Volume 14 Number 23
                       Produced: Thu Jul 14 23:24:16 1994

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Beracha on Talit Katan
         [Jeffrey Woolf]
Corrected Talmud Source for Hareini Kaparat Mishkavo
         [Melvyn chernick]
Long Black Jackets
         [Danny Skaist]
Mahlokes on Facts
         [Yitz Kurtz]
         [Yechezkel Schatz]
Rabbi Hirsh of Neturai Karta
         [Jeff Mandin]
Returning Items (2)
         [Aleeza Esther Berger, Ezra Dabbah]
Talit Katan
         [David Charlap]
Temple Burning
         [Arthur J Einhorn]
The abolition of idolatry
         [Reuben Gellman]
Wearing the Talis over your head
         [Ari Shapiro]
Women and Covenant
         [Aryeh A. Frimer]


From: Jeffrey Woolf <F12043@...>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 18:25:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Beracha on Talit Katan

In answer to Ari Schapiro: Wearing a Tallit Katan is a custom if you
hold enwrapping is an integral part of the Biblical command.


From: <chernick@...> (Melvyn chernick)
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 14:31:28 -0400
Subject: Corrected Talmud Source for Hareini Kaparat Mishkavo

On Tue, 12 Jul 1994 <chernick@...> wrote:

> The abbreviation Hey Khaf Mem that the Lubavitcher are currently using
> when mentioning the name of the late Rebbe, stands for Hareini Kaparat
> Mishkavo, "may I serve as atonement for his death." According to the
> Talmud in Sanhedrin, this is the appropriate way to express Kavod for a
> deceased parent during the 12 months following his demise. Understandably,
> Hasidim use it for their Rebbe.

I now offer a correction: the source is Kiddushin (not Sanhedrin) 31b.
  Sorry for the error.



From: DANNY%<ILNCRD@...> (Danny Skaist)
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 03:13:40 -0400
Subject: Long Black Jackets

>Gedalyah Berger
>I believe that the pesak mekubal (generally accepted ruling) is that two
>corners formed by a slit are not counted toward the four unless the slit
>goes at least half way up the garment, which is never the case with a
>suit jacket (at least in my experience).  A bigger issue, I think,

Some long black jackets worn by Israeli Rabbis, that come dowm below the
knee, do have slits more then halfway up.  (Halfway is measured not to the
top of the garment, but to the armpit).



From: Yitz Kurtz <hmrcelec@...>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 09:29:25 -0400
Subject: Mahlokes on Facts

In v14n9 Yitzhak Unterman writes:

>The principle that the Talmud does not contain arguments about mezius (
>empirical fact) is limited to those occasions where the fact would be
>verifiable at the time of debate so that all the disputants would have
>had to have done would be to go out and check (puk chazi) .  A previous
>scholar's statements cannot be ascertained at the time of argument as
>the scholar has by then passed away.  This is obvious.

The principle of avoiding factual arguments in the Talmud goes beyond
verifiable facts.

As I mentioned in an earlier posting Rashi (Ketubot 57a s.v. ha km"l)
states that if a dispute can be interpreted as either factual or
halakhic we interpret it as halakhic. The reason is that the principle
"eilu veeilu divrei elokim chaim (both opinions are the words of the
living G-d)" only applies to halakhic disputes and not factual ones.

The factual dispute that Rashi refers to is about who said what in a
dispute in a previous generation and therefore is not verifiable.
Nevertheless, if possible, we avioid interpreting the dispute in this

Yitz Kurtz


From: Yechezkel Schatz <lpschatz@...>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 01:41:00 -0400
Subject: Moshiach

  Having read David Kaufmann's response to Sam Juni's posting, I'd like
to ask a question that has always bothered me, concerning identifying
the Rebbe as the Mashiach:
  What about the biblical sources?  Does the Rebbe fit in to the
biblical description of Moshiach?  Where in the tanach does it say that
the Rebbe will live all his life in chu"l?  Where in the tanach does it
say that he will die before accomplishing any of the tasks assigned to
him?  Where IN THE TANACH does it say he is to die and be ressurected?
  While the Rebbe was sick, Chabad activists used to qoute verses from
Isaiah 53, a chapter they felt explained the suffering the Rebbe was
going through.  Personally, I was appalled at the similarity to
Christian theology, having always understood that chapter as talking
about `Am Yisrael, but at least their interpretation was a plausible
one.  But now, with all due respect to other Jewish sources (including


From: Jeff Mandin <jeff@...>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 15:16:10 -0400
Subject: Rabbi Hirsh of Neturai Karta

Danny Skaist writes:

>Rabbi Hirsh, is a well known personality in Israel, he is also known as
>the "foreign minister" of the Netura Karta, and is well versed in

I believe that the "foreign minister" who is well-versed in Nietzche is
actually R. Leibele Weissfish, who is no longer affiliated w/ Neturai
Karta.  In 1988 he gave a public lecture on Nietzche in Jerusalem and
was introduced by Prof. Yeshayahu Leibowitz.

On the other hand, a Rebbe of mine who was learning at the Mir in the
early seventies said that R. Weissfish had some talmidim there - perhaps
R. Hirsh is one of them.


From: Aleeza Esther Berger <aeb21@...>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 18:20:34 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Returning Items

Shmuel Weidberg suggests that the halacha does not demand that attention
be drawn to an error made by a store in the customer's favor, because non
Jews behave in this manner among themselves.  From practical experience I
would disagree with this assertion.  Honest customers *do* correct the 
store's mistake made in the customer's own favor; I think we should be 
comparing ourselves with honest people, not dishonest ones. The last time I 
did this (giving $10 back to the cashier that he gave me in my change by 
mistake)I think that he was very grateful to me.  I got the impression 
that he might have been held responsible for the missing money, or 
anyway, it would have reflected badly on him in the boss's eyes.  

aliza berger

From: Ezra Dabbah <ny001134@...>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 94 20:30:26 -0500
Subject: Returning Items

Shmuel Weidberg writes in v14#6 that you can take advantage of a non-jews
error. This IMHO is a hillul hashem. How would you feel if a christian or
moslem said to you that the reason they didn't pay you is because their
religion permits them to keep quiet on a jew's misfortune?

This brings to mind a story of a Rosh Yeshiva at Porat Yoseph in Jerusalem
many years ago (I believe this was Rabbi Attiyeh A"H). Before giving
semicha to a student, he asked what he studied. The student mentioned
just about everything that could be studied including the 4 Tureem. The 
Rabbi then asked did you learn the 5th Tur. The student looked puzzled
and asked what 5th Tur? The Rabbi answered "common sense!"

Ezra Dabbah  


From: <david@...> (David Charlap)
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 94 12:11:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Talit Katan

<m-as4153@...> (Ari Shapiro) writes:
>This is not correct.  The reason one would put on a Talit Katan may
>be because of a custom but once you put it on you are fulfilling the
>torah obligation of wearing tzitzit and therefore you make a Bracha.

The mitzva is in having tzitzit on the garment, not in putting on a
garment that has tzitzit.  In other words, your mitzva is not in
wearing the garment, but having the tzitzit on that garment when it is

One could argue that you should only make the bracha when putting the
tzitzit on the garment, and not every time you wear it.  (What was done
in the Gemara's time, when normal clothes were four-cornered, and had
tzitzit.  Did they make a bracha when putting their clothes on every


From: Arthur J Einhorn <0017801@...>
Subject: Temple Burning

How did the Temple(s) burn if they were made of stone? If only the wood
furniture and other none stone parts burnt what happened to the stone

Aron Einhorn


From: <rsg@...> (Reuben Gellman)
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 22:15:09 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: The abolition of idolatry

About 2 years ago I heard a shi'ur on the g'marah in Yoma (69b) that
describes how the anshei k'neset hag'dolah (according to Rashi) asked
G-d to help them destroy the desire to worship idols. The g'marah
describes how the desire came out from the kodesh hakodashim (holy of holies)
in the form of a lion cub of fire. The shi'ur provided an interpretation,
which the teacher (Rabbi Moshe Shulman) though was originally given by
Rav Kook (perhaps elaborating on an idea of the GR"A). Rabbi Shulman had
himself heard the shi'ur orally, and was not sure of the source. I'm looking
for an expert on Rav Kook, who might be able to point me at a source.

B'kitzur: does Rav Kook discuss the g'marah on Yoma 69b, (which also is
quoted in Sanhedrin 64a)? The idea, in brief, is that the yetzer to
worship avodah zarah stemmed from a strong spirituality. It stemmed from
the same source as the drive to be a navi (prophet). Just like
prophecy's ultimate source is the kodesh hakodashim (G-d addresses Moshe
"mibein sh'nei hak'ruvim"--from between the Cherubs in the H of H),
idolatry's ultimate source is also the H of H-- the other side of the
coin, if you will. Evidence comes from the g'marah in perek chelek
(heleq?) (Sanhedrin 104 or so), where Rav Ashi is told that had he lived
in first temple times he too would have been an avid idolator: a great
man would have had a strong drive to worship idols. Anyway, if someone
can provide me with a source I would be happy to elaborate if anyone is

Reuven Gellman


From: <m-as4153@...> (Ari Shapiro)
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 94 20:25:13 -0400
Subject: Wearing the Talis over your head

<I am sorry that i do not have the time to look it up at home but R.
<Aryeh Kaplan z"l in his book on the topic (the thin set now in
<Anthology) states that only married men wear it over their head.

The source is the gemara kidushin 29B quoted by the Magen Avraham Siman
8 Sif Katan 3.  The gemara has a story that Rav Huna met Rav Hamnuna and
when he saw he wasn't covering his head he asked him why.  R' Hamnuna
replied because I am not married.

Ari Shapiro


From: <frimer@...> (Aryeh A. Frimer)
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 08:48:36 -0400
Subject: Women and Covenant

	Alan Cooper asks how woman enter the Covenant of Abraham if there
is no Circumcision. The Talmud deals with this in several places and
indicates that "nashi ke-man de-mehili damya" (women are considered
circumcized from birth).  This has ramifications regarding eating from
the Paschal Lamb (Kol arel lo Yochal bo - where the uncircumcized are
forbidden to therefrom, even if his exemption is halachically
sanctioned) and elsewhere. Hence, A female convert requires only mikvah
because she is halachically considered circumcized.
		Tsom Kal       Aryeh 


End of Volume 14 Issue 23