Volume 32 Number 38
                 Produced: Thu Jun  1  6:22:49 US/Eastern 2000

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Circumcising non Jewish children
         [David Kaufmann]
Coca-Cola (2)
         [Chaim Wasserman, Keith Bloomfield]
Gated communities
         [Gershon Dubin]
Heter to Carry Key In Shoe (6)
         [Y. Askotzky, Alexander Heppenheimer, Gershon Dubin, Alan
Davidson, Janet Rosenbaum, Gershon Dubin]
Keys on Shabbat
         [Louise Miller]
Kiddush for a daughter as a segula for a good shiduch
         [Rose Landowne]
Kosher Vitamins
         [Robert A. Book]
Prenuptial Agreements
         [Dovid Oratz]
Question about Nusach
         [Paul Ginsburg]
'yihye' and tihye'
         [Perets Mett]


From: David Kaufmann <kaufmann@...>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 08:33:00 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Circumcising non Jewish children

>From: Elaine and Robert Sherer <ERSherer@...>
>    To me, this fraud perpetrated on the child himself as well as his
>parents is the worst of it. The current secretary of defense (Mr. Cohen)
>was also born to the non-Jewish wife of a Jew, and thought for the first
>twelve years of his life that he was Jewish and was accepted by the
>other Jewish kids in his home town in Maine as one of them. It was only
>when it came to planning a Bar Mitzvah (like his friends) that the local
>rabbi set him straight and told him he was not Jewish. It was a fraud on
>the boy, and a traumatic experience.  In the case described here, it is
>a fraud on the family and a chilul Hashem on the part of the mohel, who
>certainly knows better, even if the parents don't. I think any mohel who
>does such a thing should be boycotted by the Jewish community.

While working with college students, I have seen the trauma experienced
by the children of such fraud many times. In fact, this topic is central
to a book I co-wrote with Shoshana Zakar, _Judaism Online: Confronting
Spirituality on the Internet_, published by Jason Aronson. (The title
comes from the fact that the book was writtene entirely by email.)
Shoshana discovered there was a problem with her Conservative conversion
18 years - and two children - after the fact. I think even (especially)
non-Orthodox rabbis should read it. Every communal leader has the
responsibility to be honest and explain the consequences of a particular


From: Chaim Wasserman <Chaimwass@...>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 21:48:03 EDT
Subject: Re: Coca-Cola

<< Story has it that the rav, of Atlanta, was asked to give a heksher.
 This was arranged when the rav stipulated that he would never reveal the
 formula. >>

The man was Rav Tuvia Gefen, a astute talmid chacham and tzaddik, whom I had 
the pleasure of meeting in my travels on behalf of NCSY over four decades 
ago. One of his sefarim, which I received from his children, has the whole 
story in a teshuvah he wrote. 

chaim wasserman

From: Keith Bloomfield <KMBloom@...>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 13:13:09 EDT
Subject: Re: Coca-Cola

As a former Pepsi-Cola employee, I know that both Pepsi and Coke use
High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) as a sweetener.

In former years, they used Medium Invert Sugar (MIS) which many people
believe produces a better tasting beverage.  HFCS is less expensive to
use than MIS.  Of course HFCS is chametz -- so many bottlers who want to
produce a product that is "Kosher for Passover" revert to the use of the
more expensive MIS sweetener during the holiday.

So regardless of your preference, you might consider stocking up on your
beverage of choice during Pesach when MIS is again a part of their
otherwise "secret" formulas.

Keith Bloomfield
New York


From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 09:21:07 -0400
Subject: Gated communities

From: I. Caspi <icaspi@...>
<<1.  If the vast majority of the residents are non-Jews, what is the
     status of this property, which is completely enclosed behind an
     iron fence -- reshut ha-rabim, reshut ha-yachid or carmelit?>>

	The number of Jewish residents is irrelevant to the fence. The
fence renders the area a reshus hayachid, private domain, specifically a
chatzer she'einah me'ureves (a yard without an eruv).  If there is more
than one Jewish family, you need to make an eruv. If there are any
nonJews, you need to "rent" their rights in the common areas for
Shabbos.  I suggest asking your LOR for guidance.



From: Y. Askotzky <sofer@...>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 18:26:49 +0200
Subject: Heter to Carry Key In Shoe

<From: Shalom Krischer <shalom_krischer@...>
<Wait a minute, AFAIU a "shabbos belt" (one where the buckle has been
<"modified" to use a key instead of the usual clasp) is allowed ONLY
<because it too is a "non normal" way of carrying ("k'liacher yad"
<{literally "as if on the back of the hand" ie "non normal method of
<carrying"}), and as such, both methods "rely" on the same heter.

The heter for the belt has absolutely nothing to do with a shinui! The
key acts as an integral part of the belt and therefore it is considered
as clothing which we obviously know is permissible to wear on shabbos!
Its the same as the button on your shirt!

kol tuv,
Rabbi Yerachmiel Askotzky, certified sofer and examiner
<sofer@...>   www.stam.net   1-888-404-STAM(7826)

[Same response sent in by: David Charlap <shamino@...>, Janet
Rosenbaum <jerosenb@...>. Mod]

From: Alexander Heppenheimer <aheppenh@...>
Date: 29 May 2000 11:34:32 -0700
Subject: Re: Heter to Carry Key In Shoe

If that were the case, then you wouldn't need to "modify" the belt at
all - just hang the key on the belt, and that would be equally a
"non-normal way of carrying." The point is that, by making the key part
of the belt, you're not carrying it at all - you're wearing it, meaning
that it is governed by a different set of halachos (the belt has to be
performing some useful function, etc.). Whereas carrying a key in your
shoe is definitely not "wearing" it; it is carrying, albeit in an
unusual way. So these two methods rely on two quite different heterim.

Kol tuv y'all,

From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 09:26:55 -0400
Subject: Heter to Carry Key In Shoe


A non-normal way of carrying, kil'achar yad, is a ptur in Shabbos. This
means if you do it, you are not liable for the death penalty or to bring
a korban chatos (sin-offering).  It is not a heter (permission to do

The belt buckle is permitted because the key becomes thereby an item of
clothing.  The key must be PART of the functional part of the buckle,
not just stuck on there.  If it just stuck on, you would be correct and
it would only be a ptur due to being a non-normal way of carrying.


From: Alan Davidson <perzvi@...>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 21:54:22 -0400
Subject: Heter to Carry Key In Shoe

WIth a shabbos belt (either a conventional belt or a tzitzis belt like
those worn by some Chassidim), the belt does not and is unable to stay
on without the active intervention of keys -- the shoes stay on
regardless of whether keys are in them.

From: Janet Rosenbaum <jerosenb@...>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 10:27:50 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Heter to Carry Key In Shoe

Rachel Mestetsky <irises@...> writes:
> A few years (or maybe more than that :-) ago, after my very first car
> went to the junkyard, I took the door and ignition keys (I *am* dating
> myself!), and made a pair of earrings out of them.  Could I do something
> like this for my house keys and literally wear my earrings out?

This isn't different from the shabbat pins which are permitted by making
the keys serve the purpose of being decorative.


From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 09:22:42 -0400
Subject: Heter to Carry Key In Shoe

	Yes, certainly, if you would wear the earrings during the week
as well i.e., it is a bona fide piece of jewelry.



From: Louise Miller <daniel@...>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 19:58:16 -0700
Subject: Keys on Shabbat

I was given an ingenious idea by a friend who now lives in LA.  We keep
our keys in a real estate agent lock box, which we have permanently
attached to our doorknob.

The nice advantage is that we can give out the combination to guests who
arrive earlier than we do on Friday, etc.

Drives real estate agents nuts, because they can't figure out why our
house hasn't shown up on MLS yet.  (It's been around 6 years since we
put the box up.)

We bought ours at a key shop.



From: Rose Landowne <ROSELANDOW@...>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 10:14:22 EDT
Subject: Re: Kiddush for a daughter as a segula for a good shiduch

<< From: Aviva Fee <aviva613@...>
Someone told me that they heard of someone who went to a Rebbe and said
that their daughter was having a big problem finding a shidduch.  The
Rebbe asked if they ever made a kiddush for their daughter to which they
replied "no".
The Rebbe said that they should make a kiddush for their daughter and she 
will then have success n finding a shidduch.  To which they did.
Has anyone heard of that ma'sey?>>

Here's my question on that: Was the kiddush a "segula" in a mystical sort of 
way, or was it a way of publicizing the fact that the daughter was available 
for  shiduchim?  Either might have helped. 

Rose Landowne


From: Robert A. Book <rbook@...>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 03:02:41 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Kosher Vitamins

Yitz Weiss <YitzW@...> writes:
> Someone, sometime ago had inquired about vitamins available with kosher
> certification. One of the Nutrilite brand daily vitamins was recently
> certified by the Star-K (Nutirite is the largest manufacturer of branded
> vitamins worldwide - and IMHO, the best!).  If anyone was interested in
> more info please feel free to email me at <YitzW@...>

Thanks.  I was that someone.  Since most of the responses at the time
came to me instead of to mail-jewish, I should have summarized them a
long time ago.  Since I didn't, I'll correct that neglect now.

The basic question was, do vitamins have to be kosher?  I received
several answers, which generally fell into the following categories:

1) Of course they have to be kosher.  Everything you ingest has to be

2) Of course they don't have to be kosher.  Only things you "eat" have
   to be kosher, and swallowing a pill does not count halachically as

3) There are kosher Vitamins, why not use them anyway just to be safe?
   I was alerted to the existence of Freeda Vitamins (OU), which
   Norman Bander <Nbander@...> also mentioned in a recent posting.

There were a few interesting twists, of course.  On person mentioned
in support of (2) that since pills don't have a taste, they don't
count as "eating."  In addition, I received teh following amazing (to
me) tidbit from Israel Pickholtz (<p2o5rock@...>):

> Our Rav once said that the only way you can take vitamins on shabbat
> is by virtue of their being davka not medicine.  He brought Ritalin
> as another such example.

Now (a) I thought I didn't know what vitamins were -- now I don't even
know what medicine is!  (b) Does this mean they need to be kosher, and
(c) If Ritalin isn't medicine, what is it?  And what *IS* medicine?

Futhermore, every ruling of medicine on Shabbos I've ever heard has been
based on the melacha of grinding, since medicines used to have to be
ground right before being taken.  Since most medicines now do not have
to be ground -- and generally either should not be ground (tablets) or
cannot be ground (asthma inhalers!), wouldn't that prohibition generally
not apply now anyway?

(By the way, in case anyone was wondering what I did, I picked #3, of
course.  For those of you in Chicago, the Target on Howard Ave. has
Freeda Vitamins specially ordered by the Jewish pharmacist.)

--Robert Book    <rbook@...>
  University of Chicago


From: Dovid Oratz <dovid@...>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 21:06:26 +0200
Subject: Re: Prenuptial Agreements

In mail-jewish Vol. 32 #29 Alza Fishman wrote:
> The topic of the entire evening was prenuptial
> agreements.  Imagine!  An entire roomful of engaged couples talking
> about signing a document which basically provides for in case R"L the
> marriage that they are so looking forward to does not work out.  Now of
> course none of us were planning on divorcing, otherwise we wouldn't be
> marrying (one hopes!).  But one argument that was given for having a
> prenup was to protect those brides and grooms who were not as confident
> in the future marriages as we are of ours.

What an eloquent argument against prenuptial agreements!  Supposing one
of those other couples (knowing Aliza, I wish her only the best), so
sure of the suitability of their marriage, were subsequently R"L to
divorce. When faced with the prenuptial agreement, suppose the former
groom were to claim that when signing the agreement it was clear to all
that they were just signing for the sake of those of "others who were
not as confident of their future marriages," whereas he had been
confident that his would last. Could the agreement signed under those
circumstances be enforced according to Halachah? An agreement that is
signed with no thought of ever having to make good on it, is considered
an "asmachta" -- an obligation one does not expect to fulfill -- which
is not valid!

As to those in fact less confident, why would any Rabbi want to
encourage marriage under those circumstances? Maybe without the
"security" of a prenup the couple would wait until they were more
confident of their future -- or not get married!

Dovid Oratz


From: Paul Ginsburg <GinsburgP@...>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 08:12:50 -0400
Subject: Question about Nusach

I am researching Jewish life in the shtetl of Sudilkov, Ukraine
(Volhynia Guberniya - Khmelnitsky Oblast).  Sudilkov is famous because
of Rabbi Moshe Chaim Ephraim of Sudilkov, author of Degel Machaneh

In particular I am trying to discover what Nusach and Siddurim were used
by the community.

If you have any information on this question, or would happen to know a
source of information I might consult, please contact me.

Thank you in advance for your help.

Paul W. Ginsburg
Sudilkov Online Landsmanshaft
Bethesda, Maryland 


From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 12:16:31 +0100
Subject: 'yihye' and tihye'

Someone wrote recently, in an item correcting the grammar in the Kitsur:

>according to Gur and Even Shoshan. "Yihiye lo menorah" (139:5) instead
>of "tihiye lo menorah." Menorah is only F according to Gur and Even

What is all this tihiye and yihiye business?  The vowel under the hey is
a shvo (noch), so the words are 'yihye' and tihye'

Perets Mett


End of Volume 32 Issue 38