Volume 30 Number 61
                 Produced: Sun Jan  2 10:47:21 US/Eastern 2000

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

"Anonymous" Poskim
         [Daniel Israel]
Adnei Hasadeh
         [Eli Lansey]
Eating in a Supermarket
         [Chaim Shapiro]
Eli`ezer vs. Elozor
         [Perets Mett]
Eretz Hemdah
         [Rabbi Shmuel Jablon]
Hair covering
         [Janet Rosenbaum]
Mi Sheberach for Cholim (2)
         [Jeanette Friedman Sieradski, Neil Kummer]
         [Danny Schoemann]
Oral vs Quiet Prayer (4)
         [Gershon Dubin, Daniel Israel, Tara Cazaubon, Yisrael Medad]
Tearing toilet paper for shabbos
         [Tara Cazaubon]
Women not washing for Mayim Acharonim and German Jews
         [Sam Saal]


From: Daniel Israel <daniel@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:24:02 -0700 (MST)
Subject: Re: "Anonymous" Poskim

While I agree with most of Carl Singer's reservations about asking a
sheilah anonymously, I would suggest that many of the sheilos that are
asked over the internet anonymously are probably from people who would
otherwise not ask them at all, either because of the embarassing nature
of the question, or because the question does not have a Rov that he can
go to.  I suspect many of the questions are from non-frum people who
have little concept of the importance of asking sheilos.  Certainly it
can be abused, but for some people it is a huge improvement.

Daniel M. Israel
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ


From: Eli Lansey <elansey@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 22:57:30 -0500
Subject: Adnei Hasadeh

<<<Dov Teichman wrote: <<It seems from the Tiferes Yisroel and the
Yerushalmi that Adnei Hasadeh was more of a Sasquatch/Big Foot type of
creature. Tiferes Yisroel explains it as a "Waldmensch" or "Forest-man." 
Yerushalmi calls it a "Bar Nash DeTurah" or "Mountain Man."  I believe
the Gr"a also explains a posuk regarding the plague of Arov-Wild Animals
incorporating the Adnei Hasadeh.>>>

According to many peirushim (i.e. Rav m'Bartenura) the Adnei (or Adonei)
hasadeh were man like creatures. They most likely lived in, or worked
the fields (hence: Adnei/Adonei *Hasadeh*). The description of the Adnei
Hasadeh as a Sasquatch/Bigfoot type creature is probably accurate. I
only suggested Neanderthals because they fit both the description of
being similar in shape to man, except larger, and that according to the
anthropologists they were farmers.  Also, they were abundant in the
Middle East.

<<<Micha Berger wrote: >>According to Webster's the word "urangutan" is
from the Malay orang (man) + hutan (forest). Sounds much like the
expression adnei hasadeh (men of the field).>>>

Could very well be. Urangutans are in the grouping of homonoids , which
we (Homo sapiens sapiens), and Neanderthals (Homo sapiens
neanderthalensis), are in as well. Clearly the Adnei Hasadeh were/are
homoniods so unless someone has real proof it is just a guessing game as
to which particular species the Adnei Hasaseh were.

<<<Dov Teichman wrote: >>How do you know that the "Adnei Hasadeh" died

Being that I am not an anthropologist I can not make a statement based
on vast amounts of knowledge, but I, IMHO assume that most likely they
either died out or were killed by our species. I can't really think of
any other suggestion other than Darwin.

<<<Warren Burstien wrote: >>Why would the Mishnah contain a ruling
concerning an extinct species?>>>

Two possible answers. One, the Adnei Hasadeh weren't extict then, but
are now. Two, maybe I am mistaken and they are not Neanderthals (or
Neanderthals are not extinct??).

I will try to research this topic of "prehistoric primate and see if I
can get a more definite answer to the description of the Adnei Hasadeh.

Eli Lansey


From: Chaim Shapiro <Dagoobster@...>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 13:26:54 EST
Subject: Eating in a Supermarket

    Can one eat or drink from a product they intend to purchase at a
store before they actually pay for it?  Truth be told, before paying,
the product still belongs to the store.  Does the intent to purchase
allow its use prior to ownership?

Chaim Shapiro


From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 18:29:24 +0000
Subject: Re: Eli`ezer vs. Elozor

on 28/12/99 12:42 pm, Yosef Gilboa wrote:
> Why this confusion? I have no idea. One speculation that I have heard is
> that, in Yiddish, both names are abbreviated to Leizer and so the
> distinct spelling and pronunciation of the two names is lost.

This is not correct. The names for Eliezer and Elozor in Yiddish are
respectively Lyzer and Luzer (or Leyzer and Lozer if you are a litvak).
The distinction is certainly preserved. So whatever the source of the
confusion between the two names, Yiddish has nothing to do with it.

Perets Mett


From: Rabbi Shmuel Jablon <rabbij@...>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:14:24 -0800
Subject: Eretz Hemdah

Here's the link to Kollel Eretz Hemdah:

Home Page: http://www.eretzhemdah.org/default.htm
Ask Rabbi Page: http://www.eretzhemdah.org/askrabbi.htm

Rabbi Shmuel Jablon
Visit my new homepage!:  www.rabbijablon.com
Send an e-fax!: 810-314-2515

[Another link was submitted by A.J.Gilboa <bfgilboa@...>:
These appear to be two different sets of web pages, but both from the
same organization. 


From: Janet Rosenbaum <jerosenb@...>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:56:00 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Hair covering

Chaim Mateh <chaimm@...> writes:
> Single women not having to cover their hair is the basic Hallacha as
> explained in the Tur, Shulchan Aruch, and many other commentators and
> Poskim.  It's not brought down as a leniency but rather part of the main
> Hallacha.  I personally have never heard or seen written anything that
> equates a man's requirement for head covering with a woman's (single or
> married).  If anyone has, I'd be interested in the sources.

R. Ovadiah Yosef has a responsum which says that all women should cover
their heads for brachot, davening, etc., which is common practice in some 
Sephardic communities.  Also see SA Even HaEzer 21:2 and Rambam in Issurei 
Bi'ah 21:17, which say that all women should cover their hair.  

> <<Also, even if women are no longer required to cover their hair anymore
> because social standards have changed, >>
> Married women are _still_ required to cover their hair, 

To clarify, that's why I said "even if".  (As in, even if someone held that
a woman didn't have to cover her hair, why wouldn't she still have to cover 
her head when appropriate?)  Sorry if this wasn't clear.



From: Jeanette Friedman Sieradski <FriedmanJ@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:50:16 EST
Subject: Re: Mi Sheberach for Cholim

I am with Carl Sherrer on this one. Those tefilot for my son in law
three years ago may have saved his life. There are people who read the
mishbeyrach lists online or receive them from Aish and others who
actually take the time to memorize the names and make the mishebeyrachs
on Shabbos. I remember receiving an email from someone in Atlanta who
told me that he and the fellow up next were both making them for my son
in law. There is nothing wrong with that.  I do not understand why
someone would even think of complaining of such a practice.

Jeanette Friedman Sieradski

From: Neil Kummer <kef@...>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:13:29 +0200
Subject: Re: Mi Sheberach for Cholim

There was a double blind study conducted a few years back in a US
hospital regarding tfilla for holim.  Neither the doctors, nurses, nor
patients were aware which of the holim were being prayed for.  And the
results were dramatic.

Symptoms and death rate were dramatically reduced in the group that was
prayed for by individual name.  For details of this and related studies,
look up Larry Dossey, M.D..

Just as there is a trend in some shuls to increase the care, attention,
and time given to the holim there seems to be an equally large trend
towards effectively eliminating it. This past Shabbat I dovened in a
shul that asked everyone to think of their sick persons name.  The
Shabbat before..by the time I stood up it was over.  The Gabai said the
point was to eliminate indecorous crowding around the bima.

Prayer is also about pronouncing.  I welcome the move towards vocal and
focused prayer for sick people and worry about the the shuls that are
going away from it.

Neil Kummer


From: Danny Schoemann <dannys@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:11:06 +0200
Subject: Re: Negiah

In mail-jewish Vol. 30 #52 R' Eliyahu Shiffman <shiffman@...>
stated that ...  the extreme concern for secrecy surrounding a woman's
visit to the mikva is also an Ashkenazi-only phenomenon.

I have just finished reading a new Sefer "Darkei Tahara" by my former
Rosh HaKollel, Rav Y. Yona shlit"a. He's a Sefardi posek (but also
includes ashkenazi rulings in his sefer, and earmarks them as such.)

More than once he mentions the requirement for secrecy surrounding a
woman's visit to the mikva. It's apparently an accepted halacha for both
Sefardi and Ashkenazi.

Danny Schoemann


From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 10:19:09 -0500
Subject: Oral vs Quiet Prayer

> From: Yeshaya Halevi <CHIHAL@...>
<<Doesn't the language "Hashem open my lips, and let my mouth tell your
praises"  automatically indicate oral prayer (i.e. spoken out loud?>>

	The proper way to say the Shemoneh Esre is to vocalize the
words, loud enough for you to hear yourself, but not loud enough for
someone else to hear.


From: Daniel Israel <daniel@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:05:24 -0700 (MST)
Subject: Re: Oral vs Quiet Prayer

Ad'raba, we are required to say our praryers out loud.  In fact, if one
does not actually vocalize the words, I think he is not yotzei (AFAIR).
The restiction is that one must say them quietly enough that others do
not hear.  I would assume that this is for two reasons, (1) not to
disturb the kevannah of others, and (2) so as not to be embarrassed by
hearing each others private prayers.  (The latter especially relevant
for vidui if one is careful to mention things not listed in the standard

Daniel M. Israel
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ

From: Tara Cazaubon <cazaubon@...>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 14:50:20 -0800
Subject: Oral vs Quiet Prayer

My Artscroll siddur cites the following instructions regarding the Amidah:

"Recite it with quiet devotion and without any interruption, verbal or
otherwise.  Although it should not be audible to others, one must pray
loudly enough to hear himself. "

So it is not a silent prayer, just a quiet one.  The "silent amidah" is a

Kol tuv,

From: Yisrael Medad <yisraelm@...>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 19:39:26 +0200
Subject: Oral vs Quiet Prayer

Rambam, Sefer Ahava, Hilchot T'fila, Chap. 5, Para. 9: (explaining the
term "hashvayat hakol" - which Rav Mordechai Rabinowitz translated for
me as "tone moderation" or "voice control") writes: "Voice control -
how? he shall not raise his voice but neither pray only in his heart but
clippingly pronounce the words with his lips and have his ears hear in a
whisper.  He should not have his voice be loudly heard...but if in
public, his voice shouldn't be heard so as to be bothersome" (My
translation - YM).

So, actually, there is no "silent" prayer but a very, very quiet one.

[Second submission received and combined. Mod.]

Further to my previous posting, I reviewed the issue some more
and wish to note the following points for a fuller discussion:
a)  is it/why is it permitted to say the verse "Hashem open my lips" when
one is supposed to put the Geula Blessing together with the Amidah
without interruption?
b)  if one forgot the verse, do you repeat?
c)  what about people who say out loud special additions
such as "yaaleh v'yavo", et al.? permitted? frowned upon? custom?
d)  the Mateh Efrayim notes that if on Rosh Hashana & Yom Kippur
one hears his next-seat neighbor saying a Amidah blessing out loud,
he should respond with an Amen even in his own Amidah.
e)  and last but not least, it is not a Silent Amidah but "T'fila b'lachash",
a whispered prayer?
Yisrael Medad


From: Tara Cazaubon <cazaubon@...>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 12:46:20 -0800
Subject: Tearing toilet paper for shabbos

I was told by a Chabadnik that it is NOT assur to tear off toilet paper
on shabbos, but I keep seeing other people referencing this practice.

What are the Halachic issues and perspective on this practice?


From: Sam Saal <saal@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:23:09 -0500 (EST)
Subject: re: Women not washing for Mayim Acharonim and German Jews

Rachel Smith <rachelms@...> posted:

>I've heard the same reason given why German Jews don't wash mayim
>acharonim - Chas V'Shalom (Heaven forbid) that a proper German would
>eat with his fingers!

I thought that before the fork made it to Europe, people slurped soup and
cut things with knifes, but otherwise used their hands to eat. Is there
any evidence that Jews got forks before the rest of Europe?

Sam Saal      <saal@...>
Vayiphtach HaShem et Pea haAtone
(<saal@...> also works)


End of Volume 30 Issue 61