Volume 12 Number 12
                       Produced: Wed Mar  9 17:44:48 1994

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

         [Harry Weiss]
Bet HaMikdash
         [Ezra Rosenfeld]
         [sue zakar]
Holocaust Museum and Kohanim (3)
         [Lon Eisenberg, David Charlap, Justin M. Hornstein]
Kesuva of a Ger
         [Yitzchok Adlerstein]
Name of Parent in the Kesubah
         [Benjamin Rudman]
Prayer for the State of Israel
         [Yamin  Goldsmith]
Prayer Text
         [Joseph Steinberg]
Rashi's Torah
         [Michael Shimshoni]
Reading a ketubah
         [Aryeh Frimer]
Strangers & Minyan
         [David Charlap]
Threats to Judge
         [Lawrence J. Teitelman ]
Yaakov and Yosef
         [Eli Turkel]


From: <harry.weiss@...> (Harry Weiss)
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 94 18:27:13 

Last year my son checked with Rabbi Eliezer Eidlitz of the Kashrus
information bureau in Los Angeles.  He said Bailey's Irish Cream was not
Kosher.  (I don't know if there is a difference outside the United
States as there is with Southern Comfort.)



From: Ezra Rosenfeld <zomet@...>
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 1994 07:12:28 -0500 (CST)
Subject: Bet HaMikdash

I would suggest the article by Rab Yitzchak Shailat entitled "Synagogue 
on the Temple Mount" in volume 4 of "Crossroads - Halacha and the Modern 
World". The author discusses the issue at length with an emphasis on both 
the historical and Halachic perspectives.

Ezra Rosenfeld


From: <sue.zakar@...> (sue zakar)
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 1994 21:43:01
Subject: Camps

We have two children, a boy, age 12 and a girl, age 8, both with
primarily a Reform/Conservative Hebrew school education.  As a family we
have begun to become more observant over the past nine months (emphasis
on Shomer Shabbos/Yom Tov and Kashrus) and are G-d willing planning to
move to an observant community. We would like to find an overnight
camp(s) where observance is encouraged, but whose structure is sensitive
to the situation of newly observant campers.  We live in the
Baltimore/Washington, D.C. area, so someplace on the East coast would be
preferable.  If anyone has suggestions, they would be greatly


From: eisenbrg%<milcse@...> (Lon Eisenberg)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 94 04:11:58 -0500
Subject: Re:  Holocaust Museum and Kohanim

Having not been in the museum, could someone explaing to me why a kohen
would think that there may be a problem with going to it?

From: <david@...> (David Charlap)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 94 20:15:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Holocaust Museum and Kohanim

<umeth@...> (Uri Meth) writes:
>I assume you are referring to the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC.  I
>had the same question a couple of months ago.  My brother who lives in
>Baltimore asked Rabbi Anemer, head of the Vaad of the Greater Washington
>area (he is a Rov of a shul in Silver Spring) and he said that it was
>permissable for a Kohain to go to this museum. 

This is what I'd expect.  After all, there aren't any bodies buried
beneath the museum.  Kohanim aren't prohibited from all things
pertaining to death, just dead bodies.

From: Justin M. Hornstein <jmh@...>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 1994 09:49:12 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Holocaust Museum and Kohanim

The question posed by the Macks in v12 #3 about Cohanim visiting the
Holocaust museum is instructive; I would think that Cohanim have
already investigated the issue, but these problems are not always
evident or easy to solve.

As an anecdote to illustrate this problem: When I was a student at
Brandeis I recall Cohanim always entered the Berlin Chapel (University
synagogue) by using the side door. The front door has nearby a "Job" (Iyyov)
statue as a mini Holocaust memorial (it's fairly "abstract" art if
that helps the issue of figurines-images) and in front of it is
interred "ashes" from Treblinka, under a plaque. The memorial may have
been meaningful but definately upset the Halachic applecart.  I think
a specific psaq (ruling) was nifsaq (ruled) during the time I was
there, that the safek (doubt) about the nature and amount of buried material
made it necessary for Cohanim to avoid the area.

Probably a posek would need to investigate all the original exhibits at the
Holocaust museum; possibly some, like the cattle car and other death
conveyences, might need to be avoided by Cohanim, while other exhibits
may be ok.
						Justin M. Hornstein


From: Yitzchok Adlerstein <ny000594@...>
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 94 22:19:20 -0800
Subject: Kesuva of a Ger

To all those writing about lenient piskei halacha [halachic decisions]
regarding the recording of the father's name, a word of caution.  In
many circles, there is firm insistance that the name of the ger always
be recorded as "Avraham Avenu."  This probably stems from the fact that
in a Get [bill of divorce], our minhag is to INSIST on this. (See Beis
Shmuel, Even HaEzer, 129:39).  The Rosh in a responsum (15:4) did not
like the idea of a ger choosing any (paternal) name for himself,
although interestingly enough, he insisted on "ben Avraham," rather than
"ben Avraham Avenu."  Now the practices associated with writing a kesuva
need not be as stringent as those of Get, but it still might not be wise
public policy to broadcast that converts are perfectly free to forgo
ever using the "ben Avraham Avenu."  See also Shut Minchas Yitzchok,
Vol. 1, #136.

Another way to spare people the embarrasment of attaching the "ben
Avraham Avenu" is to write it into the kesuva, but have the person
publically reading it forewarned to mumble at the appropriate places, so
that no one will know the difference.


From: <bdr@...> (Benjamin Rudman)
Date: 9 Mar 1994   8:34 EST
Subject: Name of Parent in the Kesubah

WRT Mike Gerver's story about the giyores whose Jewish father's name was
written into the Kesubah.

I was at the wedding of someone whose father is not Jewish.  His father
had a reform (I think) conversion, with a Jewish name.  In the Kesubah
his name was written Ploni ben Plonis (his mother) but so as not to
embarrass his father (who was present, and I think walked him down) when
the Kesubah was read, it was read as Ploni ben Ploni, his father's name.

The point is, that when you hear a Kesubah being read, it is not always
as written.

Binyamin Rudman


From: Yamin  Goldsmith <yg24@...>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 94 16:11:50 -0500
Subject: Prayer for the State of Israel

Concerning the Prayer for the State of Israel: what is the
difference between "...mey hagvul balvanon..."  and "... me gvul
halvanon..."?  I know that the former means "...from the border in
Lebanon..." and the latter means "...from the Lebanese border..." but
what other differences are there? And why the difference?

Yamin Goldsmith
Columbia University


From: Joseph Steinberg <steinber@...>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 94 16:13:23 -0500
Subject: Prayer Text

In response to Aryeh Frimer:

1) The Koren siddur -- which usually has correct grammar in the Nusach -- has
'Ra'im V'kashim.'
 2) The prayer that we (Bnei Ashkenaz) say in Shma' Koleinu is based on
the Sefaradic Barech Aleinu for the winter (in Nusach Sefarad the Nusach
of pretty much the entire Bracha of Barech Aleniu is different in the
winter than in the summer (i.e., the Minhag Sefard is not to simply add
a few words...))
 Hope this answers your questions

           |  Joseph (Yosi) Steinberg       |              <steinber@...>
Rak HaLikud|  972 Farragut Drive            |  <jstein@...>
  Yachol!  |  Teaneck, NJ 07666-6614        |               <jsteinb@...>
           |  United States of America      |       Tel: +1-201-833-YOSI(9674)


From: Michael Shimshoni <MASH@...>
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 94 16:01:36 +0200
Subject: Re: Rashi's Torah

Ari Kurtz stated:

>in regards to Howard Reich's closeing question about the inconsistensy
>between quotes from the tanach by the Sages in the Midrash and the
>accepted text today. Most of the Sages quotes from the tanach are
>misquoted as this is also obvious in the Talmud this missmatching
>derives from the custom of that time not to reproduce quotes from the
>tanach . Therefore there is no validify of proof through quotes of the
>Sages in the Midrash

Could  Ari Kurtz  or anybody  else supply  a possible  reason of  that
custom to misquote  the Tanakh.  I am also doubtful  of the claim that
*most* such quotes are misquoted.

 Michael Shimshoni


From: Aryeh Frimer <F66235@...>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 94 04:11:48 -0500
Subject: Reading a ketubah

I've been to a variety of weddings where there is a "kri u-ketiv" in the
ketubah - i.e., the ketubah is written accurately/halakhically but it is
read in a fashion which does not embarrass the parties involved (e.g.,
not well known that the bride or groom are gerim, that the bride is not
a virgin (200 vs 100 zuz) or is a divorcee etc.). After all, the only
reason we read the ketubah in the first place is to serve as a hefsek
(interruption) between the Kidushin and the nisuin so that we can make
a second boreh pri ha-gafen. People don't normally read there contracts
in public before hundreds of people. So reading the ketubah per se' has
no halakhic standing.  As far as the "inaccuracy" - it is permitted to
tell a "white lie" so as not to embarrass someone (meshanim mipnei


From: <david@...> (David Charlap)
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 94 10:48:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Strangers & Minyan

<harry.weiss@...> (Harry Weiss) writes:
>Another interesting point regarding Aliyot to visitors is where the
>visitor is a non Orthodox Rabbi.  Our LOR said to use the title Reb not

This makes sense, considering that "Reb" doesn't imply being a rabbi.
In much Jewish literature, "Reb" is used a generic term of respect.


From: Lawrence J. Teitelman  <csljt@...>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 94 12:01:33 EST
Subject: Threats to Judge

Eli Turkel raises the issue of whether a judge whose life is threatened 
should rather give up his life or rule in favor of a particular litigant
who would otherwise lose the case.

The Gemara in Ketubot (19?) in the sugya of "Anusim hayinu" [we -- the 
witnesses -- were forced to sign the document] addresses a similar question
and cites one opinion (that of R. Meir?) that in fact one *should* 
give up one's life rather than offer false testimony. (The focus of this
source is on the witnesses, however, and not the judge.) 

Larry Teitelman


From: <turkel@...> (Eli Turkel)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 1994 13:09:19 -0500
Subject: Yaakov and Yosef

      Mechel Fine objects to to the various interpretations of the of the
story of Yaakov and Yosef on the grounds

> I believe there are certain things that if CHAZAL did not say them,
> we have no right to say them especially when it denigrates or belittles
> the avos or sh'votim.

    I am not sure why the proposed interpretaions denigrate anyone. More
importantly, I refer him to the Tosaphot Yom Tov on Nazir 5:5 who
states that we have the right to our own explanations of Torah and
even Gemara as long as it doesnt affect Halakha. In fact many
commentaries on the Torah, both rishonim and acharonim disagree with
the explanations of chazal (at least on the pshat level) and offer their
own interpretations.



End of Volume 12 Issue 12