Volume 29 Number 12
                 Produced: Tue Jul 20  6:26:52 US/Eastern 1999

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

A Note On Parking Violations and Love thy Neighbor
         [Russell Hendel]
Etymology Q: Ratzon and Retzini
         [David and Toby Curwin]
Kosher Corrections (4)
         [Alexander Heppenheimer, Michael Poppers, David Charlap,
Yitzchok Zirkind]
Minhag of Reading Eicha during Day
         [Tszvi Klugerman]
Not Listening to Recorded Music during the Three Weeks
         [Yitzchok Zirkind]
Question about IBM Policy
         [Zvi Weiss]
Restaurant Serving Meat during Nine Days (4)
         [I. Harvey Poch, Harry Weiss, David and Toby Curwin, Chaim
Shabbat Chazon and Tisha b'Av (2)
         [Jeff Fischer, I. Harvey Poch]
The Kennedy Curse?
         [Chaim Shapiro]
Three Steps Back in Shmoneh Esrei
         [Yitzchok Zirkind]


From: Russell Hendel <rhendel@...>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 19:19:48 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: A Note On Parking Violations and Love thy Neighbor

Just a short footnote on Immanuel Burton's position (v29n03) that
people who don't move out of parking spaces are violating the Biblical
commandment "And you shall love your neighbor like yourself".

Indeed it is an established principle throughout Jewish commercial law
that if some act will benefit one party and not cause loss/anguish to
the other party then we do the act. The Biblical verse "And do what
is right and proper" (Dt 6:18) is cited. To avoid doing these acts(which
cause no loss and benefit one party) is to "behave like the Sedomites".

These laws particularly occur in Neighbor laws (Thus eg Rabmam, Neighbors
12:1 Rambam says that if Bob wants half a field near
his property and Simon is indifferent which half he gets then we must
give Bob the half he wants (provided it is of equal quality) since otherwise
we are behaving like the Sedomites. This concept dominates the whole
"Neighbor buy-back laws" (Ben Mezer) (Chapters 12-14). It also occurs in
many division problems between neighbors (E.g Neighbors 7:8)

Russell Jay Hendel; Phd ASA
Moderator Rashi Is Simple


From: David and Toby Curwin <curwin@...>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 18:19:00 +0300
Subject: re: Etymology Q: Ratzon and Retzini

According to "A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary 
of the Hebrew Language for Readers of English", by the
late Rabbi Ernest Klein (a wonderful dictionary, and a great
Shabbat afternoon read), the origin of the word "retzini" is:

ratzin, retzini: (now retzini is preferably used) serious [Coined
by Eliezer ben Yehuda from ratzon ( =will), after Arabic "razin"
( = grave, serious).

-David Curwin
Kvutzat Yavne, Israel


From: Alexander Heppenheimer <Alexander.Heppenheimer@...>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 08:24:29 -0600
Subject: Re: Kosher Corrections

The Kashrut.com website has a page listing the contact information for
about ten (so far) of the most commonly encountered hashgachos; it's at

Kol tuv,

From: Michael Poppers <MPoppers@...>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 10:01:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Kosher Corrections

One resource: surf to http://www.kosher.co.il/orgs/ -- the national US
org.s are on page usa1.htm.

All the best from
Michael Poppers =*= Elizabeth, NJ

From: David Charlap <shamino@...>
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 01:07:36 +0000
Subject: Re: Kosher Corrections

Kashrut Magazine runs an issue every year that lists virtually all of them.

I also found this web site: http://www.kashrut.com/, which has a small list
located at http://www.kashrut.com/agencies/.  This list has the big names, but
not many regional or local agencies.

-- David

From: Yitzchok Zirkind <Yzkd@...>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 09:04:45 EDT
Subject: Re: Kosher Corrections

The OU's web site is www.ou.org
The OK's web site is www.ok.org

Kol Tuv


From: Tszvi Klugerman <Klugerman@...>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 01:43:37 EDT
Subject: Re: Minhag of Reading Eicha during Day

<< Does anyone else have the minhag of reading Eicha following the Torah
 reading?  Does anyone know of a source/reason for this practice?
 Dan >>

I do recall seeing a source many years ago that discussed the
permissibility of reading eicha after the knot were over only if it was
not chatzot hayom.  Since we arise after chatzot and remove some of the
aveilut (mourning) from ourselves eicha can no longer be read.



From: Yitzchok Zirkind <Yzkd@...>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 11:37:40 EDT
Subject: Re: Not Listening to Recorded Music during the Three Weeks

> From: Rachi Messing <rachim@...>
>  Does anyone know the source for not listening to recorded music during
>  the three weeks? I've found sources not to play musical instruments
>  because of simcha - which can probably be extended to listening to live
>  music, but besides extending it even further to include recorded music
>  is there any other source? Also, how about during sefiras haomer?

See O"C 560:3, note the Loshon "V'chol Mashmiei Kol Shel Shir", and see Klei 
Nosim there.

Kol Tuv
Yitzchok Zirkind


From: Zvi Weiss <weissz@...>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 19:35:06 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Question about IBM Policy

Side issue:
Does anyone know (who works at IBM) whether IBM has put in to place an
unambiguous policy regarding taking *Personal Days* for Rom Tovim? thanks.


From: I. Harvey Poch <af945@...>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 16:35:11 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Restaurant Serving Meat during Nine Days

I once knew a man o"h who was required to eat meat every day because of
medical reasons. His wife was so "frum" that she refused to cook or
serve it during the nine days, so he ate in a treif restaurant.

Yes, he might have been able to cook it himself (I don't know for sure),
but this is a good reason for kosher restaurants to be open during the
nine days. "Ve-heve don es kol odom lekaf zechus" (judge each man

I. Harvey Poch  (8-)>

From: Harry Weiss <harry.weiss@...>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 99 22:51:17 -0700
Subject: Restaurant Serving Meat during Nine Days

Richard Wolpoe asked the following.
"Question: is a glatt kosher restaurant responsible for serving meat to
those who should be halachically refraining from eating meat duringteh
nine days?"

The first comment I have is that this question was raised prior to
Shabbat Chazon, when only Ashkenazim refrain from eating meat.  There
are also others who for health reasons may have to eat meat.

The bigger question is, Is the owner helping promote complying with the
restrictions of the nine days by advertising their vegetarian menus and
thus reminding everyone of these restrictions.  If the restaurant would
not have the meat meals available, what would these people do?  Would
they eat the vegetarian entrees or go the non kosher facility down the

How much responsibility do restaurant owners have?  Should they have
security guards to insure that everyone washes and says the appropriate
brachot?  Or is their responsibility just to insure that the food is
kosher, that people have some reminder of the special times, such as
through special menu items, have washing stations and bentchers


From: David and Toby Curwin <curwin@...>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 20:58:02 +0300
Subject: re: Restaurant Serving Meat during Nine Days

I think the concept of "dan adam l'kaf zchut" (judge each individual
favorably) is being overlooked here. There are a number of explanations
of why people could be eating meat:

a) Perhaps they are Sefardim, who only refrain during the week of Tisha B'Av
b) They could be old or sick people who need to eat meat
c) The restaurant could have a significant non-Jewish clientele (I've known
kosher restaurants like that who served meat during the 9 days for that

So by jumping to conclusions, one a) unfairly casts aspersions on the people
eating the meat and b) assumes the restaurant is acting improperly. Neither
may be true, so let's leave the mashgichim (supervisors) alone.

David Curwin
Kvutzat Yavne, Israel

From: Chaim Wasserman <Chaimwass@...>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 13:52:16 EDT
Subject: Re: Restaurant Serving Meat during Nine Days

 Rich Wolpoe is concerned about eating meat in the nine days served in
restaurants with reputable kashrus. Why so when the din hagemara of
abstaining from meat is only on erev Tisha bAv. All else is a time
honored minhag but not a violation of that halachic restriction.

Not so with the mixed dancing which is subsumed under the heading of
pritzus.  Here religious authority is mandated to control. That is why
the Glatt Yacht didn't fly (or sail).

chaim wasserman


From: Jeff Fischer <NJGabbai@...>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 13:59:33 EDT
Subject: Re: Shabbat Chazon and Tisha b'Av

>  Two questions regarding Shabbat Chazon and Tisha b'Av:
>  1.  There seem to be two traditions regarding where the first aliyah of
>  parshat Devarim ends.  On the one hand, the Koren Tanach and the
>  ArtScroll chumash end the aliyah with verse 10.  On the other hand,
>  every other listing of the aliyah which I have (the Hertz chumash,
>  Siddur Rinat Yisrael, the JPS chumash, my two tikunim--including the new
>  "Simanim", and others) end the aliyah with verse 11.
>  >From a practical standpoint, I like the version of the majority--it's
>  easier to switch trop once (Eicah to regular) than twice (regular to
>  Eicha and back).  On the other hand, I can appreciate the esthetic which
>  might not want the aliyah to begin "Eicha..." (although I had though the
>  general principle was only to prevent text from *ending* on a bad note).

As you said...  The actual aliyah ends with the pasuk before Aycha, but we 
are not allowed to start an Aliyah on such a sad note, so we move back one 
pasuk and start from there.

From: I. Harvey Poch <af945@...>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 16:38:30 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Shabbat Chazon and Tisha b'Av

The true first posuk in sheini is, in fact the "eichah" posuk, since
that's where shelishi ends on Shabbos afternoon, Monday and Thursday.
(Yes, there are other weekday keriyos which end after the sheini mark in
the Chumash, but not just one posuk after.) However, in order to not
begin reading at a sad point (and with a sad tune), the custom arose to
begin sheini one posuk earlier.

I. Harvey Poch  (8-)>


From: Chaim Shapiro <Dagoobster@...>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 20:28:34 EDT
Subject: The Kennedy Curse?

	After the apparent Kennedy tragedy (I say apparent for as the
time of this writing John has not been pronounced dead) I have heard a
story that I have heard many times in the past.  Joseph Kennedy, JFK's
Father was cursed by a Rabbi (which one depends on who tells the story)
because of his pro-Nazi, anti-Jewish stance as ambassador to England
prior to World War II.
	A Few questions here.  1) Does anyone have any verification of
this story?
	 2) Assuming the story is true, and that is an assumption that I
cannot personally prove, what on earth kind of curse was it?  The
Kennedy family could have disappeared into nothingness.  JFK could have
died on his PT boat, and RFK killed some other way.  Instead, the
Kennedy's have become the premier American political family.  Yes, they
are beset by tragedies, but they still have a prominence unmatched in
the country.  Why would a curse that given the unsettling number of
family tragedies seems to be working, work in such a way that Joe
Kennedy's family would include Senators and Presidents?  Why would RFK
and JFK's burial places be turned into national shrines?  It would seem
that a more appropriate curse would be that all the children die, and no
one would ever know of the family again.  The only argument I can hear
in favor of this particular curse is that everyone knows of the family
and the power of the curse.  However, that would only be true if the
curse story was public knowledge which it is not.
	A more basic question deals with curses in general.  Why must
they include seemingly innocent descendants of Joe Kennedy?
	Why Joe Kennedy?  There were many people around the time of the
War that were much worse!  Why would he be the one chosen for a curse?
Chaim Shapiro


From: Yitzchok Zirkind <Yzkd@...>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 11:27:33 EDT
Subject: Re: Three Steps Back in Shmoneh Esrei

Sorry for leaving this out in the earlier post, with regard to going
back before Shmone Asrei, (while the E-liyohu Rabboh 95:3 says that
there is no need to go back, if there is room to go forward, and that
there is possibility that if one goes to Shul or moved from his place to
Daven no moving forward is needed alltogether) the Kitzur S"O (18:2)
brings to go back before saying "Tehilos Lkeil Elyon", the source is the
Eitz Chayim also brought in the E"R.

Kol Tuv


End of Volume 29 Issue 12