Volume 34 Number 91
Produced: Sun Jun 24 11:13:46 US/Eastern 2001
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Eggs, Sperm and Familial Relationships
[Yisrael & Batya Medad]
Ein Navi B'iro
[Mark Steiner]
Ibn Ezra's Torah Commentary
[Alan Cooper]
Israeli vs American tunes/ correct pronounciation
[Dani Wassner]
Kabbalah as a source of Halachah
[Ari Z. Zivotofsky - FAM]
Mappiq Hey - Not Qometz
[Michael Frankel]
meshulachim
[Aliza Fischman]
Responding to mistreated Jews vs Israelis
[Russell Hendel]
Succah on Shmini Azeret
[David Wachtel]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael & Batya Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 23:12:00 +0300
Subject: Eggs, Sperm and Familial Relationships
Avi,
can you put this up and ask for comments from a Halachic viewpoint?
Brother's sperm aided France's oldest mom
Wednesday, 20 June 2001 8:32 (ET)
PARIS, June 20 (UPI) -- A 62-year-old woman who gave birth in France last
month said her brother is the father of her baby.
Jeanine, whose last name was not disclosed, caused a stir last month
when she became the oldest known woman in France to give birth -- and
one of the world's oldest new mothers.
She opted for in-vitro fertilization in the United States, using the
egg of an American woman -- and, reportedly, sperm donated by her
brother.
"I could no longer transmit my genetic inheritance because of my age,"
Jeanine told Le Parisien newspaper, in an interview published Wednesday.
"So I wanted to transmit his, and give birth so our [genetic] line would
continue."
The May birth in France's southeastern Var region sparked an uproar in
France, as Jeanine used a medical procedure that is forbidden in France
for older women.
Although the baby was not the product of test-tube incest -- as the egg
was donated by a woman outside the family -- French professor Axel Kahn
said it nonetheless raises disturbing ethical issues.
"There is something that seems shocking," Kahn, who heads France's
Ethic's Committee, told France Info radio Wednesday. "There is a
disruption of all the family ties."
Kahn also raised questions about the ethics of Jeanine's Los Angeles
doctors, who performed the in-vitro procedure.
"What has happened would have been completely forbidden in France," he
said.
The sperm of Jeanine's 52-year-old brother Robert, also fertilized
another egg from the American donor, Le Parisien reported. The French
and American women gave birth eight days apart.
Biologically, that would mean Jeanine's baby has a sibling in the
United States.
For her part, Jeanine told the newspaper she had no regrets about her
decision to have a test-tube baby with her brother.
"It allowed me to become a mother ... and allowed him to have his first
child, a little girl," she said. "... I have not committed any moral
error in my pursuit, and I have no problem with my conscience."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mark Steiner <marksa@...>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 16:08:02 +0300
Subject: Re: Ein Navi B'iro
Ari Kahn writes:
<<I noticed that Rick Turkel used as a signature on his email "ein navi be
iro" ... As far as I know the only source for this teaching is The Koran
referring to Mohammad - does anyone out there know something I don't -
is there a Jewish source for this saying?>>
Sure there is: Matthew 13:57: And they were offended in him. But Jesus
said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own
country, and in his own house.
Well, he was Jewish, wasn't he? And there are other Jewish customs
whose source we find only in the so-called "New Testament." An example
is naming a male Jewish child at his circumcision, whose only ancient
source is Luke 1:59 (as J. D. Eisenstein points out in his "Sefer Dinim
Uminhagim): And it came to pass, that on the eighth day they came to
circumcise the child; and they called him Zacharias, after the name of
his father.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Alan Cooper <amcooper@...>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 08:50:07 -0400
Subject: Ibn Ezra's Torah Commentary
I do not wish to enter into the controversy over English translations of
Ibn Ezra, but do wish to note that people should not consider Weiser's
Hebrew edition to be in any way authoritative. For details, see the
critical review by Prof. Uriel Simon in Kiryat Sefer 51 (1976)
646-658. For the best available text, one should use the new Bar-Ilan
University Miqra'ot gedolot "ha-keter" (Genesis is the only book of the
Torah available so far) or the publications of Prof. Simon's Ibn Ezra
project (Hosea, Joel, and Amos so far).
Those interested in the supercommentary tradition should consult Prof.
Simon's article, "Interpreting the Interpreter: Supercommentaries on Ibn
Ezra's Commentaries," in Isadore Twersky and Jay Harris (eds.), Rabbi
Abraham Ibn Ezra: Studies in the Writings of a Twelfth-Century Jewish
Polymath (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993) 86-128.
Alan Cooper
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dani Wassner <dani@...>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 14:33:15 +0200
Subject: re: Israeli vs American tunes/ correct pronounciation
Louise Miller wrote:
>>>Experiment: Stop for a second and sing each of the melodies, first
imagining that you are a 7 year old Israeli, and the second time pretend
that you are a 9 year old American. It's NOT the same melody.
(AH nim ZMIR ot bSHIRim) vs (ahNIM zih-mi-ROTE b'shirIM)
>>>>
I think, (and I could be wrong), that this is a common mistake. In fact,
no matter what tune you use, what pronounciation you use, where you
live, or what your background is (Sefardi, Ashkenazi, hassidic, Polish,
Lithuanian etc...) it should always be "ahNIM".
It was explained to me once that many ashkenazim used to be worried
about using lashon hakodesh for anything other than prayer. As such,
when they used "Hebrew" words in Yiddish or any other language, they
purposely mispronounced those words by putting the emphasis on the
incorrect syllable. Thus SHAbbes became a Yiddish word, whereas shaBBAS
was the Hebrew. In theory shaBBAS was used only in prayer.
The problem was that the mispronounciation actually spread and became
the norm. As far as I know, when praying, only shaBBAS should be
used. But so many people say SHAbbes when speaking that they use the
same term when praying.
As a result of all of this, I find that having grown up with ashkenazi
tunes, we pronounce many,many words, in prayer, incorrectly. The two
best examples are Anim Zemirot and (K)el Adon
(eg we all sing BAruch umVOOrach beFI kol NEshama, but it should be
baRUCH umvooRACH befi kol neshaMA).
I am trying to kick the habit and use correct pronounciations, but it
ain't easy.....
Dani Wassner, Jerusalem
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ari Z. Zivotofsky - FAM <azz@...>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 05:26:18 -0400
Subject: Kabbalah as a source of Halachah
The question was asked why those who wear tchelet tie their tzitzit
differently those those with only white.
Here is a response from one of those involved in ythe production of the
new tchelet.
I also highly reccomend their informative web site:
http://www.tekhelet.com/
Ari
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ari Greenspan <ari@...>
The question regarding alternate tying of tekhelet is quite complex.
Clearly the shulchan aruch states its opinion but right on the spot the
ramah already makes a slight change. You can immediately see that it is
not as straightforward as it seems. In fact there are at least five
different accepted methods today , for tying with white strings
alone. Sefardi, ashkenazi, teimani, chabad and syrian.The tradition of
ashkanazik jews and even most sefardim is really quite late.
It is clear from the gemarah that zitzit was tied very differently from
today.The gemara speaks of only 2 knots, kesher elyon and tachton. The
gemara in menachot mentions the need for chuliyot, that is wrappings of
3 times around, and according to almost all rishonim each three
wrappings is one chuliya. The gemara mentions the need for 7-13 chuliyot
and again most rishonim understand that as 7 or 13 chuliyot. The gemara
says that one begins and ends with white and again almost all rishonim
understand that the first and last chuliya must be white, with the
tekhelet somehow tied in the middle. There are multiple computations and
permutations of how it all should be tied , all of the ways are based on
various opinions of geonim, rishonim and in some cases achronim.
One thing is clear, when am yisrael had tekhelet, 1300 plus years ago it
was worn differently that the way white is worn today. Those people who
wear tekhelet today , feel that if they are fulfilling the mitzvah the
way the Torah commands it, then it should be tied the way our tanaim and
amoraim did it when they wore tekhelet.
For a complete discussion on the topic see techumin, vol 15, article by
Rabbi Yehuda Rock or go to the Ptil Tekhelet web site www.tekhelet.com
and see both the extensive download able library on Tekhelet in general
and the Short Guide to Tying Tzizit with Tekhelet, with a picture of the
most common shitot..
ari greenspan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Frankel <mechyfrankel@...>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 08:55:11 -0700
Subject: Mappiq Hey - Not Qometz
<From: David Herskovic <crucible@...>
Mechy Frenkel wrote: Perhaps list members can provide (anecdotal to be
sure) data from their own observations.
Well, with a Munkatsher pedigree (or minkatsh, as we pronounce it), a
galitsyaner khasidish yeshive upbringing and a Monday/Thursday/Shabes
afternoon bal koyre I can provide some evidence. Please bear in mind
that the English equivalents are as I hear them and pronounce them in
London. There are three pronunciations for komets in our Godly circles.>
actually, my note did not ask for a tour of qomotz. It rather followed
a different interchange in which a poster asserted that the mappiq hey
was no longer realized and, since this is not my own experience, I'd
requested any feedback from the experience of group members who presumably
attend a spectrum of shul types. The poster particularly pointed to
chasidishe type circles where this elision is asserted to be the rule,
and I was thus particularly interested (a relative assertion -it doesn't
keep me up nights)in a response from the shtible frequenting segment
of the readership. Still waiting.
Mechy Frankel W: (703) 588-7424
<mechyfrankel@...> H: (301) 593-3949
<michael.frankel@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aliza Fischman <fisch.chips@...>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 09:15:52 -0400
Subject: Re: meshulachim
>From: Shoshana Socher <shoshanasocher@...>
>Hi--if you have been visited by meshulchim (people asking for tzedakah),
>I'd like to hear your story.
Shoshana,
Firstly, good luck in your endeavor. This sounds like an interesting book.
You may want to visit the MJ archives. As I recall, about 2 years ago
there was a whole discussion on meshulachim after a young woman complained
about one who persistently rang her doorbell at 10 PM. There were LOTS of
replies. As Avi, or some other members may recall, my husband and I each
submitted the same story separately. Avi got a kick out of that, and
posted them both. Some of the replies were backing up her outrage, and
some were in defense of the meshulach. You find it quite interesting/
enlightening. Let us know when your book is published.
Aliza
[Actually, it was almost exactly 1 year ago, the original posting
(subject: Whatever Happened to Derech Eretz?) was in vol 32 number 71 on
June 28 2000 and your and your husband's reply was on June 30 in number
77. Shoshana, go to http://www.mail-jewish.org/ and choose the link to
search the archives, and you can search keywords there, also just choose
the link for the Mail-Jewish Hypertext Edition, choose volume 32 then
choose W to get to all topics starting with W. Do that for volume 33,
there is a continuation of the discussion there, different subject line,
but also starting with W. If you want to use any material from
mail-jewish in your book, I would appreciate if you contact me
first. Thanks in advance. Avi]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell Hendel <rhendel@...>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 00:15:13 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: RE: Responding to mistreated Jews vs Israelis
<Leona_Kroll@...> in v34n71 reacts to Micah Bergers suggestion
that we wear Yellow badges to protest mistreatment of Hindus.
Leona (correctly) asks
< I think the suggestion to show solidarity with the Hindus and other
minorities is a beautiful one, but I would really like to know, why did
you have to wait until the Taliban threatened non-Muslims?
You- every single Jew in the Diaspora- should have been wearing yellow
since Rosh Hashanna. Jews are being murdered here every day- because we
are Jews. >
I would like to defend Leah halachically with 3 defenses. First of all:
It is a clear law that < THE POOR OF YOUR OWN COMMUNITY TAKE PRECEDENCE
OVER THE POOR OF OTHER COMMUNITIES > Hence we should protest for Israel
BEFORE we protest for anyone else.
Second: Would it be fair if we protested for Hindus but no Hindu
community protested for the Israelies. Wouldnt that be a double
stadard. Where is the logic demanding we devote resources to Hindus when
Hindus do not devote resources to us.
Third: The arguments of Leona are precisely the arguments of Rabbi Meir
Kahana, may he rest in peace who protested Jews protesting for Viet Nam
but not for Israel.
Finally to harmonize Leona's suggestion with Micahs I think we should
all go to work dressed in blood-drenched clothing and announce that we
<are preparing for being hit by terrorists even in American > Such a
dramatic statement would indicate the fear Jews live in.
Russell Jay Hendel; http://www.RashiYomi.Com/mj.htm (My MailJewish archives)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Wachtel <Dawachtel@...>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 09:47:37 -0700
Subject: Re: Succah on Shmini Azeret
For a discussion of Ashkenazic (and other) minhagim regarding the succah on
Shmini Atzeret, see Eric Zimmer's "Olam K'minhago Noheg"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 34 Issue 91
