Volume 18 Number 32
                       Produced: Tue Feb  7  0:01:17 1995

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

         [Josh Backon]
Drashot before Musaf
         [Aryeh Frimer]
First Aliya in Absence of a Kohen
         [Jerrold Landau]
Hills and Sunset
         [Jeff Mandin]
Humrot (stringencies)
         [Aryeh Frimer]
Kadish before Mussaf and Meat before Fish
         [Jeremy Lebrett]
Kedushas Shevi'is in Chul
         [David Goldhar]
Lvov Incident
         [Jay Rovner]
         [Mordechai Zvi Juni]
Question on Peyut Language
         [Joe Wetstein]
Seven Clean Days
         [Eliyahu Teitz]
Shmitta Fruit - Again
         [ Dr. Jeremy Schiff]
Shmitta Produce outside of Israel
         [Michael J Broyde]
Titles in Signatures
         [Leah S. Gordon]


From: <BACKON@...> (Josh Backon)
Date: Mon,  6 Feb 95 8:18 +0200
Subject: Re: Chumrot

Ben Yudkin asked about sources relating to the pros and cons of keeping
Chumrot. Harav Moshe Weinberger wrote a very interesting article ("Keeping
up with the Katz's: The Chumra syndrome - An Halachic inquiry") in JEWISH
ACTION, 1988 (I believe it was the Rosh Hashana issue).



From: Aryeh Frimer <F66235@...>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 95 08:45 O
Subject: Re: Drashot before Musaf

   The "Rabbi's Sermon" in most American Shul's is given after returning
the Torah to the Ark, before the Kaddish of Musaf. The issue of Hefsek
(interruption) pivots on the question of whether that kaddish is an
introduction to Musaf or the conclusion of Keri'at ha-Torah. I'd like to
note that Hineni, said on the Yamim Noraim, is also said there, as is
"Geshem" and "Tal" in Erets Yisrael (where we don't say the piyut as
part of Hazarat ha-Shats).
   Rav Hershel Shachter shlita in Nefesh ha-Rav has a discussion of the
role of Kaddish as a closing prayer, introductory prayer and/or a
separation between different parts of the tefillah. However, I never
really understood what the problem is, even if the kaddish goes back
to kria't ha-Torah.    After all, the Drasha is in fact an
extension of the public limud ha-Torah as is the meturgaman (the
translator from Hebrew to Aramaic in the time of Chazal). So even if the
kaddish goes back to the Torah reading, what's the problem? In addition
we include many prayers and Supplications as part of the keriat ha-Torah
(e.g., Misheberachs for the one getting an aliyah, his family, those
that are ill, those who don't say lashon ha-ra, Chayalei tsahal, yekum
purkan, tefillat hachodesh etc.etc.) Why should Hineni be any different?
Where do we find that Kaddish must be said the second the Torah is
returned? How then can we say uv-nuchoh Yomar?


From: <LANDAU@...> (Jerrold Landau)
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 11:28:18 EST
Subject: First Aliya in Absence of a Kohen

In many shuls, when a kohen is not present, a levi will be called up for
the first aliya.  In some shuls, there seems to be a minhag (custom) not
to call up a levi in such a case, but rather to call up a yisrael
instead for the first aliya.  Does anyone know the source and reasoning
behind this latter minhag?

Jerrold Landau


From: Jeff Mandin <jeff@...>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 14:38:37 -0500
Subject: Hills and Sunset

Jonathan Jacobson writes:

>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.

I think its based on the gemara in the second perek of Shabat where an
Amora instructs his slave(approximately): "You who are not familiar["boki"] 
w/ the exact time, when the sun is in the treetops, light the lamp".

A Rav here in Manhattan accordingly holds that melacha should be avoided 
at least 10 minutes before sunset (as at that time the sun is behind the 
foothills of New Jersey.


From: Aryeh Frimer <F66235@...>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 95 10:41 O
Subject: Re: Humrot (stringencies)

        A while back during the heated discussion on Humrot, I quoted a
Maharsha (without reference) which states that if one is stringent when
in doubt, he/she certainly get a share to the world to come. But if one
seeks out sound grounds to be lenient and acts accordingly, he/she not
only get a share to the world to come (for learning Torah) but also
enjoy this world as well! The Maharsha is in the Hiddushei aggadot to
Hulin 44b (in Vilna Shas edition of the Maharsha there is an error in
the pagination and it says 44a) s.v. "Ha-Roeh tereifa".
       Being more machmir is not better. Study Torah so you can enjoy
both this world and the next!


From: Jeremy Lebrett <JEREMY.LEBRETT@...>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 10:47:05 +0000
Subject: Kadish before Mussaf and Meat before Fish

1) In our Shul, when the Rov speaks, he does so before Mussaf. 
   Ashrei, on these occasions, is said after the Drasha (rather 
   than immediately after Leining), followed by Kadish and Mussaf.

2) I once asked about eating fish after meat and was told that as
   long as one takes the same precautions as when eating meat after
   fish (eg. separate crockery, cutlery, having a drink/eating bread 
   to ensure one's mouth is clear, etc.) it is perfectly OK.


From: David Goldhar <dgoldhar@...>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 95 13:47:38 
Subject: Kedushas Shevi'is in Chul

On a visit to London after the last Shmittah (5747), I asked Dayan
Lopian about the Israeli fruits on sale there. I was told that there was
no problem EATING the fruit (though it had Kedushah), even if there was
an ISSUR in exporting it from Israel.


From: <JAROVNER@...> (Jay Rovner)
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 1995 11:27:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Lvov Incident

i am requesting responses based upon halakhic considerations or 
information based upon knowledge of local or individual practices (minhag 
shel yahid) relevant to the following situation.
in about 1836, a resident of Lvov, evidently a member of the Hassidic 
shul there, declared that, since he had been saved from some terrible 
troubles in a miraculous may, he was going to refrain from putting on 
phylacteries on the 3rd and 4th day of hol ha-moed sukkot, from that year 
on, to comemorate the miracle (le-zikaron ha-nes).
this does not seem to be connected with the difference between ashkenazim 
and others regarding tefillin on hol ha-moed, since the individual 
specifies only two days, and leaves out passover altogether.
since tefillin is a torah obligation, this seems to be a serious 
matter, which the initiater of this minhag yahid must have considered, 
although he does not provide any information.
thank you for any leads, especially with regard to halachically ambiguous 
minhagim shel ha-yahid
jay rovner


From: <bi029@...> (Mordechai Zvi Juni)
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 22:45:37 -0500
Subject: Mamzer

Sory i just wrote an article about mamzer and a guemarah in Kidushim, i by
mistake said that it was daf "79" it should be "69"

Mordechai Zvi Juni                    


From: <jpw@...> (Joe Wetstein)
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 11:02:57 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Question on Peyut Language

Why do the peyutim [additional passages] in the chazarras haShatz
[repetition of the Amidah] of the regalim [Festive holidays; Pesach, etc.]
(for those who say them) and yamim norayim [High Holy Days - Rosh HaShana,
Yom Kippor] begin with "mesod chachamim u'nevonim" [lit. "By the tradition
of our sages..."] but neither tal or geshem [the prayers for dew/rain 
that occur on Passover, Succos respectively] begin that way? 



From: <EDTeitz@...> (Eliyahu Teitz)
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 23:03:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Seven Clean Days

it was pointed out to me that i made a mistake in my posting about seven
clean days.  a woman who does not go to the mikva would be able to start
counting clean days as soon as she stopped bleeding, and not have to wait the
mandatory five day delay.  i inadvertently wrote she could start on the
seventh day, mixing up a case with which i was involved. sorry for the error,
it is not a new chumra.

eliyahu teitz


From: <schiff@...> ( Dr. Jeremy Schiff)
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 10:27:05 +0200
Subject: Shmitta Fruit - Again

> From: Yechiel Wachtel <YWACHTEL@...>
> >From: Michael J Broyde <relmb@...>
> >labeled as "in dispute."  What I labeled as in error was the assertion 
> >that exported fruit produced bekedushat sheveit was prohibited to be 
> >eaten.  I stand by that statement and I am unaware of any authority who 
> >prohibits a Jew in America from eating fruit of Israel produced during 
> >the shemitta.  of course, one has to treat it bekedushat sheviet, and be 
> >aware of zman biur issues, but that is a different matter.
> 	I hope I understand these quotes properly and am not reading
> them out of context, if so my apologies.
> 	Last year, at the beginning of shmeita there were several
> classes given on the laws of shmeeta given by Rabbi Moshe Sternbuch, and
> Rabbi Leff.  We were taught that keushas shviies fruit were definitely
> not allowed to be taken out of Israel.  You can find this written too,

Yechiel, indeed it is broadly accepted that it is forbidden to take
kedushat sheviit fruit out of Israel. Michael's point is that _if it
gets there_, it is not forbidden to eat it, and on the contrary it still
has its kedusha, and thereof there are positive aspects to eating it.
This is an important halacha today, because many farmers in Israel hold
by the heter mechirah, and thus allow their fruit to be exported - no
one in chutz laaretz should have any grounds for not eating it. Now,
someone might chose to cite the issue of not supporting those who commit
averot as a reason not to buy this fruit (the gemara on this subject
refers specifcally to not supporting those who violate the shmitta) -
before anyone does this, the heter mechirah does have some very solid
ground below it, so I think it hardly fair to criticize, let alone call
an "avaryan" (sinner), anyone who holds by it. (This is coming, by the
way, from someone who - at least for home consumption - buys otzar bait
din/Arab/imported stuff).



From: Michael J Broyde <relmb@...>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 09:28:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Shmitta Produce outside of Israel

Yechiel Wachtel <YWACHTEL@...> is completely correct 
that there is a significant problem for a farmer to export produce of 
sheviat unless he is willing to rely on the heter mechira.  I do not 
think I said anything to the contrary.  Rather, what I stated was that 
this fruit, once exported, may be eaten even by one who does not rely on 
the heter mechira, and rules it prohibited to export.  Indeed, this is a 
very common situation when one who does not rely on the heter mechira 
sees produce of Israel in America and yet does not personally rely on the 
heter mechira.  Indeed, in such a case I think it is a mitzvah to eat 
that fruit, as otherwise it will rot, or be eaten by a Gentile, neither 
of which is the proper way to treat produce of shemittah.
	In short, whether one way eat the fruit after it is exported is 
not related to whether it may be exported.


From: Leah S. Gordon <lsgordon@...>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 1995 01:13:48 -0800
Subject: Titles in Signatures

In response to the poster who objected to the use of "Rabbi" as a title,
and to the moderator who defended the practice, I have an additional

It seems misleading to have a system whereby men only have the
opportunity to be given "more credence" based on their title, as
currently, the Orthodox movement is ordaining only men as rabbis.  I
feel that it is imperative to develop a parallel title that educated
women can use to indicate as much academic halakhic expertise as has
someone who signs his name "rabbi."  I know several women who have
completed years of advanced halakhic study; how are they to demonstrate
that in a signature?  Obviously, not everyone who spends a few years
studying random Judaism should be allowed to use such a title, but there
are definitely women who have as much knowledge as rabbis.

This is not so much a "women's issue" as it is a request for a more
complete titling system on the Mail.Jewish list, if some titles are
thought to carry more halakhic weight than others.  After all, I would
guess that few of the rabbis who post are acting as "LOR"'s for the
readership.  Hence the purpose of their title is to show their
educational credentials, and a parallel structure for women is needed.

Leah S. Gordon


End of Volume 18 Issue 32