Volume 11 Number 42
                       Produced: Wed Jan 26 18:10:28 1994

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Burial of non-Jewish Soldier (3)
         [Howard S. Oster, Ron Katz, Warren Burstein]
         [Dr. Moshe Koppel]
Singing and Repeat-Singing
         [Danny Geretz]
Trees on Tu B'Shvat in Shmitta
         [Josh Klein]
Yidimu in Shirat Hayam
         [Ephraim Becker]


From: <hso@...> (Howard S. Oster)
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 94 14:07:06 -0500
Subject: Burial of non-Jewish Soldier

Tsiel Ohayon relates the following explanation regarding the burial
of a non-Jewish soldier in the Jewish section of a cemetary:

>The Rav (who was in Tokyo a few weeks after the incident) explained that
>the soldier had given the biggest possible sacrifice in the name of
>Kedushat Hashem and Kedushat Haaretz, and therefore there should not be
>any distinction (whether he was Jewish or not) made in his case.

What I wonder is what, halachically, forbids us from burying non-Jews in
Jewish cemetaries, and how sacrifice in the name of kedushat Hashem and
kedushat haaretz will then permit the burial.

Howie Oster

From: katz%<milcse@...> (Ron Katz)
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 94 10:44:37 -0500
Subject: Re:  Burial of non-Jewish Soldier

Tsiel Ohayon wrote:
>Warren Burstein wrote:
>> Recently in Israel there was an issue concerning an Beduin army officer
>> (a general, I think, I didn't pay much attention to the story) who was
>> buried in a military cemetery, and there was a controversy about in
>> which part of the cemetery he ought to be buried

>Actually, it was the case of a Russian immigrant born to a Jewish father

Just to set the story straight.  What I think Warran is refering to is the

An Israeli war hero named Amos Yarkoni, who was a high ranking officer
and a commander in the Givati elite unit who was also a Moslim Beduin died
some time ago.  Then some Israeli officer was about to be buried next to
him, and the question came up as to whether this was permissable.  The
Chief Rabbi of the army, Rabbi Gad Navon ruled that the Jewish officer
could not be buried next to the Moslim.  At that point the national outrage
broke out where people were saying how can such disrespect be shown to
a war hero, a soldiar is a soldiar, etc. etc. 

From: <warren@...> (Warren Burstein)
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 1994 23:27:43 GMT
Subject: Re: Burial of non-Jewish Soldier

These are two separate cases in which there was a controversy
concerning the burial of a non-Jewish IDF soldier.  While I don't know
if this makes any difference concerning how either of them should have
been buried, I stand by my statement of the facts.  The Beduin general
was named Amos Yarkoni.  The Russian immigrant had a Russian name.

 |warren@      But the weeder
/ nysernet.org is not *** at all.


From: <koppel@...> (Dr. Moshe Koppel)
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 94 11:39:22 +0200
Subject: Mashiach

I'd be interested to hear responses to the following:

The three most ideologically active and succesful subgroups within
Orthodox Judaism over the past generation have been Gush Emunim,
Lubavich, and the 'Yeshiva velt'. Each has made a distinctive and
substantial contribution to Torah awareness. Gush Emunim has focussed
on attachment to and redemption of Eretz Yisrael; Lubavich has
focussed on the unity of all Am Yisrael, even the most distant; the
Yeshiva velt has focussed on the intensive study of Torah. (To be sure,
none of these groups has a monopoly on its area of focus nor are the
contributions of any of them limited to just those areas.)

For better or for worse, each group has emphasized what could be
called 'Messianic' aspects of its area of focus. For Gush Emunim the
liberation of the Land is part of an *irreversible* Messianic  process.
For Lubavich the unity of Am Yisrael is a necessary prelude to the
universal acceptance of the Rebbe shlit'a as Mashiach. For the Yeshiva
velt the Messianic ideal of learning without working has become the
norm. (I realize that this last point is the least obvious because,
unlike Gush Emunim and Lubavich, the Yeshiva velt does not explicitly
draw on Messianic terminology to justify and promote itself.
Nevertheless, I submit that the idea of 'ish tachas gafno' and
'melachtecha naseis al yedei acherim' is *implicitly* Messianic.)

I don't think that this Messianic tilt is coincidental. It is natural
that a nation which has experienced earth-shattering events such as 
the Shoah and the establishment of the State of Israel should become
somewhat self-conscious regarding its role within a
delicately-callibrated, gradual redemptive process.

But here is the mystical part. Over the past several years these
movements have undergone serious sebacks in almost perfect tandem. The
Madrid conference, the illness of the Rebbe shlit'a, and the
Reichman's declaration of bankruptcy were nearly simultaneous. Since
then our hold on Judea and Samaria has become even more tenuous, the
Rebbe shlit'a has become more seriously ill, and the Yeshiva velt's
financial situation has become even more dire. While it is hard to see
any causal connection between these events, their parallel unfolding
seems to me to be more than a bit curious.

In the event that Mashiach doesn't come real soon are we headed for
Sabbatean calamity? Or are we perhaps headed towards an overdue
retrenchment from ill-considered perspectives? Will disappointment
lead to stultifying despair or will the forced abandonment of
comfortable theological positions lead to creative renaissance?

Beats me.

-Moshe Koppel


From: imsasby!<dgeretz@...> (Danny Geretz)
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 94 13:47:52 -0500
Subject: Singing and Repeat-Singing

In volume 11, number 27, Barry Siegel writes:

  [...] I believe that most Shabbat morning "main minyun" are too long,
  largely because of the excessive singing and repeat-singing.  I
  have Davened at Haskomo minyun for the last 5 years and appreciate
  it very much.  We sing very little. [...]

This touches upon a subject that I have been meaning to post about since
last Shavuot, but haven't gotten around to it.  This seems to be a good
"hook" for the subject.  The specific question I wish to raise is: How is
"excessive singing and repeat-singing" defined? Subjectively? Objectively? 

Around last Shavuot, I and several other m-j subscribers had a short
discussion about "repeating words during davening." The specific instance
discussed was the "Brich Shmeh" (the Aramaic supplication said while taking
out the Sefer Torah).  In many congregations, the final part of this is
sung to a melody which seems to be universal in the ashkenazic community
(in my own personal experience and travels).  The melody, as sung in my
parent's shul (in Minnesota), involves repeating the sentence "Beh ana
rachitz..." However, in Highland Park, NJ, where I now reside, it seems
that this part has been edited out by all shuls.  Has this been done to
avoid repeat-singing? If so, I don't understand why the community still
repeats words while singing "vayehi binsoa ha-aron" and sometimes in
"etz chaim hi".  

I have heard (but don't know the source) that repeating words during
the kaddish is not such a good idea, since the number of words in the
kaddish is significant (hence also changing "min kol" to "mikol" when
we say "l'eilah l'eilah" during aseret y'may teshuvah, to conserve the
number of words).  The only other references I have been able to find 
about repeating words are (sorry, I'm at work and can't remember the
chapter) a mishna in Masechet Berachot about repeating "modim modim"
(so that one is not misled into believing in multiple gods), and in
the Mishna Berura ( section 53, I think ) about how a shaliach tzibur
with a pleasant voice is allowed to "stretch out" the davening more
than one without a pleasant voice. How is "stretch out" (I think the
Hebrew word used was "l'haarich") defined?  I.e., what's allowed and
what's not allowed?

I have a relative who is a professional chazan, who has told me that
he thinks it is OK to repeat because it increases kavana ( "concentration").
Most chazzanut (cantorial music) that I have heard  does seem to rely on
repeating words.

Are there general rules or guidelines concerning repeating words during

Daniel Geretz


From: Josh Klein <VTFRST@...>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 94 15:53 N
Subject: Trees on Tu B'Shvat in Shmitta

This year the JNF (Keren Kayemet) is advertising a "once every seven year
special deal". Since (they say in the ad) one cannot plant trees during
shmitta, they are organizing hikes through JNF forests, and concerts in
national (reforested) parks. It's a great idea, and is nicely in the spirit of
shmitta. As far as giving money to JNF this year, I hope that no donor is so
naive asto think that each certificate represents an actual tree. There are
lots of costs in *maintaining* existing trees, ranging from irrigation (its a
bad year for rain, as I've mentioned previously) to spraying against bugs and
other nasties that defoliate forests. These are permitted activities even for
shade/ornamental (ie non-fruit-bearing) trees, according to most poskim, as
long as the aim is to maintain the tree such that it will not die otherwise.
 Incidentally, a number of religious yishuvim in Judea and Samaria are
actually planting fruit tree orchards this year, according to a 'heter' (from
the CHief Rabbinate?) that allows them to do so in order to 'enlarge the
Jewish presence' in those areas. It's a hora'at sha'a (temporary decree for an
emergency situation) in the face of upcoming/ongoing plans to 'give up' such
areas to a Palestinian authority.
Josh Klein VTFRST@Volcani


From: Ephraim Becker <becker@...>
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 94 16:18:24 -0500
Subject: Yidimu in Shirat Hayam

We read the shira ("Az Yashir" the song of Moshe following the
deliverance at the sea) today and the baal koreh (reader) was corrected
for reading the word in 15:17 as "yidmu" rather than the correct
"yidimu."  After a millisecond of annoyance at the seemingly trivial
correction (everyone on m.j. is supposed to be confessing to something -
it's kinda folksy) it occured to me that there may, indeed, be a
significant, albeit common, error here.  Yidmu ka'aven could (be
corrupted to) mean 'compared to a stone' whereas yidimu ka'aven would
mean 'silenced like a stone.'  Thought I'd pass it along, together with
my favorite joke on the shira.

[Sam, I left this in here, as it is "inyana D'yoma" - i.e. current, but
it can still go into the Purim edition. Everyone else, if you have Purim
stuff, send it to Sam Saal at <SSAAL@...> Mod.]

Warning: the following requires some familiarity with Hebrew and Talmudic 
texts.  Any excessive explanations/translations would be a clear 
violation of the eleventh commandment: lo sasbiru (thou shalt not explain 
a joke) and I do not wish to violate the lav of bal tasbir.

A melamed had to be away from his charges one morning and asked one of 
the "yungeliet" in the local kollel to fill in for him for the hour.  The 
class, he told him was in the middle of the shira, and he should pick up 
from there.

On Friday night one of the young charges was reciting his lessons to his 
father and proceded to translate the pasuk (15:10) tzolalu kaoferes 
b'mayim adirim to mean "they roasted like a bird in salt water."  (It 
correctly means "the mighty sunk like lead in water".)  On 
the morrow, the enraged father grabbed the melamed out of davening and 
assailed him for wrecking the pasuk.  The melamed, after a moment of 
thought, realized what must have happened, and assured the father that 
the matter would be taken care of.

The melamed went over to the yungeleit and said, "tzolalu you translated 
as roasted - I can understand!"  "kaoferes you translated as a bird, I 
can follow!"  "But how did mayim adirim become 'salt water?!'"  The young 
man proceded to defend himself and said, "It's an explicit 
("befaireshe") gemara (Gittinn 56b), "ayn _adir_ ela _melech_!"


End of Volume 11 Issue 42