Volume 11 Number 93
Produced: Mon Feb 21 19:37:20 1994
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Dina
[Michael Rosenberg]
Eruv down announcements: clarification
[Mike Gerver]
Eruv going down and mitasek
[Jeff Mandin]
non-Jewish Parents
[Finley Shapiro]
Pets on Pesach (2)
[Phillip S. Cheron, Benjamin Rietti]
Shabat Qidoush
[Joey Mosseri]
Trees in bags during Shmita
[Josh Klein]
Women
[Marc Warren]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <Michael.Rosenberg@...> (Michael Rosenberg)
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 94 08:18:26 PST
Subject: Dina
I heard a discussion a couple of years ago about the relative ages
of bnei Yaakov and of Dina. According to the discussion leader,
Dina was 8 years old when she was raped making the crime all the
more heinous. Has anyone else heard of this or done a similar
cheshbon?
Michael Rosenberg
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!31.9!Michael.Rosenberg
Internet: <Michael.Rosenberg@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <GERVER@...> (Mike Gerver)
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 1994 18:23:51 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Eruv down announcements: clarification
To avoid any misunderstanding resulting from my recent maiseh, I want to
emphasize that Yitzchak Halberstam was not in any way criticizing the
halachic decision to put a warning on the eruv hotline advising people not
to carry unless necessary. He was only saying that, given the fact that it
turned out not to be very windy, and that in his professional opinion it
was not going to get any windier, there was no need to worry anymore about
the possibility that the eruv might be down. I apologize if anything I said
in my previous posting has caused any misunderstanding.
Mike Gerver, <gerver@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jeff Mandin <jeff@...>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 94 16:42:42 -0500
Subject: Eruv going down and mitasek
Gerver writes:
>In fact, my understanding is that people who carry when the eruv is down
>are not violating Shabbat at all, even be-shogeg, if they do not know the
>eruv is down. This is because there is a chazakah [legal presumption] that
>the eruv is up during Shabbat if it was up when it was checked before
>Shabbat, and that chazakah gives people the right to carry on Shabbat.
>They are not supposed to check the eruv on Shabbat, and the chazakah is
>broken only if they happen to find out that the eruv is down. It therefore
>makes perfect sense not to tell people the eruv is down, so as not to
>inconvience them.
Along these lines, there is a tshuva of R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach included
in a book by R. Gedalia Felder (I believe the title is Yesode Yeshurun)
where he argues that someone who knows that the refrigerator light will
go on when the door is opened may ask another Jew to open the door.
Since the second person assumes the refrigerator light is off, his
action constitutes only "mitasek"(performing an action that the actor
did not think was forbidden labor).
R. Shlomo Zalman leaves the question with "tzarich iyun"(requiring
further investigation). Both the refrigerator and the eruv case seem
counter-intuitive - IMHO.
My LOR remarked that R. Akiva Eiger writes that if you see someone
walking on Shabat with something in his pocket you shouldn't say
anything to him - since he doesn't know he's carrying, it is again
a case of "mitasek". A basic source for the whole issue is Tosafot
on the mishna of the tailor carrying out his needle close to dark
in the second perek of Shabat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Finley Shapiro <Finley_Shapiro@...>
Date: 15 Feb 1994 12:58:29 U
Subject: non-Jewish Parents
Regarding the discussions on the parents of a convert, when I was a
child our (Conservative) rabbi said that a convert does say kaddish for
non-Jewish parents. I don't remember a source and maybe he didn't give
one, but it certainly indicates the retention of family ties.
I know of one wedding (to which I was not invited) in which the bride
had converted and her parents (both Catholics) refused to attend the
ceremony. However, I am told that they did attend the party afterwards.
Perhaps a more complicated issue is that most of the people I know who
have converted have Jewish fathers. Some were raised to think of
themselves as Jewish, even if they did not convert until adulthood.
(Others were converted as children.) Links to the father and his
family, which are likely to include attending Jewish rituals with those
relatives, can play an important role in the path that leads someone to
convert. What are the issues regarding the family links of a convert to
a father who has always been Jewish (although he is intermarried)? This
is far from a hypothetical question!
Finley Shapiro
<shapiro@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <dt168@...> (Phillip S. Cheron)
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 94 01:41:18 -0500
Subject: Pets on Pesach
We have kept a cat since Motzai Shabbos Chol HaMoed Pesach 1982
(it's a long story), and have found feeding her getting easier
and easier each year.
At first, we followed a friend's suggestion and used broiled
chicken livers. Unfortunately, after six days on this diet, the
cat became a BEAST. Year after year, She'vii shel Pesach was
marked by the cat terrorizing guests, children, etc. So we switched
to hard boiled egg(limited success), pesachdik Tuna fish (she
likes this, but gets bored), cooked chicken (mixed results).
Then, about three or four years ago, the Star-K Pesach booklet
listed one or two brands of canned cat food which don't contain
any chometz. I think by last year they were down to one brand.
And you must be VERY careful about which varieties you buy, since
only about six or seven of the 15 or so kinds in this brand are
certified. The names all sound alike, so getting a copy of the
Star-K pamphlet is essential before going to the supermarket.
Among the acceptable kinds is the "Shrimp and Crab Dinner".
So, these items are essentially certified as "Treif L'Pesach"
cat food.
Unfortunately, Rabbi Blumenkrantz' Pesach publication does not
list any acceptable brands of pet foods. He generally suggests
getting rid of the pets over Pesach, i.e., giving them to non-Jews
for the duration of the holiday. Don't forget to Toivel them
when you get them back.
Phillip Cheron
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <sales@...> (Benjamin Rietti)
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 94 22:23:42 GMT
Subject: Pets on Pesach
I had the same shaaloh (question) many years back when I owned a Hamster
and was going away for Pesach. I saw an advertisement in the local paper
for (and I'm 100% serious!) a "Hamster Hotel" - excellent I thought;
called them up and THEY really were serious - for a small sum they would
take my cute little pet and look after him. I then proceeded to "check"
him in, arrived at the house, only to find a mezuzah on the door!
Yidden seem to find parnosoh in all fields! - Anyway, under the
circumstances I then called my Rov (Rav?) and was quite simply to give
the animal non-Chometz food, and that kitniyot (non-wheat grain) - such
as corn would be OK. - So I gave them the hamster and a bag full of
corn. Kitniyot is NOT assur b'hanaah (forbidden to receive benefit) and
therefore the hamster survived Yom Tov.
Hope this helps! (Hamster Hotel was somewhere in Edgware - can't remember
any other details! - sorry.)
Regards,
Benji.
---------------------------
Benjamin Rietti
IS-PC Marketing Division
Innovation in Data Delivery
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <JMOSSERI@...> (Joey Mosseri)
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 1994 20:36:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Shabat Qidoush
Regarding this topic about Kidush Clubs, maybe I'm comming in a little late
but I think the question should be looked at this way.
I think that what we are actually dealing with here is 2 questions, that in
our case intertwine to form 1 problem.
QUESTION 1
Are you allowed to eat in the morning before prayers?
QUESTION 2
When are you mehouyab(obligated) to say qidoush, i.e. which prayer is
mehayeb (obligates) qidoush?
To begin we must see Shoulhan 'Aroukh, Orah Haim, Hilkhot Shabat, chapters
286 and 289. From there we learn the following:
Regarding the Saturday Qidoush it is forbiden LIT'OM (to taste) anything
until you say qidoush. But in any case it is permited to drink water
Saturday morning before Shahrit because the obligation of saying qidoush has
not yet arrived. (The reason being, that you are not obligated to say
qidoush until after prayers, because qidoush can only be said in place where
there will be a meal, and before prayers one is forbidden from eating). And
it is also permissible to drink tea or coffee. It is also permissible for
one to drink milk in the morning for health reasons. But somebody who is
hungry and he can not concentrate on his prayers without eating before hand
and also someone who must eat before prayers for health reasons, since it is
now permissible for them to eat bread, now the obligation of saying qidoush
has now rested upon them even though it is before prayers, therefore if they
wish to eat or drink they must say the qidoush over wine, and if not it is
forbidden for them to eat.
It is permitted to eat fruit even in quantity before the Mousaf prayer, and
it is even permitted to eat bread (up to 54 grams/less than 2oz) before
mousaf, but more bread than that is forbidden. It is also forbidden to eat a
quantity of baked goods more than 54 grams.Now there are 2 opinions at this
point ; do you need to make qidoush to eat these items before mousaf or not?
It seems that the prevailing opinion and definitly that of the Shoulhan
'Aroukh is that you do not make qidoush, since the obligation to make
qidoush (sanctify the day) does not fall upon you until after the mousaf
prayer. One can therefore partake of a small snack after shahrit and before
mousaf without saying qidoush!
This may come as shock to many of you , but it is a very well documented
Rabbinic opinion.
For example , let's say that the Hazans' throat is a little dry after
shahrit, he can have a piece of sucking candy without saying qidoush without
a problem.(And for that matter , so can the rest of the congregation).
I think the clarification of the 2 questions and the law , should make
things easier on everybody.
Awaiting your comments and replies..........Joey Mosseri
(<jmosseri@...>)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Josh Klein <VTFRST@...>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 94 14:31 N
Subject: Trees in bags during Shmita
David Ben-Chaim wants to know why the Rabbanut allows planting 'bagged
trees' during Shmita. R. Yisraeli, a leading figure in the Rabbanut some
25 years ago, paskened that it is permissible to prepare vegetable seedlings
in bags *in a greenhouse-- NOT outside*, and that the seedlings can be
transplanted outside (out of their bags)) later, after Shmita is over. By
extension, the Rabbanut now allows tree seedlings to be transplanted *in their
bags*, since the tree is not really being planted in the ground, but rather
its bag is being placed there. The roots are not likely to penetrate the
plastic until the following year-- it's sort of a 'time delay planting'. What
counts during Shmita is that the plant/seed is 'niklat' [absorbed,
established] in the ground , and that's not the case with such trees.
Incidentally, R. S.Z. Aurbach has indicated that shade or decorative (as
opposed to fruit-bearing) trees that are planted during Shmita might not have
to be uprooted. Fruit-bearing trees that are planted during shmita should be
uprooted, since the counting of the years of 'orla' is otherwise disrupted.
Josh Klein VTFRST@Volcani
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <warren@...> (Marc Warren)
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 94 06:09:55 -0500
Subject: Women
If I recall correctly (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) Jewish
male slaves are also not required to do time related mitzvos. This
lends credence to the logic that women are not required to do such
mitzvos, because they are often not the masters of their time. However,
there is a big difference between a women, a male slave, and a man who
is a house wife. And that is that there is a halachic definition for a
women and a slave. There is no halachic definition for a man who is a
housewife. And were we to simply allow any man to say that since he
does house work he is not required to do any time related mitzvos, I
think we would soon find many men claiming to help around the house
Marc Warren
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 11 Issue 93
