Volume 20 Number 96
                       Produced: Wed Aug  9 22:27:31 1995

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Fax on Shabbat
         [Jay Bailey]
Including Shabbos Desecrators in a Minyan
         [Mordechai Perlman]
Postings on Shabbos
         [Joe Goldstein]
Rabbis' psak on IDF
         [Ari Belenkiy]
Religious Zionism Article in Jerusalem Report
         [Aharon Manne]
Shabbos Postings
         [Mordechai Perlman]
Taxidrivers vs. Rabbis
         [Kenneth Posy]
Tinokot Shenishbu
         [Moishe Kimelman]


From: <jaydena@...> (Jay Bailey)
Date: Wed,  9 Aug 95 10:49:34 PDT
Subject: Fax on Shabbat

A question (and our new e-mail address for any of our friends on
mail-jewish who do not yet have it ;)

We're in Israel and we have a fax machine. What are the ramifications of
receiving a fax on Friday night (from the States, when it is still
Friday afternoon)? A far as I can tell, the page itself if probably
Muktzeh, as it could not be designated in any way before Shabbat. I
assume the actual act by the sender is not problematic, and reading it
without touching it (assuming it's one page) is not really a
problem. I've considered some other possibilities...anybody?

Jay & Dena-Landowne Bailey
Rechov Rimon 40/1  Efrat, Israel
Phone: 02/9931903
E-mail: <jaydena@...>


From: Mordechai Perlman <aw004@...>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 00:54:50 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Including Shabbos Desecrators in a Minyan

On Sun, 6 Aug 1995, Shmuel Himelstein wrote:

>         Finally, I would like to bring one more source on the topic,
> that being Rav David Tzvi Hoffman (1843-1921), who was the head of the
> Bet Din of the Adass Yisroel congregation in Berlin, in his Melamed
> Le'Ho'il, Part 1:29. The question asked of him was whether a Jew who is
> a Mechalel Shabbat may be counted toward the Minyan of ten adult males
> needed for communal prayer. He writes, "As, due to our many sins most of
> the Jews in our country are Mechalei Shabbat, and they do not indicate
> by so doing that they deny the basic principles of our faith," one can
> include them. He stipulates, however, that if a person can go to a
> different Shul where there is a Minyan of Shomrei Shabbat without
> hurting people's feelings, that is preferable.

     There is a responsa from Rav Moshe Feinstein (Orach Chaim Part 1,
siman 23) which discusses this.  He was asked if in pressing
circumstances one may include Shabbos desecrators in a minyan.
     He answers (without going into the whole legth of the responsa)
that one can include them for Kaddish, Kedusha (and of course say the
rest of the Chazan's Repetition) and Borchu.  However, the added benefit
of praying the silent Shemone Esrei with ten people, the minyan will not
achieve (they should say the silent Shemone Esrai but they won't get
some added dimension of spirituality associated with praying with ten
people).  The basic reason why he permits this is because the law of not
saying these things without ten people is learned from the M'raglim (the
Ten Spies) and since the spies were worse than Shabbos desecrators, they
were deniers of Hashem, therefore one can include them.

Mordechai Perlman
Ner Yisroel Yeshiva of Toronto


From: Joe Goldstein <vip0280@...>
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 95 09:48:34 
Subject: Postings on Shabbos

I was wondering the same thing.  In fact I had received A POSTING from
the RAV FRAND list on SHABBOS! I asked the poster how was this possible,
and he said the posting was sent out Friday morning! However, for
whatever reason it was it did not arrive into my mailbox until Shabbos.
Therefore, I would assume that unless one is 100% sure the letter was
sent out on Shabbos, there would be no problem at all.

If there is some kind of timestamp indicating that it was sent out on
SHABBOS, Then I would also like to know what the Halocho is.



From: <belenkiy@...> (Ari Belenkiy)
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 23:36:39 -0700
Subject: Rabbis' psak on IDF

Does anybody know whether these 9 Rabbis served in IDF ?  I hope: yes.

(This normal question of mine was turned down by Moderator as
"groundless" so I had to supply it with a proper Halakhic background).

[I stand by my decision. Mod.]

My point was that Sanhedrin,5 discusses several relevant problems.  It
mentioned that to become an expert in the identifying of "the first-born
animals permissible for ritual slaughter" Rab spend 18 months with a
sheperd to be able to distinguish between innate and temporary

So my first "learned" question sounds this way: did these 9 Rabbis serve
in IDF for at least 18 months?

Sanhedrin,5 made some other interesting statements (which might or might
not become Halakha).

Despite Rab became an outstanding expert his teacher R.Judah HaNassi did
NOT allow him to render decisions on this matter in Babylonia. A few
explanations were presented. The conclusion was: "it was decreed that
one must not give decision unless he was granted permission by his
teacher".  Another statement was "that a disciple cannot render decision
in the radius of three parasangs from the place where his teacher is

Here is my second "learned" question: Who are teachers of these 9
Rabbis? Are they alive?  Where do they live?

Ari Belenkiy


From: <manne@...> (Aharon Manne)
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 95 11:11:51 IDT
Subject: Religious Zionism Article in Jerusalem Report

In mj 20:76 Arnie Lustiger wrote:

> The writer of the article then provides proof in the opposite direction:
> that Modern Orthodox Jews have never been better integrated in Israeli
> life, and that many are no more passionately ideological than other
> Israelis. This part of the article is less convincing, since outside of
> Meimad, there does not seem to be an organized RZ constituency that is
> not profoundly alienated by the peace process.

Mr. Lustiger's doubts reflect what many Israelis want to believe: the
Religious Zionist camp is a uniform bloc, solidly in the right-wing
camp.  The true believers in Gush Emunim want to believe that there is
no alternative within Torah Judaism to the doctrine of "not one inch".
Secular leftists want to believe the same, so as not to disturb their
preconception of Judaism as a benighted, "medieval" (their favorite
epithet) collection of superstitions.  Even secular rightists want to
believe it, because they want to see Religious Zionism as an
unquestionably reliable ally.  The fact that Mr. Lustiger has
apparently never heard of Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom proves the extent
to which politically moderate religious Zionism has been marginalized.
The article in the Jerusalem Report described Netivot Shalom as
"marginal", or some such compliment.

>The reason that I bring up this article is to solicit opinions.
> ...                     Is the thesis correct? Is this sea change
>actually taking place? 
For the reasons mentioned above, I doubt that much careful sociological
research (a rarity, not an oxymoron) has been done on the intensity and
distribution of political views in the Religious Zionist camp.  My
opinions may be affected by the fact that I am a dues-paying member of
Netivot Shalom, but I would bet that such research would validate the
following hypotheses:
1)  The distribution of political opinion among religious Zionists
would be roughly a bell-shaped curve, with the bulk at a position which
would be called "center-right" in Israel.  For example, I would guess
that most religious Zionists were willing to give the Oslo process a
chance at the time of its signing.  Enthusiasm for the Oslo process
among religious Zionists has been eroded by Arafat's inability or
unwillingness to effectively control terror.  Still, I would guess that
a sizable minority of religious Zionists (20-30% ???) are willing to
see the process through.
2)  Neither the p'sak of Rabbanei Yesha nor the fulminations of Adir
Zik reflect the views of the majority of religious Zionists.  Many
verifiable statements in the Jerusalem Report article reflect the
commitment of religious Zionists to the Army, to productive economic
activity, and virtually every other area of state-building one could
name.  While the glory days of Gush Emunim activism and fervor are gone
(killed mostly by the exposure of the "Underground" in the mid-80s)
Religious Zionism remains a viable and vital option.
>                       Will the "tefila lishlom hamedina" go the way of
>the prayer on behalf of the Czar?
My copy of "Torah Temimah" still has the prayer on behalf of the Czar
and the Czarina in the back ;-).


From: Mordechai Perlman <aw004@...>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 17:07:01 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Shabbos Postings

On Wed, 9 Aug 1995 <vip0280@...> wrote:

>  If there is some kind of timestamp indicating that it was sent out on
>  SHABBOS, Then I would also like to know what the Halocho is.

     I received a posting in response to my question from Rav Avi
Lefkowitz in Eretz Yisroel and he referred me to the explicit sentence in 
the Shulchan Aruch that says that if a Jew commits an act of Shabbos 
desecration on Shabbos, another Jew is permitted to have benefit from 
that act immediately after Shabbos.

Mordechai Perlman
Ner Yisroel Yeshiva of Toronto


From: Kenneth Posy <kpposy@...>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 08:47:42 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Taxidrivers vs. Rabbis

Mr. Kuzmack writes:
> A taxi driver has as much ability to make such judgments as a general or
> even a rabbi.
     While most taxi drivers I have met, at least in Israel, think they
have much *more* ability than a general or a rebbi to speak on
geopolitical questions, I don't think that that is in line with a Torah
     Someone who has immersed himself in Torah approaches thing from a
perspective that is fundimentally more legitimate than someone who does
not care what the halacha says about a situation. While an expert on
that situation might be more qualified to render an opinion, Mr Kuszak
clearly is not talking about a professional judgement, since he groups
rabbis with taxi drivers and generals. Rather, as he said, he is talking
about the ability and necessity for everyone to make rational
decisions. Someone who is well verse in Ratzon Hashem, has more ability
to opine on what the Ultimate Rational of HaChonen L'adom Da'as (the one
who gives man rational thought) is.


From: <kimel@...> (Moishe Kimelman)
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 12:35:39 +1000
Subject: Tinokot Shenishbu

In discussion of the Chilul Shabbos for non-Shabbos obeservers question,
a number of peopel have referred to the average Israeli non-observant
Jew as a tinok shenishba - literally "a child that was taken captive",
i.e. someone who was brought up estranged from Torah-Judaism.

I would like to know if this is in fact a correct application of the
term, and therefore all that the status entails.  It seems clear from
the original sources of the term - gemara Shabbos 7th perek readily
springs to mind - that it actually implies someone who has no awareness
whatsoever of the laws of the Torah.  The average non-observant Israeli
is well aware that the Torah claims to be binding on him, and that he
transgresses many of those laws.  He has merely (unfortunately) been
raised to erroneously believe that the Torah is a man-made set of
antiquated rules that have no relevance to him.

I am not chas v'sholom trying to be melamed chov ("find fault") with the
average Israeli, I am just wondering whether a different set of laws
applies to him than it would to an "original" tinok shenishba.



End of Volume 20 Issue 96