Volume 31 Number 04
Produced: Wed Jan 19 5:40:02 US/Eastern 2000
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
10 Tevet trumps Shabbos?
[Art Werschulz]
Adnei Hasadeh (2)
[Mike Gerver, Eli Lansey]
Collect Calls
[Yisrael Medad]
Counting Women for a Minyan
[Gitelle Rapoport]
Eating in a Supermarket
[Janet Rosenbaum]
Feminism/Politicisation
[Alexis Rosoff]
Freedom to Profession and Marriage
[Russell Hendel]
Motsa'e Shabbat
[A.J.Gilboa]
Pidyon Shvuyim
[Daniel Israel]
Pollard and Pidyun Shuvuyim
[David Ziants]
Shidduchim (was Kollel)
[Carl M. Sherer]
State of Israel Bonds
[George Fairdshmecker]
Trop marks and stressed syllables
[Bernard Horowitz]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Art Werschulz <agw@...>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 10:22:05 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: 10 Tevet trumps Shabbos?
Freda B Birnbaum <fbb6@...> said:
> Jonathan Baker notes recently, in his .sig file:
>> Calendar curiosity: 10 Tevet can't fall on Shabat, but if it did, it
>> trumps Shabat.
> Ummmm, as Mr. Spock might say, "Interesting...."
> As they might say in my neighborhood, "Say what?!"
> Could you explain how that comes to be?
Actually, Mr. Spock would be more likely to say, "Fascinating ...". :-)
Rabbi S. Y. Zevin's "The Festivals in Halacha", vol. 2, pg. 217,
mentions a qualification (originated by Abudraham, cited by the Beit
Yosef) of the rule that if any of the fasts of mouring were to fall on
Shabbat, then it would be nidcheh [pushed back to Sunday].
The point here is that Ezekiel 24:2 uses the phrase "b'etzem hayom
hazeh" [this very day] in discussing the fast of 10 Tevet. This same
phrase is used of Yom Kippur (Leviticus 23:28). The point here is just
as YK must fall on its designated day, so must 10 Tevet, even if it were
to fall out on Shabbat.
Note, however, that the Jewish calendar is set up so that 10 Tevet can
never fall out on Shabbat. I have seen it occasionally fall out on
Friday, however. (If I remember correctly, of all the days that 10
Tevet can occur, Friday is the one that is least often.) The last time
this happened was when it fell out on Friday 20 December 1996; the next
time will be when it hits Friday 17 December 2010.
Art Werschulz (8-{)} "Metaphors be with you." -- bumper sticker
GCS/M (GAT): d? -p+ c++ l u+(-) e--- m* s n+ h f g+ w+ t++ r- y?
Internet: <agw@...><a href="http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~agw/">WWW</a>
ATTnet: Columbia U. (212) 939-7061, Fordham U. (212) 636-6325
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mike Gerver <MJGerver@...>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 12:14:31 EST
Subject: Adnei Hasadeh
Dov Teichman says (v30n82)
> It would seem far-fetched to say the mishna was discussing this in regard
> to extinct Neanderthal man.
It is indeed far-fetched, not because it is of no practical importance
(that never stopped the mishnayot from discussing a question), but
because Neanderthal fossils were not known until 150 years ago, long
after this mishna was written. The only way the "Adnei Hasadeh" could
have been Neanderthals is if there were still a few living Neanderthals
(or some other hominid species) hiding out in the woods 2000 years ago.
In other words, if Bigfoot, the Abominable Snowman, et al, are real.
While I would love to think this is true (Kilayim meets the National
Enquirer?), it seems far more plausible that the mishna is referring to
some species of great ape, as Warren Burstein recently suggested
(v30n95).
Mike Gerver
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eli Lansey <elansey@...>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 20:53:51 -0500
Subject: Adnei Hasadeh
Warren Burstein wrote:
> But what reason is there to think that Adnei Hasadeh are Neanderthals,
> rather than a variety of monkey or ape?
None. There are enough opinions to think either way. I originally had
not read the peirushim saying that they were a monkey type, rather the
descriptions of a creature similar to man, both in appearances and tumah
levels. I thought that maybe they were Neanderthals (if you look back at
the original issue [V30#46] I had a question mark next the suggestion of
Neanderthals). But the other possibilities mentioned in recent postings
shed light on other species which need to be viewed as definite
possibilities.
Eli Lansey
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael Medad <isrmedia@...>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 06:04:31 +0200
Subject: Collect Calls
Yeshaya Halevi <CHIHAL@...>writes:
>Back in the 50s and early 60s,...Many people -- including very
>Orthodox, yeshiva types (adults, not just kids), would take the fraud a
>further step. They would have the operator call a number and ask, for
>instance, "May I speak to Mr. Nisht Kreink?", thus informing their
>family that a certain relative had recovered from an illness.
At the Beit Medrash of Chofetz Chayim Yeshiva in Forest Hills, it was
customary to ask for "Alice Goot" as the confirming statement to ones
parents that All Was Well.
Yisrael Medad (Winkelman),
Yeshiva Preparatory High School [Chofetz Chayim] 1960-64
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gitelle Rapoport <giteller@...>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 14:04:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Counting Women for a Minyan
Re Jay Shachter's post on counting women in a minyan: While the general
concept of minyan may be Scriptural, the precise definition of a minyan
for public prayer is rabbinic (the Scriptural basis of the ten spies may
be considered an asmachta, or biblical "support," for the law as
established by the rabbis). A fascinating discussion of counting women
for a minyan for various purposes can be found in Aryeh Frimer's article
"Women and Minyan" in the Summer 1988 issue of Tradition, pp. 54-77.
G. Rapoport
[The above mentioned article, as well as a longer 1998 article from
Aryeh will be up on our web site by the weekend. Expect to see an
Administrivia announcing it. Thanks to Aryeh for sending me the articles
and permission to post them. Mod]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Janet Rosenbaum <jerosenb@...>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 19:30:22 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Eating in a Supermarket
Josh Backon <BACKON@...> writes:
> I suggest that simply picking up the item in the supermarket is *not* a
> kinyan. Only paying for the item at the supermarket checkout counter
> would be the acceptable kinyan "situmta" since only this method is the
> law of the land and binding.
If someone takes something out of another person's cart and buys it,
have they done anything wrong?
Janet
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Alexis Rosoff <alexis@...>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 19:48:18 -0500
Subject: Feminism/Politicisation
|> not recite Birkat Hagomel at all nowadays. Even though the codes of law
|> clearly state that women are not only permitted, but also obliged, to
|> recite this benediction, such people would argue that in modern society
|> such a public act on the part of a woman would be taken as a political
|> statement and would strengthen the feminist movement, an undesirable
|> consequence
Hmmm. Although I don't worship in an Orthodox shul (which is another
story...) this story, and the atttude it reveals, is troubling. Although
I am a feminist, I don't think equal means identical and I think the
progressive movements have often emphasised surface equality over true
equality. To give an example, the fuss over giving women smicha is
primarily a symbolic one. It would be much more meaningful if time and
energy had been spent on expanding Torah study for women. A few hundred
women acting as congregational leaders is, to me, far less influential
than a well-educated laity. Z
Alexis Rosoff ---=--- http://www.mono.org/~alexis ---=--- Long Island, NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell Hendel <rhendel@...>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 18:15:48 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Freedom to Profession and Marriage
I was shocked (but not surprised) by Rivkah Tuttle's remarks in v30n91
concerning pressures of Bais Yaakov education to mold students in only
certain professions and certain dating patterns. Several non-halachik
points should be made
* Rav Hirsch severely criticizes the Patriarch Yitzchak for trying to
make both Esauv and Yaakov into Kollelnicks. Esauv was an outdoorsman.
He loved to hunt and camp. Yitzchak alienated him by not allowing Esauv
to hunt and camp in a torhadich manner.
By contrast the Patriarch Jacob, clearly blesses EACH of his children
with that profession that they are good at (Gen 49). The famous
partnership of the Learners of Yissachar and the sea-farers of Zevulun
is but one example
* Num 36 is an ENTIRE Biblical chapter devoted to the statement that
women aren't pawns in an economic game. We are told that even when they
have restrictions they "should marry someone who is good in there eyes"
The message is clear---we should be free to date whom we want and marry
whom we want. Rivkah herself pointed out that I am not asking for a
radical change....introducing some COPE type computer programs in Bais
Yaakov would INCREASE the amount of learning these devoted young ladies
could enable their husbands with.
Finally Rivkah spoke about the hypocrosy and alienation. I would be very
interested in statisitics on how many people we are losing (to either
frumkeit or Judaism) because of these Bais Yaakov Policies.
I really think a topic like this ("Advice of Bais Yaakov teachers on
marriage and work) is the type of thread that should occupy mail jewish
for 10-30 issues.
Russell Hendel; Phd ASA; Math Towson Univ;
Moderator Rashi is Simple
Http://www.shamash.org/rashi/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: A.J.Gilboa <bfgilboa@...>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 14:56:29 -0800
Subject: Re: Motsa'e Shabbat
> Relative to Gershon's question about motzoei shabbos, whether it is used
> to mean the entire day of Sunday:
Another comment - Likewise, "`erev shabbat" is used to mean the whole
day of Friday, as opposed to "lel shabbat" which is specific to Fri.
night.
Yosef Gilboa
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Daniel Israel <daniel@...>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:27:24 -0700 (MST)
Subject: Re: Pidyon Shvuyim
As far as the Pollard case, specifically (and without getting into my
personal opinion) people should remeber that this is not simply a case
of a Jew caught doing something illegal. There is clear evidence that
(in a large part due to the influence of Casper Weinberger) Pollard was
given a particularly harsh sentence considering what the situation was.
AFAIK, halacha does recognize the distinction between doing something
that will cause someone to be justly punished, and something that will
cause unjustified levels of harm. (This is certainly the case
w.r.t. LH.)
Daniel M. Israel
<daniel@...>
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Ziants <davidz@...>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 16:22:09 +0200
Subject: Re: Pollard and Pidyun Shuvuyim
In a recent posting, Chaim Shapiro <Dagoobster@...> seems to compare
the Pollard case with Jews who are rightfully in jail for committing
crimes.
I could not properly understand his comparison, as this posting did not
seem to show an understanding of what the Pollard case is about.
May I suggest a visit to the Justice for Jonathan Pollard home page:
http://www.jonathanpollard.org/
and especially go to the link:
http://www.jonathanpollard.org/facts.htm
which will demonstrate that there is an obvious case of pidyun sh'vuyim,
to release a Jew who is in jail because his "crimes" were that of
helping the State of Israel and the Jewish People. He never received a
proper trial, and moreover, the 14+ years he has served are completely
in disproportion to the specific American law that he broke (and showed
remorse).
David Ziants
<davidz@...>
Ma'aleh Adumim, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl M. Sherer <cmsherer@...>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 14:49:59 +0200
Subject: Shidduchim (was Kollel)
Stuart Wise asks:
> Likewise, the joke was that
> anyone who wanted an advantageous shidduch merely had to plunk himself
> down in Lakewood Yeshiva, and would find that shidduch sooner than
> later. (I understand that the practice in recent years is that bochurim
> at Lakewood are forbidden to date for the first few months they're
> there; can anyone confirm that?).
I think it's a lot longer than "recent years." From what I understand
(going back to my days as a baalebus in Passaic, when bochrim often left
the Yeshiva there to go to Lakewood to get married), a bochur is not
allowed to date until the end of his first zman (semester) in Lakewood
(Elul zman (the semester from the first of Elul through Yom Kippur) not
included). There may be an exception for bochrim who are dating someone
before they arrive in Lakewood; I don't know anyone who was in that
situation.
Carl M. Sherer
mailto:<cmsherer@...> or 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: George Fairdshmecker <george.fairdshmecker@...>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:08:10 -0500
Subject: Re: State of Israel Bonds
In all the discussion of this topic, nobody has made the case for
giving. What is the (charity / tzedaka based)reason one should buy
Israel Bonds today? What is it that is being supported by those dollars
that qualifies as a charitable donation comparable to supporting torah,
servicing the needy, etc.
George Fairdshmecker
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bernard Horowitz <horowitz@...>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 00:44:20 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Trop marks and stressed syllables
Here is a question I have often wondered about. With the exception of
five trop symbols (Pashta, zarka, segol, tlisha ktana and tlisha gdola),
the location of the trop tells us which syllable is the stressed
syllable. Of the five exceptions noted above all but the tlisha gdola
are always located above the last letter of the word. The gdola is
always located above the first letter of the word. These placements are
(to the best of my knowledge) without exception, regardless of which
syllable is the proper stressed one. In all texts that I have ever
seen, a second, 'pseudo-pashta' is printed when the stressed syllable is
other than the last syllable. Many recent texts do the same for the
other four - a great help for ba-alei kriah.
My question is, why are these five different in this regard? Is there a
reason that these alone cannot be relied on for determining the proper
pronunciation of the word?
Bernard Horowitz
<horowitz@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 31 Issue 4
