Volume 18 Number 20
                       Produced: Sun Jan 29 23:48:42 1995

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Airplane Food
         [Deborah J. Stepelman]
Animals in the Torah
         [Bernard Horowitz]
Burning Bush Stones
         [Joseph Greenberg]
Coming of age
         [Zvi Weiss]
         [Mordechai Horowitz]
Hayyei Adam
         [George Max Saiger]
Hebrew date for English Date
         [Stephen Slamowitz]
How many Adars?
         [Moishe Kimelman]
Mikva Party
         [Lori Dicker]
Mikveh parties
         [Nadine Bonner]
Patriarchal Names
         [Yisrael Herczeg]
         [Harry Weiss]
Talitot for Single "Shatzes"
         [Danny Skaist]
Yishuv Ha'Aretz & zilzul Mitzvah
         [Gilad J. Gevaryahu]


From: Deborah J. Stepelman <stepelma@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 1995 14:12:42 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Airplane Food

	I recently flew TWA from Israel to JFK for the third time in the 
past 30 months.  Each flight was scheduled to depart Israel at 6:20 AM. The 
kosher meals were prepared in Israel under the auspices of the Rabbi of the 
	Each time the breakfast consisted of eggs with what appeared to 
be hot dogs in one dish, something pink in another dish which, upon very 
close examination looked like lox, and miscellaneous other foods.  The 
first two times there was absolutely no notice enclosed (not with my 
husband's meal nor mine) to indicate that the meal was meat.  Frankly, 
I was was fairly certain that what appeared to be hot dogs must have been 
a pareve substitute.  Why else would there be no indication that the meal 
was fleishig?  Why else would they be serving lox? How many kosher Jews 
eat sausages for breakfast in Israel, the US or anyplace? The two forks, 
which we only noticed afterwards, provided the first clue that perhaps 
the package contained meat and fish.  Later discussions with other 
passengers helped us all believe that the hot dogs were real and the lox 
should have been tasted first. 
	On the third trip, last week, there was finally a notice 
indicating that the meal was meat, along with some chicken on a stick in 
the same plate with the eggs and hot dogs.  The next meal on that trip 
consisted of a deli sandwich and a plate of tuna as the main items.
	I can't understand why the rabbinate approves these types of 
meals.  The breakfast could have been pareve or could have included the 
delicious-looking dairy product that appeared to be an Israeli yogurt 
product with a pouch of granola that the non-kosher meals contained. Why 
did both meals have to have meat and fish on the same tray?

Deborah J. Stepelman
Bronx HS of Science ... <stepelma@...>


From: Bernard Horowitz <horowitz@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 1995 14:41:53 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Animals in the Torah

My wife teaches Hebrew school and has come up with a class project which
involves the animals (fish, fowl, or otherwise) listed by name in the
Torah.  Does anyone know of a published source of such a list, including
the references for the source psukim for each animal?

Bernard Horowitz


From: Joseph Greenberg <postmaster@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 1995 18:14:30 + 500
Subject: Re: Burning Bush Stones

regarding the "burning bush" stones, there is a stone which is found
here in Michigan called the petoskey stone, found oddly enough in the
county of Petoskey, that also bears the imprint or figure of a tree or
branch. Quite interesting, and been around for a lot longer than any of
  Joe -  <postmaster@...>
     Human Synergistics, Int'l
 39819 Plymouth Road  800/622-7584
 Plymouth, MI 48170   313/459-1030


From: Zvi Weiss <weissz@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 1995 16:10:01 -0500
Subject: Coming of age

Comment on Leah Gordon's comment that it is peculiar to use physical
signs of maturity to recognize coming of age (this in a post dated 16
Jan).  I fail to understand this "peculiarity".  The halacha is quite
clear that it is physical signs of maturity in both a male or female
that determines their adult status in the community.  The Gemara in
Yebamoth is pretty definitive and to claim that this was only the case
in order to indicate that a woman is "marriageable" is simply not true.
[Besides, the Torah gives explicit permission to a father to marry off
his MINOR daughter so it does not even make sense to define
"marriageability" in terms of physical maturity.]

I do not know what it means to say that women are no longer Jews solely
through being daughters and then wives....  Does that mean that men were
defined as being Jews through being sons and then husbands?  To claim
that we should focus on "real changes" brought on by "religious
maturity.."  appears to imply that the halachic standard (i.e., years
based upon the chazaka of physical maturity) is somehow defective.  I
find THAT unsupportable.



From: Mordechai Horowitz <BR00318@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 95 19:19:05 ECT
Subject: Enviromentalism

I have a friend who will be running a program at the Spitzfer conference
on Jewish environmentalism.  The problem is finding the Jewish part of
the issue.  Any suggestions?  If you could add in anything regarding
how halachic Jews should act in the American political system regarding
the issue.


From: George Max Saiger <gmsaiger@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 1995 18:50:52 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Hayyei Adam

R Yehiel Michel Danziger (d 1821) was known for his "Hayyei Adam" which
set forth a version of halachah and musar that common people could
understand.  Chevros Hayyei Adam were common in Lita and in America in the
19th century and into this one.  My query is this:  In my hometown, a shul
was incorporated under the name of "Hai Adam" (sic). Were we unique, or
were there other shuls, as opposed to study hevros, by that name in this
Thanks to any respondent.


From: Stephen Slamowitz <adserve!<steve@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 1995 23:49:26 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Hebrew date for English Date

I am wondering if someone could tell me what the corresponding hebrew 
date would be for February 27, 1992 (a day in the beginning of Adar) and 
whether there were two Adars in that year.


Stephen Slamowitz


From: <kimel@...> (Moishe Kimelman)
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 1995 10:54:20 +1100
Subject: How many Adars?

As a follow up to my earlier posting, where I suggested that had there been 
two Adars in the year of the miracle of Purim then there would be no 
argument in the gemara as to when Purim occurs in a leap year:

I just noticed that in the Yerushalmi Megillah (Perek 1 Halachah 5 - page 7a 
in the standard edition) R' Chama bar Chanina says explicitly that Purim 
occured in a leap year.

So much for my proof!


From: Lori Dicker <ldicker@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 1995 15:02:34 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Mikva Party

In V18, #17, Joshua Burton wrote about a "mikva party" for a bride:

> I was suddenly reminded of a long article that appeared three or four
> years ago in the Sunday NY Times Magazine.  <edit>
> I recall, the whole female wedding contingent spent hours decorating what
> sounded like a huge women's bathhouse, with an extraordinarily large
> mikva adjoining it.  <edit>
>  spent more than two hours washing and primping and 
> scrubbing themselves and the bride, singing and laughing the while, 
> preparatory to the bride's first immersion.  <edit>
>  the author described it as a wonderfully sanctifying (and empowering!)
> Jewish experience.

I didn't happen to read the NY Times article, but I know there is a 
Sfardi custom to do this before a woman gets married.  I don't know too 
many details, but beyond the "standard" being-the center-of-attention 
embarrassment, I don't see why this would be embarrassing.
	"Everyone knows" that she is immersing prior to the wedding, it's 
a women-only event, and it's a one time thing, a standard pre-wedding 
ritual, so it doesn't strike me as an invasion of privacy the way 
announcing that a married woman is going to the mikva might be.
	Granted, it might depend on the person (feeling as if her privacy is 
being invaded), but if this is accepted in the culture, it's probably 
seen in the same context as the American secular world has bachelor parties.



From: <n.bonner@...> (Nadine Bonner)
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 95 20:53:00 UTC
Subject: Mikveh parties

  When I lived in Israel, I lived in a diverse ethnic neighborhood and
frequently saw bridal parties in the mikveh. This appears to be a
sephardic/North African custom and is an occasional for singing and
refreshments.  Yes, it was a small mikveh waiting room and those of us
attending for the usual reasons were somewhat inconvenienced, but it is
a charming custom and more suitable than the American bridal shower,
which is often merely an exercise in greed.
  This is, however, an entirely different matter from a bat mitzvah
mikveh trip, as here we are dealing with a new bride who has a real
reason to be there and not a troop of pre-adolescent girls.


From: Yisrael Herczeg <heichal@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 1995 23:29:52 +0200 (IST)
Subject: Patriarchal Names

Sam Gemoran is correct in pointing out that no Tannaim or Amoraim were 
named Moshe. But there is a Moshe mentioned in the gemara -- Moshe bar 
Atzri, who is mentioned in Bava Basra 174b and Arachin 23a. This 
suggests that there might have been Avrahams and Davids in those days, 
as well. But the fact that there were no Tannaim or Amoraim by those 
names still requires explanation.

Yisrael Herczeg


From: <harry.weiss@...> (Harry Weiss)
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 95 21:25:18 -0800
Subject: Sermons

In Xian churches sermons are the primary focus of the service.  This was
emulated originally by the Reform and then adopted by the Orthodox.

In many places the quality of the Rabbi's sermons is the prime factor in
hiring.  The sermon often is the one part that those who do not
understand Hebrew can understand.

I enjoy the sermon as a time to take a nap between Shacrit and Mussaf.



From: DANNY%<ILNCRD@...> (Danny Skaist)
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 95 15:18 IST
Subject: Talitot for Single "Shatzes"

>Reuven Jacks
>Regarding a single man wearing a talit. As most people know, the lubavitch
>custom is not to wear a talit if you are single. But our head lubavitch rabbi
>here ruled that if any of the youngsters (i.e. singles) are davvening as a
>shatz, then out of kovod for the tzibur, they should don a tallis.

Lubavitch "shatzes" (married or single) only wear a talit when the
tzibbur wears talitot. For any mincha or maariv including Shabbat and
Hag when the tzubbur does not wear tallitot neither does the shatz. So
in their case kavod hatzibbur, seems a bit stronger, since it really
means that the only person NOT wearing a tallit is the shatz.



From: <Gevaryahu@...> (Gilad J. Gevaryahu)
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 1995 20:51:00 -0500
Subject: Yishuv Ha'Aretz & zilzul Mitzvah

Andrew Sacks (MJ18#18) asks:
>While some authorities hold yishuv ha'aretz to be Toraitic and
 >others hold it to be Rabbinic--most all see it as a Mitzvah. How do
 >mainstream observant Jews fulfill this Mitzvah? If one does not
 >make Aliyah--and there are no extenuating circumstances, is this
 >zilzul ha'mitzvah?

I would like first to point out that the issue is: Is there a mitzvah
de'oraita or no mitzvah at all. Rambam does not enumerate this as a
mitzvah, whereas Ramban does (it was discussed previously in MJ). Some
hold that Rambam did hold to this mitzvah, but did not enumerate it for
various reasons, and some even suggest that he simply forgot to
enumerate it. Rabbis throughout history had to face this dilemma. If
they ruled that indeed there is such a mitzvah, then why didn't they
make aliyah. Some ruled that it was a mitzvah and made aliyah. Some used
the three oaths as a postponement of this mitzvah, claiming that this
mitzvah has been postponed to the messianic area.  Rabbis who dwell in
the diaspora face also a conflict of interests issue (nogeah ba'davar)
since they could not and should not issue a self serving
decree. Rabbeinu Chaim in the Tosfot (Ketubot 110b) suggested that the
mitzvah does not hold to his time for fear of the way (sakanat
de'rachim) and I have heard from many that the fear of the Arabs and
security issues in Israel are holding them back. Rabbi Feinstein also
makes a distinction between mitzva hchiyuvit and mitzvah kiyumit. (Igrot
Moshe, Even Ha'ezer, Siman 102).

In another place R. Feinstein says:

"it is my humble opinion that we cannot make a mitzvah from a takanah of
chachamim to dwell in Israel. And if they say that there is no mitzvah
de'oraita, then there was no reason for chachamim to rule on such an
issue [and make a takanah], since the Jewish people were dispersed in
the galut in the entire world, when the majority of the Jewish people
could not fulfill such a mitzvah, and it is known that since the
Tanaitic time only a small minority of Jews lived in Israel, not even
one out of a thousand, therefore, if such a takanah was issued, even the
minority did not fulfill it.  Therefore, for those who hold to such a
mitzvah, it is de'oraita, and for those opposing it there is no mitzvah
at all. And therefore, we should say that it is important [to live in
Israel] and it has value" (Igrot Moshe, Orach Chaim, IV, Siman 122).

It appears to me that most Rabbis today who do not live in Israel will
hold that there is no such mitzvah, and hence there is no "zilzul
mitzvah". For those who believe (as I do) that there is such a mitzvah,
and don't accept the three oaths argument, they could hold by the
"mitzvah kiyumit" doctrine or they should be in the process of packing!

If you own real estate in Israel are you OK? Or must you be there
physically?  The term Yishuv has both elements.

Gilad J. Gevaryahu


End of Volume 18 Issue 20