Volume 18 Number 47
                       Produced: Thu Feb 16 23:23:41 1995

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

A Briskerian analysis of Tea Sweetening
         [Aryeh Frimer]
Are men and women really different?
         [Andrea Penkower Rosen]
Beit Teshuva
         [Yitz Etshalom]
Lunch Next Week...
         [Mike Grynberg]
Pesach Sheni
petirah of Rav Shimon Schwab zt"l
         [862-1197 fax-4134)]
Prayer for a non Jew
         [Edward Goldstein]
prayers for a sick non-Jew
         [Alan Zaitchik]
Prayers for a Sick non-Jew
         [Avi Feldblum]
Required before Optional
         [Zvi Weiss]
         [Ellen Golden]
today's Daf Questions
         [A Einhorn]
Women's participation
         [Aleeza Esther Berger]


From: Aryeh Frimer <F66235@...>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 95 10:23 O
Subject: A Briskerian analysis of Tea Sweetening

       What a delight it was to read Rabbi Bechofer's light but
insightful analysis of various approaches to talmudic analysis. Along
the lines of Tea sweetening analysis - I remember one of my shtender
mates quipping that Reb Chaim was always makpid (careful) to drink
Lipton - because it was the Brisk tea!


From: Andrea Penkower Rosen <apr@...>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 13:11:50 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Are men and women really different?

In v18n42, >From: <rachelr@...> (Rachel Rosencrantz)

the poster calls our attention to contemporary writings which indicate
that men and women communicate differently leading to frequent
misunderstandings between the sexes.

It is my understanding, however, that G-d has no trouble understanding 
the prayers of supplicants, no matter the language or style.
So why is it necessary to limit the prayers of women to a form
which they find more constricting or less expressive or less joyful?
As long as they are acting in accordance with their LOR, what can be 
accomplished by questioning their motivation?  I have been taught that it 
is only G-d who can see into the heart and mind of any individual.

If we can adapt to changes wrought by modern technology (e.g. 
refrigerator, stove, hot plate on Shabbat or Yom Tov) in accord with 
halachic decisions by contemporary poskim, why is it so difficult to 
accept changes based on modern concepts (e.g. equality of women - which 
does not mean that men and women are exactly alike) also in accord with 
halachic decisions by contemporary poskim?

And if you do not accept the validity of the latter, then, of course, you 
will continue to daven as you have in the past. But why is it necessary 
to denigrate others, to question their sincerity? What has happened to 
Ahavat Yisrael?  If we cannot circumvent the angry divisiveness amongst 
fellow Jews, how will we ever survive in the world at large?

Andrea Penkower Rosen


From: Yitz Etshalom <rebyitz@...>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 17:58:00 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Beit Teshuva

Mark Borovitz and his wife (I believe her name is Harriett) run Beit 
Teshuva - it is not associated with Chabad.  It is a "Jewish halfway 
house" for released prisoners; attempting to integrate them into the 
general society while giving them whatever level of Jewish knowledge, 
identity and feeling will help them.  While I am not familiar with the 
demographics and/or recidivism numbers from Beit Teshuva, I do know Mark 
to be a highly motivated, very caring and sincere person.


From: spike%<bimacs@...> (Mike Grynberg)
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 95 12:00:01 +0200
Subject: Lunch Next Week...

As it turns out my brother-in-law is a kohen. I Hope that mashiach will 
arrive at the latest before my exam next week. :-) my question is what
will happen when in subsequent weeks, me and my wife are invited to
my brother-in-laws for shabbat? Will we be able to eat their food? will
what they already own become hekdesh, and edible only by kohanim?

[As far as I know, food does not acquire any level of kedushah
(holiness) simply by being owned by a Kohen. However, once he has
Terumah and possibly kodshim in the house, he will have to be much more
careful when he invites you over, so separate the "regular" food from
those that can be eaten only by Kohanim. Mod.]

mike grynberg


From: <Andrew_Marc_Greene@...>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 16:57 -0400
Subject: Pesach Sheni

Now that Shushan Purim Katan is drawing to a close, I have a question
about Pesach Sheni. (I'm sure there's a fundamental connection there
somewhere :-)

Aside from Tachanun (which, I understand, is omitted in some
congregations), does Pesach Sheni "mean anything" now that we no longer
offer the korban Pesach? If, heaven forbid, someone is for medical
reasons unable to have a seder on 15 Nisan, would they hold one in Iyar?

- Andrew Greene


From: <ainspan@...> (Herschel Ainspan (862-1197 fax-4134))
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 09:37:35 -0500
Subject: petirah of Rav Shimon Schwab zt"l

	I just heard this morning (Tuesday) that Rav Shimon Schwab of
KAJ (Washington Heights, NYC) passed away.  The levayah was at noon
today outside the shul on Bennett St.


From: <EdwardGoldstein@...> (Edward Goldstein)
Subject: Prayer for a non Jew

 I also had that question. 

 In addition, in the Amidah "SHMA Kolenu" is it  inappropriate to say a 
prayer for a non Jew? 


From: Alan Zaitchik <ZAITCHIK%<INCDV1@...>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 08:30:31 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: prayers for a sick non-Jew

Robert Book asks about prayers for a sick non-Jew. Specifically he asks
what to substitute for the Hebrew name formula (so-and-so son of
so-and-so) and for the expression "amongst the other sick of Israel".  I
assume that the question refers only to the "mi shebeirach" recited
aloud, since there is obviously no such problem "what to say" in one's
private prayers, which is of course the _real_ place to pray for someone
who is ill. (I mean in the "r'fa'einu" prayer of the Sh'monah Esrei".)
I have heard on any number of occasions the name of an ill non-Jew added
to the list of "cholim", using his/her full name ("Mr. john Doe"). It
obviously makes no difference "ultimately" in that surely God knows the
reference no matter how the name is specified. I suppose the idea is
that saying "John son of Mary" might seem more odd, even inappropriately
comical, if recited aloud, so all in all it's best to just say "Mr John
Doe" from the communal point of view. At least in America today.  As for
"amongst the other sick of Israel"... that should not be a problem since
(a) we _do_ wish him/her a recovery together with other sick Jews, (b)
in context invariably other Jewish names will be mentioned in the course
of reciting this prayer in shul, and anyway (c) there is precedent for
this locution used in exactly this way. I refer to the Rambam towards
the end of Hilchot Mlachim (about 2 chapters before the end, near the
end of the chapter... sorry I have no Rambam handy), where the Rambam
says one must arrange for the burial of non-Jews "im meisei yisrael" and
give them charity "bichlal aniyei yisrael".

From: Avi Feldblum <feldblum>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 21:52:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Prayers for a Sick non-Jew

Alan Zaitchik writes:

> I assume that the question refers only to the "mi shebeirach" recited
> aloud, since there is obviously no such problem "what to say" in one's
> private prayers, which is of course the _real_ place to pray for
> someone who is ill. (I mean in the "r'fa'einu" prayer of the Sh'monah
> Esrei".)

This is not at all "obvious". R. Yehuda Halevi in the Kuzari seems clear
that no private prayers are allowed in Sh'monah Esrei outside of the
blessing of Shema Kolanu. If you look at the halakha as brought down in
the Shulchan Aruch and its commentators, it appears that we poskin that
a private prayer with the same context as the existing text is
permitted. However I wanted to point out that it is not so simple what
and when to add private prayers in Shemonah Esrei.

Avi Feldblum
<mljewish@...> or feldblum@cnj.digex.net


From: Zvi Weiss <weissz@...>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 15:17:35 -0500
Subject: Required before Optional

Andrew Pessin's statements in this area should be discussed further.  In
particular, the statemnt that Jewish identity is defined by number and
sorts of practices one observes -- seems to be a halachically flawed
concept.  For example, if one observes many "social mitzvot" (going to
Shule, etc.) but is repeatedly desecrating the Shabbat, the halacha has
a serious problem in dealing with such a person.  While we tend to RELY
on the lenient Responsa (which are of the format that the sinner is like
a child and does not know any better, etc.), the basic halacha is that
one who violates the Shabbat has a VERY deficient "Jewish identity"
REGARDLESS of how many other mitzvot that person does.  Certianly, if
Pessin also includes non-halachic activities under his rubric of
"practices", this point becomes even clearer.
 In my opinion, this is part of the problem.  We forget that Judaism is
defined by Halacha and NOT by the prevailing social mores.  If the
halacha REQUIRES that we do an action and we choose INSTEAD to do
"optional" matters and disregard the required, we are engaging in an act
of REBELLION against G-d.  I.e., we are stating that we know better than
the halacha what we are "supposed" to do.  Obviously, one who does not
know any better cannot be judged by this sort of strict standard.  But
since this list seems to imply that we all accept the primacy of
halacha, how can we advance the idea that the optional is to be treated
on the same par as the required?
 As far as the question that Pessin raises as to whether it is REALLy
making "a political point" for someone to dance with the Torah... well,
that DEPENDS.  As R. Moshe himself stated in the responsa that has been
mentioned in prev.  postings -- if the motive is because the person
wishes to get "closer" to G-d, then such optional activities are quite
legitimate.  However, if the person is doing this "to make a statement"
or because she feels "discriminated against" and wishes to "speak out"
against such discrimination, then R. Moshe strongly condemned this.
 It was in THIS context that I suggested "Required before optional".
Namely, if the person is doing this in order to "get closer" to G-d,
then we can reasonably expect that she would also be doing that which is
required of her, as well (assuming that she knows what to do...).
However, a person who "picks and chooses" -- especially when that
"choosing" is in a public area can -- in my opinion -- be suspected of
having less than admirable motives.  And, as I mentioned earlier, we see
enough source material -- esp. when it comes to optional matters -- that
indicate that motives ARE important...



From: <egolden@...> (Ellen Golden)
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 95 01:27:38 EST

In Volume 18 Number 17, <RWERMAN@...> (Bob Werman) wrote:
    There is one shnorrer who is my nemesis and has clearly been sent to
    test me.  I fail this test over and over again.
    This shnorrer refuses to give me change when I ask for it.  This
    shnorrer begs in the most demeaning way, to him and to me, no holds
    This shnorrer is to be found purchasing clothes in the most expensive
    men's shops in Jerusalem.
    I am being doomed to the other place, has ve shalom, by this man.  I am
    being tested again and again, and I fail the test.

Doesn't a person have the responsibility to do honest work to support
himself if he is able (or herself if she is able), and not sponge off
others?  It seems to me that supporting spongers is not tsdakah, since
tsdakah should go to those who really have no way to provide for
themselves.  I cannot feel that I had given tsdakah just because I gave
up a tenth of my income, unless I feel that it has gone to legitimate
needs.  If it hasn't, it wasn't tsdakah, it was just money thrown away.
How can that achieve anything?

V. Ellen Golden


From: <ajeinhorn@...> (A Einhorn)
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 95 20:15:53 PST
Subject: today's Daf Questions

1. Maybe someone can help me understand today's Daf, Baba Bara
121b. What is the significance of the 15th of AV with respect to the
days getting shorter and the nights longer? Isn't this a solar phenomena
ie. June 21st and therefore not governed by a specfic Jewish date which
is Lunar? Look in the Marsha also.

2. From 119b: In those days was the nature of women different ie they
couldn't give birth if they didn't marry before 40 but if they married
before they could give birth till 60?


From: Aleeza Esther Berger <aeb21@...>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 12:31:05 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Women's participation 

I don't have it in front of me now, but a poster suggested that it is
very important to develop a "frum" response to this issue. E.g to
respond to women's desires to carry sefer Torah - in some other way than
to permit it, just that since the desire exists "we" should respond to

However, the "frum" (using that as a synonym for Orthodox) spectrum
includes allowing this and other participatory activities. As an
Orthodox woman who does participate in these activities, I think it
inappropriate for someone to imply that we are not "frum". I believe the
moderator should have been sensitive to this, if not the poster
himself. If someone would like to exclude me from the "frum" category in
their mind, that is his or her choice, but please refrain from doing
this on the list.

Aliza Berger


End of Volume 18 Issue 47