Volume 13 Number 3
                       Produced: Tue May 10  0:03:35 1994

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Ani ma'amin
         [Gedalyah Berger]
Birkhot Ha-Shevach - Solar Eclipse
         [Aryeh Frimer]
Death of Hitler (2)
         [Jack Abramoff, David Sherman]
Direction during prayer (2)
         [David Charlap, Tsiel Ohayon]
Fender Bender (2)
         [Isaac Douek, Ron Katz]
Fossils as an anti-religious diversion
         [Frank Silbermann]
         [Harry Weiss]
         [Josman Zvi]
Shalom Rav and Sim Shalom
         [Michael Broyde]
Shalom rav instead of sim shalom
         [Mitch Berger]
The OU and DE
         [Lon Eisenberg]


From: Gedalyah Berger <gberger@...>
Date: Sun, 8 May 1994 14:06:13 -0400
Subject: Ani ma'amin

In response to Rabbi Milecki and Yacov Barber in V12n99:

I'm beginning to get the feeling that much of our disagreement is a
semantic one.  I agree that one must hope for and *eagerly* await
moshiach's arrival at all times.  I just don't see how one must
*believe* that moshiach is arriving *today*; if that were the case, then
one of the 13 `ikkarim has been proven false every day again and again
for the last 2900+ years, which is obviously impossible.  I must be
misunderstanding you somewhere; please clarify.

Gedalyah Berger
Yeshiva College / RIETS


From: Aryeh Frimer <F66235@...>
Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 01:40:05 -0400
Subject: Birkhot Ha-Shevach - Solar Eclipse 

    In some parts of the United States there will be a total eclipse of
the sun on Tuesday. The question is whether there is any special Brakha
that is appropriate.  When first asked, I instinctively responded
"Oseh Ma'aseh bereishit" (OMB). However, Shulkhan Arukh OH 229
doesn't seem to mention it and only says to make OMB every 28 years when
the solar cycle starts anew. (Same for Hayei Adam  63). So I guess there
isn't any special berakha. Perhaps an eclipse of the sun doesn't remind
us of "ma'aseh bereishit" (the creation) any more than the monthly
total eclipse of the moon by the earth.  Without any clear source, the
principle "safek brakhot le-hakel" (when in doubt, refrain from
recitinga benediction) should be applied. I suggest, however, that to
let the event pass without saying anything is also inappropriate -
perhaps one should recite: "Tovim me-orot shebara Elokeinu etc." from
the Shabbat morning Davening.  A little praise certainly can't hurt.
    Any mekorot or thoughts?   Chag Sameach!    Aryeh


From: Jack Abramoff <abramoff@...>
Date: Sat, 7 May 1994 21:35:07 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Death of Hitler

With regard to the question [in Vol. 13 No. 2] as to whether we should
have a great celebration on the date that Hitler (Y'Sh) died, if one
agrees with the historians who hold that Hitler died in the early
evening, then we already have a celebration on this day, since the
evening of April 30, 1945 was the commencement of Lag B'Omer.  How

From: <dave@...> (David Sherman)
Date: Sun, 8 May 94 4:42:34 EDT
Subject: Re: Death of Hitler

Victor Miller writes:
> In the case of Haman, we remember it every year in the Megillah
> reading (of course we have the Mitzvah of hearing the Megillah, but we
> certainly remember it in other ways too).  Should the death of Hitler
> also be commemorated as a great deliverance for the Jewish people?

Hardly.  By the time of his death he'd already accomplished most of his
goals with respect to European Jews.  Furthmore, his death as such had
little impact on the surviving Jews -- Germany had by then lost the war
and the camps were being liberated.  Had Hitler survived, would more
Jews have died as a result?

With Haman, there was a real deliverance -- 100% of the threatened Jews
were saved, not 10%.

David Sherman

[Similar point was made by Gedalyah Berger. Mod]


From: <david@...> (David Charlap)
Date: Fri, 6 May 94 17:42:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Direction during prayer

<gee@...> (Shirley Gee) writes:
>	On a related issue, what direction will one face when the Temple is
>rebuilt and one is actually in it?

According to the rabbi who taught me this in grade school, when one is
davening in the Temple, one would face the Kadosh Ha'Kadoshim.  (The 
"Holy of Holies" - the room where the Ark is)  As for what you do when
you're in there, don't worry about it - only the Kohen Gadol can go in
there and live anyway.

From: <ohayon@...> (Tsiel Ohayon)
Date: Sun, 8 May 1994 23:07:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Direction during prayer

>	This is what I learned on a recent trip to Israel:
> [1] When outside of Israel, one faces Israel (which is presumed to be due
>    east).

You will find that in all countries East of Israel such as the Far-East
(Japan, Hong Kong, Thailand, India etc ...) you will face West ...



From: <zakd@...> (Isaac Douek)
Date: Sun, 8 May 1994 09:14:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Fender Bender

As an insurance consultant, I can offer our viewpoint on your question.
Here in Australia, (and I presume also our international counterparts),
you, "the insured" would have a duty to disclose any material facts
pertaining to your claim, in this case, any previous damage, to your
company "the insurer". As such, the insurer would decide in the exact
same way as you claim Halacha would, in that it would not let you
benefit more than you are entitled to. Practically speaking, however,

I see that 99.99% of my clients just go ahead and claim anyway on the
basis that the insurer would pay in full if the previous damage wasn't
there and besides, it is mutually understood that the insured pays
premiums in return for the insurer to pay claims when needed. I don't
know if this helps at all - I am not a Rabbi to advise you halachically
- but I would be interested to know what you end up resolving to do.
Zak Dee.

From: katz%<milcse@...> (Ron Katz)
Date: Sun, 8 May 1994 10:39:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Fender Bender

To answer my own post, I spoke with a Rav and he said as follows:
I don't have to worry about the fact that the insurence is paying for
a new part even though the original part was already somewhat damaged,
because that is their business.  Meaning this is not a question of
damages (NEZIKIN), but business.  
As to the person who did the damage, the same rule applies.     Insurence
buys a new part (or a new paint job, etc) and the damagor pays the
However (!!), if the damage was exactly in the same place as the original
damage, then it is proper to come to an arrangement with the damagor,
Especially if you know the person.
(A P'shara was the exact word, i.e compromise or arrangement).


From: Frank Silbermann <fs@...>
Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 10:46:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Fossils as an anti-religious diversion

It has been suggested that G-d may have created the universe ~6k years
ago in such a way as to _appear_ to be billions of years older.

If so, it would seem to be a simple matter to rewrite the theory of
evolution to be compatible with Chazal.  Instead of speculating that Man
evolved from apes, etc., we may speculate that G-d created the world to
_appear_ that Man evolved from apes, etc.

In that case, we might assume that if we look hard enough we should be
able to find fossils that would _appear_ to be the "missing link."

Sounds like facinating work for frum anthropologists!

Frank Silbermann	<fs@...>
Tulane University	New Orleans, Louisiana  USA


From: <harry.weiss@...> (Harry Weiss)
Date: Fri, 06 May 94 13:30:06 
Subject: Minhagim

There has been some discussion on MJ recently about changing minhagim
based on a new location.  This brings to mind several interesting
discussions I had recently regarding the Nusach of prayer.

I spoke to a Lubavitcher, who told me that the everyone should switch
their nussach to Nusach Ari which is the "holiest" version.  I spoke to
a Rabbi who follows the Litvak school of learning and was told one
should follow the Nusach that has been in their family unless they
switch to Nusach Ashkenaz.  One may always switch to Nusach Ashkenaz.  A
cousin who is a Chasid (Satmar) said one should switch to Nusach Sfard
because of Kabbalistic reasons.

I wonder if the same caveat holds true for other Minhagim.  It is always
appropriate for someone else to switch to our Minhag, but not
appropriate for us to adopt someone else's Minhag.

Chag Sameach


From: Josman Zvi <josman@...>
Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 14:29:32 +0200 (WET)
Subject: Query

Shalom. I would like some help in finding out all the parashot shavuah in
Israel for the month of July, 1995 for friends in the USA. They intend to
celebrate their son's Bar-Mitzvah in Yerushalyim in July. However, from
Pesach onwards we are ahead of the Parashot in the USA. Does anyone have
a handy luach? 
Betodah Marosh.
Dr. Zvi Josman
Bar-Ilan University.


From: Michael Broyde <RELMB@...>
Date: Sat, 7 May 1994 23:42:15 -0400
Subject: Shalom Rav and Sim Shalom

One of the writers questioned whether it really is correct that one who
says shalom rav instead of sim shalom fulfills the obligation.  The
halacha is that one does fulfill the obligation if one says shalom rav
instead of sim shalom; see mishna berura 127:13 and biur halacha on


From: <mberger@...> (Mitch Berger)
Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 08:18:37 -0400
Subject: Shalom rav instead of sim shalom

And now, for a little nepetism.

My great grandfather, R. Yisra'el Avraham Abba Krieger, in "China
Dechayei", wrote a teshuvah on the subject of someone who wants to say
"shalom rav" when in a hurry, as it is shorter than "sim shalom".

He came out vehemently against changing the matbei'ah (coinage) of the

Just as a side-note, my great-grandfather was in Boston at the time
"China Dechayei" was published. According to family legend, he was
offered to be a Rosh Yeshivah for this Yeshivah in New York, and turned
it down saying that the institution would never amount to anything. He
suggested they offer the position to R. Mosheh Soleveitchik instead. :-)

Micha Berger          Ron Arad, Zechariah Baumel, Zvi Feldman, Yehudah Katz:
<mberger@...>  May the Omnipresent have mercy on them and take them from
(212) 464-6565      constriction to openness, from dark to light, from slavery
(201) 916-0287      to salvation.


From: eisenbrg%<milcse@...> (Lon Eisenberg)
Date: Sun, 8 May 1994 06:46:44 -0400
Subject: Re:  The OU and DE

Gerald Sacks said that the OU doesn't use the DE marking for parve food
made in dairy equipement.  From my observation, however, they DO have a
way of indicating this: They use OU d (as opposed to OU D).  My
conclusion is based on seeing such items and noticing no dairy
ingredients.  Have I misinterpreted this?


End of Volume 13 Issue 3