Volume 20 Number 39
                       Produced: Thu Jul  6  6:31:40 1995

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

2 Days Yom Tov
         [Lon Eisenberg]
Administrivia - Picnic Info
         [Avi Feldblum]
Bombay bus ticket for Jews
         [Dani Wassner]
         [Zvi Weiss]
Codes in the Torah
         [Chaim Schild]
Haftarah from a scroll
         [Mordechai Perlman]
Kids & Mezuza question
         [Stephen Phillips]
Separate seating at weddings
         [Marc Meisler]
Yom Tov Sheni
         [Joseph Steinberg]
Zohar authorship
         [Yaacov-Dovid Shulman]


From: Lon Eisenberg <eisenbrg@...>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 09:10:22 +0000
Subject: 2 Days Yom Tov

Eliyahu Teitz stated:

>To bolster this point of view, look at the situatin in Jordan, which is
>surely within a two week radius of Yerushalayim, and yet keeps two days
>of Yom Tov.

I believe there are NO Jews living in Jordan.  If there were, I believe
they would keep only one day (as the Jews in Syria do, as far as I
know), since, as you stated, they are close enough to have known the
correct day.

My question is "what about Eilat?"!

Lon Eisenberg   Motorola Israel, Ltd.  Phone:+972 3 5659578 Fax:+972 3 5658205


From: Avi Feldblum <feldblum>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 22:45:35 -0400
Subject: Administrivia - Picnic Info

Hello All,

The picnic/BBQ is going to be this coming Sunday, July 9th from 4:30 pm
till ?. In addition to the BBQ, since one of my good friends was nice
enough to agree to host the party at their house, we also have a pool,
with a shallow end as well as a large deep area. So feel free to bring
bathing gear if you would like to make use of it (please note: if you
are going to use the pool, please bring along your own towel).

Carolynn needs to purchase stuff like the meat for burgers by Friday, so
if you think you will be coming, please let me know by Thursday
night. If you mentioned it to me but did not send email, please send me
an email message, as I can more easily keep track of that.

The idea is for the BBQ to be self-paying, so I am asking for $7.50 per
adult (or teenage boy who eats more than many adults, I know I have one)
and $4.00 for kids who will eat, but not as much as adults.

The Party will be at the home of Harry and Ellen Shick, 429 Lincoln
Ave. There are basic directions to Highland Park in the archives (file
name - directions), to get to 429 Lincoln from the main road (Raritan
Ave), go to 5th Ave, then turn (right if you are going down the numbers,
left if you are going up the numbers on Raritan) onto 5th. 5th will end
by curving left and becoming Lincoln, and the Shicks are the 4th house
on the right.

Looking forward to meeting many of you this Sunday.



From: Dani Wassner <dwassner@...>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 13:19:47 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Re: Bombay bus ticket for Jews

A friend of mine lives in Israel (and thus kept one day chag). His
parents who lived outside Israel came to Israel on Pesach to visit. They
were keeping two days chag.

My friend caught a bus with them on 2nd day chag. He bought the tickets
and signalled the bus. Since for everyone else it was not chag there was
no problem of ma'arat ayin. I presume this was halachically

Similar to the Bombay bus I presume.....

Dani Wassner.
Sydney, Australia. 


From: Zvi Weiss <weissz@...>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 1995 16:51:00 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Calendar

While it will take me quite a while to locate the source in the Birchei
Yosef (it has been a long time since I was in that sefer...), I would
like to note that the "Book of Jewish Curiosities" on P. 24 quotes
R. Adah's calculation and compares it with that of Prof. William
Harkness (Former Astronomical director of the U.S. Naval Observatory at
Wash. D.C.) and finds that the two differ by 0.092914893 seconds...
This book was written in 1955 but I do not know how much more improved
the calculations of the Solar year have become in the past 40 years....
 In general, I noted an air of extreme disrespect when referring to the 
Chazal in this discussion which I think is entirely uncalled for.  Before 
WE get on our "high horses" of superiority, there is probably an awful 
lot that we can learn from Chazal...

[second posting. Mod.]

While I have not been able to locate the citation in the Birchei Yosef, 
there is a relatively recent responsa from R. Moshe in Part-4 of Orach 
Chaim in REsponsa 17.  There R. Moshe deals with the "claims" of one who 
asserts that Shmuel was all wrong in his calculation of the Tekufa (and 
the problem in terms of Tal U'Matar).  R. Moshe makes quite clear that 
this is not the issue here -- that shmuel knew what he was doing as did 
R. Adah.  AND R. Moshe also uses the terminology that Shmuels' 
calculations are easier (the Hebrew term is "Kalah") that R. Adah's.  
Further, R. Moshe brings citaitons for Rambam in Hilchot Kiddush 
Hachodesh where Rambam apparently tries to work with *both* sets of 
It is also clear that R. Moshe STRONGLY condemns those who think that 
they know more than any one else in this case.  He uses the term 
"Yaheerusa Yeseerta" -- which literally means excessive arrogance.



From: <SCHILDH@...> (Chaim Schild)
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 1995 10:21:59 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Codes in the Torah

A good place to read is the journal B'or HaTorah...Codes are discussed in
Volume 6, rebutted in either Volume 7 or 8 and debated back to back in
Volume 9 which just came out............Yes, there is still info in hard copy



From: Mordechai Perlman <aw004@...>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 1995 01:07:55 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Haftarah from a scroll

     The Aruch Hashulchan quotes the Gemora (Gittin 60) that it is really 
forbidden to read the Haftarah from anything but when it is written on 
parchment like a Sefer Torah but it was permitted because it was 
difficult to do so (Ais La'asos Lashem).  He discusses the subject at 
length which is the reason why i will not try to translate it. 
     The Mishna B'rura has the following to say:
      "The L'vush writes, 'It is a wonder to me that we are not 
accustomes to have the Haftaros written like a Sefer Torah because it 
appears to me that one does not fulfill his obligation by reading the 
Haftara from printed Chumashim since they're not written in 
accordance with all the laws of a Sefer Torah or a Megillah'.  The 
Taz and Magen Avraham justify the custom that even though it is 
written on paper and it's printed it is okay.  Nevertheless, it is 
the view of the Magen Avraham that it is necessary to read the 
Haftarah from a complete T'nach which is printed and not from the 
Haftarah printed in the Chumash and this is also the view of the 
Elya Rabbah.  Nevertheless, if one only has the Haftara printed in 
the Chumash one can rely on the lenient opinions and not refrain 
from reading the Haftarah altogether.  However, it is proper and 
correct that each congregation should have the Prophets written on 
parchment according to the laws of writing such so that all the 
Names of Hashem will then be written with holiness which is not the 
case when printed alone.  And so the Gaon of Vilna in his 
congregation was accustomed to do and now it has become spread 
among many congregations in Yisroel and fortunate is their lot."
     In the Sha'ar Tziyun he continues "One should really speak a 
great deal about this but one should not protest those who are 
lenient because it's difficult for every congregation to have the 
Prophets written on parchment properly.  However, a congregation 
which is able to do so, should do so.   Especially in our days 
(he's writing about pre-War days) where many spend lavish sums on 
the decorative silver to decorate the Sefer Torah and the Shul 
which is not absolutely necessary, though they do so for the sake 
of heaven to beautify the mitzvos, for sure it is a mitzva to 
beautify the Shul with the writing of the Holy Prophets."          

Mordechai Perlman
Ner Yisroel Yeshiva of Toronto


From: <stephenp@...> (Stephen Phillips)
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 95 18:10 BST-1
Subject: Kids & Mezuza question

>From: Shalom Krischer <PGMSRK@...>
>Chana, my personal feeling is that it should be OK becuase of CHINUCH
>teaching <children>).  (To all those who would immediatly flame me,
>note that I supply no sources for this, since a) it is my own personal
>feeling b) and not a Halachic statement, and c) I did not look it up.)
>However, since certainly a (real) Mezuza is supposed to be hung 1/3 of
>the way from the ceiling (not the floor), why not just hang a Mezuza
>case without the Klaph (parchement) for your little one?

The Rav of our Shul, Rav Moshe Hool, once said in a Shiur that when a
child performs a Mitzvah for Chinuch purposes it must be performed in
the Halachically correct manner, otherwise it is worthless. Therefore,
any Mezuzah must be a kosher one, not merely the appearance of a kosher
one.  Furthermore, if you put up another Mezuzah cover, this gives the
appearance that one is transgressing "Bal Tosef" [the prohibition
against adding to the Torah] which having two Mezuzot would involve.

It seems to me that the Mitzvah is not to kiss the Mezuzah, rather to
affix one to the doorpost. Many people place their Mezuzot right at the
top of the doorpost, which, if it is less than a tefach [handbreadth -
about 4 inches] from the top, means that the Mitzvah is not being
performed at all. It is better to have it much lower down, but so long
as the bottom of the Mezuzah is within the top third of the
doorpost. Then it is more likely that children can reach it. If not,
then the suggestion has already been made that a stool be placed by the

On the subject of Mezuzot, how many times have you seen a Mezuzah on the
curved part of an arched doorway? I was told once by a Rav that the
archway is considered as the lintel and therefore the Mezuzah should be
at least a tefach below where the vertical part of the doorway begins.

Stephen Phillips.


From: Marc Meisler <mmeisler@...>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 1995 13:29:55 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Separate seating at weddings

Jeffrey Woolf, in v20n27, stated that there is no absolutely no halachic
obligation to have separate seating at weddings.  First, I think that
people shold refrain from such absolute statements unless they can be
sure that no one makes such a requirement.  He may have gotten such a
psak from his Rav, but this by no mean makes it an absolute statement.
Second, I mention this because when I was learning from my Rav before my
wedding he brought down, I believe from Kitzur Shulchan Orach that there
is an obligation, or at least a strong recomendation against mixed
seating at the wedding dinner.

Marc Meisler                   6503E Sanzo Road   
<mmeisler@...>         Baltimore, Maryland  21209


From: Joseph Steinberg <steinber@...>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 1995 14:25:24 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Yom Tov Sheni

:To bolster this point of view, look at the situatin in Jordan, which is
:surely within a two week radius of Yerushalayim, and yet keeps two days
:of Yom Tov.

Jordan keeps 2 days? I was not aware of this. Is that really the halacha 
-- that in Jordan you keep 2 days? Western Jordan was the home of 2 1/2 
tribes of Jews and certainly was closer to Jerusalem than portions of 
Northern Israel that even today keep 1 day...

Did Eliyahu HaNavi keep 2 days all of his years at home in Toshavei 
Gilad, Jordan?

Could someone please explain to me what the criteria are for determining 
whether a region celebrates one day or two days.



From: <YacovDovid@...> (Yaacov-Dovid Shulman)
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 00:54:37 -0400
Subject: Zohar authorship

I recently saw a passage from the Zohar (the Zohar Chadash, more
exactly) that contained words and phrases that seemed to be of a
medieval philosophic nature: "nefesh sichlit, nefesh beheimit,"
"muvdalim," "muskalim."  Years ago, I also recall having seen the word
"teva" in a passage.

This brought to mind the whole argument about the authorship of the
Zohar.  I know that non-religious academics generally claim it to be a
thirteenth century work, and I believe that R Yaakov Emden claimed that
parts of it are authentic and parts of it later editions.

The basic question is obvious.  How is that that a Tannaitic work
contains--if it does--language and concepts of a later era?  But if we
were to say that the Zohar is not authentic, how could it have been
accepted as a central work by all (or at least the great majority) of
gedolim since its appearance?  And if parts are authentic and parts not,
how does one tell the difference?

Does anyone have any information to add to this, such as reference to
works of Orthodox scholars?


End of Volume 20 Issue 39