Volume 30 Number 89
Produced: Fri Jan 14 5:46:05 US/Eastern 2000
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Adnei Hasadeh
[Cheryl Maryles]
Eating in Stores Before Paying (4)
[Chaim Shapiro, Sam Gamoran, Z'ev Scherman, Ellen Krischer]
Eruvin
[Zev Sero]
Kissing of Tzitzit
[Yisrael Medad]
Mechalel Shabbos in a Minyan
[Bill Bernstein]
Mishabeirach for the ill
[Bernard Merzel]
Mishebayrachs FROM women
[Carl Singer]
Reading Recommendations: Herman Wouk
[Freda B Birnbaum]
Sephardic pronunciation
[Ari Z. Zivotofsky]
Special Education
[Rivka Finkelstein]
Tahara
[Anonymous]
Tearing Toilet Paper for Shabbos
[Carl M. Sherer]
Welcoming guests
[Rabbi Mitchell Ackerson]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Cheryl Maryles <C-Maryles@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 12:52:16 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: Adnei Hasadeh
> As I recall the mishna in Kilaim that talks about Adnei Hasadeh is
> discussing the permissibility of mating an anmal with it, and whether it
> is a violation of the prohibition against interbreeding species. It
> would seem far-fetched to say the mishna was discussing this in regard
> to extinct Neanderthal man. Why would the laws of interbreeding
> exctinct species be relevant to the mishna?
> Dov Teichman
You recall incorrectly, the mishna kilayim 8:5 is talking about tumah,
the previous mishna was talking about breeding, however the rest of this
particular mishna is talking about tumah
> But what about the first part of the Mishnah which rules that this
> species is a "chaya"? What halachic consequences are there of a bone
> coming from a "chaya" as opposed to some other sort of creature?
very simple, a chaya's bone isn't tamei in an ohel the tanna kamma who
says chaya is opposed to R. Yosi who says man--the whole issue can be
explained to refer to tumas ohel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Chaim Shapiro <Dagoobster@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 13:44:06 EST
Subject: Eating in Stores Before Paying
Joseph Geretz says, <<I don't assume that the owners have intention to
grant ownership to the customer, until the customer purchase pays for
it. (At most, the placing of an item in your cart gives the customer a
precedence, over other customers, to subsequently purchase that item.)>>
I must at this point ask, couldn't that precedence also give you the
right to begin eating from it?
As an aside, my original question was not regarding food which is paid
for by weight e.g. bulk candy of fruit. Eating in that case would
certainly reduce the amount of food you are paying for. I still wonder
about soda or wrapped candy whose purchase price does not decrease
because it is eaten from by the purchaser.
Chaim Shapiro
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sam Gamoran <gamoran@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 16:55:25 +0200
Subject: Eating in Stores Before Paying
I'm in Fort Worth Texas this week visiting Motorola stateside. I just
went into a supermarket where the shopping cart has a red bottle/cup
holder on the side that says on it "Enjoy a Coke now - pay at the
checkout". Under this circumstance, I cannot see why it wouldn't be
permitted to drink in the store.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Z'ev Scherman <zscherman@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 23:05:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Eating in Stores Before Paying
I'll not discuss the Halachic aspects (though think about Dina
D'Malchusa Dina), but it is ILLEGAL to open the package and eat from the
store's goods before paying for it. It is technically shoplifting.
[However, the stores are generally not makpid as long as it gets paid
for later.]
Z'ev Scherman
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ellen Krischer <krischer@...>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 14:21:59 -0500
Subject: RE: Eating in Stores Before Paying
> And even if one "grazes" from a package which he/she intends to buy,
> as long as it has not been bought - and hence still belongs to the
> store - isn't that Gezel at that time as well?
A little reality check to go with this thread:
I have never gotten anything less than sympathetic looks and
help when I have opened packages of cookies/crackers to feed hungry
children who have been walked up and down endless aisles or have been
waiting on line too long at the supermarket. Checkout cashiers are
always helpful to carefully scan and pack up the open packages so than
none of the contents spilled. Never has any employee suggested that I
should have done anything other than what I did - let alone that I did
something offensive to the store.
(As for my intentions for kinyan (acquiring) - once I open a
package, I don't care if I change my mind about wanting it in the first
place - I'm buying it no matter what.)
Ellen Krischer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Zev Sero <Zev@...>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 23:09:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Eruvin
Mendy Chitrik <MChitrik@...> wrote:
>It is interesting to note that the Lubavitcher Rebbe Zi"a, did not agree
>to put up an Eiruv in the Crown Heights neighborhood, so that the
>children would grow up knowing that on Shabbat they should not carry, so
>that when they go elsewhere when there is no Eiruv they would know not
>to carry. Furthermore he suggested that people should put up an Eiruv,
>but they should not publicize that fact, so the Eiruv will serve only to
>help out the people who mistakingly carried out of their home so that
>they will not be "nichshal" in Chilul Shabat!.
The problem with this argument is that the Shulchan Aruch already
provides for it. A city that erects an eruv is required to leave one
section (a `shiyur') out of the eruv for precisely this reason: so that
the prohibition on carrying outside an eruv not be forgotten. Small
towns, however, are exempt from this requirement, because the limits of
the eruv are in any case going to be small enough to accomplish this
goal. IOW, this is not a new problem that needs a new solution, it's an
age-old problem, and the solution that the halacha already provides
ought IMHO to be enough for us. Of course, the implication is that the
shiyur ought not to be so far away that the average member of the frum
community is unlikely ever to cross it, and a child is likely to grow up
without ever being aware that it's there, and therefore that some of the
very large eruvin that are constructed in various cities ought to be
shrunk, or divided into two eruvin, each of which can serve as the
shiyur for the other.
Zev Sero Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day;
<zsero@...> set him on fire and he'll be warm for the
rest of his life. - Ankh-Morpork proverb
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael Medad <isrmedia@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 00:45:02 +0200
Subject: Kissing of Tzitzit
Yosef Gilboa wrote:
>I think we are on non-intersecting paths.
probably.
>While you are referring to "hefseq", in the sense of "digression", I am
>referring to "pisuq" in the sense of punctuation and phrasing.
you were talking about losing one's kavanah - concentration. i was just
trying to point out that many actions are permitted in terms of stopping
reading that would indicate that the kissing of the tzitzit (and I am
neither promoting or denigrating the custom) is the least of your
problems.
>About hefseq, are you saying that any of the posqim that you
>quoted actually recommend purposeful interruption of qri'at shma`?
no. but the breaks and actions are permitted nevertheless.
>It certainly seems more likely that they are referring to situations
>arising that are beyond our control.
maybe but then again, if one holds to strong customs, then kissing the
tzitzit would be out of one's control anyway - like touching the head
and arm t'fillin and kissing them, no?
Yisrael
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bill Bernstein <bbernst@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 10:15:30 -0600
Subject: Mechalel Shabbos in a Minyan
I hope we are approaching the end of this discussion. To further that:
I have found in the recent sefer, Minchat Shmuel (by Rav S. Khoshkerman
shlita of Atlanta), a listing fo those who permit and those who forbid
this practice Among those permitting are: Melamed L'Hoyil, Igros Moshe,
and Rav Henkin zt'l. On the other side he also brings the Lev Avrohom,
who rules that even though they are considered as "tinok shenishba"
(captive children) they cannot be counted since they are unbelieving
scoffers and therefore mumarim and cannot be counted.
BTW, I highly commend this sefer which brings many relevant issues and
piskei halakha connected with them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bernard Merzel <BoJoM@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 11:27:55 EST
Subject: Re: Mishabeirach for the ill
Mordechai, in Vol 30 #82 wrtites:
<<Granted that a case could presumably be made that it is better to
mention a sick person specifically, by name >>
Please note the gemara in Berachos 34a: >R. Yaakov says in the name of
R. Hisda: If one seeks mercy for his (sick) friend, he need not mention
his name, since Moshe (when praying for hs sick sister) simply said:
"Kel na, r'fa na la" i.e. "O G*d, please heal her " and never mentioned
Miriam by name.<
Just before this passage the talmud cites R. Eliezer's referrall to this
very concise prayer of Moshe as an exemplar of brevity, and not, in the
least, diminshing its efficacy (after all, the request was immediately
granted)
This entire dicussion of Mishabeirach seems rather typical to me of
today's tendency in the Jewish world of building mountains out of
molehills. What makes a prayer rattled off by a (sometimes) not very
thoughtful or learned gabbi any more effacious than one's personal
sincere (and yes, brief) prayer for friend or loved one?
The custom of lengthy and communal Mishebeirach for the ill is a very
new one and may even bring about a serious "sh'elah" of "tirchah
d'tzibbur" ie. testing the patience of the congregants by making what
is often an already lengthy service even longer. Time to get back to
basics and leave the molehills be.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <CARLSINGER@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 21:12:17 EST
Subject: Re: Mishebayrachs FROM women
This may be more a question of logistics and decorum than halacha -- I
was wondering how various shules deal with providing a means for women
to provide names for the "public" mishebayrach for Cholim. I've seen
everything from women going to a spot (say an end of the mechitzah),
where a gabbai relayed their names to whoever is making the
mishibayrach, to various whispering or yelling of names over the
mechitzah (usually a function of distance)
Carl Singer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Freda B Birnbaum <fbb6@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 09:42:51 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Reading Recommendations: Herman Wouk
A bit belated...
> << Wouk, Herman, This is my god
> Standard and informative, but not life-changing. >>
> I have met more than a few people for whom this book has indeed proved
> life-changing.
Some years ago, I asked Rabbi Saul Berman for some books to recommend to
a serious, intelligent adult who had expressed some interested in
returning to Judaism. MUCH to my surprise, he enthusuastically
recommended Wouk's _This Is My God_. IIRC, the person for whom it was
recommended did get some benefit out of it.
Freda Birnbaum, <fbb6@...>
"Call on God, but row away from the rocks"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ari Z. Zivotofsky <azz@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 09:44:33 -0500
Subject: Sephardic pronunciation
I am interested in both the historical development of the various
pronunciations of Hebrew as well as the halachik ramifications. I find
it perplexing that despite the fact that most of the early settlers of
modern Israel were Ashkenazim, the Sephardik pronunciation became the
dominant one. Does anyone know how this came about? Is anyone familiar
with scholarly research (as opposed to halachik) that discusses how and
when the various pronunciations of Hebrew developed and which are more
"authentic"? Thanks.
Ari
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rivka Finkelstein <ac672@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 22:07:33 -0500
Subject: Special Education
In my city, we are trying to set up a special education program among 3
day elementary schools and 3 day high schools. Does anyone have any
experience in setting up such a program. No one school can afford to do
it on it's own.
Thanks for your help
Rivka Finkelstein
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Anonymous
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 00:24:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Tahara
If the ring still won't come off, the Chapel should have a ring cutter.
Anonymous#2
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl M. Sherer <cmsherer@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 22:20:24 +0200
Subject: Tearing Toilet Paper for Shabbos
Tara Cazaubon writes:
> 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?
I once heard from R. Moshe Tendler shlita that if one finds oneself in a
bathroom without any pre-torn toilet paper on Shabbos, one is allowed to
tear it because of kavod habriyos (human dignity). Nevertheless, one
should attempt to tear the toilet paper with a shinui (change from how
one would normally tear it).
AFAIK the issue involved is tearing on Shabbos, which is a mekalkel
(non-constructive act). Therefore, although there is no Torah
prohibition, I believe there is a Rabbinic one.
Carl M. Sherer
mailto:<cmsherer@...> - mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il
Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son, Baruch Yosef ben
Adina Batya among the sick of Israel. Thank you very much.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rabbi Mitchell Ackerson <Mackerso@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 11:54:55 -0500
Subject: Welcoming guests
As a fellow traveler around the globe mostly compliments of Uncle Sam
and the US Army I can tell you that much of the welcome recieved is
directly related to the opinions of the Rav of the schul. I have had
Rabbonim ask me to leave and not return in uniform because to them it is
a biziyon and their congragations have followed suit by issueing no
invitations to visiting miliary personnel and where the Rav is clearing
supportive so too is the congregation. I also find the smaller the
community the warmer it welcomes and being a BT congregation or not has
little to do with it. Particular accolades go to Memphis, Cherry Hill,
Woodside synagogue in Silver Spring, and Indianapolis which are all
notable since they are not "military " towns.
Rabbi Mitchell Ackerson
Baltimore, MD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 30 Issue 89
