Volume 32 Number 95
                 Produced: Sun Jul 16 11:30:10 US/Eastern 2000

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Cholent Shailah (3)
         [Chaim Shapiro, Isaac A Zlochower, Daniel Katsman]
Is there a mitzvoh to be happy always? (2)
         [Zev Sero, Mordechai]
         [David Charlap]
         [Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes]
Shabbat candles
         [David Cohen]
Shabbat Somewhere Else
         [Eli Turkel]
Shabbos Belts
         [Russell Hendel]
Source for Quote on Simcha
Turning on lights on Yom Tov
         [Michael Feldstein]
What is Modern
         [Yisrael Medad]
Information Request: Jewish sites in Prague
         [Daniel Mehlman]


From: Chaim Shapiro <Dagoobster@...>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 14:15:16 EDT
Subject: Cholent Shailah

Rabbi Ari Kahn writes,
<<  Therefore: if Chaim loves his chulent there is not much to talk about -
 it is his oneg shabbat and allowed. This is even if the stirring
 constitutes a violation of a Torah law, if the stirring is in violation
 of a Rabbinic law again the Chulent is allowed, even for the stirrer.>>

There is no doubt that I love my cholent :-) Following this theme, we
had an interesting Shailah when I was in Yeshiva regarding the cholent.
It seems the fire went out under the cholent pot (Oh those horrible pre
crock pot dark ages) One of the high school students asked the non
Jewish worker at Yeshiva to relight the fire under the cholent.  Someone
found out, and the question was what to do with the cholent.  Some
thought that it is an issue of tirche dtzibura (a bother for a large
population of people) The Rosh Yeshiva paskened that in essence, cholent
is an individual thing.  The Tzibur (community) does not eat the cholent
together, it is an individual act, each person for his own pleasure.
The cholent was served Saturday night 3 hours after Shabbas (enough time
to cook it fully).  Yes, we were sad that we had no Shabbas cholent, but
hey, we learned that cholent is a good meal for Saturday night!

Chaim Shapiro

From: Isaac A Zlochower <zlochoia@...>
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 01:11:21 -0400
Subject: Cholent Shailah

I believe that Rabbi Kahn and others have adequately covered the
halachic aspects of mistakenly stirring or adding to a cholent on
shabbat.  I only wish to add an anecdotal actual pesak that was related
to me by a kollel friend.

When he started kollel life in Israel they had even less income than
when I knew them in the states.  Once he came home from shul on a Rosh
Hashanah that fell on shabbat, looked at the cholent that was to be
their main course, and added water to it - since it was dry and he had
momentarily forgotten that it was shabbat as well as yom tov.  Only
after his wife yelled at him did he realize his error.  He quickly ran
to Rav Chaim Sheinberg's apartment in his building and blurted out his
predicament.  Now, Rav Sheinberg has (or had) the minhag of not speaking
on shabbat.  So, my friend stood there anxiously waiting to see if the
Rav would speak and what his answer (if any) would be.  Finally, Rav
Sheinberg said, "Es cholent, tu teshuva (eat the cholent, but repent)".

Yitzchok Zlochower

From: Daniel Katsman <hannah@...>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 01:12:51 +0200
Subject: Re: Cholent Shailah

The posts on this issue have all concentrated on the Shabbat laws that
were violated by the "cholent-napper", and how they should affect the
permissibility of the cholent.  However, equally important is the
question of what effect his action had on the cholent.  If the cholent
was already fully cooked when it was illegally stirred, what added
benefit accrues to the lunchtime cholent eater because of the stirring?
There doesn't seem to be any, and therefore there should be no reason to
prohibit the cholent.

Even if the cholent was not already fully cooked at that time, in the
normal course of events it would by itself have become ready by
lunchtime.  Can we say that the illegal stirring is responsible for any
significant part of the "readiness" of the dish?  More than 1/60?  If
not, there again doesn't seem to be any justification for prohibiting

Daniel Katsman
Petah Tikva


From: Zev Sero <Zev@...>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:53:58 -0400
Subject: Is there a mitzvoh to be happy always?

In the summary of sources at http://mail-jewish.org/simcha.txt you
don't mention the AriZal's saying quoting the Torah, in the Admonition
of Devarim, to the effect that all the misfortunes listed will befall
you `because you did not serve Hashem with happiness'.

As for atzvut, you say that 
>Atzvus may have it's proper place in the world in aiding a choteh 
>(sinner) and spurring him to do teshuva (repentance). 
See Tanya for a discussion of the difference between atzvut, which leads
not to repentance but to despair and falling further into sin, and 
merirut (bitterness) which can lead to repentance.

Zev Sero                Any technology distinguishable from magic
<zsero@...>       is insufficiently advanced.
                         - Gregory Benford 

From: Mordechai <Mhayehudi@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 09:49:17 EDT
Subject: Is there a mitzvoh to be happy always?

<< From:    <Zev@...> (Zev Sero)
 In the summary of sources at http://mail-jewish.org/simcha.txt you
 don't mention the AriZal's saying quoting the Torah, in the Admonition
 of Devarim, to the effect that all the misfortunes listed will befall
 you `because you did not serve Hashem with happiness'.>>

Sorry, but I don't understand the point here. Firstly, what is being quoted 
from the AR"I that is additional to / different from the posuk itself? 
Secondly, as I addressed in the beginning of the essay re the posuk 'ivdu es 
Hashem bisimcha', the posuk cited above doesn't say 'because you were not 
bisimcha' - rather 'because you didn't serve Hashem bisimcha' - a significant 
difference - which fits into my explanation that happiness is not a mitzvoh 
in and of itself.

<<As for atzvut, you say that 
 >Atzvus may have it's proper place in the world in aiding a choteh 
 >(sinner) and spurring him to do teshuva (repentance). 
 See Tanya for a discussion of the difference between atzvut, which leads
 not to repentance but to despair and falling further into sin, and 
 merirut (bitterness) which can lead to repentance. >>

I have heard the above thought, which is interesting, but seemingly has
no bearing on the main essay subject (if there is a mitzvoh to be happy
always), rather just on a tangential piece I tacked on to the essay.

Thank you for the feedback.



From: David Charlap <shamino@...>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 09:22:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Molad

Daniel M Wells wrote:
> -- Hence, the average Hebrew year is slower than the average solar
> -- year by about one day in every 216 years. That means that today,
> -- we celebrate the holidays, on average about 8 days later than did
> -- our ancestors in 359g at the time that the fixed calendar rules
> -- were published.
> -- Should no Hebrew calendar reform take place then over the next few
> -- millenia all of our holidays will have drifted out of their
> -- appropriate seasons and Pesach could theoretically be observed in
> -- winter

The significant part that everybody ignores in statements like this is
"Should not Hebrew calendar reform take place...".

Our rabbis are not stupid.  This drift is no secret.  When the calendar
drifts far enough to be a full month off (in about 4500 years), I have
no doubt that the rabbis of the day will do something to resynchronize
the calendar.  My guess is that a regularly-scheduled Adar-II will be

> Bear in mind also that until the coming of the Mashiach, the *only*
> valid determination of festival occurrence is the lunar calculation
> of R.Gamliel. And thus even if Pesach would eventually occur in
> winter, we would celebrate in winter as a rabbinical command to
> follow our sages.

If (God forbid) Moshiach doesn't come by then, I have no doubt that the
rabbis of that day will arrive at a more reasonable solution than to
celebrate Pesach in winter.  Especially when we already have a mechanism
in place for re-synchronizing the calendar (Adar-II).

-- David


From: Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes <sthoenna@...>
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 12:53:15 -0700
Subject: Re: Ratner's

http://www.abebooks.com/ lists two booksellers with copies of "The
World-Famous Ratner's Meatless Cookbook".


From: David Cohen <bdcohen@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 13:54:34 -0400
Subject: Shabbat candles

Just a quick additional comment to those who wrote about the glass candles
holders breaking and being dangerous--- we found the same problem, so we
switched to the glass inserts that are made with "tempered" glass. Since
then we have (for over 2 years now) not had any of the inserts break, even
with the extra metal disc left over from the first day of Yom Tov still
David I. Cohen


From: Eli Turkel <turkel@...>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 16:59:08 +0300 (IDT)
Subject: Shabbat Somewhere Else

> I was about to use a Kotel Kam to view the Kotel on a Friday night when
> I wondered, can one actually control an object in a place where it is
> Shabbas?  I have often heard that there is no problem watching a
> football game played in California after Shabbas in Chicago.  However,
> in that case, the watcher is not controlling any of the broadcasting
> equipment.  He is simply picking up a signal.  As I understand these
> Kotel Kams (such as on VirtualJerusalem) the viewer can actually move
> the camera adjust the view, etc.  He, therefore, is controlling an
> object which would be assur to use on Shabbos, in a place where it is
> Shabbas.  Is there a Shabbas problem in that?  Or does one say Shabbas
> depends on where you are, not on what you control.  Or perhaps, using he
> computer to control these pieces of equipment is not really considered
> controlling them?

I was always taught that shabbat is determined only by where one is.
Thus, doing anything somewhere else is no problem even if it is shabbat
there. The more usual questions concern sending faxes or even working on
a compueter or printing in a place that is shabbat. The possible
eception would involve making an animal work as mechamer has other
critera. Thankfully this does not seem to be a usual problem.

Eli Turkel


From: Russell Hendel <rhendel@...>
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 23:31:52 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: RE: Shabbos Belts

Nachum Klafter in v32n73 calls a shabbos belt "contrived"

I disagree (depending on the belt of course)

If as Nachum outlines, the key functions as a belt-snatch to lock the
leather in place, then the key is a functional unit of the belt and
since the belt is a garment there is no carrying.

True--I am using this belt to carry the key but if I normally wear a
belt there is nothing wrong with this. For a fundamental idea of
shabbath is the prohbition of WORK not of RESULTS. I am allowed to eat
prepared foods and eg I am allowed to toss mixed silverware over the
table so that when I select forks and spoons I am not violating the
labor of SELECTION.

While in certain other areas of halachah we may look at intention, in
shabboth we principally look at method

Russell Jay Hendel;Phd ASA
Moderator Rashi is Simple
http://www.RashiYomi.Com/---------NEW IMPROVED


From: Mordechai <Mhayehudi@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 09:58:30 EDT
Subject: Source for Quote on Simcha

Hi -

Can someone perhaps help me with the following - 

1) I seem to recall coming across a quote / teaching that 'simcha tmidis
eina simcha' (a constant 'happiness' is not considered genuine
happiness) some time ago. Can anyone tell me where that is stated (if my
recollection is correct)?

I would like to add the source to my essay "Is There A Mitzva To Be
Bisimcha (happy) constantly?" (on the M-J website) if possible.

Thanks in advance.



From: Michael Feldstein <MIKE38CT@...>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 12:47:05 EDT
Subject: Turning on lights on Yom Tov

Growing up in my parents house in the 1960s and 1970s, they had a
practice of turning on lights (but not off) on Yom Tov.  When I got
married, I stopped engaging in this practice, as it seemed to fall into

A while back I remember reading some response by a noted rav, Rabbi
Epstein, which allowed the practice of turning lights on on Yom
Tov--although I know there are many others who have stated that the
practice is prohibited.

Does anyone know the reasoning behind why certain rabbis allowed one to
turn lights on (but not off) on Yom Tov?  Were there any rabbis who
permitted one to turn lights both on and off?  Why should there be a
difference between turning a light on or off--does it have anything to
do with the concept of aish m'aish?  Also, why did this practice fall
into disfavor--was it that we learned more about the science of
electricity (and therefore felt that what we once thought might be
permitted is now assur), or was it a general swing to the right?

Any comments would greatly be appreciated.

Michael Feldstein
Stamford, CT


From: Yisrael Medad <isrmedia@...>
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 01:37:18 +0300
Subject: What is Modern

Akiva Miller <kennethgmiller@...> wrote:

>Actually, this problem is not as modern as Mr. Bernstein thinks. The
>Mishna Berurah (453:24) noted this problem and referred to even earlier

while the earlier authorities quoted would indeed justify not terming them
modern, the Mishnah Brura was composed by the Chafetz Chaim, Rav Yisrael
Kagan, just over 100 years ago which would, I maintain, make him "modern".


From: Daniel Mehlman <Danmim@...>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 19:14:42 EDT
Subject: Information Request: Jewish sites in Prague

Looking for information on tourism for Jewish sites in Prague. Does anyone 
know of tour guides for such a tour.
thank you


End of Volume 32 Issue 95