Volume 24 Number 54
Produced: Tue Jul 2 22:07:46 1996
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Assisting Others
[Micha Berger]
Get Law in Germany and Movies for Tisha B'av
[Michael J Broyde]
Hebron & Pikuach Nefesh
[Yisrael Medad]
Issur on the sale of land to non Jews
[Michael & Bonnie Rogovin]
Jews in Hebron
[Joseph Steinberg]
Mazal Tov! Some good news...
[Yehudah Prero]
Stopping for motorists in distress
[Y. Adlerstein]
Tashlich on Rosh Hashannah
[Sheldon Z Meth]
Techinas/Women's Prayers
[Shari Hillman]
Use of electronic medical equipment
[Sheila Tanenbaum]
Vows vs. Respect
[Anonymous]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <micha@...> (Micha Berger)
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 11:39:18 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Assisting Others
Another factor that has to be taken into account is who the observer is.
All people help out "their own" first. In the case of O Jews this means
that I am more likely to feel generous to a Jew than a non-Jew (all
other things being equal), an O Jew than another Jew, and even within O,
people who dress like I do would come first.
I'm by far not saying it's a good thing. I'm just acknowledging
something in human nature we ought to overcome.
So, it might be the reason why mod-O people in this discussion have had
less help from their right-wing brothers than from other mod-Os may have
been merely a product of not being as similar. If we found the same
comparison to be true for a chareidi in need, I'd be more concerned.
The true test would be comparing cross-community help and intracommunity
help with observers from both communities. This would also require
finding observers who wold be honest about flaws among their own.
As someone who has lived in both communities, I found that the mod-O are
MUCH weaker in intracommunity help. Friends take care of each other, but
you don't find the whole community pitching in to the same extent.
OTOH, the cost that chareidim pay for maintaining this tight-knit sense
of community is that it narrows the definition of "we" to within the
community. So there's less cross-communal effort. The ruling about not
joining the SCA just adds to that. Perhaps a product of the same
hashkafic point-of-view.
Micha Berger 201 916-0287 Help free Ron Arad, held by Syria 3492 days!
<micha@...> (16-Oct-86 - 17-Jun-96)
<a href=news:alt.religion.aishdas>Orthodox Judaism: Torah, Avodah, Chessed</a>
<a href=http://aishdas.org>AishDas Society's Home Page</a>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael J Broyde <relmb@...>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 16:17:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Get Law in Germany and Movies for Tisha B'av
Two small requests for help.
1] I was recently told by someone that there was a some form of a "get
law" in Germany in in the 1830's governing Jewish divorces. Has anyone
ever heard of this?
2] Does anyone have any thoughts on movies that are suitable for camps
(grades k through 5) for tisha b'av. Grade suitable material about the
Holocuast, destruction of Jerusalem, or other suitable themes would be
welcomed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <isrmedia@...> (Yisrael Medad)
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 19:50:31 PDT
Subject: Hebron & Pikuach Nefesh
The post by Harry Maryles regarding the opinions of Rav Shach and the
residents of downtown Hebron lacked at least one reference vis a vis the
issue of Pikuach Nefesh:
the Shulchan Aruch, Siman 329 which is extensively quoted by Chabad.
The point there is that even if a town of Eretz Yisrael is threatened
not physically (that is, people's lives are not in danger), and the
attackers come to steal livestock and warehous supplies, then one is
commanded to repulse the attack and go out to fight even on the Shabbat.
The point here is not Shabbat but that the Halacha commands one to place
one's life in danger to defend a (frontier) town becuase then the rest
of the country becomes fair game.
Funny, I am now reading Benny Morris' book, the Hebrew edition, on
Israel's border wars which reviews elements of this Halachic discussion
and Ben-Gurion would get high marks.
Returning to the subject at hand, to claim that the residents of Hebron
are putting themselves in danger and perhaps the other portions of the
populace and therefore they should leave doesn't adequately answer the
problem of whether the Oslo Accords are perhaps what should be removed
for it is they that demand the redeployment of the IDF in the town. Why
should the Jewish Hebronites pay the Halachic price, even if Rav Shach's
outlook is totally correct? Why not the government, the IDF?
Yisrael Medad
E-mail: isrmedia
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael & Bonnie Rogovin <rogovin@...>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 21:36:01 -0500
Subject: Issur on the sale of land to non Jews
Harry Maryles writes:
> There are those like my Rebbe, Rav Aaron Soloveichik, Shlita, who
> hold that it is Assur (forbiden by Torah Law) to give back any land
> held by Jewish hands. Of course no one disputes that Halacha.
I do not claim to be on the level of Rav A Soloveichik nor do I have
smicha, so I will not argue with a psak halacha of his, assuming you
are quoting him accurately. However, having recently completed a shiur
on the subject (but without the benefit of notes in hand) let me humbly
say that your statement is not the halacha.
It is assur to sell land in Israel to an idolator. That issur does not
apply to the non idolatrous non-Jew (Ger Toshav). [The Palestinians are
not true idolators, whatever else they may be.] If the issur forbade
any sale to a non-Jew, then the sale of land during the shmita year
would always be fornidden. While many poskim in Israel following the 67
war did assert that it was forbidden to "return" the land, one by one,
over time, each either retracted such staements or shifted their
argument from a halachic assertion to political or theological/
philisophical assertions (how can we give up what HaShem gave us, etc.)
It is furthermore not clear whether it is pikuach nefesh to retain the
lands or to give them up.
Finally, the issue at stake is not ownership but sovereignty, which is
not the subject of any of the sources frequently cited by those who make
your assertion.
I am _not_ saying that we should (or should not) give up any part of
eretz yisrael to the PLO. I merely wish to clarify what is and is not
forbidden and separate halachic assertions from philisophical ones.
(For those who want sources, let me know and I'll try to find my shiur
notes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joseph Steinberg <steinber@...>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 14:10:17 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Jews in Hebron
Someone wrote:
:contemporary poskim. There is obviously no dispute about Pikuach Nefesh.
:Everyone agrees that the saving of Human life overrides every mitzvoh in
:the Torah (except for the Big Three).
Not only is it incorrect that everyone agrees that Pikuach Nefesh
overrides every Mitzvah in the Torah excelpt for the Big Three, everyone
agrees that this is NOT TRUE.
Pikuach Nefesh according to EVERYONE only overrides those Mitzvot that
do not normally involve mortal danger. For example, since keeping
Shabbat does not normally involve putting oneself in mortal danger, if
keeping the Shabbat were to put someone in danger, he would not have to
keep it (and would be prohibited from keeping it.)
However, commandmants which normally do involve life-threatening danger
(e.g., Milchement Mitzvah, Mechiyat Amalek, Kibush HaAretz, etc.) are
not overridden by Pikuach Nefesh. The proof is that if Pikuach Nefesh
were to override Milchemet Mitzvah it would be IMPOSSIBLE to have a
Milchemet Mitzvah in the first place. When G-d told Moshe to tell
Yehoshua to find soldiers and fight Amalek, wasn't every man in the army
a case of 'Sakanat Nifashot, Pikuach Nefesh, etc.' The same by
Shaul. Could he not have said 'I'd love to kill out Amalek, but Jewish
boys will die in battle, so it is a case of Pikuach Nefesh...'
It is a davar pashut that Pikuach Nefesh does not override Mitzvot which
by definition involve Sakanot Chayim (mortal danger).
Whether one who settles in Chevron has the din of someone fighting for
Kibush HaAretz is an issue for someone far greater than me to decide. I
will note that the Talmud does say that if non-Jewish armies are
attacking Jewish cities we violate the Sabbath to fight them. If they
are coming to take money (and not lives), however, we do not fight them
on the Sabbath. However if they come for money -- but are near the
border of Eretz Israel -- we do fight them on Sabbath. The Pirush on
'close to the border' says this means 'Bavel' (and closer).... (Bavel =
Iraq)... and the Talmud was not referring to the time when the Temple
stood, or when there was a Sanhedrin either.
| | ___ ___ ___ _ __ | |__ Joseph Steinberg
_ | |/ _ \/ __|/ _ \ '_ \| '_ \ <steinber@...>
| |_| | (_) \__ \ __/ |_) | | | | http://village.ios.com/~yosi
\___/ \___/|___/\___| .__/|_| |_| +1-201-833-9674
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <DaPr@...> (Yehudah Prero)
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 23:02:21 -0400
Subject: Mazal Tov! Some good news...
With gratitude to Hashem, my wife and I are happy to announce that we
became the proud parents of a beautiful baby girl, Sarah, on Tuesday
June 25, 8 Tamuz. Both mother and daughter are, thank G-d, doing fine.
R' Yehudah Prero
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Y. Adlerstein <yadler@...>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 07:38:03 -0700
Subject: Stopping for motorists in distress
Picking up on a recent thread, readers might be interested to know that
Rav Ovadiah Yosef, shlit"a, (Shu"t Yechaveh Da'at 5:65) holds that it is
obliagatory to stop and assist a motorist in distress, as a direct
application of the laws of Perikah and T'inah (unloading and loading.)
He seems to lean to considering it a chiyuv d'orayso (obligatory by
Torah, rather than rabbinic, law).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <METHS@...> (Sheldon Z Meth)
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 15:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Tashlich on Rosh Hashannah
In v24n44, Chaim Shapiro asks about not saying Tashlich on Rosh Hashannah
because of the "social scene". I quote the Mattei Efrayim 598:4, in the
Elef Hamagein, note 7 (translation mine):
One should abolish the Minhag [custom] (whose letters are Gehennom),
that which the women also go to Tashlich, for through this comes the
mixing of women with the men. Woe to the eyes which see this on this
Holy Day! Going to Tashlich is thus for them as a stroll in parks and
orchards. Since the world stands in judgement, the Satan will find
room for his accusations, and to pour out the judgement, G-d forbid,
with poured our wrath. And woe to that son who stirs up poured out
wrath in his Father, Whose goodness of character is to be merciful as
a father is merciful to his son. Yet he overturns this from Mercy to
Anger and Judgement. Those who are defending will change their
position and accuse, and the final judgement will be for evil not for
good, G-d forbid. This matter rests upon the sustainers of the city
and its leaders, to supervise in this matter. Whoever has the power
to protest, should protest!
I have not said Tashlich on Rosh Hashannah for many, many years. I usually
say it later in the week. I am told that one has until Hoshannah Rabba to
say it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shari Hillman <73512.2351@...>
Date: 27 Jun 96 10:21:10 EDT
Subject: Techinas/Women's Prayers
For a talk I will be giving later this summer, IYH, I am looking at
techinas, the women's prayers, mostly in Yiddish originally. I know of a
couple of compilations/translations that have been published but would
also be interested in learning more about the historical development of
techinas: what we know of their origins, how they were handed
down/around in communities and in families. I would also like to talk
with anyone who has the minhag of reciting techinas in their family or
who can help me find more of them (in either English or Hebrew; my
Yiddish is very limited).
I had not heard of these beautiful prayers until a few years ago, and
would welcome more information.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <sheilat@...> (Sheila Tanenbaum)
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 17:04:07 GMT
Subject: Use of electronic medical equipment
From: <yehudi@...> (Ephraim Dardashti)
>Is a Jew dependent on electronic medical equipment allowed to use such
>equipment at a shul on Shabbos? Redently a wheelchair bound man was
are you aware that there is a specially modified wheel-chair device,
developed by Tsomet, which has a "gramma" switch, so it can be run in a
shabbat mode. They also make Jeeps for orthodox kibbutzim, which operate
on the same "always on" principle.
Sheila Tanenbaum
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Anonymous
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 1996 22:29:35 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Vows vs. Respect
I have been wearing a tallis and kipah since I was Bat Mitzvahed 10
years ago. At that time I took a very private vow, between me and G-d
only, that I would take on these and other mitzvot that are not required
of women. I believed strongly in this vow and I still do. I won't go
into the reasons behind this here because they are private, but suffice
it to say I take this vow very seriously. But now I'm in a conflict.
When I used to go to Chabad for shul, the tallis/kipah was not a
problem; they pretty much ignored it and concentrated more on the fact
that I was there and interested in learning. But I recently spent
shabbos with my best friend in an Orthodox community, and she requested
that I not wear the kipah in their homes out of respect to them. As she
pointed out, it would be different if we weren't sleeping there or it
was just in shul, but she was afraid that I would have offended them in
their own homes. So I removed my kipah. And I had a blast, one of the
best shabboses I've ever had in fact, but with every prayer, every song,
I felt the absence of my kipah. It was absolutely terrible. Not to
mention the fact that I felt terrible about having broken my vow with
G-d. I would love to go back and spend shabbos there again, but I don't
think I could not wear my kipah. But I also don't want to offend
them--having now met them I do think some of them would be offended and
I doubt the children would be able to drop the subject. I am very
interested to hear some opinions of people who are more traditional in
their beliefs in this area. What do I do? Is there any halacha on this
issue (aside from women not wearing men's clothing--I am VERY versed in
this area, and I took the vow anyway)? Anybody see the issue another
way? HELP! Thanks in advance!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 24 Issue 54
