Volume 27 Number 44
                      Produced: Sun Dec 28  6:47:09 1997

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Chalav Yisrael
         [Chaim Mateh]
Channukah and sukkot
         [Paul Shaviv]
         [Avrohom Biderman]
         [Zev Sero]
Men Dyeing their Hair
         [Dr I. Balbin]
Men Dying their Hair
         [Susan E Slusky]
Milk from a Cow which is a Treifa
         [Gershon Dubin]
Morid Hag?shem
         [Dr I. Balbin]
Shabbat and the Deaf
         [Rahel Shermans]
         [Steve White]
         [Zev Sero]
World to Come
         [Micha Berger]


From: Chaim Mateh <chaimm@...>
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 1997 14:08:11 +0200
Subject: Chalav Yisrael

Regarding nonMehadrin milk exported from Eretz Yisroel as to whether it can
be considered Cholov Yisroel, Carl Sherer quoted the Rav hamachshir of Tnuva :

"In any event, today, there is no use of non-Jewish milk in Tnuva products.
 ...  It should be noted that what is under discussion is always raw
materials that are added to milk which constitutes the main ingredient, and
that the basic milk is always Chalav Yisrael.  But there are times when
there is a shortage of fresh milk, and then some of the products are
manufactured using milk powder, and in these cases the powder becomes the
main ingredient in the product; but in all of these instances what is under
discussion is Jewish milk powder which is
manufactured in Israel, and Tnuva does not currently use any milk powder
that is imported from overseas."

I live in Israel and I was told by a few years ago by a Rav involved in
kashrus here that at that time "nonJewish" milk powder was indeed imported
to suppliment the liquid milk.  The point is that the Tnuva Rav correctly
says that _today_ there's no cholov akum, and _currently_ Tnuva doesn't use
imported milk powder.  However, if and when they _do_ use it, nobody knows
(unless you ask).

Also, there are other companies that produce milk in Israel (such as Tara
and Tene).  I wonder what their policies are.

Kol Tuv,
Chaim Mateh (Israel)


From: <shaviv@...> (Paul Shaviv)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 13:53:16 -0500
Subject: Channukah and sukkot

[Several people have written in to mention the explicit source for the
connection between Chanuka and Succot based on 1 and 2 Maccabees. I had
pointed that out to the original poster, and what he is looking for is a
Rabbinic or Midrashic source who has incorporated the 1/2 Maccabees
stories into the rabbinic/halachik domain. The best I knew, which Paul
quotes here is the possible/probable echoes of that in the reasoning for
the lights being due to the sacrifices on Succot. Mod.]

The sources for the Channukak-Sukkot connection are primarily 1 Maccabees
8-9 and (more explicitly) 2 Maccabees 10 5-8. 

[Also submitted by: <micha@...> (Micha Berger) who mentions the
connection to Beis Shammai's reason for the decrease in number of candles
and <alsilberman@...> (Alfred Silberman) who translated the relevant

"They celebrated the eight days in joy as the Festival of Succos
recalling their adversity a short while before during the Festival of
Succos in the mountains and caves just like wild animals. Therefore, with
[hadasim], [esrogim] and [lulavim] in their hands they gave thanks to the
one who gave them the power to purify his abode"


This connection (which is fascinating and - imho - compelling) is
alluded to in the Gemara Shabbat 21b, where the reasons of the two
zekenim of Tsidon are given regarding their practices of lighting the
lamps according to Shammai and Hillel. The one who lights acc to Shammai
(starting with eight and decreasing) says; "..  k'neged parei ha-chag"
-- according to the [sacrifices] of the Festival- parallel to the
sacrifices of Sukkot, where the number of animals sacrificed went down
every day -- Bamidbar 29:13 etc. See also Taanit 28b, where we learn
that the days on which full Hallel are said include all days of Sukkot
and all days of Hannukah.  The connection is remarked on in many places,
and provides much food for thought...  Chag sameach!

Paul Shaviv
Principal, Bialik High School, Montreal
Fax: +514-483-6391 (school)/ +514-488-6532 (Home)
Tel: +514-481-2736 (school)/ +514-488-8631 (home)


From: Avrohom Biderman <abeb@...>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 1997 18:48:21 -0500
Subject: Geshem/Gashem

Reagtding the Gwshem/Gashem issue, Steven Oppenheimer, D.D.S. <oppy2@...>
writes "Artscroll has taken the position that Geshem should be said." For
the record, ArtScroll siddurim which have been published/reprinted over the
past year or two all  note the variant readings.


From: <zsero@...> (Zev Sero)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 12:25:48 GMT
Subject: Re: Kiruv

Seth Kadish wrote:
>For instance: Last year I taught Tanakh at a secular high school in
>Netanya.  A ninth grade girl told me how her brother was becoming
>religious.  He listens to tapes made by a well-known rav, a teshuva
>activist; much of the tapes' content is, quite literally, that those who
>don't try to keep all the mitzvot will burn in gehinnom.  She asked me:
>"Why do the rabbanim want to terrify people?"  No amount of explanation
>from my side can erase the negative impact of something like that tape.

Unfortunately, this is not a new problem.  One of the major missions
of the Baal Shem Tov was to battle the disease of `magidim' that was
plaguing the Jewish communities at that time.  These travelling
preachers would arrive in a community and give the locals the 
opportunity to observe and host a `real talmid chochom', and then
lash into them with the same tactics that you describe above, with
pretty much the same results that you describe.  Maybe here and
there they made some people more careful with their mitzvot, but
the overall effect was to distance people from Hashem and from
the Torah.  By filling people's hearts with despair, they led many
to decide that if olam haba was beyond reach of ordinary humans
like them, then they may as well enjoy olam hazeh, with disastrous
results.  There are many stories of the Baal Shem Tov's campaign
against these magidim, and the success he had in reintroducing
people to Hashem's love for them, and the need for them to love
Him and do His mitzvot.

It seems to me that the organisations who engage in these tactics
are mostly not of the Chassidic tradition (I'm thinking particularly
of the one whose tapes are to be found everywhere).  If any chasidic
organisations engage in these tactics, perhaps they should be 
reminded of the history of their movement and the Baal Shem Tov's
teaching on the subject.

Zev Sero                Imminent death of the net delayed, Film at 12.
<zsero@...>                     - Joe Greco


From: Dr I. Balbin <isaac@...>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 1997 20:14:50 +1100
Subject: Re: Men Dyeing their Hair

>From: Steve White <StevenJ81@...>
>Specifically with respect to Grecian Formula, I don't think it's a dye
>at all; as I recall, it removes the white coloring from the white hair,
>leaving the remaining natural color from hair that hasn't turned white.
>If that's correct, the halachic question would be different from dyeing.

As far as I can see it would only make the question different if the
result was _visually_ different. If you made men's pants for instance by
using a knife instead of scissors, then I don't think the pants would
become permitted for a woman simply because they were made differently.
They might become different if they looked different. In the case of
hair dye, it is difficult to make a difference whether the white hair
becomes black or whether the white is removed. The result would be the
same.  The issue is the one of "changing a hair colour" which is a
woman's domain (under normative halachic practice). Similarly the Poskim
forbid a man from plucking out the white hairs for the same reason.


From: <sslusky@...> (Susan E Slusky)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 14:35:55 +0000
Subject: Men Dying their Hair

The Grecian Formula folks would certainly like men to believe that it's
not really dye, and that Grecian Formula is just removing the white
color from their hair and letting the natural color shine through,
soothing men's usually non-halacha-based anxiety about dying their
hair. However, from what I know, this is not the case. Unpigmented hair
is white. The pigments that our bodies make render the hair
colored. (Hair bleach, hydrogen peroxide, oxidizes those pigments and
makes the hair whiter/lighter.) As we age our bodies stop making so much
pigment so the some of the hair starts coming in white. Therefore,
Grecian formula must be a pigment that colors all the hair.  It's just
most noticable on the white hair. And indeed the halachic problem has to
be considered from the point of view of adding pigment to the hair and
whether that is like wearing women's clothing.


From: <gershon.dubin@...> (Gershon Dubin)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 09:46:13 -0500
Subject: Re: Milk from a Cow which is a Treifa

>that it would not be kosher, is its milk still considered kosher?  I
>would assume it is, based on the (somewhat roundabout) logic that many
>rabbis permit USDA-supervised milk, and the USDA would permit milk from
>such an animal.

The Shulchan Aruch says that milk from such an animal (treifa) is in
fact forbidden.  We drink milk without regard to the specific cow whence
it came because of the rule of "rov" that most cows are not treifos.



From: Dr I. Balbin <isaac@...>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 1997 20:28:28 +1100
Subject: Re: Morid Hag?shem

>From: Avrohom Biderman <abeb@...>
>This topic is discussed in Igros Moshe Or Hachayim vol.4, Teshuvah 40, sec.
>15. There Rav Moshe Feinstein --  who was not a maskil -- comes down firmly
>on the side of Hagashem.

On page 121 of Nefesh Horav, Rav Hershel Shechter notes that
Rav Soloveitchik said Hegeshem and not Hagoshem. No reason is given.


From: Rahel Shermans <sherman@...>
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 12:21:08 -0500
Subject: Shabbat and the Deaf

Would magnetic letters be acceptable for communicating with the deaf on
Shabbat? Most people do not know sign and the deaf people I know , even
when offered hospitality, feel isolated. On other days, people who do
not sign write notes. Does anybody know a halachically permissible way
to communicate with Deaf people ?  Shabbat and Yom tov are the loneliest
times of the year for quite a few.

Thank you.  


From: Steve White <StevenJ81@...>
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 16:00:25 EST
Subject: Shemot

> From: Kenneth H. Ryesky <KHRESQ@...>    
>  If one were not permitted to write "God" in English (or languages other    
>  than Hebrew), then we'd have an awful problem with people named    
>  G-ttlieb, G-ttfried, Grussg-tt, G-ttesman, or, for that matter,    
>  Th-odore.  Not only writing the name, but pronouncing it as well.    
>  Like the Kohen Gadol's wife, if such is so, then there is no end to it all.

Or, for that matter, Ari-kel, Yisra-kel, etc.  And while I've seen
things like that done, as far as I can tell we do not have the custom of
treating those names as shemot, even in Hebrew, where the alef and lamed
actually appear.  Indeed, there is no end to it all.

Steven White


From: <zsero@...> (Zev Sero)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 15:24:41 GMT
Subject: Re: Tachanun

On Thu, 25 Dec 1997 Daniel Israel wrote:

>AFAIR (I don't have the citation handy) the Mishna Berura brings down
>that since after hazaras hashatz one does not say "oseh shalom..." and
>take three steps back, one should remain standing in place until the
>"oseh shalom" of Kaddish, unless it is necessary to move for some other
>reason.  This would clearly apply in the case of saying Hallel, for
>example, when there is no need to leave the amud.

Except on Chanukah, when mourners do lead the services but someone
else takes over for Hallel.  I suppose the mourner *could* remain
standing at the amud, and the stand-in stand next to him, but I
haven't seen that done.  In my experience the practise is always
that the mourner leaves the amud, the replacement comes up and
leads Hallel, and then the mourner comes back to say the Kaddish
(which belongs, of course, to the Shmone Esrei, not to the Hallel).

Zev Sero                Imminent death of the net delayed, Film at 12.
<zsero@...>                     - Joe Greco


From: <micha@...> (Micha Berger)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 07:24:42 -0600 (CST)
Subject: World to Come

When discussing Olam haBah (the World to Come), a basic issue has (so
far) been overlooked. There are two definitions of the term.

To the Rambam, the ultimate reward must be nonphysical. Therefor, Oh"B
refers to the non-physical life after death. For similar reasons, the
Rambam writes (in "8 Chapters") that although the post resurection body
will be healthier and live longer than this one, it is not eternal. This
way, one returns to ones ultimate reward.

The Ramban ("Toras Ha'adam", Sha'ar Hagemul) takes the expression to
mean life after resurrection of the dead. This life is to be eternal,
and is the ultimate reward.

Micha Berger (973) 916-0287      Help free Ron Arad, held by Syria 4006 days!
<micha@...>                         (16-Oct-86 - 26-Dec-97)
For a mitzvah is a candle, and the Torah its light.
http://www.aishdas.org -- Orthodox Judaism: Torah, Avodah, Chessed


End of Volume 27 Issue 44