Volume 18 Number 30
Produced: Mon Feb 6 0:06:42 1995
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Angel Teaching in the Womb
[Eliyahu Teitz]
Animals inthe Torah
[Larry Israel]
Are Sermons Considered a Hefsek
[Israel Botnick]
Calculating Shabbos Times
[Jonathan Jacobson]
Comment on Airplane Food
["Maslow, David"]
Community Bulletin Board System
[Sylvia F. Abrams]
Dictati
[Yitzchok Adlerstein]
Drasha being a Hefsek
[Eliyahu Teitz]
Halakhic Times (candle-lighting etc.)
[Leah S. Gordon]
Mamzer mariying a Shifja Canaanite
[Mordechai Zvi Juni]
More on Calendars
[Ed Cohen]
Non-mamzer Slave Children
[Warren Burstein]
On Arizal
[Ari Belenky]
Rosh Hodesh as Special Yom Tov for Women
[Irwin Keller]
Sermons
[Lon Eisenberg]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <EDTeitz@...> (Eliyahu Teitz)
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 21:49:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Angel Teaching in the Womb
if a girl is not taught in the womb, and the indentation above the upper
lip is the mark left by the angel teaching the torah to make the embryo
forget the torah, then why do women have this mark? likewise, why do
non-jewish children have this mark? does this mean that _all_ fetuses
are taught tora?
eliyahu teitz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Larry Israel <VSLARRY@...>
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 95 08:24:59 +0200
Subject: Re: Animals inthe Torah
In the spirit of Adar, albeit Adar I, I ask - what book of the T'nach
is the only one which does not mention any members of the animal
kingdom, save people? Not one "behemah", "dag", "parah", "tzippor",
or anything of that kind.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <icb@...> (Israel Botnick)
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 10:58:18 EST
Subject: Are Sermons Considered a Hefsek
As Isaac Balbin pointed out, a sermon given before musaph may cause
a problem of hefsek.
According to the Rambam (seder tefillot col hashana) the shaliach tzibbur
is required to say kaddish before each shmona esreh. Therefore, the kaddish
before musaph should be said together with the shemona esreh of
musaph. According to this, a sermon before musaph is not a problem since
it doesn't interrupt the kaddish and musaph.
According to other opinions though (quoted in mishna brura 25:59 and 55:22),
the kaddish before musaph is associated with ashrei and the other psalms
and psukim that are said before musaph. The kaddish should be said right
after uvenucho yomar. According to this opinion, a sermon before musaph
would be an interruption between uvenucho yomar and the kaddish (Assuming
the kaddish is said after the sermon and not before).
I once heard from Rav Herschel Schachter that the Maharam Schick has a
teshuva regarding when the sermon should be. His conclusion is that we
basically follow the opinion that the kaddish is associated with the
shmona esreh of musaph, so the sermon can be before musaph. But if
possible it is better to satisfy all opinions and have it after krias
hatora.
Israel Botnick
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <JonJ1@...> (Jonathan Jacobson)
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 19:54:21 -0500
Subject: Calculating Shabbos Times
Avi Feldblum writes in MJ 18:26
>[While I understand that this makes logical sense, I was under the
>impression that the halakhic definition of sunset/sunrise etc does >NOT
>take elevation into account. Any experst on this out there? Mod]
I happened to be in Palm Springs, CA this past November. I called the
Lubavitch hot line to find out what time Shabbos started and ended and it
started at 3:55, at least 40 minutes before sunset. I was told by a friend
of mine this has to do with the fact that the sun sets over the mountains and
you can't see it once it reaches that point so that is when to base the time
of candle lighting. The interesting thing was that Shabbos ended at what
seemed to be the correct time, unless they used the same fromula and added 60
or 72 minutes. Anybody have any further insight on this?
Jonathan Jacobson
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Maslow, David" <MASLOWD@...>
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 95 15:11:00 est
Subject: Comment on Airplane Food
In vol. 18, number 20, Deborah Stepelman is quite critical of the kosher
breakfast provided on TWA on trips from Israel, with much of her annoyance
directed to questioning why
>the rabbinate approves these types of means.
Rabbis giving kashrut supervision receive much criticism, not all without
merit, but I think it is going too far to criticize them for the menu that
the airline orders. El Al does not provide meat breakfasts, and the kosher
breakfasts on US flights are not meat. No doubt, TWA was trying to provide
as close a match to the non-kosher meals as possible, accounting for the
sausage included with the eggs, a combination that is, perhaps, only feasible
in the kosher airline kitchens of Israel. IMHO, her complaint should be
directed to TWA for their menu selections.
She also discusses the issue of having meat and fish:
>...the hot dogs were real and the lox should have been tasted first.
> why did both meals have to have meat and fish on the same tray?
While I am aware that meat and fish should not be eaten on the same plate or
with the same silverware, is there any restriction on eating fish after
meat, with separate dishes and utensils, eg. fish after a beef-stock soup?
Also, if separate forks were provided and the fish was in a separate dish, is
there any problem with having them on the same tray?
I will concur with the need for a notice that the meal was meat!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <ai871@...> (Sylvia F. Abrams)
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 22:16:25 -0500
Subject: Community Bulletin Board System
There was an inquiry in this posting about communities that have set up
a bulletin board system. The Jewish Education Center of Cleveland
(formerly the BJE) has a BBS on the Cleveland Freenet. To look at the
setup, telnet to Cleveland Freenet. Register as a visitor and type - "go
jewished" at the prompt. For more info; contact the sysop Helen Wolf at
the Jewish Education Center of Cleveland 216-371-0446
or e-mail me, Sylvia Abrams at <ai871@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <yitzchok.adlerstein@...> (Yitzchok Adlerstein)
Date: Sat, 04 Feb 95 22:41:12 -0800
Subject: Dictati
Dr. Eli Turkel recently raised several very good questions concerning
the manner of dictation of Torah to Moshe, especially contributions of
the speeches of some very ungodly figures like Bilam and Lavan. He then
proceeds to provide an even better answer - that whatever human beings
thought of on their own, only became fixed in the Torah when G-d
commanded such, and dictated the words to his faithful scribe. This
view is alluded to in Ramban's introduction to Bereshis, and is fleshed
out some more in Abarbanel's intro to Devarim.
Incidentally, such an approach should motivate us to search for deeper
meaning in the speeches of even lesser figures in Chumash, knowing that
it was HaKadosh Boruch Hu who judged these contributions as important,
and Who probably paraphrased them anyway. A case in point is one that
Dr. Turkel pointed to himself - that of Bereshis 31:47. Who cares what
Aramaic phrase Lavan used to call the mound of stones he and Yaakov set
up as a monument? Consider the observation of the Netziv. Lavan called
it "yagar sahadusa" while Yaakov called it (using the Hebrew) "gal ed."
The two phrases, observes the Netziv, are NOT parallel. Yaakov's words
in Aramaic would be "gal sahada," not "sahadusa." Lavan called it the
mound of testimony. The monument itself serve as a reminder of the pact
between them. Yaakov was not satisfied with this. The reminder of the
event, and its ultimate guarantor, was not the mound. It was the single
Witness Himself. Therefore, Yaakov called it the "mound of Witness,"
meaning G-d.
The seemingly unimportant difference in nuance may have been included in
the Torah to make a point about Yaakov invoking the Name of Heaven often
in his mundane affairs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <EDTeitz@...> (Eliyahu Teitz)
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 1995 23:20:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Drasha being a Hefsek
re isaac balbin's question of drasha being a hefsek:
the half kaddish before musaf might belong to musaf, according to a line
of reasoning posed by r. yosef dov solveitchik ( a"h ) [ do not read
anything political in the a"h, as opposed to zt"l, if a"h is good enough
for moshe rabbenu and david ha-melech, it should be good enough for
everyone ]. he raised the possibility that every amida is preceeded and
followed by a kaddish. if so, the drasha would, in fact, underscore
this point by separating between putting the torah away and musaf. a
possible proof that the kaddish is musaf's is that on weekdays we say no
kaddish after putting away the tora, but continue straight to ashrei.
and the kaddish after u'va l'tzion is clearly the amida's, as are all
kaddish tiskabel.
eliyahu teitz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Leah S. Gordon <lsgordon@...>
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 13:14:37 -0800
Subject: Halakhic Times (candle-lighting etc.)
There is also a calendar program (by my father, Dr. Edward M. Reingold),
on gnu-emacs, that can be used for calculating any halakhic time given
any longitude and latitude. I'm not sure of how to get that program
and so on, but if anyone wants to email me, I will forward the responses
to my father, who I am sure would be glad to help.
Leah S. Gordon
<lsgordon@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <bi029@...> (Mordechai Zvi Juni)
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 18:01:41 -0500
Subject: Mamzer mariying a Shifja Canaanite
I remember hearing the question about a Mamzer Marying a Shifja Canaaniite
and then realising the son so that the son is not a mamzer:
In Masejta Kidushim Daf samaj tes amud Alef (79.1) The Mishnah brings a
Majloket between R.Tarfon and R.Eliezer.
R.Tarfon says that a Mamzer is allowed to mary a Shifja Canaanite, the son
is his eved but if he frees him then he (the son) becomes ben jorim
(libarated).
R.Elieze says That the Son is an eved mamzer so even if he frees him
(libarates the son) the son will still be a mamzer.
The Guemara says that the Halajah is like R.Tarfon, the Guemara also asks
if what R.Tarfon says is lechatjilah (you are alowed to do it ) or
Bedieved (if you did it then its done but if you havnt done it yet then
you are not alowed to do it), and the Guemara is maskin that it is
Lejatchilah.
Mordechai Zvi Juni
<bi029@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ed Cohen <ELCSG@...>
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 95 01:02:47 EST
Subject: More on Calendars
Re 2 comments in vol. 18 on the calendar:
(1) Lori Dicker, #14: Adar I is considered the leap month. Therefore,
anyone born in an ordinary year will celebrate the birthday in Adar
II. [See Arthur Spier, The Comprehensive Hebrew Calendar, Feldheim,
1986, p.7; my posting: v18,#4.]
(2) Stephen Slamowitz, #20: 27 Feb. 1992 = Thu. 23 Adar I, 5752. 5752 =
19 (302) + 14; hence it is a leap year. See my posting: v18,#4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <warren@...> (Warren Burstein)
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 09:20:54 GMT
Subject: Re: Non-mamzer Slave Children
I thought that a Yisrael, Mamzer or not, is only allowed to have
relations with a Shifcah Cnaanit if he is an Eved Ivri.
|warren@ an Anglo-Saxon." -- Stuart Schoffman
/ nysernet.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <belenkiy@...> (Ari Belenky)
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 95 22:57:15 PST
Subject: On Arizal
Unfortunately, I did not make my point clear.
Harold Gans said that Codes in the Torah were already mentioned
by Moshe Cordovero (and even R.Bachya. These two names follow all
discussions on Codes, nobody ever said what was actually written there).
My point is that Arizal, who was able to see the Well of Miriam
through Sea of Gallilei and miriades of other things, did not
notice any Codes in The Book. Even knowing writings of Cordovero...
Ari Belenky
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <keller@...> (Irwin Keller)
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 10:19:20 +0000
Subject: Rosh Hodesh as Special Yom Tov for Women
I know that Rosh Hodesh is supposed to represent a special Yom Tov for
women because they didn't participate in the sin of the Golden Calf! Can
anyone expound on this further?
Thanks!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Lon Eisenberg <eisenbrg@...>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 15:23:56 +0000
Subject: Re: Sermons
Shimon Schwartz mentions all the wonderful learning and rabbi's sermons
that go on at his shul. I have not objection. His reasons for their
taking place are fine and valid. So what if the ones on Shabbath
happened after mussaph? All those who currently benefit by them would
still have that option, but those who had "other things to do" would not
be forced to be a captive audience.
Lon Eisenberg Motorola Israel, Ltd. Phone:+972 3 5658438 Fax:+972 3 5658205
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 18 Issue 30
