Volume 34 Number 97
Produced: Wed Jun 27 17:37:57 US/Eastern 2001
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Cholov Yisroel Milk
[Shlomo Argamon]
D-E
[Carl Singer]
Islam and Idolatry
[Mark Steiner]
Islam is not idolatry
[Elanit Z. Rothschild]
L'shon Haqodesh (was Lashon Hakodesh)
[Shlomo Argamon]
More Info On Yoatzoth
[Russell Hendel]
OU and DE
[Eli Turkel]
Phrasing in Prayers
[Mark Steiner]
Repetition of Words in Prayer
[Ben Katz]
Repetition of words in Qeri'at Shema`,
[Ira L. Jacobson]
Torah & Sefer Yehoshua
[Jonathan Katz]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shlomo Argamon <argamon@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 14:40:46 +0200 (IST)
Subject: Cholov Yisroel Milk
From: Josh Backon
> The term "Cholov Yisroel Milk" reminds me what old timers used to call
> Mayim Acharonim: "mayim acharonim VASSER" :-)
> Vasser in Yiddish = water
And so, a friend of mine and I used to call it "Mayim achronim vasser
water". Inflation, you see.
-Shlomo-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <CARLSINGER@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 06:44:49 EDT
Subject: D-E
<< Are you saying that if people realized they could eat DE after a meat
meal, but that the OU decided to hide the necessary information from
them, they'd be OK with that? Why would someone want to be essentially
prevented from eating something after a meat meal when so many
authorities permit it?
Barak >>
Not to butt in and answer someone's question -- but two points to
consider: 1 - why not go to the O-U and get their stated position rather
than have everyone (myself included) try to either defend / attack them.
2 - "people" is so all encompassing -- the level of knowledge, training,
observance, etc., among "people" who are Jewish (and thus observe / or
obliged to observe kashruth) varies greatly. If you are to provide a
service to such a diverse community -- not all of whom read the Jewish
Press or participate in Mail Jewish (sorry, Avi) -- then how would you
weigh invconvenience to some Jews (those who have to contact you re:
specific products) vs. providing other Jews with an opportunity to make
Kashruth related mistakes (i.e., those who are unfamiliar with the
status of D-E)
Kol Tov
Carl Singer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mark Steiner <marksa@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 15:07:55 +0300
Subject: Re: Islam and Idolatry
I would like to contribute an unlikely source concerning Islam and
idolatry: The Pe'at Hashulchan, written by R. Israel Shklover, a
disciple of the Vilner Gaon who settled in Zfat.
As is well known, Muslims declare "Allah Akbar" before slaughtering
a cow and the Pe'at Hashulhan rules that a Jewish shochet may declare
this too, as it means only "Hashem is great." He discusses whether
saying "Allah Akbar" would be an interruption [hefsek] between the
Jewish benediction "`al hashexita" and the mitzvah.
There is therefore no objective basis for religious hatred of Jews and
Judaism by orthodox Muslims, which unfortunately has become common.
Mark Steiner
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Elanit Z. Rothschild <Ezr0th@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 08:41:49 EDT
Subject: Re: Islam is not idolatry
Mike,
It might be enough to say that in Arabic, the term Allah, means G-d,
nothing more, nothing less. It is the exact equivilant of Hashem in
Hebrew. Jews who reside in Arab countries will tell you the same, as
they daven to Allah three times a day while the Muslims pray five times.
While I'm sure the Rambam mentions it, I do not have any sources
offhand, but I hope this is helpful.
Elanit Z. Rothschild
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shlomo Argamon <argamon@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 16:23:56 +0200 (IST)
Subject: Re: L'shon Haqodesh (was Lashon Hakodesh)
> From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
> At least I hope he concedes that the term is not "LASHON HAKODESH," but
> rather l'shon haqodesh. My reference here, of course, is to the fact
> that in the nismakh construction, the qamatz of lashon becomes a shewa.
Also note that the proper translation of the phrase is *not* "The Holy
Language", but rather "The Language of Holiness". Similarly, "Lshon
`Hakhamim" is "The Language of the Sages". ("The Holy Tongue" would be
"Lashon Haqadosh".)
-Shlomo-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell Hendel <rhendel@...>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 23:38:09 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: RE: More Info On Yoatzoth
I just wanted to make a few minor supplements to the 2 excellent
postings in Volume 34n80 on Yoatzoth.
1st) Besides the telephone number given in that posting (011 972 2 642
9801)(which I assume is correct), there is another NIGHTLY HOTLINE
number (011 972 2 642 0102) as well as the Nishmat Office in NY number
(212 983 6975).
I obtained this information from a recent article in Amit Women Summer
2001 pg 35-37 which gives further details that supplement what has
already been said.(AMITS 800 number is 800 989 AMIT)
The hotline service was opened November 2000 and presently receives 150
calls per week. The article mentions that the yoatzoth even sometimes
receive calls from Mikvahs.
Some of the accomplishments of the Yoatzot are also mentioned in the
article (e.g. WITH YOATZOT NOW AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION WOMEN
PREVIOUSLY UNABLE TO CONCIEVE BECAUSE OF UNNECESSARY DELAYS GOING TO
MIKVAH ARE NOW BECOMING PREGNANT)
The article also mentions the work these Yoatzoth are doing outside
Nishmath. For example "Yoetzet Shani Taragin has been engaged by the
Religious Council of Efrat to advise women in the laws of Taharat
Mishpachah--in this capacity she takes calls from women, makes house
calls, and meets with women in her home"
Finally the article describes in detail the rigorous training program
these women go thru as well as the warm acceptance of the idea of Female
Yoatzoth by the Israeli Torah and Secular community.
Russell Hendel; Ph.d.;A.S.A
http://www.RashiYomi.Com/mj.htm VISIT MY MAIL JEWISH ARCHIVES
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eli Turkel <Eli.Turkel@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 13:11:28 +0200
Subject: OU and DE
> Are you saying that if people realized they could eat DE after a meat
> meal, but that the OU decided to hide the necessary information from
> them, they'd be OK with that? Why would someone want to be essentially
> prevented from eating something after a meat meal when so many
> authorities permit it?
> Barak
On the contrary they introduced [DE] to give people more information.
It was removed not because of chumrot but because they found that in
practice it confused people. Kashrut symbols on packages are not made
for the Talmid Chacham but for the average consumer.
Eli
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mark Steiner <marksa@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 14:56:25 +0300
Subject: Phrasing in Prayers
I have just checked the very scholarly edition of the siddur of R'
Saadya Gaon (pub. Mekitzei Nirdamim, 1941), who has the following text
for kedusha (I will use Israeli vocalization for convenience; the
comment in square brackets is by R. Saadya himself, of course in
Arabic):
mimqomkha malkeynu tofi`a vetimlokh `aleynu ki mexhakim anu lakh
matai timlokh vetimlokh betziyon beqarov beyameynu [cong: amen]vetishkon
vetitgadel betokh yerushalayim `irkha le`eyneynu ledor vador...
We can infer from the break (i.e. the "amen") that the proper
phrasing in our own (Ashkenazic) text should also be "tishkon, titgadel,
vetitkadesh..."
Also that the word "betziyon" is the first word of the sentence:
"betziyon beqarov beyameynu...va`ed." (In our version, the word
"timlokh" is not doubled, but the doubling can and should be understood,
more or less as R. Yosef Eliyahu Henkin, of blessed memory, wrote in his
important work, Eydus L'Yisroel.)
In a previous posting I drew the same conclusions from the Seder
R. Amram Gaon.
Finally, I'd like to point out the "anu" instead of "anaxnu." As I
previously pointed out, the Mishnaic Hebrew of the siddur has been
"Biblicized" in many places, particularly in the latter day Ashkenazic
siddurim.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ben Katz <bkatz@...>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 10:34:10 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Repetition of Words in Prayer
>From: Carl Singer <CARLSINGER@...>
>-- I think a key issue is that the Rav of a shule determines what is or
>is not acceptable (sometimes ONLY 1 way, sometimes varieties of
>acceptable ways) That establishes the halachic boundaries for that shule
>and for the people who daven for the amud. Beyond that the congregation
>(as a political body) might (and I'm not sure here) provide further
>strictures -- i.e. Rav say A or B -- board of directors says A only.
>(Board cannot say C, as this transgresses Shule Rav's p'sack.)
I would just like to make one point re Mr. Singer's comment (which
I generally agree with). The problem, these days, in my opinion, is
that because of the "swing to the right" in many shuls there is a
"bottom-up" phenomenon: the Rabbi may not care too much between A or B,
or may even favor A, but because of pressure from the right, decides on
B. In that situation, I think the A people (because moderates in
general are less passionate) feel cheated. This may be less than ideal
(a strong Rabbi shouldn't do this, the A people should make their voices
heard, etc.), but is the reality.
Ben Z. Katz, M.D.
Children's Memorial Hospital, Division of Infectious Diseases
2300 Children's Plaza, Box # 20, Chicago, IL 60614
Ph. 773-880-4187, Fax 773-880-8226
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 21:57:43 +0300
Subject: Re: Repetition of words in Qeri'at Shema`,
At 13:52 25/06/01, Nahum Klafter wrote in mail-jewish Vol. 34 #92 Digest,
after expressing all due respect:
>According to the Shulchan Arukh Ha Rav (printed also in Tehilat HaShem
>Siddur, pg. 46, top) when one is praying alone and did not concentrate
>properly on the verse Shema Yisrael, he should repeat the verse OUT LOUD.
>(When one is in a congregation and did not cocentrate properly, he should
>repeat the verse but only silently.)
Well, the Ben Ish Hai (First Year, parashat Va'Era) *appears* to rule
rather differently. (See below.) He states that one must *not* repeat the
Shema` verse, because of the warning not to appear to be recognizing two
rashuyot (not reshuyot). Rather, he rules that one must wait the amount of
time required to recite the entire first parasha, and *only then* repeat
the verse that one fears he may not have had the proper kavvana in reciting.
(I have no trouble understanding that the Alter Rebbe meant precisely this,
but assumed that it would be understood that one must wait a suitable
interval before repeating the verse.)
> Since this halakha was not instituted with respect to Brich Sh'may
> (which is after all a passage from the Zohar and not a biblical text), I
> cannot understand what compels us to object to a sh"tz using a melody
> which involves some minor repetitions.
The reason is that we listen to what we are reciting! And if it sounds
pretty, music-wise, but offends the Jewish sensibility, then we find
another tune. Or we are reciting words without taking them seriously.
>With all due respect, Ira is extrapolating inappropriately here. The
>halakha of not repeating applies to Kriat Shema and not to Brich Sh'may.
>The fact that the same principle COULD apply, does not mean that it DOES
>apply. After all Hem Gazru v'Hem Gazru (i.e., the Sages instituted legal
>decrees with very limited parameters, and they do not apply in other
>sistuations even when the logic would seem to dictate that they very well
>should).
Perhaps I was not extrapolating without good cause. The Ritva, on Sukka
53b, states in connection with Shema` Shema` and Modim Modim, "Not only
there, but in all similar cases," thereby extending the prohibition on
repetitions and placing me in very good company.
IRA L. JACOBSON
mailto:<laser@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jonathan Katz <jkatz@...>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 08:41:57 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Torah & Sefer Yehoshua
Bernard Raab writes:
>>From: A. Seinfeld <aseinfeld@...>
>>I agree with Dr. Katz that archaeologists have explored the historicity
>>of the conquest more than any other part of Tanach. However, my personal
>>experience from teaching is that the most challenging part of the Torah
>>archaeologically (or geologically) is the Flood. Anyone else share my
>>experience?
>I agree. This has been the hardest part of chumash for me to understand
>and reconcile with physical reality. Any ideas?
Check out the book "Noah's Flood" by Pitman and Ryan (two professors at
Columbia University). They claim to have found archaeological evidence
supporting a flood in the Middle East thousands of years ago. The
following website also has a news article about this research:
http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.edu/news/story9_1.html
Jonathan Katz
<jkatz@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 34 Issue 97
