Volume 36 Number 84
                 Produced: Fri Jul 26  3:23:57 US/Eastern 2002

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

3rd chapter in Eicha (2)
         [Dov Teichman, <JoshHoff@...>]
Bayit Neeman
         [Ilana Saks]
Benefitting from non-Jew's work on Shabbat
         [Binyomin Segal]
carrying ID on Shabbos
         [Robert Rubinoff]
Earth Revolving Around Sun
         [Matthew Pearlman]
Eichah in the morning
         [Beth and David Cohen]
Holding hands in public
Laundry at the close of Tisha B'Av on a Thursday
         [Michael J. Savitz]
Portable mikva'ot?
         [Yisrael Dubitsky]
Queen=wife of king - was groom/bride=melech/malkah
         [Perry Zamek]
Shabbat electric wheel chair
         [Beth and David Cohen]
Starting Devarim Sheni at Eicha


From: <DTnLA@...> (Dov Teichman)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 10:52:06 -0400
Subject: 3rd chapter in Eicha

I had never heard of that tune change, until this year when I prayed in
the White Shul in Far Rockaway, NY, I noticed it was done there. When I
asked, I was told that it may be a Yekke custom. It sounds more like a
sad davening nusach, as no trop is sounded as far as I could tell. And
since the Aleph-Beis sequence in that chapter runs in sets of threes, I
think the first 2 verses ended on a high note and the last of the 3
ended low, and then it repeated, etc. 

Dov Teichman

From: <JoshHoff@...>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 12:08:40 EDT
Subject: Re: 3rd chapter in Eicha

I heard Rav Soloveichek zt'l speak about this on Tisha B'Av in
Boston. He said that when he was in the ukraine he never heard this
change in trop, but he did hear it in Berlin. He said that it makes ense
because the entire tenor of Eicha changes in that chapter. Until that
point the mood was mostly of asking how such destruction could occur-
almost a complaint. In fact the Rov said that the tone of kinos is
different from selichos, which always emphasize mipnei chataeinu, that
it's all our fault. Kinos ask how could god do this? There is actually a
teshuvah in Halachos Ketanos in which he was asked about the nature of
some of the Kinos, and he says that some are too harsh and should not be
said. The mood of the third perek of Eicha however is one of taking
responsibility for what happened and turning inward- isa capeinu el
levaveinu,'etc. It's true that each perek has some mention of
acknowledging our fault, but it isn't the emphasis. I was once in YU for
Eicha and the prson reading it changed the trop at the third
perek. However R.Dovid Lifshitz zt'l told hom to us ethe regular trop,
and said he had never heard of a minhag to switch trps at the 3rd
perek. The reader however said that was the minhag in his shul(in
Philadelphia), and actually it was the minhag in my shul(z'l) in
Cleveland, as well.


From: Ilana Saks <lonnie@...>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 22:34:05 +0200
Subject: Re: Bayit Neeman

The meaning of "neeman" in this context is "established" or "secure."
See e.g. Shmuel bet 7:16.

Ilana Goldstein Saks


From: Binyomin Segal <bsegal@...>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 04:29:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Benefitting from non-Jew's work on Shabbat

> hmm, i thought this only applied when the only way a goy could
> accomplish something he was contracted to do was on Shabos. example:
> tellling a woker on Friday evening something has to be done by saturday
> night.

not exactly. rather the reason it is permitted to benefit if he could
have done it on sunday, but you both know that he will do it on shabbos
is that he is no longer doing the work FOR you on shabbos. rather he is
doing the work for you, but he is choosing to do the work on shabbos for
his own convenience.

> Otherwise, going to a goy in a street and telling him that the TV volume
> is on high but you can't turn it off becuase it is a holy day would be
> forbidden to do.

correct. this is forbidden

> In addition, many of the shtetl's in old Europe would have been michalel
> Shabos since they had Shabos Goy to stoke the coals, etc. Not even old
> Europe, I recall someone from Philadelphia who grew up there in '20s
> telling about the Shabos Goy and the things done via him.

there are two exceptions to the general rule that I did not mention and
are relevant to this.

1 is rather obvious in the abstract, but perhaps not in this case. any
time there are health risks (sakana) it is permitted to tell a nonjew to
do melacha. as a result, heating issues were always treated very

2 - tzarchei tzibbur. any time the need is a communal one, benefitting
from non-jewish melacha on shabbos is permitted. hence, one can directly
ask a non-jew to turn lights on in the shul, but not in ones house.

hope this clarifies.
Contact me via my NEW address


From: Robert Rubinoff <rubinoff@...>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 14:59:07 -0400
Subject: Re: carrying ID on Shabbos

> As far as halacha is concerned I know of a teshuva by R. Ernest
> Gugenheim zt"l who was the head of the Rabbinical Seminary in Paris for
> years (it is published in a book called "Les Portes de la loi. Etudes et
> responsa").  If I remember right, in this teshuva he says that if one is
> forced to carry and ID form on shabbat he can do so be-derekh shinuy,
> e.g. by inserting the form in one's hat inside band.  I would have to
> ask, but I imagine this teshuva corresponds to the period of the war or
> is merely a "theoretical" teshuva, because again I know of no one who
> carries an ID form with shinuy on shabbat just because one could be
> asked to produce it by the police.

I would think this is, at least in part, a pikuach nefesh issue.  In
some times and places, not having your papers when you are stopped by
the authorities could put your life at risk.  Particularly since
carrying is usually d'rabbanan, in such a case it seems reasonable to
carry the papers.  My guess would be that, despite the current goings
on, in modern-day France the worst that could happen is you might be
taken down to the police station and forced to wait there until the
police are convinced there isn't really a problem.



From: Matthew Pearlman <Matthew.Pearlman@...>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 10:13:57 +0100
Subject: Earth Revolving Around Sun

A number of contributors have commented to the effect that in quantum
physics [or more probably general relativity] there is a rule that
anytime we see A going around B we MUST accept that B also goes around

I am afraid that this is a misunderstanding.  It is true that relativity
states that if two objects are moving with constant velocity then it is
indistinguishable whether they are moving or stationary.  However when
it comes to rotating bodies, which involves acceleration (eg the moon
orbiting the earth is constantly accelerating towards the earth) then
this is not true.  It is very easy to distinguish between a body that is
accelerating from one that is stationary - just think of a car going
round a corner - there is no way that you can ignore the fact the you
are moving.

There is also the famous "twins" proposition of relativity (which I
believe has been tested) that if one twin stays on earth and the other
flies into space then returns, then the latter twin ages less.  That
twin's circuit involved three bouts of acceleration/deceleration and is
distinguishable from the twin that stayed at home.



From: Beth and David Cohen <bdcohen@...>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 09:01:36 -0400
Subject: Eichah in the morning

Rabbi Teitz wrote that Eichah is read on the morning of tisha B'av in
addition to the reading at night. Is the reading in the morning a
widespread minhag? I am familiar only with eichah ( and a few kinot) at
night and extensive kinot, but no Eichah in the morning.

David I. Cohen


From: <chaim-m@...> (Chaim)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 17:38:54 +0300
Subject: Holding hands in public

The discussion about yes or no to a married couple holding hands in
public seems to be a discussion of hashkafa.

I presume that there is no debate that (a couple) holding hands is a
form of chibah (affection).  I also presume that there is no debate that
a married couple that hold hands in public (when they are Hallachically
permitted -- hmmm if a couple usually hold hands in public, then when
they don't would be a give-away that they are not permitted which is
contra-tznius) is not transgressing a Torah prohibition (di'oraysa). The
whole debate seems to be whether the Poskim forbid it or just
recommended against it.  While the Rema explicitely said not to do it
(as a prohibition or as a recommendation), did any Posek say that it
can/should be done?

IAC, if it's forbidden, then we shouldn't do it.  If the Poskim
recommend not doing it, I shouldn't do it.  So in either case, I
shouldn't do it.  OTOH, some may say, well if it's only a
recommendation, I can do it, so why shouldn't I do it?  From the legal
POV, I guess he would be correct.  >From the Hashkafa POV, I think he
would be wrong.

The Shulchan Aruch Orech Chaim 24:1 says about wearing Tzizis: "If a
person doesn't wear a garment of 4 corners, he is not required Tzizis,
and (but) it is good and correct for each person to be careful to wear a
talis katan (that is required and has Tzizis) the entire day."  Here too
we could say that according to the letter of the law, we could go the
entire day, every day, without Tzizis, if we take care not to wear a
4-cornered garment.  Is this the correct thing to do?  Of course not.
Would any frum Jew defend the practice of no Tzizis?  Would any Rav say
it's OK not to wear Tzizis?

I see the hand-holding discussion in the same light as the
Tzizis-wearing issue.  One difference I _would_ point out is that AFAIK
wearing Tzizis has been accepted by the vast majority of (if not all)
frum Jews, so that I don't see much of a debate about it.  Holding hands
OTOH may perhaps be a want-to-do among some frum Jews, so that showing
that it does not violate the letter of the law would be important.
OTOH, other frum Jews would say that the spirit of the law (as in
recommendation, minhag, Hashkafa, tznius) is not to hold hands in

Kol Tuv,


From: Michael J. Savitz <michaelj@...>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 23:25:40 -0400
Subject: Laundry at the close of Tisha B'Av on a Thursday

> Tisha B'Av will come this year (and next) on a Thursday. It seems to me
> that many families could benefit from the clear, but perhaps
> little-known, halachah according to which laundry may be done on
> Thursday night when the fast ends and there is absolutely no need to
> wait until the morning, much less afternoon, of Friday the 10th of
> Av. For details see Shemirat Shabbat Kehilkhatah, Volume 2, page 2
> (42:5) and footnotes.  To me it seems that it would actually be a
> mitzvah to inform homemakers of this halachah, not only because of its
> implications for kevod shabbat but also becasue of the contribution to
> shlom bayit resulting from the relief it provides for those responsible
> for doing the washing.

Without this leniency, laundering clothes would be prohibited by the
"Nine Days" prohibitions, since these last until chatzot (midday) on the
10th of Av.

However, I don't know (but perhaps others do) of a comparable leniency
to allow laundering clothes, on erev Shabbat, for the Shabbat _prior_ to
Tish'a B'Av, even though one is allowed to wear fresh clothes on Shabbat
during the Nine Days.

Why would this be?  Is it because for Shabbat Nachamu, Shabbat itself is
after the Nine Days, so wearing of clean clothes is more important than
for Shabbat Chazon?  Or is it because it is presumed that one can
launder, before Rosh Chodesh Av, enough clean clothes for one Shabbat,
but one might not have more than one set of Shabbat clothes, so it would
be important to get them clean again on erev Shabbat Nachamu?  Keep in
mind that if Tish'a B'Av falls out on Shabbat or Sunday, then there are
2 Shabbatot during the Nine Days - so one would need _2_ clean sets of
Shabbat clothes if one were to wear fresh clothes for Shabbat
Chazon/Erev Tish'a B'Av.  So that would argue against the second theory.


From: Yisrael Dubitsky <yidubitsky@...>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 12:11:26 -0400
Subject: Portable mikva'ot?

Apparently there is a new type of mikvah which is portable. Does anyone
know anything about it, technically and halakhically? Which rav has
given his hekhsher to this?

Any information would be appreciated.

Yisrael Dubitsky


From: Perry Zamek <jerusalem@...>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 11:51:29 +0200
Subject: Re: Queen=wife of king - was groom/bride=melech/malkah

Aliza N. Fischman wrote:
>If you look in Megilat Esther, you will see that Achashverosh was only
>king because he was married to Vashti, the granddaughter of

My understanding was that Achashverosh was a usurper, who, to
"reinforce" his claim to the throne, married Vashti. His kingship was
not due to the marriage, but due to his usurpation of the throne. He did
what many such upstarts do -- he married someone from the previous royal
family, in order to cement relations with the previous ruling class.

Perry Zamek


From: Beth and David Cohen <bdcohen@...>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 08:59:19 -0400
Subject: Shabbat electric wheel chair

<<I am a wheelchair user and some time back there was a discussion about
power (or electric) wheelchairs modified for use on shabbos. I
understand that this is done by an organization named Tzomet in
Israel. Does anyone have the contact info for this organization ?
Elisha Kobre>>

Zomet Institute
Alon Shevut, Gush Etzion 90940
Tel # 02-931442

BTW, a shabbat electric wheelchair, according Dirctor Ezra Rosenfeld, was
one of their original projects. It was started by R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach
zt"l who apparently had a neighbor with an electric wheel chair who was
stranded at home every shabbat.

David I. Cohen


From: .cp. <chips@...>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 11:04:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Starting Devarim Sheni at Eicha

My understanding is that those who use the 'Eicha' tune for that posuk
don't start Sheini there, but those who use regular tune do.


End of Volume 36 Issue 84