Volume 33 Number 69
Produced: Tue Oct 10 6:14:11 US/Eastern 2000
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Aleynu's Censored Phrase
[Eli Linas]
Artscroll
[Chaim Shapiro]
Artscroll Gemorah (2)
[Steven Schulman, Shaya Goldmeier]
Avodah Zarah ?
[David Waysman]
Chassidishe Shechita
[Mark Steiner]
Frum men wear rings?
[Chaim Mateh]
"li"
[David Olivestone]
Men and wedding rings
[Danny Skaist]
A Mesorah of Kashruth - Chalav Yisroel & Glatt Kosher
[Carl Singer]
More book questions.
[Howard Reich]
Proper Quotation
[Yisrael Medad]
Tikkun Leah
[Israel Rosenfeld]
Wedding rings?
[Aliza Fischman]
Zmanim Calculator
[Gershon Dubin]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eli Linas <linaseli@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 12:13:22 +0200
Subject: Re: Aleynu's Censored Phrase
Concerning removing some words from Aleinu, A. Frimer wrote:
>There is no doubt that in all of pre-World war Europe the verse
>was removed because of the censors. It was out for hundreds of
>years. And once out - it becomes T-R-A-D-I-T-I-O-N. It's almost like
>the hesitancy most males (myself included) have about wearing techelet
>on their tsitsit - even though according to most poskim there is nothing
>to lose!
Since when do we say that because the non-Jews force us to do something
that it becomes tradition??? Moreover, this is absolutely nothing like
techeles, the wearing of which was not forcebly taken from us! Also,
there is not 100% universal agreement that what some people wear today
is techeles, but there is 100% agreement that these words are part of
Aleinu. Furthermore, I suspect that just because the censor removed
them, we didn't stop saying them - father's continued to teach it to
their children. The only difference is now, publishers are printing it
in the text again. Therefore, we have always said it, and will continue
to say it, for this is our TRADITION.
Eli Linas
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Chaim Shapiro <Dagoobster@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 23:39:20 EDT
Subject: Artscroll
I find it hard to see where Aharon Fischman disagrees with my assertions
about the Artscroll Gemorahs. I did say that Artscroll is an incredible
rescource for those who otherwise would be unable to learn. Likewise,
Aharon agrees with my decision to not use the Artscroll in my own
learning. So Aharon, please clarify your point of contention!
I'd like to take this opportunity to wish the entire Mail Jewish Family a
Ksiva Vchasima Tova!
Chaim Shapiro
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steven Schulman <Steven.Schulman@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:02:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Artscroll Gemorah
>What's worse, I must admit, the ease of the Artscroll is a very tempting
>"crutch" to lean on when one does not want to spend the time figuring
>out a Gemorah on his own.
What's worse, I must admit, the ease of Rashi is a very tempting
"crutch" to lean on when one does not want to spend the time figuring
out a Gemorah on his own.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shaya Goldmeier <JGoldmeier@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 04:59:44 EDT
Subject: Re: Artscroll Gemorah
Reb Chaim,
have you considered that matbe the point of the torah is to open
learning to all - not limit it to those who want to shvitz over it?
Should we eliminate rashi because rashi "explains" things that otherwise
we wouldn't understand? Why discount Artscroll? Is it because it's in
english and Yeshivas have mostly held gemara as a key to a secret club
to seperate themselves from baal habatim. and now the secret is out.
Sorry for being so sarcastic but you sound like too many what I call
"born-again" jews who think that "ameilus b'torah" means to suffer, not
work at it alot. I beleive it was R' Kaminetsky who insisted when
teaching in America that rebeim start teaching in english because that
is what the talmidim here understand. Yes, you have to pick up a
seperate sefer now to find the "Ron and MaHaRSHa" butcount that towards
your struggle, even if it's a struggle of just carrying those extra
sefarim.
good yom tov all,
shaya goldmeier
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Waysman <davidw@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 13:21:00 +1000
Subject: Avodah Zarah ?
All the discussion about the troublesome phrase of Aleinu, gave me pause
to wonder whether there is some sort of prohibition to express the name
of an alien god. There are those who refuse to invoke the secular year
name (2000), for what it represents. Methinks however that maybe we
should be more hesitant to use the names of certain of the days of the
week, eg Wednesday (named after Woden), Thursday (Thor) etc, as well as
some months [January (Janus), March (Mars), spring to mind].
Is popular usage or public ignorance sufficient justification to use
these names ?
[If you follow this path, you should also not be allowed to use the
names of the Hebrew Months, check out the source of many of the
names. Mod.]
Rgds & Shanah Tovah
David Waysman
<davidw@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mark Steiner <marksa@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 23:25:21 +0200
Subject: Re: Chassidishe Shechita
My information is that ALL (Ashkenazi) shechitos today in the
U. S. are "chassidishe"--including Breuer's shechita. I heard this from
a shochet I met in Europe who told me that he could not be appointed a
shochet at Breuer's kehilla because they take only chassidishe shochtim,
even though he had studied at the Mirrer Yeshiva in Jerusalem for many
years and had a "kabbalah" as a shochet from Eretz Yisrael. I'd be
interested in any other information that readers have on this topic,
because what he told me shocked me.
Mark Steiner
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Chaim Mateh <chaimm@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 18:44:36 +0200
Subject: Frum men wear rings?
In vol 33 #66, Louise Miller <daniel@...> wrote:
<< I would venture a guess that at least 50% of all frum married people DO
in fact wear rings.>>
If you include married frum women, then I would say that your 50% figure
is accurate, since women are about 50% of humankind. OTOH, if you refer
to married frum _men_ only, then I would say that you were not including
the Yeshivish/Chassidish/Chareidi men. In these communities, I would be
surprised if even 5% of their married men wear rings, of any kind.
[I thought it was extremely obvious that Louise and the previous poster
she was quoting was explicitly refering to the fact that almost all frum
women wear rings, so that statements that "frum people do not wear
rings" is clearly wrong, and if you mean "frum men do not wear rings"
say that. Mod.]
Regarding what someone else wrote, that frum men used to wear rings,
bringing proof from the fact that the Gemoro talks about signet rings
(used to "sign" contracts). This discussion is not about signet rings
used for business purposes. We are discussing _ornamental_ rings. When
did frum men start wearing _ornamental_ rings? I've been out of America
for a couple of decades, but I think (as I wrote above) that the vast
majority of Chareidi men in the states do not wear wedding bands.
Including those who work in the gentile workplace. I _can_ attest to
the fact that Chareidi men in Israel, including those who work in the
secular workplace, do _not_ and have not (as long as I can remember)
worn wedding bands? Why is this? Why do "modern" frum men wear wedding
bands more than Chareidi frum men? When did this all start?
Kol Tuv,
Chaim
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Olivestone <davido@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 17:51:50 -0400
Subject: "li"
A.M. Goldstein wrote:
> Related question: My Rabbi-m'sader keddushin was very makpid
> (scrupulous) on not intoning the "li" when reciting the "harei at...."
> He said that only the husband-to-be should say that word (meaning, of
> course, "to me"), as otherwise it would seem as though both of them were
> asking to be betrothed. Yet I do not recall any other m'sader keddushin
> in the U.S. or here in Israel being so makpid on that point. Any
> comments, whether from the literature or otherwise?
In England, most centrist Orthodox chupot take place in a shul, and
usually the Rabbi and the Chazan "officiate" together. In both United
Synagogue and Federation of Synagogue shuls (both organizations are
centrist Orthodox), the Rav and the Chazan are usually also the edim (I
believe this is official policy), to make sure that they have shomrei
Shabbat edim. In any case, it is almost always the case that the Rav
first says the "harei at . . ." ahead of the chatan, but the Chazan is
the one who says the word "li". I was in London for a family wedding
earlier this year where the Rav read the ketubah, but when he was about
half way through, he stopped and said "Etcetera", and walked away. Has
anyone ever seen that before?
David Olivestone
<davido@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Danny Skaist <danny@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 11:25:53 +0200
Subject: RE: Men and wedding rings
<<From: Bill Bernstein <bbernst@...>
On the subject of men wearing rings, the gemoro in the second perek of
Rosh HaShono discusses a signet ring and whether it can be worn or not,
or used or not. (The answer seems to depend on whether it has a raised
or incised design). But from this it would seem obvious that men wore
signet rings in the time of the gemoro. Maybe signet rings were
different and women didn't wear them, but at least it suggests that
wearing decorative jewelry per se should not be prohibited. >>
The signet ring is more problematic then decorative rings. It is worn
to prevent financial loss. The ring is your signature, and can be used
to sign/forge documents for you. It is dangerous to leave it around,
and even then it is permitted to wear, because it is also decorative,
and decorative rings are 100% permitted.
danny
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <CARLSINGER@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 17:34:35 EDT
Subject: Re: A Mesorah of Kashruth - Chalav Yisroel & Glatt Kosher
<< Much of the Kosher meat sold in Israel is Kosher but not glatt.
Carl M. Sherer >>
I should have specified .... in the United States ....
Carl Singer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Howard Reich <HREICH/<0006572811@...>
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 07:50:11 -0500 (EST)
Subject: More book questions.
You may wish to consider: "God Is Missing...And They Think We Did It!"
by Rick Arons, published by BS"D Press.
Howard Reich (<hreich@...>)
Chicago, IL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael Medad <isrmedia@...>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 00:13:29 +0200
Subject: Proper Quotation
Shlomo Pick had written at the end of his posting about saying exactly
what the original texct was in the matter of Aleinu thus: >with hope of
"lehakhzir ateret leyoshna"
and in that spirit, may I point out that the Gemara in Yoma 69B has
it this way: "atarah leyoshna", as does the Even Shoshan dictionary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Israel Rosenfeld <israel.rosenfeld@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 17:44:52 +0200
Subject: Re: Tikkun Leah
> From: Menashe Elyashiv <elyashm@...>
> In Israel, this coming year, 5751 is a Shemitta year, & because of the
> added holyness, thru the year only Tikkun Leah is said.
I'm all ears! Sources please?
Ketiva VeHatima Tova.
Yisrael
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aliza Fischman <fisch.chips@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 17:34:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Wedding rings?
Louise Miller wrote:
>I was unaware that it was any sort of a halachic necessity to actually
>wear the ring I was given under the chuppah.
I don't know that you must specifically wear the "kedushin ring" for
lack of a better term. AFAIK, the only requirements are that (1)the
chatan OWNS the ring and that (2) the ring is worth money (shava pruta).
As a matter of fact, I have heard that it doesn't HAVE to be a ring, but
anything of value. We have just come to use rings in our culture.
(Maybe someone else has an insight into why this custom has emerged.)
When my husband and I started dating my Bubby A"H had just passed away.
I was the only one of her grandchildren who she did not see marry. When
my husband I got engaged, my grandfather offered us her wedding ring.
I, of course, jumped at the chance. To be zoche to wear the ring of a
woman who kept her family frum when most of her family, and her
husband's family, had not chosen that derech, a woman who took in her
never married sister as part of her family to live with them when they
had barely enough room (and probably money) for themselves, who was such
a ba'alat chesed, whose marriage seemed perfect to me, even after 56
years (a rarity in this day and age) WOW. It was a big zchut to be her
granddaughter, but to wear her ring?!?!
I looked at the ring, and noticed that there was an indented pattern on
in. There were no stones, but it was not a plain, gold band. I
immediately asked our posek, Rav Yaakov Neuberger, who answered that
because the inside of the ring was solid, with no indentations, it was
kosher for kedushin.
When we wrote my grandfather a thank you note (before the wedding), we
mentioned that we planned on using it under the chuppah, and that I
would enjoy wearing it for the rest of my life. At the wedding, my
Zaidie approached me and said that he thought that I would either marry
in it and wear something else, or vise versa. I do know of people who
have done this. I do not think that there is any halachic reason not
to. I do, however, see sentimental reasons to wear the same ring. :-)
Kol Tuv,
Ketiva V'Chatima Tova to each of you and your entire family,
Aliza
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gershon Dubin <gdubin@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 11:21:22 -0400
Subject: Zmanim Calculator
Does anyone have a copy of a zmanim calculator called JCAL, or similar
program for DOS/Windows which will output a month of zmanim at a time in
delimited format?
Gershon
<gdubin@...>
<gershon.dubin@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 33 Issue 69
