Volume 12 Number 40
Produced: Tue Apr 5 14:25:38 1994
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Benefiting from Hilul Shabbat
[David Kramer]
Control of Electricity on Yom Tov
[Bob Smith]
Electricity and Heat
[Leah S. Reingold]
Electricity on Shabbat and Yom Tov (2)
[Michael Broyde, Michael Broyde]
Electricity on Yom Tov (2)
[Warren Burstein, Alan Mizrahi]
Fetal-Reduction
[Bob Werman]
Fetus Reduction (2)
[Aryeh Frimer, Moshe Goldberg]
Fetus Reduction and Pig Genes
[Rabbi Freundel]
Multi-fetal Pregnancy Reduction
[Joel B. Wolowelsky]
Oat Matzoh
[Ari Kurtz]
Pig Enzyme Production
[Doni Zivotofsky]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <kramer@...> (David Kramer)
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 94 07:08:44 EST
Subject: Re: Benefiting from Hilul Shabbat
In mail-jewish Vol 12.36, Mike Gerver asks:
>Is it forbidden if a non-Jew would pick up the phone, or a non-Jewish
>operator assists in making the call? Or is it only forbidden if a Jew would
>pick up the phone, or an Israeli operator (who would most likely be Jewish)
>assists?
Where does this end? What about benefit from electricity maintained at
Jewish run plants? I understand there are people in Eretz Yisrael who have
generate electricity for their own needs so they will not have any benefit
from Chilul Shabbat. This practice is apparently not a mainstream view.
David Kramer (The other one).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bob Smith <bob_smith@...>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 1994 14:23:24 -0500
Subject: Control of Electricity on Yom Tov
Yitzchok Adlerstein writes:
>a firm concensus of several generations of poskim has evolved, banning >all
creation of electric circuits on Shabbos.
My question: How does this apply to the raising and lowering of an
electric current on Yom Tov. Many lights are now on potentiometers, can
be left on at low power and raised up when needed. Similarly, the heat
of electric ranges can be varied. Since a new light e.g. candle or even
cigarette according to some, can be kindled from an existing flame on
Yom Tov, is the key to avoid creating a new circuit where there was none
or is there some general prohibition against controlling electricity
that goes beyond prohibitions of controlling fire?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <leah@...> (Leah S. Reingold)
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 1994 16:31:40 -0500
Subject: Electricity and Heat
In recent postings addressing electricity and chag/shabbat, several
people have posted comments implying that electricity has applications
that do not involve heat production. For example, "electricity...even
if no heat is produced" etc.
It is a thermodynamic impossibility that electricity could be used
without heat production in any household machine. This is because to
get useful work from electricity, energy must be converted from one form
(e.g. electric impulses) into another (e.g. mechanical motion). Any
energy conversion necessarily produces heat in the form of losses, such
as those from friction.
As to the issue of lights on chag, I have indeed heard of a family of
Orthodox Rabbis, each of whom has a different opinion on the matter, and
some of them definitely permit at least turning lights on on chag,
(though not necessarily off).
Leah S. Reingold
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Broyde <RELMB@...>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 1994 14:23:29 -0500
Subject: Electricity on Shabbat and Yom Tov
Rabbi Adlerstein states that it is the concensus of poskim that the use
of electricity is prohibited because of the Chazon Ish's assertion
concerning boneh. I do not read the concensus that way at all. The
concensus in my opinion is that the use of electricity when neither
light nor heat is generated is prohibited because of an issur derabanan
called molid, as noted in Beit yitzchak 2:31. The Encyclopedia Talmudit
states rather clearly: "For the writing of numerious achronim it appears
that turning on an electrical circuit does not violate the prohibition
of fixing an object or building" v18 p.166. This is very important to
note, since there are significant difference between situations where
one can violate a biblical prohibition and situations where one can
violate a rabbinic prohibition. For a reveiw of the various opinions,
and a read of the concensus identical to that I present here, see "The
Use of Electricity on Shabbat and Yom Tov" 21 J. Halacha and Conte. Soci
6-23, where an article (by me, actually) appeared on this topic; see
particularly note 41 of that article.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Broyde <relmb@...>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 1994 14:23:36 -0500
Subject: Electricity on Shabbat and Yom Tov
In addition, Rabbi Adlerstein states that even Rabbi Auerbach indicates
that in practice one should agree with the Chazon Ish. This is not
correct. Rabbi Auerbach indicates that in practice one should agree
with Rabbi Shmelkes and consider the use of electricity to violate the
rabbinic prohibition of Molid. With only a few exceptions, most
authorities have not accepted the Chazon Ish, and even Chazon Ish
himself (OC 50:9) only indicates that this is a possibility of a
biblical prohibition. (If my memory is correct he states "ephshar")
Have a good yom tov.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <warren@...> (Warren Burstein)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 1994 09:45:57 GMT
Subject: Re: Electricity on Yom Tov
Many years ago, I recall hearing Rabbi H. Lookstein of Kehilath Jeshurun
say that there was someone in his family who used to permit some use
of electricity on Yom Tov, but Rabbi Lookstein himself does not do so.
I'm very unclear on this, but perhaps someone who is located closer to
New York than I am could ask him about it.
|warren@ But the ***
/ nysernet.org is paranoid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Alan Mizrahi <amizrahi@...>
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 94 02:18:21 EDT
Subject: Electricity on Yom Tov
I am sorry for the confusion caused by my posting on this topic. I was
by no means trying to convince people to follow the lenient ruling, as
I do not follow it myself. I was just curious about it. I found it rather
shocking when i first read it.
It was discussed in a recent article in the World Jewish Press, which I
unfortunately no longer have. Does anyone get that paper, or know if it
is available on the internet. I believe it was the week of March 16.
Alan Mizrahi
<amizrahi@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <RWERMAN@...> (Bob Werman)
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 1994 03:05:51 -0500
Subject: Fetal-Reduction
Rav Levi-YitzHak Halperin, a leading posek here, and a strong advocate
of "fetal rights" is maykil on reducing [killing in effect] some of the
fetuses in a multiple pregnancy in order to allow greater chance of
survival of some of the fetuses.
__Bob Werman, Jerusalem
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aryeh Frimer <F66235@...>
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 1994 10:50:20 -0400
Subject: Fetus Reduction
Regarding Fetus reduction
See Resp. Tsits Eliezer (Waldenberg) XX, no. 2 who permits. See resp.
for details. Aryeh
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <vamosh@...> (Moshe Goldberg)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 1994 02:45:05 -0400
Subject: Fetus Reduction
Rav Mordechai Eliyahu has a short article in Tehumin vol 11 (5750), pg
272, on the subject of fetus reduction. His ruling is based on the laws
of rodef [life threatening attack] in Masechet Sanhedrin. His summary:
"When a woman has so large a number of fetuses that they will all die,
and the medical technique is to give her an injection so that some of
them will be killed--it is permitted to inject her, since each one is a
rodef of the others. In this way, one or two will continue to live,
otherwise all will die."
In the same article, Prof. Richard Haim Grazi gives references to specific
medical procedures in line with Rav Eliyahu's ruling.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <dialectic@...> (Rabbi Freundel)
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 94 21:56:31 EDT
Subject: Fetus Reduction and Pig Genes
A.I have discussed the matter of fetus reduction with Rabbi Tendler shlita.
He makes two points
1. It is allowed when absolutely necessary (usually with four or more
fetuses).
2. Doctors will prescribe it even when not relly necessary so that care and
consultation with a rabbi who is expert in these matters must take place.
B. To add to what has been said about pig genes (which by the way have been
used for a while in tomatoes to insure freshness) things which are
submicroscopic are not consequential in Halachah in the way the macroscopic
items are. As an example microscopic needle biopsies may be permissable when
autopsies are not
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <sl14403@...> (Joel B. Wolowelsky)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 1994 00:53:26 -0400
Subject: Multi-fetal Pregnancy Reduction
Richard Grazi and I have an article on "Multifetal pregnancy reduction and
disposal of untransplanted embryos in contemporary Jewish law and ethics" in
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nov. 1991, vol 165, no. 5,
pp. 1268-1279. A recent popular summary was included in the recent issue of
Amit Women's magazine.
Joel Wolowelsky
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ari Kurtz <s1553072@...>
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 1994 01:44:45 +0300
Subject: Re: Oat Matzoh
regarding the letter from: <umeth@...> (Uri Meth)
>Gedalyah Berger quotes that according to some oppinions that oats are not
>one of the five species of grain. According to those who hold this,
>what 5 grains constitute the five species? As children we were all
>taught that the five species are BROWS - barely, rye, oat, wheat, and
>spelt.
The problem is that what is called today oat is not necessarily the
"shibolet shaul " quoted by Chazal . In fact Proffessor Felix who has
written books on identifying the animals and vegetation mention in the
Torah and by the Sages ZL' . Actually highly doubts that oat is shibolat
for the simple fact that oat was only discovered in America and there is
no proof that oat ever grew in the Middle East . This arises the
question is oat one of the five speices or not even though shibolet is
commanly translated to oat .
Ari Kurtz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <DONIZ@...> (Doni Zivotofsky)
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 1994 03:05:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Pig Enzyme Production
regarding eric burgers pig enzyme.
I am no expert on the pig enzyme or its kashrut status but using the
rBGH example he cites can explain why it would not be a problem. The
product is not an altered or purified hormone. It is a hormone, enzyme
or protein produced by bacteria that is the same as that which the
animal in question might produce. In the rBGH example, the gene that
produces BST (ie. bovine somatotropin (growth hormone)) in the pituitary
gland of the cow is spliced into the genetic information of an E. coli
K-12 bacterium. The E. coli possesses a small circular piece of DNA
(plasmid) into which the bovine DNA is inserted. After the vector DNA
carrying the BST gene is introduced into E. coli cells the cell make the
protein coded for the BST gene using their own protein synthesis
machinery. The bacteria can be grown in quantity in large fermentation
vats. The bacteria are then killed and ruptured. The bacterial
constituents such as membranes, DNA and proteins are separated from the
desired protein such as rBGH or rennet or insulin or other recombinant
products. I hope this helps
Doni Zivotofsky
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 12 Issue 40
