Volume 20 Number 57
                       Produced: Thu Jul 20 22:54:36 1995

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Avos and Mitzvos
         [Gad Frenkel]
Dasan and Aviron
         [Avrom Forman]
Driving on Shabbat with a Talit
         [Sam S. Lightstone]
Eilu ve-Eilu
         [Aryeh A. Frimer]
         [Diane Sandoval]
         [Josh Wise]
Halachic arguments
         [Eli Turkel]
Mar'it Ayin (Suspicious Looking Activities)
         [Eli Turkel]
Maris Ayin
         [Josh Wise]
MArriage - Divorce - Marriage
         [Joseph Steinberg]
Names and ayin hara
         [Constance Stillinger]
Oat Matzah
         [Jeremy Nussbaum]
Oops!!  Correction to my post on "Handicappers (sic)"
         [David Charlap]


From: Gad Frenkel <0003921724@...>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 13:40 EST
Subject: Avos and Mitzvos

In regards to the way the Avos kept Mitzvos it has always been my
understanding that they kept all of the mitzvos but not necessarily in
the way that we keep them.  I say this both from a logical perspective
and from sources.  Logically certain mitzvos, such as writing a sefer
Torah, just weren't yet doable.  Textually, there is a well know Midrash
that says when the Melachim came to visit Avraham it was Pesach.  There
is another which says it was Yom Kippur.  To reconcile both Midrashim
one could say that whatever occurs spiiritually through the performance
of the mitzvos associated with Pesach, and whatever occurs spiritually
through the performance of the Mitzvos associated with Yom Kippur, was
happening to Avraham that day as a result of his actions.  Similarly, I
believe it's a Zohar, but might be a Midrash, that says when Yaakov did
his business with the the strips of bark he was in fact fulfilling the
Mitzvah of T'fillin.

Gad Frenkel


From: Avrom Forman <AS402714@...>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 23:41:31 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Dasan and Aviron

A friend of mine asked me a question about the Parsha that I was unable
to answer. As such, I told him that I would post this message and see if
there is anyone out there who could give us a hand.

In Parshas Pinchas the Posukim that deal with the children of Reuven
[Bamidbar 26:5 - 26:10] go out of their way to explain the story of
Dasan and Avirom, and their involvement with Korach. Furthermore, Posuk
26:10 relates the part of the story that deals with the earth opening up
and swallowing them.

His question was as follows. Is there some connection between the story
of Dasan and Avirom and the story of Reuven throwing Yosef in the pit
before he was sold to the Midyanim? Is there some type of midah keneged
middah that is being shown here? That Dasan and Avirom were swallowed by
the earth as a punishment for Reuven throwing Yoseph in the pit?

Please help,

Avrom Forman


From: <light@...> (Sam S. Lightstone)
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 95 12:20:04 EDT
Subject: Driving on Shabbat with a Talit

Someone asked about driving on Shabbat with a Talit.

I assume the reason for this being that should someone see you with a
Talit they would think:

 1) You must be an observant person, otherwise you wouldn't be wearing a
 2) Since you are Orthodox, you wouldn't normally be caught dead driving
on Shabbat. If your Yetzer got to you, you would at least try to be
subtle about it -- not dress demonstratively Jewish.
 3) Therefore you must have an emergency that requires you to be

I'm not sure I agree with that reasoning, but my guess

Sam S. Lightstone
Workstation Database Manager Development
IBM Canada, Software Solutions Laboratory
VNET: TOROLAB2(LIGHT)    INET: <light@...>


From: <frimer@...> (Aryeh A. Frimer)
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 12:49:24 EDT
Subject: Re: Eilu ve-Eilu

	I heartily recommend a book on "The origin of Dipute" (or
something like that) by Rabbi Zvi Lampel. It deals with the origin of
Mahloket, the reliability of the mesorah, Eilu ve-Eilu etc. Must


From: Diane Sandoval <74454.321@...>
Date: 20 Jul 95 08:09:38 EDT
Subject: Fajitas

In response to Israel Wagner (Vol 20, No 50), fajitas are sandwiches,
using a wheat-flour tortilla as the "bread."  Wheat tortillas are made
using water, are not crisp, and are not cooked with filling in them (the
cooked tortillas are wrapped around the filling later).  Therefore, they
are 'pas' and not 'mezonos' , requiring washing and 'hamotzi.'  I
recently attended a series of shiurim on the topic of 'mezonos' so I'm
pretty sure of this.  


From: Josh Wise <jdwise@...>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 12:16:50 EDT
Subject: Gelatin

I think that part of the debate over whether non-Kosher animal bones are
traif, and why bones (even kosher bones) are pareve, has to do with
their initial status. In other words, you can take something fleishig
and make it pareve (i.e.: remove it's fleishig status), but you can't
take something traif and make it Kosher (i.e.: remove it's status as
traif).  Take for example, the laws of bitul b'shishim (nullification in
sixty parts). If you have a pot of beef stew, and some milk falls in, it
can be nullified with a proper ratio of meat to milk.  The milk, in
essence, loses it's status as "milchig". However, if something traif
fell in the pot, the food is traif.
	I hope this answers some of the questions that Dov Lerner posed.
	In addition, I don't understand how the Jewish Press would have
advocated supporting Jewish companies that produced Kosher Gelatin,
since none existed until a few years ago!  (Did I miss something?)

Also, any ideas on why a discrepency would have arose between American
and Israeli minhagim (customs)? (I'm not trying to overturn the American
minhag, I'm just curious what might have led to it).

Finally, there does seem to be a corner of the American "Ortho"
community that doesn't hold by the American minhag. Particularly, the
marshmallows that only appear around Pesach time. But, then again, how
do we define "Orthodox"?  (Note: I am *NOT* trying to start another
discussion regarding the definition of Orthodox. :))

Josh Wise


From: Eli Turkel <turkel@...>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 12:13:05 -0400
Subject: Halachic arguments

   Yisrael Herczeg has an extended submission disagreeing with some of
my statements on truth in halakhah. Either he is misunderstanding me or
I am misunderstanding him. As far as I can see we basically agree. For
the record let me restate my position which I believe is that of Rav
Feinstein and the Ketzot.

1. As a general rule when there is an argument between rabbis one is
   right and one is wrong in the meaning that at most one corresponds to
   "heavenly" halakhah i.e. what Moshe received at Sinai.

2. A person's reward for learning is independent of whether his
   conclusion coincides with this heavenly halakhah.

3. Halakhah in practice is decided by a majority of poskim, e.g. the
   Great Sanhedrin, Rambam, Shulchan Arukh etc. Man will be judged in
   accordance with this standard and not "heavenly" halakhah.

Eli Turkel


From: Eli Turkel <turkel@...>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 13:19:40 -0400
Subject: Mar'it Ayin (Suspicious Looking Activities)

    I wrote:
> There is a psak attributed to Chazon Ish that if one needs to
>drive to a hospital on shabbat then the man should wear a tallit to
>avoid the problem of mar'it ayin

   To which Elie Rosenfeld questioned:
>> How would that _avoid_ Maris Ayin?  If anything, it should make it worse
>> because it would make it obvious that the passenger is a Jew.  In fact,
>> I've heard the opposite concept; that if one has to go into a McDonalds
>> to, say, use the rest room or telephone, one should (if a man) remove
>> one's kippa first.

   I think that the original psak was based on the principle that one
does not normally wear a tallit in a car. Thus, if one saw someone
waering a tallit in a car on shabbat it would clearly demonstrate that
there was a good reason for being in the car on shabbat.
I was told that there is no problem of entering a MacDonald's to use
the bathroom or buying food in a restaurant on a fast day to use at
night. That the person who sees such an activity should assume that
it is a legitimate activity.

   However, I share Elie Rosenfeld's general question:
Under what conditions does mar'it ayin apply ?
Am I obligated to avoid any activity (even in private) that some person 
finds suspicious ?

Eli Turkel


From: Josh Wise <jdwise@...>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 11:51:06 EDT
Subject: Maris Ayin

Regarding the problem of Maris Ayin (not doing a permissible act
because people may think that it is not permissible) Elie Rosenfeld says:

>How would that _avoid_ Maris Ayin?  If anything, it should make it worse
>because it would make it obvious that the passenger is a Jew.  In fact,
>I've heard the opposite concept; that if one has to go into a McDonalds
>to, say, use the rest room or telephone, one should (if a man) remove
>one's kippa first.

The reasoning behind the Chazon Ish's psak (as I understand it) is so
that if people see this individual in a car on Shabbos while wearing a
tallit, it would be clear to them that he is religious and knows it is
Shabbos and must have a *very good* reason for driving on Shabbos.
	Also, regarding the proposal for a man to remove his kippah
before going into a McDonalds (to use the restroom for example), such an
act could give the message that you can do whatever you want as long as
you remove your kippah first.

Josh Wise


From: Joseph Steinberg <steinber@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 13:19:13 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: MArriage - Divorce - Marriage

If so, Avraham would have been putting himself in a situation in which
he would become eternally forbiddedn to Sara. As he would have divorced
her, Avimelech would have taken her, making him forbidden to her as his
'remarried-divorced wife'. I have problems with your explanation...


I heard on one of the tapes of Rabbi Isaac Bernstein z"tzl a beautiful
explanation as to how Avraham could have allowed Sarah to go with
Avimelech if they were married and how he considered that they would be
allowed to continue living with her afterwards. Basing himself on the
Rambam I mentioned above, it seems that Avraham, by stating that Sarah
was his sister and not his wife, had actually divorced her, divorce
being brought about by their agreeing to live apart.


From: Constance Stillinger <cas@...>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 14:17:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Names and ayin hara

Orin d Golubtchik <ogolubtc@...>
> In continuing with the recent discussion of names - I hope that someone
> can help me out with the following question.  We know that we do not
> name a child with the same name as it's parents (presumably because of
> ayin hara) - my question is how strictly do we hold to this:

I understand that this naming tradition is not universal.  Specifically
it's not a Sephardic custom.

In a related vein, I'd like to know more about the halachic status of
concerns about ayin hara.


Dr. Constance A. (Chana) Stillinger        <cas@...>
EPGY, Stanford Univ.   Morris's Mommy   "Hoppa Reyaha Gamogam" (Lev. 19:18)


From: <jeremy@...> (Jeremy Nussbaum)
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 9:44:04 EDT
Subject: Oat Matzah

> >From: <jeremy@...> (Jeremy Nussbaum)
> > >From: Bernard F. Kozlovsky M.D. <BFK@...>
> > Michael Broyde states:
> > >I would strongly advise such a person to eat white matzoh soaked in 
> > >water, if needed. In my opinion that is preferable to using oats as one 
> > >of the five grains.
> > 
> > I believe the original question involved a person who could become
> > seriously ill eating wheat products. Suggesting soaking wheat matzah in
> > water would be of no use. My understanding was that these individuals
> > could fulfill the mitzvah with oat matzah, but I am not familiar with
> > the sources. I would appreciate any information regarding this topic
> While I am sure Dr. Kozlovsky silently noted this, for cases of allergy
> to wheat gluten, soaking the matza might do the trick.  For other wheat
> allergies, it probably won't.

Pardon my poor etiquette in following up to my own posting, but I
happened to be speaking to someone who has celiac disease who has looked
into the general question of what foods are available for herself and
others who suffer from this.  None of the 5 grains are "safe" for such
people, nor does soaking make it safe either.  (Perhaps there may be
marginal cases where it does make a difference.)  In an interesting side
note, she told me that even non-jewish celiac sufferers are big
customers for many kosher for passover items, like broth mix, because
they can rely on their not containing any grain products.

Jeremy Nussbaum (<jeremy@...>)


From: <david@...> (David Charlap)
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 19:01:47 EDT
Subject: Oops!!  Correction to my post on "Handicappers (sic)"

I mistakenly wrote:
>In other words, while you should go around using offensive language, I'd
>want to first find out if the language is actually offensive.  This means

I in fact meant to say:

In other words, while you should _NOT_ go around using offensive language,
I'd want to first find out if the language is actually offensive.  This
means actually meeting some of these people, not by watching TV programs
where only the loudest protesters are heard.


End of Volume 20 Issue 57