Volume 44 Number 19
Produced: Mon Aug 16 5:35:13 EDT 2004
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Abuse Issue
[<mj-subscriber@...>]
Child Carrying Tallit
[Martin Stern]
Dairy Bread
[Shmuel Himelstein]
Ficticuious Marriages
[Yisrael Medad]
Labelling dairy products clearly
[Martin Stern]
Mixed marriage problem (2)
[Martin Stern, Edward Ehrlich]
Mixed Weddings
[Immanuel Burton]
Names of Rabbis
[Leah S. Gordon]
Prayer vs. Learning
[Martin Stern]
"Unmarried Girls" [sic]
[Leah S. Gordon]
Who are these rabbis?
[Mike Gerver]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <mj-subscriber@...> <mj-subscriber@softhome.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:33:49 -0400
Subject: Abuse Issue
I am a mail-jewish subscriber who feels a need to post this question
anonymously. I am asking for responses off-list.
Postings in mail-jewish vol. 44 #12 make it clear that child abuse must
be reported immediately.
There is a related problem which has not been discussed.
What happens, and what should be done, when an adult discovers that
they, or someone they know, was abused as a child, and there are
continuing problems from this, and the abuser is still alive and alert?
Who should the adult, or the friend, turn to?
What if the abuser is a non-Jewish step-parent? (The abuse victim is
Jewish.) What if the abuser refuses to recognize what has happened, and
insists that any mention of this will bring legal repercussions? (The
abuser is threatening the person who is abused, and has brought in
attorneys who demand there be no discussion of the matter at all.)
The results of the abuse, and the permanent trauma from it, are a
current problem, and it has cast a shadow over the abuse victim's entire
life.
Please respond to <mj-subscriber@...> .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:52:58 +0100
Subject: Re: Child Carrying Tallit
on 13/8/04 11:01 am, Shmuel Himelstein <himels@...> wrote:
> Going back close to a century ago, my father z"l, as a child would carry
> his father's tallit to Shul on Shabbat - and his father was a Rosh
> Yeshivah. This was in Warsaw. I understand, though, that the area had
> an Eiruv, and his father nevertheless preferred to have a minor carry
> his tallit for him. Thus, we find another reason why a child might be
> asked to carry a tallit rather than to have an adult do so.
Any 'town eiruv' relies on numerous kullot and, though it is highly
commendable to make one where possible, it is equally commendable not to
rely on it to carry on shabbat except in cases of great need which would
certainly include mothers with small children and disabled people in
wheelchairs. It is not unusual to see couples in Yerushalayim where the
husband wears a shabbos belt to avoid carrying a key and the wife pushes
their infant in a stroller. This must be the thinking underlying
Shmuel's grandfather's position.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shmuel Himelstein <himels@...>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:09:54 +0300
Subject: Dairy Bread
For a summary of the rulings regarding dairy bread, which Rabbi Joseph B.
Soloveichik (and hence the OU) permitted when the wrapper states clearly
it is dairy, check out http://www.koltorah.org/ravj/Dairy%20Bread.htm.
Shmuel Himelstein
[The link to one of Rabbi Howard Jachter's Halacha columns from the TABC
Student publication. It is a good (imho) overview of the subject, and
does include Rav Soloveichik's opinion among many others. Mod.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 15:15:20 +0200
Subject: Ficticuious Marriages
Daniel Gross writes in connection with the recent Druse woman case:
> What if a jewish woman takes the ring when getting married but does
> not intend to get married. Would she in principle stay single?
While anyone out there is working on a possible solution, may I remind
us that we had a similar historical case, but only just so.
In the 1930s, in order to circumvent the British immigration
restrictions to then Mandate Palestine, ficticious marriages were
arranged abroad, mainly in Poland, amongst the Zionist youth movements
and then they were divorced here in Israel. This was done to increase
the number of immigrants on one certificate (the name given to the
immigration license).
I personally knew someone who did this three times, including once with
a kid who didn't belong to either of them.
I would guess that perhaps some of the literature dealing with these
cases could help out as I know some Rabbis declared that no Get was
needed and others insisted, if my memory works.
Yisrael Medad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:01:55 +0100
Subject: Re: Labelling dairy products clearly
on 13/8/04 11:01 am, Avi Feldblum at <mljewish@...> wrote:
> That remains part of the job of the Kosher consumer, to make sure that
> one knows what is dairy, what is pareve, what is meat. I strongly
> agree with the various posters that there is no existing Rabbinic
> decree against dairy cake, nor should there be.
Nonetheless, it would be much better if dairy cakes were clearly marked
as such since, as the Medads have pointed out, it is at present not easy
to tell without a very close inspection.
On a related topic, I have been campaigning for some time that dairy
caakes served at kiddushim should be clearly indicated as such since
some people daven earlier and eat their meat seudah before 'doing the
rounds' to wish the many ba'alei simcha mazel tov, rather than ruin
their appetites making them unable to eat what their wives have gone to
such trouble to prepare.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:40:08 +0100
Subject: Re: Mixed marriage problem
on 13/8/04 10:49 am, Mordechai Horowitz <mordechai@...> wrote:
> Here is an issue a friend of mine is dealing with
>
> He is a Get Tzedek (convert) his non Jewish brother is marrying a girl
> who considers herself a Reform Jew, whose mother is a reform convert.
> The ceremony will be by a reform Rabbi and a Minister
>
> Can he go to the wedding?
Quite apart from the intermarriage problem this raises the question of
whether a Jew may attend any non-Jewish religious wedding, as opposed to
purely civil marriage registration, under the prohibition of
participating in non-Jewish religious rites generally.
> The basic pro is even though they think it is an intermarriage, in
> halachic reality two non Jews are getting married. Neither the reform
> Rabbi or minister have any status in halachic Judaism. The negative as
> I see it is that people might think he is accepting an intermarriage
> because they think the girl is Jewish.
Halachically the first position may well be correct but social realities
may be more important in this case. IMHO the best way out would be to be
arrange to be delayed so as to be unable to attend the 'religious'
ceremony and so come only in time for any non-religious
celebration. This is what I do personally when invited even to
non-orthodox weddings between Jews. However your friend should consult
his LOR who may have a better solution.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Edward Ehrlich <eehrlich@...>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 15:51:10 +0300
Subject: Mixed marriage problem
In my opinion there is even a more basic problem. Such a ceremony is a
mockery of Judaism. As Mordechai pointed out, because neither the Jew
nor the Catholic conducting the ceremony has any halachic status there
MIGHT not be a halachic problem with attending such a ceremony. It might
be considered as simply a non-Jewish ceremony similar to one being held
in City Hall in which neither the bride nor the groom are Jews. On the
other hand, a joint Jewish-Catholic wedding ceremony using the
traditional symbols of Judaism (the Chuppa, breaking the glass) along
side of various Catholic symbols (invoking the name of the father, the
son etc...) is a mockery of Judaism and for that reason I personally
would be very adverse to attending it whether Halacha allowed attendance
or not.
One other minor point. One does not have to have smicha to conduct a
Jewish wedding ceremony. The Halachic status of the Reform rabbi might
be irrelevant to halachic issues.
Ed Ehrlich <eehrlich@...>
Jerusalem, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Immanuel Burton <IBURTON@...>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:45:47 +0100
Subject: RE: Mixed Weddings
In Mail.Jewish v44n10, William Friedman wrote:
> My contention is that opposing intermarriage in a way that one does
> not oppose chillul Shabbat is hypocritical if one takes halakhic
> categories seriously.
I would like to suggest that intermarriage attracts far more opposition
than Chillul Shabbat as it is a far more public and ongoing statement of
a chosen lifestyle contrary to Halachah. It is also much harder to
extract oneself from an exogamous marriage, as I would think a single
person would find it easier to start observing Shabbat than someone who
has married out to leave the marriage, especially if children are
involved. Also, marriage (to a Jewish parnter) is mentioned explicitly
in the naming of both boys and girls, whereas Shabbat observance is not.
I have a friend who has a friend who is marrying out, and he consulted
his Rov about attending the wedding and how to treat his friend
afterwards. He was told that he should not attend the wedding or any of
its associated celebrations, and that he should not invite the couple to
any religious occasion, e.g. a Shabbos meal, but that there's no reason
to end the friendship. I, too, have a friend who is marrying out, and I
received a similar response from my Rov. When my friend invited me to
his wedding I told him that I could not in good conscience attend the
wedding or any of the associated celebrations. He has accepted that,
and that we are still friends. (I did try very hard to disaude him from
marrying out, but sadly have not able to do so.)
I did once have a rather heated debate with some friends about marrying
out, and they said that one should not exclude someone who has married
out from religious occasions, as that is shutting the door in their
faces and they are less likely to return. I asked them that if one
wishes to express to them that it is wrong, how else is one going to do
so? One example I gave was how acceptable is it to have a non-Jew
present at one's Seder table, when they can't say "We were slaves to
Pharoah in Egypt", and nor may they partake of the Paschal Lamb
(symbolised in our present inter-Temple times by the afikoman)? My
friends were not able to answer this, so does anyone have any comments
on this point?
Immanuel Burton.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Leah S. Gordon <leah@...>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:44:24 -0700
Subject: Names of Rabbis
>So, the query gets murkier. And it is still "why?". Why does a famous
>Rabbi adopt his mother's maiden name out of respect for Torah learning,
>thus overriding his father's family name?
I think a better question is, why not? As Avi said, this seems to have
been common.
--Leah
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:44:01 +0100
Subject: Re: Prayer vs. Learning
on 13/8/04 10:49 am, David Riceman <driceman@...> wrote:
> It is accurate, though, and I can't understand why you find it
> objectionable. R. Haim Volozhin is quoted (Horaoth V'Hanhagoth, the
> version printed in the back of Maaseh Rav HaShalem #15*) as saying that
> he would have exchanged all of his prayers of his entire life for one
> novel halachic interpretation [din m'hudash].
This is probably a polemic position against Chassidism with its greater
emphasis on prayer as opposed to learning and must be taken with a pinch
of salt.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Leah S. Gordon <leah@...>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:41:34 -0700
Subject: "Unmarried Girls" [sic]
>as OK for children who weren't barei chiyuv yet, and even mentioned that
>un married girls were told that when they married - and fasted the day
>before their wedding - their aveirot would be forgivven , so it was OK
I have a language request: please remember that it is disrespectful to
call women 'girls' whether married or not. Only very young females
(i.e. below bat-mitzvah, or at the most high school age) should be
called 'girls,' and you can never go wrong by just saying 'young women'
in these cases anyway.
--Leah
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <MJGerver@...> (Mike Gerver)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 06:56:29 EDT
Subject: Who are these rabbis?
Yisrael Medad asks, in v44n18:
>R. Naftali Ropshitz ztl/hyd (I think this is correct) was the father in
>law of the current Bostoner Rebbe shlita
Don't think so. He died in Lanzut, Galicia (now Poland), 1827.
Almost 180 years ago. Maybe another Naftali Tzvi?
R. Naftali of Roshpitz was indeed an ancestor of the Bostoner Rebbetzin
Raichel Horowitz a"h, but he was her great-great-great-grandfather, not
her father. Specifically, he was the great-grandfather on the paternal
line of R. Alter Ze'ev Horowitz, the Stryzover Zeide, who was the
maternal grandfather of the Bostoner Rebbetzin. This information comes
from "The Bostoner Rebbetzin Remembers," Mesorah Publications (Art
Scroll History Series), 1996, as well as from the family trees found in
the back of the Bostoner siddur.
The Rebbetzin's father was also named Naftali, Rav Naftali Ungar of
Neimark.
Mike Gerver
Raanana, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 44 Issue 19
