Volume 16 Number 38
                       Produced: Mon Nov  7 19:28:49 1994

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Accessible Miqvaot
         ["Stern, Martin"]
Bible Translations
         [Jerry Waxman]
Daf Yomi Question
         [Arthur J Einhorn]
Is God a Bayesian?
         [Meylekh Viswanath ]
kosher pig
         [Moishe Halibard]
Mitzvah to Write a Sefer Torah - Not?
         [Mechy Frankel]
R' Shlomo Carlebach z"l
         [Rafael Salasnik]
R. Shlomo Carlebach\
         [Zev Kesselman]
Shlomo Carlebach, Z"L
         [Bob Werman]
Swearing to tell the truth (2)
         [Jake Colman, Robert Bindiger]
Tertullian's latin


From: "Stern, Martin" <MSTERN@...>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 94 14:19:00 PST
Subject: Accessible Miqvaot

Please distribute this inquiry as widely as possible.
Moshe Stern
Winnipeg, Manitoba

  >From: "MARK A. YOUNG" <myoung@...>

A Friend with a severe disability is touring the USA for a year long 
duration and inquires about the existence of Handicap accessibile 
Mikvaoth in communities throughout the States.

Can you all please comment on your own communities and specify the name 
of your town,the number of mikvahs,their name/location (address) and what 
if any accessible features they have (ie, wheelchair ramp, hoyer lift to 
allow tvilah for those with paralysis???)

Thank you very much!!!!

Responses to Dr. Young at e-mail address as above or to me

          Moshe Stern


From: <waxman@...> (Jerry Waxman)
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 1994 15:29:28 EDT
Subject: RE: Bible Translations

The recent postings about bible translations and the Septuagint bring to
mind a famous comment attributed (I think) to Rav Yitzchok Hutner Z"L,
Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshiva Chayim Berlin.

When commenting on the miraculous nature of the translation, that
seventy Talmidei Chachamim, in seventy different rooms all came up with
the same translation, he pointed out that that wasn't such a great
miracle. "A truly great miracle would be if sevent Talmidei Chachamim IN
ONE ROOM would all come up with the same translation!"


From: Arthur J Einhorn <0017801@...>
Date: 03 Nov 1994 14:15:14 GMT
Subject: Re: Daf Yomi Question

On today's daf, Baba Basra 17, the first mishna in Lo Yachpor that one
has to keep Slayim far from his friends wall. What are these Slayim?
Rashi says that these Slayim are stones that are radiating and give out
heat that damages the wall. The Art Scroll translates flitstones and
explains that they are used to make fire. Imho I don't understand this
because presumably the person just stores his stones by the wall. For a
flintstone to start a fire wouldn't you have to be rubbing them together
not just store them? I find it difficult to think that Rashi was
thinking of radioactive materials appearing in rocks because although
they radiate and therefore could produce some heat but the process is so
slow it would be negligible. A laser also seems farfetched for where is
the pump source and the high reflecting mirrors or cleaved sides? Maybe
some of the Bell Labs or MIT readers have some idea how to interpret
this Rashi?

Aron Einhorn


From: Meylekh Viswanath  <PVISWANA@...>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 17:01:46 EST5EDT
Subject: Is God a Bayesian?

Mechy Frankel concludes from the fact that khazoke only requires three
occurrences that God must be a Bayesian, rather than a classical

I don't think one need conclude that God is a Bayesian.  

If God were a Bayesian, then to conclude that an animal were a muad
based on three observations would require a highly concentrated prior,
i.e. God must be pretty convinced ex ante that the animal in question
(or animals in general) is a muad.  Why should we think this is so?  In
fact, it would seem to be very unlikely.

On the other hand, perhaps God is a classical statistician, and He is only 
inferring the mean from the sample, not the variance.  The variance, He 
knows is small enough, so that an observation of three gorings is 
enought to make the animal muad at the appropriate level of statistical 

Meylekh Viswanath
Graduate School of Management, 92 New St, Newark NJ 07102
Tel: (201) 648-5899  Fax: (201) 648-1233  email: <pviswana@...>


From: <halibard@...> (Moishe Halibard)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 12:34:05 +0200 (WET)
Subject: kosher pig

As a follow on to the recent discussion about chazir, I have two 
additions I recall from discussions in Gateshead Yeshiva.
Are the signs of kosher animals reasons (siba) for their kashrut,
or only an indication( siman)?
The Or Hachayim comments that pig will become kosher despite 
the laws of the Torah being eternally binding, because they 
will chew the cud. One can deduce that the signs are sibot.(observation
of the Chafetz Chayim)
A problem the  Chafetz Chayim could  not solve is the law that
yotzei min hatamei tamei - what comes out of the impure remains impure.
Hence, any futuristic pig, cud chewing or not, should remain unkosher
by virtue of its unholy anscestry.
Any suggestions welcome.


From: Mechy Frankel <frankel@...>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 1994 14:48:52 EST
Subject: Mitzvah to Write a Sefer Torah - Not?

In a recent posting, Irwin Keller referred in passing to the "big
mitzvah to write a sefer torah. in fact it is one of the 613

1. I do not know if this is very widely appreciated, but it is not
crystal clear that there is any current mitzvah to write a sefer torah
any more despite its inclusion in the taryag count (though of course the
theoretical requirement persists). The origin of this problem is the
doubt that the sefer torah we will see in shul this Shabbas (I'm writing
on friday, otherwise you would of course want to see it on monday or
thursday) is letter for letter identical with Moshe Rabbainu's torah.

2. Some relevant halachic citations include the following:

a) The Shaagas Aryeh (siman 36) writes that in our present day, where we
are not versed in chaseiros and yesairos, it is doubtful whether this
mitzvah exists.

b) The Chasam Sofer (tshuvos to Orach Chayim, siman 52) also points to
this doubt as an explanation of the fact that a sofer does not make a
beracha on the writing of a sefer torah as you would normally do when
performing a mitzvah.  There of course is then a further inyan of why
someone called to the torah in an aliyah makes a beracha at all, given
that a beracha does not technically "defer/prevent" ("aina meacave"')
and the fact that a sefer torah missing even one letter should not have
a beracha made over it.

c) The Minchas Chinuch (near the very end of the sefer, in mitzvas sefer
torah) suggests that according to this safek (that the letters in chaser
and maleh have been properly transmitted) the present day application of
the mitzvah of tefilin and mezuzah are similarly called into
question. (He offers a solution to the effect, that the parts of the
torah where the transmitted chaser/maleh test is uncertain ONLY
pertained to narrative portions of the torah which weeren't used to
derive any halacha lemaaseh, the latter being perfectly transmitted).

 3. There's a nice article by M. Shapiro (an mj-er who's also had to
take his lumps every now and then so it's nice to pass on a yeyasher
coach this time) on the Rambam's thirteen principles in a recent issue
of the Torah U'Madah Journal which treats, inter alia, some of the
related issues. I'm quite sure I remember that, at least, the above
Shaagas Aryeh is also cited there.

Mechy Frankel                                      W: (703) 325-1277
<frankel@...>                                H: (301) 593-3949


From: <Rafi@...> (Rafael Salasnik)
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 94 15:27:54 GMT
Subject: R' Shlomo Carlebach z"l

B R I J N E T    British  Jewish  Network  -  UK branch of Shamash
- Creates awareness of the internet in the community
- Helps organisations & individuals to participate in the Jewish internet
- Creates/maintains a useful quality communal electronic information database

A number of mailings have been sent in following the sudden death of R'
Shlomo Carlebach providing personal reminiscences of him. It may
interest many of you to know that The Times (that's THE Times as in the
'Times of London' or even the 'London Times') has published an obitury
of him.

If there is demand Brijnet will arrange to have this obitury scanned and
either included in a regular/special mail-jewish posting or directly
uploaded to the mail-jewish archives. I'll leave the choice up to Avi.



From: Zev Kesselman <zev%<hadassah@...>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 1994 08:09:55 EST
Subject: R. Shlomo Carlebach\

	Shlomo Koppel wrote of R. Shlomo Carlebach:

>                     I'm not ashamed to admit that Yom Kippur davening
>doesn't really get to me (well, occasionally Nesaneh Tokef strikes a
>chord) but lounging on the couch listening to a tape of Shlomo doing
>Haneshama Lach gets me right in the kishkes every time. I'll miss him.

	I attended the l'vayah on Har HaMenuchot.  Apropos of the above
post, the hundreds of mourners following the bier from the parking area
(where the hesped was delivered by Chief Rabbi Lau) chanted Shlomo's
"Haneshama Lach" all the way to the kever.  There, after the k'vura,
many other appropriate tunes of his were chanted (e.g., Pischu Li
Shaarei Tzedek).  Never saw anything quite like it, but it was very

				Zev Kesselman


From: <RWERMAN@...> (Bob Werman)
Date: Sun,  6 Nov 94 7:35 +0200
Subject: Re: Shlomo Carlebach, Z"L

Perhaps it is still too early, but I must put in my dissenting note.  I
imagine that I will be seen as small minded and carping but . . . .

Perhaps it is because I am not a Hozer; perhaps it is because I am of
the same age as the late Shlomo

Perhaps it is all my fault, perhaps it is envy . .

But I did not perceive the man as a saint, or as a kodesh . . . . nor as
an anav.

Must be a defect in me . . . .

My contacts with Shlomo began in the early 60s, when he visited the
mid-Western university where I taught.  He sang and entertained and
misbehaved.  I have followed him since and watched him sing and

__Bob Werman


From: Jake Colman <jcolman@...>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 08:47:45 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Swearing to tell the truth

[Note, the following refers to US court systems. I guess we'll hear from
Claire if the situation is similar in Canada. Mod.]

In response to Claire Austin's <CZCA@...> question 
concerning having to swear in court, I believe that courts will accept 
the word "affirm" in place of "swear".  As an elected official, my father 
has been given his oath of office numerous times.  The standard formula 
includes the words "I <name> do hereby swear or affirm...".  Most people 
simply parrot the words "swear or affirm" not realizing that they may 
pick one or the other :-).  My father always says "do hereby affirm".

BTW he brings in his own Koren Tanach in place of the standard bible.

Jake Colman                      email: <jcolman@...>
Lehman Brothers, Inc.            voice: (212) 526-1762
3 World Financial Center         FAX  : (212) 526-1411
New York, NY  10285

From: Robert Bindiger <rbindige@...>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 17:09:25 -0500
Subject: Swearing to tell the truth

>     From: Claire Austin <CZCA@...>
>     What procedure is used by the lawyer in court to satisfy both the court
>     and the person who must testify but who will not "swear"?  How is this
>     done in order to be minimally disruptive of court proceedings.

When serving in NYC on jury duty, we were "sworn in" before each
session. Most judges actually offered those jurors with religious or
other objections the alternative of "affirming" to tell the truth rather
than swear. If this was not offered at the get go, I informed the court
officer or other court personnel of my preference.

The procedure went one of two ways:

	We all raised our right hand as the judge asked us to "swear OR
	affirm" to tell the truth, etc.
				- OR -
	Those who had no problem swearing went first: raised their right
	hands and SWORE to tell the truth, etc.

	Then the next group went: raised our right hands and AFFIRMED to
	tell the truth, etc.

This seems to be a pretty accepted practice in the NYC jury system. I
don't know the procedure when actually testifying in a case or how
accepted any of this is in Quebec civil court but I would suggest
bringing up the issue with the lawyers involved.


From: <Norman.Miller@...>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 14:17:09 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Tertullian's latin

Is it possible that the gent in question spoke his native tongue so
badly that he used a non-latin word ("impossible") when he should have
used "absurdum"?

In other respects I'm in complete agreement with Mark Shapiro.

Norman Miller


End of Volume 16 Issue 38