Volume 19 Number 70
                       Produced: Tue May 23  7:18:12 1995

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

         [Avi Feldblum]
Co-ed Classes
         [Deborah J. Stepelman]
         [Zvi Weiss  ]
Ger and Loshen Hora
         [Heather Luntz]
Name of God on the monitor.
         [Gilad J. Gevaryahu]
Rav Soloveitchik
         [M. Press]
Reflections Shabbat Cosmetics
         [Chaim Schild]
Telling that Someone is a Ger/Baal Tshuva
         [Laurie Solomon]
Vegetarian food / Kashrut
         [Merril Weiner]


From: Avi Feldblum <feldblum>
Date: Tue, 23 May 1995 06:50:32 -0400
Subject: Administrivia

Hello All,

I'm about to hit the road again this morning, but I do hope to continue
getting mail-jewish out while I am on this trip. In the meantime, I'm
going to resend numbers 40 and 41 which it appears did not make it
out. They are not in the archives, so likely is that few if any actually
received them. 



From: Deborah J. Stepelman <stepelma@...>
Date: Sun, 21 May 1995 23:38:54 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Co-ed Classes

	In my coeducational classes in Manhattan Day School, one of the 
many things I learned was 'derech eretz kadma l'torah' (good manners come 
before torah).
	As a mother of two recent yeshiva high school graduates  (one from 
a co-ed school, the other unisex), as the wife of one who taught in a single 
sex yeshiva high school for many years, as a colleague of many teachers 
who 'moonlight' in yeshivot of all flavors, I would like to add 
another twist to the thread on coed yeshivot.  It is abundantly clear 
that the level and degree of derech eretz in coed high schools is far 
greater than at single sex ones.  There appears to be a calming or 
moderating influence present when there are both boys and girls in the 
same school.  The kinds of antics that go on, the disrespect for teachers 
and rebeim, the cutting problems, etc. all seem to be far worse in single 
sex yeshiva high schools.  The degree of rowdiness may vary based upon the 
administration's attitude, but the difference seems ever present.  In 
some schools it has reached the point of being a chilul hashem.  
Non-religious and non-Jewish teachers leave their jobs at many of these 
single sex yeshivot getting the impresion that orthodox Jewish kids are 
"animals," to use their own words.  I have never heard those kinds of 
descriptions of the situation inside co-ed yeshva high schools.
	Perhaps Rabbi Soloveitchik, zt'l, recognized this as a possible 
consequence of single sex yeshiva high school classes as well as some of 
the other thoughts being credited to him on this topic.
	In any event, isn't the ma'arat ayin caused by the behavior 
described worth some weight in this discussion?

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


From: Zvi Weiss		 <weissz@...>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 1995 14:41:02 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Co-ed?

I have noted with interst tje latest postings that assert that the 
position recorded in Nefesh Harav is -- somehow -- incorrect.  The 
reasonings that I have seen are (a) based upon an off-the-record 
statement from the Rav and/or (b) the fact that the Rav never changed the 
situaiton even after the school was established and/or (c) the excellent 
level of student that have been produced.
Regarding (a), I would like to know whether the recipient of this 
off-the-record statement ever discussed this with Rav Schachter.  As Rav 
Schachter states that he is basing Nefesh Harav upon his interaction with 
the Rav Zt"L, I do not know that he would distort something of this sort 
and it seems that this should be discussed directly.  Alternatively, the 
situation in Boston was considered by the Rav to be unique and could not 
be extended "automatically".
Regarding (b), the Rav *may* have felt that the dislocation of "changing 
the school around" was serious enough to be a case of "Yatza Secharo 
B'hefsedo: (i.e., the loss is greater than the gain).
Regarding (c), I do not believe that anyone ever asserted that this 
system *must* produce only bad students.  'Rather, the issue simply is 
wheterh there are legit. halachic sources to permit co-ed as a 
"lechatchilla" mode of education.  I am pleased that *one* such source 
has been cited (although I do not believe that I have access to the 
source mentioned).  I would hope that more of the discussion will focus 
upon the halachic precedents/sources for this matter rather than focusing 
upon the "it's OK -- I went there" or "Boys in Yeshivot have problems, 
also".  If we are going to analyze this problem, we should (in my 
opinion) marshal as much source material as we can.


From: Heather Luntz <luntz@...>
Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 20:57:32 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Ger and Loshen Hora

In this discussion about whether or not it is permitted to mention that a 
person is a Ger, is there some reason that no reference has been made to 
the Mishna (Baba Metzia 58b) which deals with onas devorim (wronging with 
words)? The Mishna states:

If a person was a baal tshuva, one should not say to him, "remember your 
earlier deeds", and if the children of gerim, one should not say "remember 
the deeds of your fathers".

Now by mentioning the fact that a person is a ger (or a baal teshuva) 
where it is unnecessary one is by definition alluding to the earlier 
deeds of the person. And hence if you mentioned it to the person's face that 
would be onas d'vorim. It would seem to me to be an inescapable 
conclusion that if you said it to somebody else that would be Loshen Hora.




From: <Gevaryahu@...> (Gilad J. Gevaryahu)
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 1995 11:33:26 -0400
Subject: Name of God on the monitor.

In mj19#33 Mark Kolber <MKOLBER@...> writes "regarding G-d's name on a
computer screen":

> I   feel   it   is irrelevant  whether the storage medium is a clay
 >tablet,  stone, paper  or  magnetic  disc and likewise it is  irrelevant >
if  the language is  Hebrew, English, Braille or Binary. I would  >suggest
that  the  rules  regarding  context  and  purpose  might   >be  appropriate
here and here I defer to the experts.

he states further:

> Can we erase the record of the word G-d on a computer disc? 
>In my opinion this is the destruction of information analogous to
>erasing  the  word  written  on   a  paper.   

The Mishnah in Masechet Yadayim (4,5) States:

"Leolam eino metame, ad sheychteveno Ashurit al ha'or u'vidyo" A text does
not become holy (metame et ha'yadayid is the defilement of the hands) until
it is written in square Hebrew letters (Ashurit) on a parchment (or) in ink
(dyo). It is obvious that the Mishnah is very careful to set the halachic
parameters of when a text (and by extension the name of God) becomes holy. 

Mr. Kolber is expanding the restrictions. This Mishnah does not requires
God to be spelled G-d in English; this has been done by some for
educational purpose only. Paper replaced parchment early on, since that
was the normal means of writing, and there is a consensus in halacha
that writing the name of God in Hebrew letters on paper or parchment, in
vain, is prohibited; and likewise is the erasing of His name.

Gilad J. Gevaryahu


From: M. Press <PRESS@...>
Date: Mon, 22 May 95 02:12:57 EST
Subject: Re: Rav Soloveitchik

There has been recent discussion about Mori Rabi ztvk"l and his
positions on various issues.  In the course of the discussion
Dr. Jeffrey Woolf indulges in some exaggerations of Rav Soloveitchik's
status in the Torah world and Binyomin Segal more accurately depicts the
failure of the students (but not the roshei yeshiva) of that world to
recognize his extraordinary intellectual greatness. The entire parsha
was a source of pain to many of us.  I would not even raise it again
were it not for the rash of historical revisionism that threatens to
blot out any approximation of a true view of the Rov.

I was a talmid (if I may be so bold) of Mori Rabi ztvk"l for about eight
years so I had a reasonable sense of many of his views and of his public
and private positions. Despite the lack of respect shown him in various
circles he himself recognized the greatness of many of the leading
figures in that world and this respect was reciprocated by many.  He was
friendly with Rav Aharon Kotler and publicly called him the Gadol Hador;
it was probably this relationship which led him to agree to lend his
name to prominently support the Chinuch Atzmai system of the Agudah. I
personally took the Rov to a number of meetings with leading roshei
yeshiva at various times.  I do not mean to suggest that there were not
broad gaps between some of his positions and some of theirs but merely
to note that there was constant communication and frequent respect. That
some or many of their students did not know how to value the Rov may be
an indictment of their rebbeim but I would not leap to conclusions.

I am frequently surprised by the inability of many to appreciate the
complexity of many of his positions.  He was a profound believer in the
historical significance of the founding of the state yet he opposed such
religious observances as the recitation of Hallel on Yom Haatzmaut.  I
remember how on Yom Yerushalayim itself he would not let Rav
Lichtenstein recite Hallel and instead we said the Shirei Hamaalos.  He
was a constant supporter, financially and otherwise, of traditional
yeshivos despite his disagreement with some of what they represented. He
reused to prohibit membership in the Synagogue Council but considered it
pointless. I could go on and on; my central point is that the Rov ztvk"l
was thoroughly grounded in the world of traditional Torah while valuing
many of the possibilities of modernity. Most of all he was a Yere
Shomayim of such profundity that most of those in the Modern Orthodox
world could never grasp the reconciliation of the depth of his faith
commitment with his intellectual breadth. In that respect he was far
closer to the world of simple faith of his ancestors than to any of the
groups who claimed him as their leader.

The painting of a full picture of him awaits an artist whose own
subtlety and depth approaches that of Mori Rabi ztvk"l.  In the meantime
we can be grateful to those who have begun to paint approximate
portraits and insist on as much honesty as mortals with "negios" can

M. Press, Ph.D.   Dept. of Psychiatry, SUNY Health Science Center
450 Clarkson Avenue, Box 32   Brooklyn, NY 11203   718-270-2409


From: <SCHILDH@...> (Chaim Schild)
Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 10:10:11 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Reflections Shabbat Cosmetics

One of my wife's friends showed her literature for "Reflections Shabbat
Cosmetics" approved by Rav Blumenkrantz. One set of products are
"merely" waterproof to be put on before Shabbas while a second set if
directions are followed can be put on DURING Shabbas. Does anybody know
any details, particularly on the latter kind in terms of how, what, the
basis (the directions do not discuss the halachics), any Rabbis against,



From: Laurie Solomon <0002557272@...>
Date: Mon, 22 May 95 11:28 EST
Subject: Re: Telling that Someone is a Ger/Baal Tshuva

Elad Rosin stated:
>As far as I know something is only Lashon Hara if it is a "Gnai"
>(unfavorable) in either an objective or subjective view.  If someone
>says that Mr. X is a Ger in a derogatory manner that would satisfy the
>requirements to be deemed Lashon Hara.  Otherwise unless you can show
>that being a Ger is objectively a bad thing it would permissable to tell
>somebody else that a specific person is a Ger.

In the book _Guard Your Tongue_, by Rabbi Zelig Pliskin, it discusses
that it _is_ Loshon Hara (evil speech) to discuss a person's past.  For
example you also can not reveal that a person is a ba'al tshuva.  Even
if it may be "known" by most people, and "objectively" seems not to be
derogatory at all, you should not bring it up.  This revealed
information could be very hurtful.

Laurie Cohen


From: <mweiner@...> (Merril Weiner)
Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 09:57:30 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Vegetarian food / Kashrut

The London Beth Din publishes the "Really Jewish Food Guide".  
The publisher is the United Synagogue Publications and is endorsed
by the Chief Rabbi of England, Jonathon Sacks.  You can obtain this
booklet by writing to:

	Kashrut Division
	Adler House
	Tavistock Square, London WC1H OEZ

In 1992, this booklet cost 4 pounds.

Do you want to borrow this from me on Wednesday, Andrew?

Menachem Weiner


End of Volume 19 Issue 70