current Shas on the Internet version is a scanned version of an old
Vilna Shas, which is not copyrighted. Please feel free to have a look.I
should also mention that retaining Tzuras HaDaf is a very significant
driver of this project. The people who put it together did a phenomenal
piece of work; the same with those hosting the site.
We have approached several Shas publishers about getting newer versions,
digital media, or anything to improve the site. There is some
understandable hesitation, such as ideological problems with Internet as
a whole. Everyone is entitled to their own view.
There is also a business concern, that a free Shas will lead to
diminished sales, but we believe that the site will actually lead to
more sales for a publisher associated with the site. We're doing our
best to sell the concept.
There are also plans to develop links to other Shas sites, and to use
this a starting point for a much more expanded universe of Torah made
universally available, in Hebrew, English, and many other languages.
The possibilities are almost endless.
We're looking for anybody with interest,ideas, energy, connections,
objections, URL links, people to do web admin work, or digital media of
Sifrei Kodesh to help us or join us.
Thx
Charlie Hafner
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 12:55:47 GMT
Subject: Re: Size of Kezayis, Candles, Danger
--- <kennethgmiller@...> wrote:
<<In MJ 39:30, I wondered why (despite centuries of lighting Shabbos
candles), the fire hazards never sparked a decree or custom to insure any
degree of fire safety, such as to use only short candles rather than long
ones.
Gershon Dubin responded <<< Maybe because candles for the most part were
a dish of oil with a wick, not a stick of tallow/wax/paraffin. >>> and
someone else made a similar comment to me offline as well.
I *did* consider this before writing my original post. I could respond
by pointing out that although Neros were *generally* a shallow dish of
oil, solid wax candles *were* occasionally used as well -- at least for
non-Shabbos purposes -- even in times of the Mishna. But I'm *not* going
to use that as my response, because I honestly don't know how recent the
change is, or how many people had adopted use of solid candles by any
given date.>>
OK try this <g>. Candles of any sort were so ubiquitous that it would
have been difficult to legislate any kind of gezeros. Think of a gezera
that for some reason nobody can use a bulb of greater than 40 watts.
What're the chances for it to be followed?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 15:27:31 +0200
Subject: Sources on Workers
Following up on Russell J Hendel's correct comment about Judaism being
pro-workers (and I will not dwell on Ze'ev Jabotinsky's brilliant use of
Biblical themes to offset Marxist socialism in the Yishuv which is
another tangential topic although as a Betari, I am proud of his
intellectual contribution on this matter), I recall hosting a reporter
from the Old Mapam 'Al Hamishmar' paper here in Shiloh over Shabbat.
Semi-jokingly, to try to introduce some Shabbat atmosphere, I told him
that the Bible was very worker-aware. For example, it actually commands
us to work = "six days shall you work" but also commands us to rest.
Yisrael Medad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 15:20:03 +0200
Subject: Tachanun on Pesach Sheni
Martin Stern wrote:
The general Ashkenaz custom, in Western Europe at least, was to
follow the Shulchan Aruch and say Tachanun on Pesach Sheni and not
omit it as the Peri Chadash ruled
Indeed, the Shulchan Arukh does not include Pesach Sheni as a day on
which one omits Tachanun OH 131:6, so would that mean actually that
Ashkenazim in this instance following the Sfard custom?
Pesach Sheni though is included in the list the Ishay Yisrael gives
(25:17) as well as Rav Tukachinsky's Luach Eretz Yisrael and yes, he
does note (n.64) that the Chazon Ish did say Tachanun as recored in
Orchot Rabeinu, p. 68 as well as the six days following Shavuot which
means he does not accept that there were to include the Tashlumim.
p.s. So what is the Pri Chadash's reasoning?
Yisrael Medad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 00:13:21 +0200
Subject: Takanot
Two to three months ago, the issue of Synagogue Bylaws, Takanot,
was discussed. I mentioned that I had done some research and I did
find the file. Here are the Takanot I located:-
Laws and Regulations for all the Synagogues in the British Empire, 1907
Sefer Takanot, Mizrachi Minyan of Kassov, East Galicia, 1932
Bet HaMidrash, Kfar HaRoeh
Tirat Tzvi
Elyahu Hanavi, Haifa, 1968
Kfar Maimon, 1971
Minyan Horim, Kiryat Moshe, Jerusalem, 1979
Ein Ganim, Petach Tikva
Gvurot Mordechai, Givatayim, 1983
Maalot, Chpin St., Jerusalem, 1987
Eshel Elkanah, 1991
Neveh Tzuf of Har Nof, Jerusalem, 1991
If anyone has any others, please let me know.
Yisrael Medad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Levy Lieberman <kushint@...>
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 14:23:36 -0400
Subject: Vegetarianism
Hi,
Rabbi Tzvi Freeman of Canada addresses the issue of Halacha and
Vegetarianism from a very unique perspective in this weeks edition of
chabad's weekly online magazine. It is too long for me to post the
entire article, so I've included the appropriate link. I hope this
coincides with the rules of this list. In case it isn't pleat let me
know, and I'll try and paraphrase in short the contents of the essay.
http://chabad.org/magazine/article.asp?AID=77426
Thanx.
- Levy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 39 Issue 39
