Volume 29 Number 21
                 Produced: Mon Jul 26  6:00:27 US/Eastern 1999

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Administrivia - Kashrut Symbol Questions
         [Avi Feldblum]
"Treading Water" During Prayer
         [Carl and Adina Sherer]
B'rachos not mentioned in the Gemara (2)
         [Akiva Miller, Avi Feldblum]
Babies and Basar v'Chalav
         [Michael Rogovin]
Daughters of Israel & Stringency
         [Yisrael Medad]
Music during the three weeks
         [Mark Feldman]
Nolad, not on Shabbat
         [Carl Sherer]
Time keeping methods (was: Coming Late to Shul)
         [Rachel Rosencrantz]
Tisha B'Av nigunim on Shabbos
         [Joshua Hoffman]
Unknown Kashrut Symbol
         [The Houminer Family]


From: Avi Feldblum <mljewish@...>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 13:23:30 EDT
Subject: Administrivia - Kashrut Symbol Questions

My thanks to Steve White for reminding me to post this to the list, and
I will add this to the rules on the Welcome message,

The list had a policy not to publish commentary on the reliability of
specific kashrut services. I will accept questions sent to the list, but
responses are viewed as private correspondence and should either go
directly to the poster, or if sent to me I will redirect to the poster.

Avi Feldblum
mail-jewish Moderator


From: Carl and Adina Sherer <sherer@...>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 08:00:25 +0300
Subject: "Treading Water" During Prayer

David Schiffman writes:

> My question is, let's say you've just said a word in the 'amidah' [the
> main silent prayer] that you think was incorrect, but you're not sure
> what the correct word should have been.
> for example, you might say:
> "Baruch ata adonai eloheinu melech ha olam, hamachazir"
> and then you realise that you are perhaps saying the wrong blessing.
> According to the idea that saying one word quickly after the 'mistaken'
> word means it's as if you hadn't said the 'mistaken' word, could you
> simply say this mistaken word (in the above case, 'hamachazir') to
> yourself again and again, until you work out what you should say next,
> thereby 'buying time' (treading water, so to speak) to work out what you
> should say - because if you were to stop altogether, you'd have to start
> again (unless I am mistaken), and then you'd have said a blessing in
> vain.

Of course the easy answer is CYLOP :-) 

This comes from the Sefer "Ishei Yisrael" which was published in 
Eretz Yisrael last year by R. Avraham Yeshaya Pappoifer (sp?), 32:26. 
English translation from yours truly, so all mistakes should be 
assumed to be mine.

"If one makes a mistake in one of the brachos of Shmoneh Esrei 
and ends the bracha improperly, for example, instead of saying Ha-
Kel HaKadosh he says Chonen HaDaath, or instead of Rofei Cholei 
Amo Yisrael he says Rofeh Chol Basar, even if he [otherwise] said 
the entire bracha properly, he must go back to the beginning of that 
bracha, and in the first three brachos he must go back to the 
beginning of davening, and in the last three brachos to Retzei, and 
so too in the Tfillos of Shabbos and Yom Tov.... And if he finished 
the tfilla and stepped back, he goes back to the beginning of 

In footnote 100, he says that he heard from R. Shlomo Zalman 
Auerbach zt"l that with respect to one who mistakenly said Rofeh 
Chol Basar instead of Rofei Cholei Amo Yisrael, if he adds Rofei 
Cholei Amo Yisrael *within toch kdei dibur* then he is yotzei (fulfills 
his obligation) because he is just adding praise. ("Toch kdei dibur," 
if I recall correctly, is defined by the Gemara in Brachos as the 
amount of time necessary to say, "Shalom alecha Rabbi u'Mori)." 

It sounds to me like if you are not sure that the ending of the 
bracha you are about to say is correct, then you have to go back to 
the beginning of the bracha after the last bracha you know you said 
correctly. I don't think saying "hamachazir" over and over again - 
treading water as you put it - is going to save you in such an 
instance, and it may even be a hefsek. But I am not a Rav (far from 
it) so CYLOP. Hope this at least frames the issues for you.

-- Carl Sherer
Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.


From: Akiva Miller <kgmiller@...>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 09:45:15 -0400
Subject: B'rachos not mentioned in the Gemara

Recently we have had some discussion about "She'asani Kir'tzono", and
other brachos which are said despite not being mentioned in the
Gemara. I think I heard somewhere that "Al Mitzvas Tzitzis", which is
said on a Tallis Katan, is also in this category. Can anyone confirm for
me whether or not this is true? And if it *is* true, then I would like
to know the reasons how such a bracha came about.

My guess is that prior to a certain point in history, a Tallis Gadol was
a normal style of clothing for Jews and non-Jews alike, similar to
bedouin sheets and greek togas. When styles changed, the Tallis Katan
was invented so that people could still do the mitzvah of Tzitzis all
day long. If the manner of wearing a Tallis Katan is considered "ituf"
(enwrapping) then the regular b'racha of "L'his'atef B'tzitzis" would be
appropriate, so my guess is that a Tallis Katan is *not* considered
"ituf". But if that is so, then how can the b'racha on the Tallis Gadol
suffice for the Tallis Katan as well?

Thank you
Akiva Miller

From: Avi Feldblum <mljewish@...>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 08:07:36 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: B'rachos not mentioned in the Gemara

On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, Ken G. Miller wrote:

> My guess is that prior to a certain point in history, a Tallis Gadol was a
> normal style of clothing for Jews and non-Jews alike, similar to bedouin
> sheets and greek togas. When styles changed, the Tallis Katan was invented
> so that people could still do the mitzvah of Tzitzis all day long. If the

For those that may want to answer this from a historical, halachik
perspective, I think I saw this first referred to in a Taz, which is
also the source for what we call a Yalmulka. As long as Tallis Gadol was
the "normal" style of clothing for all day long, there was no need for a
special head covering, it was done with the ituf (wrapping oneself) of
the Tallis Gadol. Once that started to be worn only for tefilla, there
was a need for a special headcovering. Looking forward to more exact
references and corrections from our esteemed membership.

Avi Feldblum
mail-jewish Moderator


From: Michael Rogovin <rogovin@...>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 21:12:50 -0400
Subject: Babies and Basar v'Chalav

I am curious how other parents handle the following issues of basar and
chalav with infants: (1) high chair trays (infants inevitably eat food
off the tray) (2) feeding milk following meat, (3) feeding milk in the
same meal context or even together with meat.  Obviously, I know that
the issur does not apply to the child, although there is also (I
believe) a concern about hana'ah to the parents. I wait into the 6th
hour, which is clearly not a practical holding to impose on an infant
who needs milk.  Thanks for any suggestions and/or framing of the
halachic issues involved.

Michael Rogovin


From: Yisrael Medad <isrmedia@...>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 14:39:10 +0300
Subject: Daughters of Israel & Stringency

 On a tangent related to the principle of "b'not yisrael gazru alayhen",
that the daughters of Israel took certain stringencies upon themselves,
one of the problems faced in resolving possible entrance into the areas
of the Temple Mount (Har Habyait) which should be permitted is: what to
do about women.
 There is a fairly simple solution for a woman old enough to have
experienced niddah blood but is married.  She must refrain from conjugal
rleations for a least three days and then go to the mikveh.
 But the custom of unmarried women is that they do not go to the mikveh.
 Rav Goren zt"l deliberated this matter.  Even though the easy way out
was to have the woman go to a mikveh too, as was practiced among Sefardi
women before Yom Kippur - and Rav Goren zt"l considered an ascent into
the Har Habayit as equal in importance to the observance of Yom Kippur -
because of the principle of "b'not yisrael gazru alayhen" he hadn't yet
resolved the matter fully before passing away almost 5 years ago.
 I spoke with him several times on this matter and although he tended to
the leniency, he was still unsure of an exact p'sak and wouldn't commit
his thoughts to paper.
 And this is the proper place to note that once again, at the special
minyan in the Rav Goren syngagogue which jutts into the airspace of
Temple Mount compound at Mincha for Tisha b'Av I was able to hear the
special formulation of the Shmoneh Esreh brachot (Baruch ata elokei
yirael min haolam ad haolam) and not answer amen but "baruch shem kvod
malchuto la'olam va'ed".
 Yisrael Medad


From: Mark Feldman <mfeldman@...>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 10:29:35 -0400
Subject: Music during the three weeks

Yitzchok Zirkind wrote:
>  Does anyone know the source for not listening to recorded music during
>  the three weeks? <snip>
See O"C 560:3, note the Loshon "V'chol Mashmiei Kol Shel Shir", and see 
Nosim there.

I am surprised at this citation.  This is the source never to listen to
music during the entire year, not specifically the three weeks.
Clearly, the majority of klal yisrael, which listens to music during the
year, has what to rely on (perhaps the Rama there, limiting the issur to
going to sleep and awaking to music and listening to it during banquets
as do princes).

The halachot for the 9 days/3 weeks are found in Shulchan Arukh O"C
551:2.  There, the halacha merely states that we do not make engagement
parties.  Presumably, this is related to the halacha that during the 12
months of mourning over one's parent, one may not participate in simchat
m'reut (a joyous gathering of friends).  Rav J.B. Soloveitchik said that
the 3 weeks (and for that matter, the days of sefirat ha'omer) are
comparable to the 12 month mourning period (see Nefesh Harav by Rav
Hershel Schachter).  I believe that he also said that one may listen to
recorded music during that time because that is not considered simchat
m'reut.  (OTOH, he opposed going to ballgames, because he felt that the
enjoyment comes from being in the crowd and therefore is one of simchat
m'reut.)  I have also heard in the name of Rav Lichtenstein that one may
listen to music on the radio while driving since this is not joyous,
just diversionary

Kol tuv,
Moshe Feldman


From: Carl Sherer <sherer@...>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 09:01:21 +0300
Subject: Nolad, not on Shabbat

David I. Cohen writes:

> I read the Rambam that R. hendel refers to in Vol28 # 93 much
> differently.  The Rambam is not saying that there's no muktzeh on
> Shabbat. (Otherwise throw out half of Masechet Shabbat). 

I would like to point out that we pasken like R. Shimon in Hilchos
Shabbos that there is in fact no muktzeh on Shabbos except in certain
specific instances, i.e. that all utensils may be carried on Shabbos for
"tzorech gufon" (for the utensils' own good or for a permitted purpose
on Shabbos) or "tzorech m'komom" (one needs their place) unless a
utensil is "muktzeh machmas chisaron kis" (a very expensive utensil
which one would not use other than for its intended purpose which
purpose is not permitted on Shabbos). See Shulchan Aruch OH 308:1.

I have of course grossly oversimplified the complicated laws of
Muktzeh. I merely wish to point out that Dr. Hendel's interpretation of
the Rambam (which was in Hilchos Yom Tov 1:17 for those who do not want
to pore through older issues to find the reference) is the generally
accepted interpretation.

-- Carl Sherer

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.


From: Rachel Rosencrantz <rachelr@...>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 23:44:34 -0400
Subject: Time keeping methods (was: Coming Late to Shul)

>From: Etan Diamond <ediamond@...>
> Second, the larger issue of
>timekeeping in pre-clock days is intriguing.  I have always wondered how
>they calculated halakhic hours in an era when one could only rely on the
>sun.  How did they know how long the period was from sunrise to sunset
>if they had no way to measure it accurately.  And besides, what did it
>mean to have a halakhic hour of, say, 64.32 minutes, when one had no
>real way of keeping track of that.  What does "one-third" of the day
>really mean if you don't know how long the day is going to be.  The only
>answer I can see is that you are always relying on YESTERDAY's length to
>calculate today.

I'll let my husband answer this one. He says:

There are a couple devices which can actually be very accurate,
especially if you are trying to calculate the local time. A sundial,
when properly calibrated is very accurate for local time. It doesn't
handle the division of the earth into timezones as well as clocks do
though. Another one is the astrolabe. We have one that is accurate to
within 4 minutes. The one we have is small though, only a couple inches
across. If you were serious about time keeping you would use one about
6-8 inches across and something to accurately "shoot" the angle of the
sun or a star and you would have the time quite precisely. The
astrolabe, btw, has the unequal hours as well as the equal hours marked
on it, so you can tell the time in either system. You can also calculate
the time of sunrise and sunset accurately for any day in the year for
any latitude. The astrolabe has been around a very long time, the
earliest records are from probably the Greeks using them in 225 BCE. The
Arabic mariners also used them. Before that sundials were used and were
also quite accurate. It isn't as clear when they were invented, but
there are some known to be made around 1500 BCE. So it is pretty clear
that you could expect that it would be possible for people to at least
know someone that knew about what time it was.


From: Joshua Hoffman <JoshHoff@...>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 10:51:18 EDT
Subject: Re: Tisha B'Av nigunim on Shabbos

In Boston one summer before Shabbos Chazon, I mentioned Rav Ahron
Soloveichek's ruling not to use Tisha B'Av nigunim on Shabbos to some
grandchildren of the Rov.They told him about it and he disagreed,saying
that the tuneof Eli Zion-and I presume he meant Eicha as well-is not
aveilus.  incidentally, if i remember correctly from my days in Rav
Ahron's yeshiva, his ruling came from his father R.Moshe.R.Ahron also
said in the name of R.Chaim that we are not, today, on a hifh enough
level to sit on the floor or dip our food in ashes at the seudah
mafsekes, and to do so would therefore be yuhera.


From: The Houminer Family <tirzah@...>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 16:23:50 +0300
Subject: Unknown Kashrut Symbol

can anyone help us ou?
we got a present, of a box of chocolates, from a company called "See's
little pops". It seems to originate from california, but was purchased in
Denver. The kashrut symbol is one that is new to us, it is made of a large
K and right next to it, on its right is a large D, the K is in bold print,
the D in regular print, and the left hand stroke of the K is rounded out to
form a half moon (can you understand what I am describing?) above the
symbol in small letters appears the legend rev 60498.
we, especially the kids, would appreciate the  help,
thanks, shabbat shalom,


End of Volume 29 Issue 21