Volume 25 Number 30
                       Produced: Fri Nov 29 10:41:39 1996

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

A Torah for our Temple
         [Marvin Euzent]
         [Yisrael Medad]
Asheknazi menahelim of Sefaradi schools
         [Shmuel Jablon]
Cohen and Roadways of Cemeteries
         [Barry S. Bank]
Dictionary of Hebrew Roots, by R.S.R. Hirsch
         [Ken Miller]
Did Yaakov Do Wrong?
         [Yisrael Medad]
Historical Perspective on the Holocaust
         [Howard Gontovnick]
Jewish Names and Redemption
         [Steven M Oppenheimer]
         [Jim Phillips]
Middas haDin in the Next World
         [Yeshaya Halevi]
Origin of the Word "Daven"
         [Yisrael Herczeg]
Origin of the word "daven"
         [Gershon Dubin]
         [Israel Rosenfeld]
The Seventh Nation
         [Rafi Stern]
Tishrei / Nisan
         [Jonathan Abrams]
Trup Trivia
         [Shimmy Y Messing]


From: Marvin Euzent <euzent@...>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 12:24:02 -0700
Subject: A Torah for our Temple

We have been using a borrowed Torah that must now be returned.  Is there
any way you can suggest that we can acquire one of our own?  Your
assistance will be appreciated.

Thank you,

Marvin Euzent


From: <isrmedia@...> (Yisrael Medad)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 96 18:43:12 PST
Subject: Abuse

 Following on from Jeanette Friedman's posting relating to Shidduch and
the subject of Abuse:
 The media here in Israel has exploded over the incident earlier this
week when a Charedi attacked a woman in the Geula neighborhood who was
"guilty" of sheltering a woman who was refusing a get and who had hidden
out in this other woman's apartment.  For the first time, the battered
woman-protector and then the fleeing woman were interviewed live on TV.
 It reminded me when I was working as parliamentary aide to MK Naomi
Blumenthal who was on the Knesset Woman's Committee. I was approached by
an American woman who lives in Mattesdorf who was active in a Charedi
group attempting to deal with the problem of abuse.  She mentioned
sensitivity training, counseling and even dealing with the Mikva ladies
to notice any evidence of physical abuse, although the psychological
abuse is more rampant.  I lost contact but I hope that they are still at
 If the Shiduch system reinforces, in addition to Torah and *yichus*
elements, the socialization practices of ignoring the proper status of a
wife, then it has to be rethought on that basis as well.
 Yisrael Medad
E-mail: isrmedia


From: <u28324@...> (Shmuel Jablon)
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 20:08:57 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Asheknazi menahelim of Sefaradi schools

Does anyone know examples of Ashkenazi menahelim of Sefaradi schools?  Has
there been an effect on the chinuch?  How have the differences in minhagim
been handled?

Kol tuv-
Shmuel Jablon


From: <bsbank@...> (Barry S. Bank)
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 07:28:38 EST
Subject: Cohen and Roadways of Cemeteries

Some time ago I wrote to inquire if anyone knew if a cohen could use the
tourist trams in Arlington National Cemetery -- i.e., are there any trees
over the roadway on which the trams travel which are also over graves
which would transmit tumah to a cohen who was riding in the tram.  

This question, for the most part, engendered a discussion about whether
or not Jews were buried in Arlington, and I never did get an answer to my
question.  Possibly no one knows, but I would like to ask again, just to
be sure.

Thank you.


From: Ken Miller <kgmiller@...>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 13:13:30 -0500
Subject: Dictionary of Hebrew Roots, by R.S.R. Hirsch

I am looking for a certain book, and I am hoping someone can help me
out. Actually I don't even know if such a book even exists, but maybe if
I describe it, we can help write it together!

I have always been amazed by the commentary of Rav Samson Raphael
Hirsch, specifically in how he takes the root letters of Hebrew words
and compares them to similar roots to derive their meaning. Often I will
come across a word elsewhere, and ask "How does Rav Hirsch explain the
meaning of that root?" Unfortunately, I have no way of figuring out
where he might mention this particular word.

I used to take my concordance and look up every place this word appeared
in the Torah. Not only was that tedious and slow, but often it was
fruitless because this word in fact appeared in a verse I never saw,
because it was discussed in context of another root which it was similar

Has anyone ever gone through any of Hirsch's works and simply
cross-reference the places where he explains various roots? One does not
need to be a brilliant scholar to publish a list which says that ABC is
discussed in Gen 12:34, and DEF is in both Ex 23:45 and Dt 34:56. This
list does not need to draw any conclusions about what XYZ means; I can
try that myself, once I know where to look.

If no book or database of this type already exists, maybe someone would
be interested in creating it? I have tried several times to do it
manually, and it was just too slow and difficult. But if someone would
feed each page of the commentary through a scanner, and use software
which would read all the Hebrew lettering and ignore all the English
lettering, it would probably be rather easy. I would be quite satisfied
it the end result pointed to a page number instead of chapter and verse.


From: <isrmedia@...> (Yisrael Medad)
Date: Sat,  1 Jan 94 20:27:04 PST
Subject: Did Yaakov Do Wrong? 

Re: Sam Gamoran's query in Vol 25:17
>Isn't giving the flip side of taking?  Should Yaakov have taken a wife
>by force?
>In Parshat Chaye Sarah, Avraham's servant is ordered to take a wife for
>Isaac.  He responds by asking, what to do if the girl won't follow him
>should he bring Yitzchak to Aram?  Avraham's answer was a firm no - the
>servant would then be released from the vow, but under no circumstances
>was Yitzchak to leave the land of Canaan (Rashi adds that the
>contingency plan was for Yitzhak to take a wife from the daughters of
>Aner or Mamre, the "righteous gentiles" of Cannaan).  From this it would
>appear that "taking" a wife forcibly was never considered an option.

I think the answer is in your example.
 Only the intended husband is to *take*.  *Taking* in the Halachic
sense is the act of asserting possession.  The Slave Eliezer could
act as an agent to bring Rivkah but not *take* her.
And no one said to take by force.
And, as per the Medrash, Yishmael is viewed favorably because he
fulfilled his father's wishes in *taking* Machlat.
Yisrael Medad


From: <howardg@...> (Howard Gontovnick)
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 16:18:53 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Historical Perspective on the Holocaust

     I wonder if someone can suggest some reference sources for a paper I am
writing on the historical  perspectives of the Holocaust - its historical
implications for the Jewish people. 
I would greatly appreciate some feedback.
Howard Gontovnick


From: <oppy2@...> (Steven M Oppenheimer)
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 16:17:23 EST
Subject: Jewish Names and Redemption

There is a midrash that appears in many places (e.g. Sh. R. 1:28, VaYik.
R. 32:5, Sh. HaSh. R. 4:12, Mechil., Tanch., etc. ) that relates that the
Jews were redeemed from Egypt because of four things:  1) they didn't
change their names,  2) they didn't change their language,  3) they
didn't speak Lashon HaRa,  4) they didn't engage in illicit relations.   

Does anyone know of any sources that relate one's Jewish name to bringing
the geulah ( redemption )?

Thanks for your help.

Steven Oppenheimer, D.D.S.


From: <RocketP@...> (Jim Phillips)
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 07:58:58 -0500
Subject: Mechitzah

Dear Fellow MJ Reader

   At a recent class our Chabad Rabbi said the primary reason for the
Mechitzah was an issue of tsnius. I would like to know the historical
basis for the mechitzah. I know that in Mesechta Sukkos there is mention
that during the water drawing ceremony, men and women were to be
seperated because of the risk of frivolity. What does this have to do
with davening.? On a related note, as I understand it, women did not
come to Shul prior to the 15th century, hence there was no need for a
mechitzah- true or not true? Do pre-15th century synagogues have
mechitzahs? Is this issue of tsnius a 20th century Chabad revision? All
answers will be appreciated.



From: <CHIHAL@...> (Yeshaya Halevi)
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 11:02:56 -0500
Subject: Middas haDin in the Next World

Shalom, All:
        Sheldon Meth <Sheldon_Meth@...> writes, "In this
world, G-d applies Middas Rachamim (the attribute of mercy) in His relations
with us; in the Next World, when bechira [free will] will be removed, G-d
will apply Middas haDin (the attribute of law/justice).  >>
         Please enlighten me.  If our free will is removed, how can we sin?
 If we don't sin, why would the attribute of law/justice be applied to us?
   Yeshaya Halevi (<Chihal@...>)


From: Yisrael Herczeg <yherczeg@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 22:24:55 +0200 (IST)
Subject: Origin of the Word "Daven"

In v25n27 Liz Muschel asks about the origin of the word "daven". I saw in a
sefer (don't recall which) that it is a corruption of the Aramaic word
"de'avuhon" which means "of the Patriarchs," an allusion to the gemara
(Berachos 26b) which says that the shemona esrei prayers were instituted by
Avrohom, Yitzchok, and Yaakov. I have also heard that it is a form of an
early German word related to the English "dawn."

From: <gershon.dubin@...> (Gershon Dubin)
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 10:27:53 PST
Subject: Origin of the word "daven"

>Does anyone know the origin of the word "daven"?
	I once heard that it was derived from the Aramaic "d'avuhon"
meaning of the Patriachs,  who instituted the regular tefilos.


From: Israel Rosenfeld <iir@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 18:13:37 +0200
Subject: Re: Riddle

> From: <EMPreil@...> (Elozor Preil)
> I just heard a great riddle from Leon Isaacson (Teaneck), and I'd like to
> share it with The List:
> Name something that a Kohen can see and a Yisrael can see, but a Levi will
> never see.

If a Kohen or a Yisrael marries a divorcee, they will see their son
    called to the Torah as a Yisrael.
A Levi's son is always a Levi.
Happy Chanuka.

Israel Rosenfeld


From: Rafi Stern <iitpr@...> 
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 12:58:18 -0800
Subject: Re: The Seventh Nation

Israel Caspi wrote:

> B'nai Yisrael were to inherit the portion of 7 nations who occupied
> Eretz Yisrael.  Why does the Prophet Nehemiah (Chapter 9) -- which is
> recited every day in our prayers -- mention only six of them?

I believe that the answer is that the seventh nation ran away.  I seem
to remember being told that they all got up and left and went to Africa
where they were rewarded by receiving a very large country.

I do not have the source for this... maybe somebody else does?

Rafi Stern
The Israel Institute of Transportation Planning and Research
Tel:972-3-6873312   Fax:972-3-6872196 
Email: <iitpr@...>


From: Jonathan Abrams <cont4y31@...>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 13:23:00 -0400 
Subject: Re: Tishrei / Nisan 

In responding to Rick Turkel's query about the creation of the sun vs
the creation of the world:

Forgive me but I see no implicit contradiction here at all.  The world
could have very well been created on Tishrei and the sun created the 4th
of Nisan.  The whole solar/lunar relationship presupposes the existence
of the sun and moon, neither of which were around when the
universe/world was FIRST created.  Indeed, our criteria for determining
the length of one day is one rotation of the Earth on it's axis with
respect to the sun.  Therefore there is no way that days one, two and
three (and perhaps even days four, five, six and Shabbos and so on)
could have been the same as our days now since the sun wasn't even
created yet.  This can easily be extrapolated for months as well -
obviously there was a first "month" of Creation but since the moon (and
thus lunar cycle) hadn't been created yet, this month couldn't have been
the same as our months now.

As in all things, obviously G_D is not and was not limited to ANY
physical phenomenon in H_S Creation process and therefore, whether the
first days and months took place within an expanse of time that was
relative to a fraction of a second or relative to a billion years is, to
me, folly to discuss since G_D is not limited by such physical

As an aside, this can give us new insight into the use of "days" in the
Torah's discussions of the time that our Patriarchs lived.  I think here
of when Yaacov Avinu was telling Paro before he blessed him of the days
of his life and how they didn't measure up to the days of the lives of
his Fathers Avraham and Yitzchok.  We see here that perhaps G_D has only
given us a physical criteria to measure our days, months and years to
assist us in OUR concept of time planning, when G_D's days, months and
years per se may be completely different and may indeed take much more
into account than simply a physical fluctuation in relationships between
heavenly bodies.  Could G_D have defined moral days, months and years as

Hope this is helpful and best regards,
Jonathan Abrams.


From: <shimmy@...> (Shimmy Y Messing)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 23:21:11 EST
Subject: Trup Trivia

Ira writes:

>This is in response to the "trup Trivia" questions. 1) the longest
>pasuk that I can recall that doesn't have an esnachta is in the 3rd
>aliya of Va'eschanan. "mayaroayr asher al sfas nachal arnon ve'ad har
>sion hu chermon." 11 words.  I'm not 100% sure this is the longest but
>it certainly is a candidate. 2) There are no "regular" (ie not
>including a pasuk b'emtza pasuk etc..) pesukim which have more than one
>esnachta.  3) the shortest pasuk in the torah is in vayigash "u'vnae
>dan chushim."  While there are many 3 word p'sukim in the torah, this
>pasuk has the least number of letters, which I guess would be the next
>"tiebreaker." Since someone started trup trivia, what are the only two
>notes (not including rare notes like a shalsheles or yerech ben yomo)
>that never appear AFTER an esnachta?

In Beraishis perek 13 posuk 1 there is another posuk with 11 words and no
esnachta.  But in Beraishis perek 21 posuk 3 there is a posuk with 12
words & no esnachta.  I'm not sure if there is one longer?  I'm pretty
sure Ira is right about the third answer, but i'm not so sure about the
second.  About his question, the answer seems obvious to me that a segol 
and an azla  (not azla geresh) can never follow an esnachta. To continue
on trup trivia, what is the only posuk in the torah with all the letters
of the alef-beis?



End of Volume 25 Issue 30