Volume 12 Number 90
                       Produced: Thu Apr 28  8:14:51 1994

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

"Italy" in 16th century
         [Steven Friedell]
         [Ezra Dabbah]
Direction during prayer
         [Aleeza Esther Berger]
         [Yitzchok Adlerstein]
Facing Jerusalem
         [Yisrael Medad]
Hotel Room Locks
         [Naftoli Biber]
         [Ben Berliant]
Meat Sacrifices
         [Robert Klapper]
Observing Shavuot after crossing int'l date line
         [Joel B. Wolowelsky]
sundry responses
         [Robert Klapper]
Video Etc. On Shabbos
         [Harry Weiss]
Women and Prayer
         [Janice Gelb]
YULA Shabbaton
         [Ruth Neal]


From: Steven Friedell <friedell@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 20:36:59 EDT
Subject: "Italy" in 16th century

My guess is that the word "Italia" when used in the 16th century
referred to the Italian peninsula as there was no country called Italy
at that time.  Is this still the case when the term "Medinat Italia" is
used (as it is in a responsum by the Maharam Lublin (number 61 -- in the
second half)?  Further, would someone at that time have considered
Venice to be part of "Italia"?  Thanks.

                         Steven F. Friedell 
      Rutgers Law School, Fifth & Penn Streets, Camden, NJ 08102
  Tel: 609-225-6366    fax: 609-225-6516     <friedell@...>


From: Ezra Dabbah <ny001134@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 18:41:49 -0500
Subject: Chumrot

In MJ V 12 #78 Bruce Krulwich remark about churot being "bad bad bad"
missed the point of the so called *lenient* views.  Fistly, his argument
about glatt meat is very understandable. However when he goes on to
discuss on chalav-yisrael that reasoning is not consistent with his
glatt reasoning. Certainly most orthodox people would not think twice
about eating a Hershey bar which is OU and not chalav-yisrael. This
means that the OU regards chalav-stam as kosher!  Secondly, chumrot
becomes a syndrome. The OU in it's Jewish Action magazine had an article
several years ago about how people are chasing chumrot and how it does
more harm than good to Clal Yisrael. It creates a sense of I am holier
than you attitudes. I hope this clears up some views.

Ezra Dabbah 


From: Aleeza Esther Berger <aeb21@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 19:18:29 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Direction during prayer

Someone asked a few weeks ago about how strict is the requirement that 
the ark face "East" (toward Israel), and where to face when it doesn't.  I
haven't checked this out fully, but since no one else responded, I'll try.

The Ramah or Mishna Berurah (I don't have it in front of me) discuss this 
in Hilkhot Tefilah (Laws of Prayer).  Apparently it's preferable but not 
absolutely required that the ark face toward Israel.  Interestingly, it 
is suggested that the ark shouldn't face due east, since this is how 
churches (?) face, toward the rising sun.  Anyway Israel is not exactly 
east (from Europe).  If you are in a placae where the ark doesn't face 
"east", you should "turn your face" toward the "east" anyway.  After 
reading this, I attempted to stand once with my feet toward the ark and
my face at 90 degrees, but this hurt my neck.

In practice (I suspect due to the neck problem)
what I have seen a shul rabbi do, and what I do, is face 45 degrees - 
e.g. if the ark faces north, I face northeast.  What to do if the ark 
faces west, I don't know.  Ninety degrees?  Does anyone know why so many
people face the ark even when it doesn't face "east"?  Is there some 
halakhic reason to do so?  Should there be a sign for guests who *like* 
to face "east", but who have lost their bearings in a strange place, as to 
which way the ark faces?  Also for shul regulars with poor sense of 

On the related notes of synagogue practice and also "why so many people 
don't do something", does anyone have an idea why so few congregations read 
haftarah from a klaf (parchment)? The Aruch haShulkhan (I think that's 
who, I don't have it with me) states that the klaf something that's more 
important to spend money on than silver ornaments for the Torah scrolls 
(which many congregations do have).  (The original leniency was 
because the extra klaf was expensive.)

Aliza Berger


From: Yitzchok Adlerstein <ny000594@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 17:11:53 -0800
Subject: Dreyfus

Someone I know needs some guidance on facts and background relating to 
the Dreyfus Affair, for application to a possible movie script.  Can 
anyone recommend a competent history scholar to assist?


From: MEDAD%<ILNCRD@...> (Yisrael Medad)
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 08:41 IST
Subject: Facing Jerusalem

Re posting in Vol 12 No. 63 on Facing "East" -

Please, we face Jerusalem (as much as possible) when we pray [see
previous discussion 3(?) years ago].

In terms of 'direction', West is the preferred direction for
example when turning to say the last verse of Friday night's
L'Chah Dodi: _hashechina b'maa'rav_ (The Divine Presence is in
the West.

Yisrael Medad


From: Naftoli Biber <bibern@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 18:26:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Hotel Room Locks

An interesting point with regard to the questions about key card locks
in Hotels.  I was in Orlando, Florida a few years ago and at the Hyatt
Hotel they have a number of rooms with regular "old fashioned" key locks
for their frum Jewish guests.  The Hotel has a kosher kitchen and a shul
with a full time mashgiach.

   Naftoli Biber                      Internet: <bibern@...>
   Melbourne, Australia             
   +61 3 527-5370                     Compuserve: 100237,711       


From: Ben Berliant <C14BZB@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 9:59:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Kipot

>From: <jsharf@...> (Joshua Sharf)
>............  According to a local rabbi, wearing a kipah out and about
>only became widespread among college students the '60s, and did so more
>as a political statement after the Six Day War, rather than as a
>religious act.  Perhaps someone with a longer memory than mine can
>confirm or deny this.
>[To the extent that YU is mainstream, mitnaggid Orthodox, I and all of
>my friends wore kippot from early childhood. That only gets you back to
>around 1959/1960, but as a 4/5 year old we were not making any political
>statements. Mod.]

	Well I can take you back a little earlier, and confirm that I
and all (well, almost all) of my friends wore kippot always from early
childhood (late 40's-early 50's). So that certainly preceded the six-day
war (but not the establishment of the State of Israel -- sorry, I'm just
not THAT old :-) )
	But I can confirm that in the early part of this century, it was
NOT customary to wear kippot in public.  I heard this from my father
(ztl) who got semicha from REITS in 1929 (pre-YU days).  I remember
discussions about whether it was halachically necessary to wear a Kippah
when eating, or only when making the b'racha.  Similarly, it is clear to
me from various conversations, that he probably did not wear a kippah
while in graduate school at Columbia in the 30's (and that was AFTER he
had semicha).  
	Of course, _I_ never saw him without one...

	The question is really for the historians on the net.  What
triggered the change?  Was it WW-II and its aftermath?  Was it the rise
of Zionism and the establishment of the state?  Or was it the influence
of the East-European refugees?

					BenZion Berliant 


From: <rklapper@...> (Robert Klapper)
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1994 05:37:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Meat Sacrifices

In Olat Raayah R. Kuk has a comment on "v'arva laHashem *minkhat*
Yehudah vYerushalayim" which may imply that only vegetarian korbanot
will be reinstituted.


From: <sl14403@...> (Joel B. Wolowelsky)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 01:22:07 -0400
Subject: Observing Shavuot after crossing int'l date line

Rabbi Shlomo Goren discusses the question of observing Shavuot after
crossing the international date line in his new book _Mo-adei Yisrael_
(1993: Yediot Aharanot/ Chemed Books), chpt 43, pp. 310-322.

Joel B. Wolowelsky


From: <rklapper@...> (Robert Klapper)
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1994 04:39:00 -0400
Subject: sundry responses

re teaching Torah to non-Jews - Rabbi Bleich's article is in
Contemporart Halakhic Problems Volume 2 p.311 

re codes - a major difficulty with the codes project is the triviality
of the allegedly encoded information, i.e. death dates of rabbis with
long biographies in a particular encyclopedia.

Dr. Juni's fears, incidentally, are well - founded - when i've mentioned
in conversation with educators the statistical meaninglessness of most
of the material (Aish itsef admits the statistical meaninglessness of
everything other than the death dates, or did in the presentation I heard
- see, however, an article in b-or haTorah which discovers meaningless
statistical anomalies in B'reishis) , or that the death date material
relies on spelling the Rabbis' names in numerous different ways
(including titl abbreviation, etc.) , the general response has been a
shrug and reference to kiruv accomplishments.  Finally, the problem of
using the method to interpret contemporary or future events is not
hypothetical - at the presentation I heard, a transliterated AIDS had
been found near S'dom.


From: <harry.weiss@...> (Harry Weiss)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 14:51:17 
Subject: Video Etc. On Shabbos

In v12n82  Moshe Golderg commented on Shmuel Weidberg's statement
regarding walking under a video camera on Sahbbos.

The reason of Psik Reisha d'lo ichpat lei is a more important
reason.  A video camera may be a non permanent writing and thus be
a mitigating factor.  There are, however, other situations which do
not have the mitigating factor.  On my walk home from Shul we pass
homes which have security floodlights controlled by motion
detectors.  Our LOR (who walks the same direction) ruled that it
was psik reisha d'lo ichpat lei  and it was permissible to walk
past those homes.



From: <Janice.Gelb@...> (Janice Gelb)
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 14:57:54 PDT
Subject: Women and Prayer

In vol 12 #79, Aryeh Frimer says:
>    IMHO, Janice Gelb  erred in saying that women can't count for a
> minyan or serve as Shlikhot Tsibbur because they are not obligated to
> pray.  

Please note that in my post, I did not say that women aren't obligated
to pray. What I said was that the *explanation* given for women not
counting for a minyan or serving as shlichot tzibbur is often *stated*
as being that women aren't obligated to pray because prayer is a time-
bound mitzvah.   

This statement is not often qualified with "in public prayer with a
minyan," which is why I think some Orthodox women get the message that
their prayers at synagogue (or even at home) are not important, which
was the original question that started this thread. Obviously women
with significant Jewish educations (as Shmuel Weidberg indicated in his
post about Bais Yaakov) may know better; however, there are many
observant women who may not have the benefit of extensive religious
education and will pick up impressions from those around them and from
how they hear this rule generally stated.

Janice Gelb                  | (415) 336-7075     
<janiceg@...>   | "A silly message but mine own" (not Sun's!) 


From: <rln@...> (Ruth Neal)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 22:50:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: YULA Shabbaton

I had a pleasantly surprising experience last week at the YULA 
Shabbaton in Los Angeles.  Many times I've read on mail-jewish about
what was said at this or that shiur, but this was the first time
I heard the rabbi giving the shiur refer at the beginning of his 
remarks to a discussion that had been ongoing on mail-jewish!  
(R. Feitman from Cleveland, in a shiur on Daas Torah In Our Time,
referring to our very own discussion of the past several months
as an example of how timely and relevant this issue is to many

I just had to :-)) right there in the bais medrash!


End of Volume 12 Issue 90