Volume 59 Number 48
Produced: Wed, 06 Oct 2010 15:12:14 EDT
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
An American in Paris
[Bernard Raab]
Birkat Kohanim
[Menashe Elyashiv]
Four Types of Idolatry (Was "Entering a church")
[Keith Bierman]
Help Stop Child Abuse
[Chaim Shapiro]
Lo Yishama al Picha (It shall not be heard through you) (5)
[Rabbi Meir Wise Michael Frankel Bernard Raab David Tzohar]
Open wound vs. mikvah question (3)
[Stuart Pilichowski Avraham Friedenberg Josh Backon]
Prohibition on entering a church
[Rabbi Meir Wise]
Shemini Atzeret (2)
[Mark Steiner Ira L. Jacobson]
Shemini Atzereth
[Perets Mett]
Shir shel yom
[Menashe Elyashiv]
Shower on second day yom tov (3)
[Martin Stern Stuart Pilichowski Akiva Miller]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bernard Raab <beraab@...>
Date: Tue, Aug 17,2010 at 03:56 PM
Subject: An American in Paris
Ephraim Tabory wrote (MJ 58#70):
>
> If one stays in a building with a code for the entrance doors, is there any
> halchik way to overcome them, or hall lights that automatically go on when
> sensing movement, do French orthodox Jews never leave their house on shabbat? I
> was lucky enough yesterday to have a ground floor aparment and so left window
> unlocked qnd put small child through to open front door but
>
> a) I may not have ground floor apartment next time
>
> b) The small child is growing fast and is getting too big to put through window
Add this to the hardships caused by the blanket prohibition of any use of
electricity on Shabbat. The use of motion-activated lighting in many hotels and
apartment buildings is ubiquitous throughout Europe. The code-activated or
swipe-card lock is a separate issue entirely. Some halachik relief is badly
needed but is unlikely.
Bernie R.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Menashe Elyashiv <Menashe.Elyashiv@...>
Date: Tue, Oct 5,2010 at 04:01 AM
Subject: Birkat Kohanim
Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...> wrote (MJ 59#47):
> I was just shown a comment in the Mishnah Berurah that the Levush
> stated that it was not done at all because most people make kiddush
> immediately after their aliyah. As a result, the kohanim were not
> allowed to duchan at musaf, even if they themselves had not made
> kiddush. Apparently, this was done to prevent accidents and someone
> forgetting or to prevent suspicion.
This may be true outside Israel, however, in Israel most places do have
the daily BK as usual on ST
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Keith Bierman <khbkhb@...>
Date: Tue, Oct 5,2010 at 02:01 PM
Subject: Four Types of Idolatry (Was "Entering a church")
Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@...> wrote (MJ 59#45):
> For example Ezekiel saw his famous prophetic chariot vision with oxen.
> There is one Talmudic opinion that the golden calf was an image of this ox
Is there something being lost in translation here? A calf does not look very
much like an ox to me. I would have expected our ancestors (being even more
familiar with such animals from their day to day interactions) to be even
better at making the distinction.
Logically, if our ancestors really were worshipping one of HaShem's
prophetic visions, would HaShem have been as upset as to threaten to destroy
us all?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Chaim Shapiro <chaimshapiro@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 21,2010 at 01:01 AM
Subject: Help Stop Child Abuse
Posting on behalf of Elliot Pasik [see signatures at the end of this post --
Mod.]:
----
Dear Friends:
We've turned the corner. There is a consensus. We are together committed to
eradicating child abuse in the Jewish community.
You can help us win the war against child abuse by doing two things.
First, sign our petition. Visit the web site of the Jewish Board of Advocates
for Children at http://www.jewishadvocates.org. Our petition calls for new laws,
such as requiring our all religious schools to fingerprint their employees so
that we can avoid hiring registered sex offenders and other dangerous persons
with criminal histories; strengthening of our mandatory abuse-reporting laws; no
corporal punishment; mandatory discipline of abusive employees; and reform of
our unfair statute-of-limitation laws.
New York State has the weakest laws in the country for protecting religious
school children. It is no wonder that our religious schools have been afflicted
with an abuse problem. This has to change.
Next, the week of October 17 through 24, 2010, has been declared National
Jewish Week for the Prevention of Child Abuse. The Week is endorsed by the
Rabbinical Council of America, the Orthodox Union, Iggud HaRabbonim-Rabbinical
Alliance of America, JSafe-Jewish Institute for an Abuse-Free Environment, and
Chicago Rabbinical Council. Our web site proposes how synagogues, yeshivas, and
all Jewish community institutions can participate through learning, speaking,
listening, and doing.
May G-d grant us and all of klal Yisroel a sweet, healthy, happy, and prosperous
New Year!
Jewish Board of Advocates for Children, Inc.
Board of Directors: Elliot Pasik, Esq., President; Dr. Asher Lipner, Exec. V.P.;
Perry Schafler, MA, MSW, VP.
Executive Committee: Haim Dweck, Eli Greenwald, Moshe Fessel, Esq., Rivka
Finkelstein, Bracha Goetz, MA, Dorron Katzin, CPA, Maury Kelman, Esq., Dr.
Nachum Klafter, Brochie Neugarten, Chaim Shapiro, MEd, Dr. Jeffrey Singer, Dr.
Vivian Skolnick, Mark Weiss.
Rabbinical Committee: Rabbi Yosef Blau, Rabbi Mark Dratch, Rabbi Allen Schwartz,
Rabbi Moshe Soloveichik, Rabbi Chaim Wakslak.
----
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rabbi Meir Wise <Meirhwise@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 05:01 PM
Subject: Lo Yishama al Picha (It shall not be heard through you)
The Talmud (ketubot 110b) teaches that... Whoever lives outside Israel
is as if he has no God.
Every time we write the secular date we should feel guilty! Although I
do remember that an Israeli who insisted on writing the Hebrew date on
a cheque had to fight all the way to the high court for the right so
to do!
Behokara
Rabbi Meir Wise
Galut London
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stuart Pilichowski <stupillow@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 06:01 PM
Subject: Lo Yishama al Picha (It shall not be heard through you)
Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@...> wrote (MJ 59#47):
> Jeanette's overly emotional reaction (MJ 59#45) to the inquiry about whether we
> can sayMonday Tuesday Wed (because of the prohibition of mentioning idols) shows
> a lack of understanding of the halachic process.
> It is NORMAL to ask something on a purely formal level WITHOUT INITIALLY
> worrying about the impact on Jewish/Non-Jewish relations. The halachic answer is
> also initially arrived at through a purely formal process consisting of
> consulting sources without regard to impact on relations.
> This is as it should be. Otherwise our religion would not have autonomy. Our
> religious actions would be to dependent on impact on Jewish/Non-Jewish
> relations.
I believe Russell is 100% correct in his description of the halachik process...
. . . Religious actions ARE (at times) dependent on Jewish/Non-Jewish relations.
Examples that comes to mind immediately in shaping the outcome of halacha are
the Mipnei Eivah (avoiding enmity) and Darchei Shalom (for the sake of peaceful
relations) adages. Chazal / the Rabbis felt these had such far reaching
consequences for Jewish society that what would've been basic halacha was
overturned.
Stuart Pilichowski
Mevaseret Zion
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Frankel <michaeljfrankel@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 06:01 PM
Subject: Lo Yishama al Picha (It shall not be heard through you)
Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...> wrote (MJ 59#45):
> Yechiel Conway stated the following (MJ 59#44):
>> I have wondered for a long time whether using the English names of
>> the days of the week is a violation of the prohibition of lo yishama
>> al picha (the names of other deities shall not be heard through you).
> The question is even more serious, perhaps, when we ask about using
> the Babylonian names of the "Hebrew" months, based on the names of
> the Babylonian gods.
But now that my consciousness has been so thoroughly elevated my concern only
grows. After all, it is hardly just the days of the week or months -both English
and hebrew/babylonian - or other hebrew idol-origin names ("moh-ves",...) which
suffer from this linguistic malady.
Entire gobs of the English language possess similar etymological infirmity of
such severity that entire fields of human endeavor may well - or should well -
be effectively closed to orthodox Jewish pursuit. Thus astronomy may be hard to
negotiate with all those peskily named celestial objects whose articulation must
be constantly avoided. And goodness knows, no more frum nuclear physics or
strategic policy guys/gals who will have to excise uranium and plutonium from
their vocabs. Come to think of it, that probably closes off all of Chemistry -
too many forbidden entries in the periodic table. And of course SOLar
engineering is out - as is addressing letters to Sunnyvale, CA and such places.
And not just closure of professions for the seriously frum, but a
self-imposed beggaring of our literary expression may be called for as well.
Metaphorical employment, such as "Achilles heel", "titanic", etc etc etc would
all have to go. And so on and so on.
Alas, I already have a profession whose practice calls for violation on a daily
basis of this heightened adherence to untainted speech. I can only hope those
pondering this issue will find a leniency to at least grandfather in those of
us stuck in halokhicly edgy occupations.
Mechy
Frankel
<michaeljfrankel@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bernard Raab <beraab@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 08:01 PM
Subject: Lo Yishama al Picha (It shall not be heard through you)
Russell J Hendel wrote (MJ 59#47):
> I think a relevant more interesting question is whether one can call a person
> who was named after the Christian deity (I know several such people...I
> personally have never had this problem but I have not heard how one handles such
> matters). Based on the logic above it possibly is OK to freely address him by
> his name even if that is identical with the Christian Deity but if someone knows
> for certain that would be nice to hear.
Perhaps someone could explain to me why it should be forbidden to mention the
name of any supposed deity which we do not regard as a Deity. Does not this
elevate the status of this faux-Deity to one of "possibly legitimate"? Does
anyone hesitate to mention the names of the many gods in Greek mythology, or in
Hindu belief? Why the special status accorded to the Christian deity? If you
believe that it is to avoid hatred or to encourage peace, remember that
Christians themselves have selected those names, and do not hesitate to use them
in conversation, sometimes in derogation, without embarrassment. Why are we more
frum than they are?
Bernie R.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Tzohar <davidtzohar@...>
Date: Tue, Oct 5,2010 at 03:01 AM
Subject: Lo Yishama al Picha (It shall not be heard through you)
Much more problematic to me than the use of English names for days of the
week, is the use of the date which is counted from the birth of the false
messiah (or son of god, according to that demonination). While few people
know that Thursday has something to do with the pagan god Thor, most people
know whose birth is being commemorated by the date. Using c.e. instead of
a.d. doesn't make any difference since the "common era' means that the date
is commonly computed from the birth of oto ha'ish. I try to use the Hebrew
date wherever possible, on letters, checks and legal documents. In Israel
this is not a problem except in the case of the validity dates of credit
cards.
--
David Tzohar
http://tzoharlateivahebrew.blogspot.com/
http://tzoharlateiva.blogspot.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stuart Pilichowski <stupillow@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 06:01 PM
Subject: Open wound vs. mikvah question
Carl Singer <carl.singer@...> wrote (MJ 59#47):
> This raises a tangential question -- Is it preferable for someone who is ill
> and possibly contagious stay home or should they go to shul so they daven with
> the tzibor. (I am not an epidemiologist)
I don't understand where this question even begins. No offense, but I don't see
two sides to the equation. How can one possibly endanger others? I would hope
that one would stay home from work, decline attending a simcha or a ballgame or
any gathering of more than one person . . . . .
In addition to the possible harm there's always the Chilul Hashem factor -
bringing shame and ill will to Judaism and the Jewish community.
Stuart Pilichowski
Mevaseret Zion
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Avraham Friedenberg <elshpen@...>
Date: Tue, Oct 5,2010 at 02:01 AM
Subject: Open wound vs. mikvah question
Carl Singer writes (MJ 59#47):
> This raises a tangential question -- Is it preferable for someone who is
> ill and possibly contagious stay home or should they go to shul so they
> daven with the tzibor. (I am not an epidemiologist)
One Shabbat last year, I dragged myself out of bed in the morning to go to
shule. I had a terrible cold; I was sniffling, sneezing, and coughing. As
I got dressed, I asked myself a question - if I was another person in the
minyan, would I want to sit next to me? The answer was no, so I davened at
home that day.
There's certainly the issue of bein adam l'chaveiro here, as I don't want
sick people around me. I would hope that people who are ill would have the
decency to stay home and not infect others.
Avraham Friedenberg
Karnei Shomron
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Josh Backon <backon@...>
Date: Tue, Oct 5,2010 at 05:01 AM
Subject: Open wound vs. mikvah question
Carl Singer wrote (MJ 59#47):
> This raises a tangential question -- Is it preferable for someone who is ill
> and possibly contagious stay home or should they go to shul so they daven with
> the tzibor. (I am not an epidemiologist)
He is prohibited to endanger others (see: Shulchan Aruch in Hilchot Nizkei
Shechenim CHOSHEN MISHPAT 155:41) and thus stay home. Nor should
someone in shul who knows another person is contagious be in contact with
that person (see: Nishmat Avraham on Shulchan Aruch Hilchot Bikur Cholim
YOREH DEAH 335:8).
Josh Backon
<backon@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rabbi Meir Wise <Meirhwise@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 06:01 PM
Subject: Prohibition on entering a church
Reb Meir Shinnar (MJ 59#40) should provide sources for his very selective
reading of the Seridei Aish, Rav Kook and others.
The Seridei Aish clearly states that the Meiri was a daas yochid amongst the
rishonim and I repeat that the Shulchan arukh and those who followed him did not
pasken like him.
Is this the same Seridei Aish who wrote a responsum to Chief Rabbi Isser Yehudah
Unterman (Shevet Yehudah vol 2 pp 263-263 ed Ariel publishing house 1993)
stating that: " a Jewish woman who had illicit relations with a gentile should
NOT be considered an aldulteress as the Gentiles seed is considered like that of
horses (ie the position of tosfos)?!
Is this the same Rav Kook who wrote in Igros Ra'ayah 89 v1 p99 that it is
forbidden to lease or sell real estate to Christians or Muslims in Israel
because of the Torah prohibition of "lo sechonaim" ?!
What does Mr Shinnar do with the Chazon Ish who wrote in his volume on Shevi'is
para 24 that it is obvious that Christianity IS idolatry and that Christians
cannot be considered residents (ger toshav)?!
What about the Chasam Sofer (part 2 yoreh deah para 131) who saw the opinion of
the Meiri brought in the Shitah Mekubetzet but found it hard to believe that he
said what he said but anyway was a daas yochid and not leholocho. He also
forbade renting or selling to Christians in Israel and when the Meiri on
Sanhedrin was printed in Israel in 1954, the Chazon Ish did not change his pesak!
What about Harav Shalom Mordechai Hakohen Schwardron, recognised as the posek of
Ashkenazic Jewry after the death of Rav Yitzchok Elchonen Spektor who wrote in
Shu"t Mishpat Kohen no 58 that Christianity is idolatry.
Should I go on? Or is somebody going to quote me a recognised posek who allows
entry into a church?
Does everybody realise that there is a seperate prohibition of admiring the
buildings of the church and the appurtenences therein! ( I am exhausted and in
bed but will provide sources if requested - I seem to remember shu"t mareh
habezek and Aseh Lecha Rav of the late sefardic chief rabbi of tel aviv Rav
Chayyim David Halevy spoke about it...)
So would somebody explain to me why a Jew would want to enter a church unless
forced to or to escape a pogrom? I am a simple person but this is Torah and I
need to understand.
Behokara
Rabbi Meir Wise
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mark Steiner <marksa@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 05:01 PM
Subject: Shemini Atzeret
I would point out that Rashi to Sukkah 47a actually has
yom shemini hag `atzeret hazeh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 05:01 PM
Subject: Shemini Atzeret
Martin Stern (MJ 59#47) stated the following:
>"Beyom (or Et Yom) Hashemini Chag Hatzeret" which unfortunately is
> grammatically questionable. "Hashemini" is an adjective qualifying
> the noun "Yom" and the rule is that both must take a definite
> article or both must omit it, i,e, either Hayom Hashemini" [THE
> eighth day] or "Yom Shemini" [AN eighth day].
The rule is generally kept, but there are important exceptions, such
as lashon (not leshon) hara and yom hashishi.
Or how about bayom hashemini (on the eighth day) [is] hag
ha`atzeret. If you don't like this solution, then I resubmit the one
I presented above first.
~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
IRA L. JACOBSON
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
mailto:<laser@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 06:01 PM
Subject: Shemini Atzereth
Martin Stern (MJ 59#47) wrote:
> The traditional liturgical usage in Ashkenazi siddurim and machzorim for
> Shemini Atzeret is "Beyom (or Et Yom) Hashemini Chag Hatzeret" which
> unfortunately is grammatically questionable. "Hashemini" is an adjective
> qualifying the noun "Yom" and the rule is that both must take a definite article
> or both must omit it, i,e, either Hayom Hashemini" [THE eighth day] or "Yom
> Shemini" [AN eighth day]. Various alternative formulations have been suggested
> to get round the problem but I should like to suggest why this one might have
> arisen in the first place.
>
> Perhaps the error crept in because of the way printers (and before them
> scribes) set up the page. Really on Shemini Atzeret, the text should have
> had "BAyom HAshemini Chag HAtzeret HAzeh" i.e. "On the eighth day, this
> festival of Assembly", and similarly elsewhere "Et HAyom HAshemini Chag
> HAtzeret HAzeh", but to save space this slight difference was not put in.
>
Shulchon Oruch O Ch 668:1 has "yom shmini chag ho-atstsereth" without the the
definite article.
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Menashe Elyashiv <Menashe.Elyashiv@...>
Date: Tue, Oct 5,2010 at 04:01 AM
Subject: Shir shel yom
>From the Talmud & Rambam (Temidim umusafim, 6/9, 10/11), the daily psalm
was said everyday at the morning tamid, weekdays & holydays. For the
Mussafim , on Shabbat they divided Haazinu into 6 parts, and every holyday
had its own psalm. For some reason unknown to me, the Rambam did not write
the psalm for Pesah, Shavuot & Yom Kippur.
I have seen 3 minhagim for Ashkenazim:
Always say the weekday psalm at the end of the prayers, and even after
Mussaf on Mussaf days
Say the weekday psalm, but on Mussaf days, say it before
the Torah reading
On Mussaf days, skip the weekday psalm and say the Mussaf
psalm.
It seems to me, that these are a sort of zecher lamikdash, but not
completely the mikdash way
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 3,2010 at 06:01 AM
Subject: Shower on second day yom tov
Steven Oppenheimer <steven.oppenheimer@...> wrote (MJ 59345):
> See the following for a review of this:
>
> http://www.koltorah.org/ravj/Showering_on_Yom_Tov_1.html
Perhaps it is worth noting that this source specifically includes the
following:
Yom Tov Sheini
One should not distinguish between the first day of Yom Tov and the second
day of Yom Tov (for those who do not merit living in Eretz Yisrael) in this
regard and rule more leniently for the second day since it is only a
rabbinic obligation. The Aruch Hashulchan (O.C. 511:11) rejects such an
approach as degrading to Yom Tov Sheini, a day whose dignity Chazal strove
mightily to preserve (Shabbat 23a).
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stuart Pilichowski <stupillow@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Shower on second day yom tov
Orrin Tilevitz (MJ 59#44) asks:
> Short of making aliya and in the absence of a 37C+-type heat wave, are
> there any authorities or circumstances permitting someone who is not ill
> to take a hot or warm shower on the second day of yom tov with water that
> has been heated on yom tov? An "istinis" [one who is fussy], perhaps? What
> if it's been heated on the second day of yom tov? Would it help if the
> second day of yom tov were also erev Shabbat?
I believe the question should be rephrased to whether showering is an obligation
or not; not whether it's permitted. Particularly if the second day yom tov is
followed by shabbat.
Stuart Pilichowski
Mevaseret Zion
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Akiva Miller <kennethgmiller@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Shower on second day yom tov
Ben Katz (MJ 59:45) asked:
> I have difficulty understanding why showering would not be allowed on either
> day of yom tov. Cooking is permitted, so there should not be as much of an
> issue with heating up the water
Your presumption is mistaken. Cooking for food purposes is permitted, and also
for washing one's hands and face. But not for washing other parts of the body.
Here's the logic: The Torah did not give us carte blanche to cook anything we
want on yom Tov, but only to cook things which are normal for enjoying a typical
Yom Tov. Example #1: In most cases, cooking on Yom Tov for a non-Jew is not
alllowed because for him it is not Yom Tov. Example #2: Even among authorities
who allow smoking in general, it is disputed whether or not one may smoke on Yom
Tov, because the large numbers of people who don't smoke might remove this from
being a normal and typical sort of enjoyment. From these examples, I hope it is
easy to see how in earlier centuries, when people did not bathe frequently,
washing one's whole body would be considered an unusual activity, and cooking
water for a shower would not be sanctioned on Yom Tov. Whether this still
applies today is an important question, but it is not as simple as Mr. Katz
would think it to be.
For sources for the above, see any of the links which have already been posted
in this thread.
Akiva Miller
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 59 Issue 48
