Volume 21 Number 04
                       Produced: Mon Aug 14 19:12:04 1995

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Chazak, Chazak Halacha
         [Manny Lehman]
Errors by Sofrim
         [Eric Schramm]
Fax on Shabbat.
         [Ari Belenkiy]
Flying West and Fasts
         [Joseph Steinberg]
         [Zvi Weiss]
Hosafos (2)
         [Elie Rosenfeld, Warren Burstein]
Kohanim and Cemeteries (2)
         [Elihu Feldman, Avi Feldblum]
Noise in shul
         ["Hadass Eviatar"]
Nolad and faxes
         [Kenneth Posy]
Question in Interest
         [Cheryl Steinberg]
Talking in Shul
         [Jan David Meisler]
Torah reading
         [David Prager Branner]


From: <mml@...> (Manny Lehman)
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 17:39:56 +0100
Subject: Chazak, Chazak Halacha

With reference to Gedaliah Friedenerg's message under the above title in mj
20/78, Ariel Burton has asked me to pass on his interesting observation
that the implication of Harav Coen's shlita  p'sak (halachic decision) is
that if the ba'al koreh (Torah reader) gets the final aliyah (call up) he
should NOT repeat Chazak, Chazak V'nitchazek after the kahal
(congregation). Can he confirm that?

Prof. M M (Manny) Lehman, Department of Computing,
Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, 180 Queen's Gate,
London SW7 2BZ, UK., phone: +44 (0)171 594 8214,
fax: +44 (0)171) 594 8215, alt fax.: +44 (0)171 581 8024
email: <mml@...>


From: Eric Schramm <eschramm@...>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 95 12:46:33 EDT
Subject: Errors by Sofrim

Arthur Roth cited some doozies in a list of mistakes by sofrim he has
come across during kriat hatorah. The most memorable I have seen was
about twelve years ago in a not-so-new sefer torah, at the end of

Vayomer Hashem pitom el   {end of line}
el Moshe

I did a doubletake, not sure of what I had seen; but of course we put the
sefer away on the spot. The sofer who fixed it erased the first 'el' and
extended the mem to the end of the line.

Maybe the original sofer was thrown off by the 'pitom.'

Eric D Schramm


From: <belenkiy@...> (Ari Belenkiy)
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 22:43:17 -0700
Subject: Fax on Shabbat.

I suggest to argue as in Tractate Beiza, chapter 1: 
is new-born egg is a "mukze" or "nolad"? 
School of Shammai was more lenient in this case but still lost it.
Such an egg was recognized as mukze and was prohibited to eat on Shabbat.

I think that fax-paper which appears on Shabbat has the same Mukze
status.  However it is not prohibited to read on Shabbat!  So if you are
able to see the text not touching it you definitely may read it.

Ari Belenkiy

P.S. This how I see the goal of the Modern Orthodoxy:  TO PERMIT PERMISSIBLE.


From: Joseph Steinberg <steinber@...>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 15:55:18 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Flying West and Fasts

 When I flew from LA to NY a couple of weeks back, there was a religious
man on the flight who told me that he had missed the 17th of Tammuz by
flying from LA to Australia -- leaving on the 16th and landing on the
18th -- spending no daylight hours in the 17th...
 Rav Meir Schlesinger told us (Americans in Shaalvim '91) that he once
flew from daylight into night, davened Maariv, and then entered daylight
again -- and paskened that one does not consider the second daylight a
new day.


From: Zvi Weiss <weissz@...>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 17:55:44 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Halacha/Morality

In a recent response to my questions re Oz V'Shalom, Mr. Manne noted 
inter alia that one can write to them and receive a response listing 
their position on both halachic and moral grounds.
I would like to know of any instance where (a) a halachick position is 
not "moral"; (b) in such a case, who defines the "morality"; (c) a case 
where something is moral but not halachic.
My understanding has always been that the halacha DEFINES morlaity for us 
-- that something that the halacha permits or mandates cannot be 
considered "immoral" for Jews.


P.S. I would also like to note that there has been no posting claiming 
that Arafat has responsibly kept ANY of the agreements that he made.

[And I do not know if I would accept most such written posts for the
list. There is a limit to how close to a purely political discussion I
will allow things to get. The FACTUAL question of whether or not "Arafat
has responsibly kept ANY of the agreements that he made" is clearly one
that a Posek may need to take into account, but for theoretical
discussions that we carry on here, you can posit either way and show
what the halakhic ramifications may be. To get into such a discussion of
what is the facts in this political/historical question is in my opinion
outside the bounds of where I want this list to go, unless someone can
convince me otherwise. Mod.]


From: <er@...> (Elie Rosenfeld)
Date: 14 Aug 1995   9:44 EDT
Subject: Hosafos

It seems that my prior belief that hosafos can only be made in shishi
and shevi'i [the last two aliyos] has now been fully debunked.  Out of
curiosity, is that in fact a common misconception, or was I the only
confused person who used to think it? (Just email me if you did; no need
to clutter up the list with replies.)

So as not to waste a good brain-teaser, here's the answer to the one I
posed: The four parshas [weekly readings] in which there are no good
places to make hosafos _in shishi and shevi'i_ are: Metzora, Kedoshim,
Nitzavim, and Va'yaylech.  In all four there are no extra stopping
places in those aliyos because every internal pasuk [verse] ends on a
bad note, such as a death penalty, the work "death", or the word "tameh"

From: <warren@...> (Warren Burstein)
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 22:22:22 GMT
Subject: Re: Hosafos

>  I remember being told, that for PARSHAS BESHALACH and YISRO when the
>Shira, the song after crossing the red sea, and the ASSERES HADIROS, The
>ten commandments, are normally read in REVI'I, and the REBBE of the
>Chasidisher Stibel normally gets SHISHI To allow the REBBE to get SHISHI
>and get this most prestigious ALIYAH 2 HOSAFOS are added BEFOER REVI'I
>making REVI'I, SHISHI. Therefore, The REBBE can get SHISHI AND THE SHIRA
>or ASSERES HADIBROS together.


 |warren@         bein hashmashot, in which state are the survivors
/ nysernet.org    buried?

[For those unfamiliar with some standard Usenet/Email conventions, the
use of UPPER CASE is often meant to connote that the speaker is shouting
those words. For many of us used to that convention it is difficult to
read postings as above. The worst situation is when you still have some
posting sites that seem to only talk in uppercase letters. Those
postings wait until I can shift them all down and put in normal
capitalization. Mod.]


From: Elihu Feldman <efeldman@...>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 95 9:58:03 EDT
Subject: Kohanim and Cemeteries

It is my habit to visit kever avos on Tish B'av. In recent years
(unfortunately) I follow up with a visit to the Lubavitcher Rebbe's
Z'T'L ohel. This year I invited a friend with Lubavitch leanings to join
me along with my wife and middle son. After initial hesitations and
consideration my friend agreed to join us. (Note: I forgot before I
asked that my friend was a Kohen). When we reacher the outer perimeter
of the cemetary, my friend who is a Kohen asked that I, my son, and a
third person join our hands around the perimeter of my friend to form an
ohel and in this way we accompanied my friendto and from the ohel of the
Rebbe. When I came home I told this to my older son who told me this was
a minhag shtus. However, I asked my friend about it he said its commonly
done for Kohanim who visit the Ohel on thebasis that the Kever of a
Tzaddik is not m'kabel Tumah. Is this practice of making an ohel around
a Kohen utilized by other than individuals of Lubavitch leaningswho are
Kohanim when they visit the Rebbe? What are the halachic ramifications?

Elihu Feldman  <efeldman@...>

From: Avi Feldblum <feldblum>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 18:23:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Kohanim and Cemeteries

I have heard of this opinion/practice and have asked both my father and
grandfather about it. As I remember, neither was aware of any
substantive halakhic justification of it.

Avi Feldblum


From: "Hadass Eviatar" <eviatar@...>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 10:05:28 -0500
Subject: Noise in shul

In reply to the person who hypothesized that Conservative and Reform
shuls are quieter than Orthodox ones because their members do not come
as often. I can't speak about Reform shuls, but in our Conservative one,
the noisiest time of year is during the High Holidays, when all our
twice-a-year members turn up. It is reasonably quiet during the rest of
the time, when the people who come every Shabbat (a sizable group) or
once or twice a day (smaller, but still larger than a minyan!) are

It was a nice try, but I don't think it'll wash.

Be well, Hadass
Dr. Hadass Eviatar                              Email: <eviatar@...> 
National Research Council of Canada             Phone: (204) 984 - 4535
Institute for Biodiagnostics, Winnipeg          Fax:   (204) 984 - 5472


From: Kenneth Posy <kpposy@...>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 11:49:08 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Nolad and faxes

> It seems like the fax arriving on Shabbat is like a postcard arriving in
> the mail on Shabbat (in the U.S., which has Saturday mail delivery,
> where you don't have to worry about whether the mail carrier is Jewish).
> Why should a postcard be mukzteh?

I am not an expert on hilchos muktza nor on fax machines, but I think I
can propose a difference between a postcard and a fax. A postcard
remains in the exact same physical form as when it was written,
beheter. However, a fax machine applies ink (or whatever) to a blank
piece of paper, creating a new object that was not in existance on erev
shabbos bein hashmashot (the period after sunset that determines whether
something is muktza or not). Thus it can be viewed as nolad (a creation)
which is forbidden.

Furthermore, I always was taught that mail that arrived on shabbos WAS
muktza, for the same reason.  I would appreciate further information.
Betzalel Posy


From: Cheryl Steinberg <STEINBC@...>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 16:46:23 EST
Subject: Question in Interest

Can you please explain the issur of interest between Jews?

If I borrow $5000 from a friend who actually took out a loan for the
$5000 on a credit card at 8% interest and I pay the money (plus 8%
interest) back to the credit card company directly, is this forbidden?
It is not my friend who is charging the interest, it 's VISA.  I could
actually say that I borrowed $5000+ at 0% interest. The "+" is the 8%
interest VISA is charging.  Is this any different? Is it different if I
pay the money back to my friend or directly to the credit company? I
rather borrow on my friend's VISA than my own because my VISA charges
18.9%. interest.

Please explain., thank you.

Cheryl Steinberg


From: Jan David Meisler <jm8o+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 14:34:13 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Talking in Shul

Sam Lightstone mentioned a possible explanation for talking in Orthodox
shuls (and the lack thereof in a Conservative or Reform shul).  He
indicated that it is similar to becoming accustomed to going to a
particular person's home.  Someone is on their best behavior to begin
with, but becomes more comfortable and more relaxed after a while.  
I don't know if this is the proper reason for talking in shul (although
I don't know why it is done so much).  I have attended a number of
Orthodox shuls where it has been very quiet, aside from the noise of
people davening.  At the same time I have been to many Orthodox shuls
with much talking.  Perhaps the talking is more connected to a lack of
understanding of what we are truly doing in shul.  If we really
understood that we were going to talk to Hashem, would we really waste
that opportunity?  The comparison to going to someone's house doesn't
seem to work.  For that case, we aren't commanded to fear another
person.  Unlike the command to Fear G-d.  This is fear in the sense of
awe and respect.  Are we really showing this respect by turning and
talking to our neighbor?  How often do we turn and talk to a third party
while in the middle of a conversation with someone?  Even someone we are
familiar with.  And when we do this, we usually say "excuse me" or
something like that to interrupt the conversation.  We don't do this
when we interrupt our "conversation" with G-d.  In fact, we often rush
through what we are saying just to talk to the person next to us.
Just some of my thoughts about talking in shul.



From: David Prager Branner <charmii@...>
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 18:07:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Torah reading

I do not believe it is normal for a literate reader to read letter by
letter.  But aside from this, there is a reason for thinking that the
basic unit of *Torah* reading in particular cannot be smaller than the
whole word: we read the Name as "Ad-onoy", which would be impossible if
we were reading letter by letter.

	David Prager Branner


End of Volume 21 Issue 4