Volume 37 Number 20
                 Produced: Wed Sep 25 21:33:10 US/Eastern 2002

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Artscroll vs. Birnbaum
         [E. Stieglitz]
Asking a non-Jew to ask another non-Jew
Beyond Melitz Yosher
         [David Charlap]
Eiruv for women too
         [Glenn Farber]
Havdalah and orange juice
         [David Ziants]
Men vs women (Boro park)
         [Janet Rosenbaum]
Seating and Muslims
Tallis Creases
         [Carl Singer]
Tallis in bathroom
         [Janice Gelb]
Travel on (or close to) Shabbat & Yom Tov
Yamim Noraim Questions
         [Shmuel Himelstein]


From: E. Stieglitz <ephraim0@...>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:52:58 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Artscroll vs. Birnbaum

For the Yom Tov Amidah, the Birnbaum siddur starts the last
paragraph of the middle section with

 "Elokeinu v'elokei avoteinu [rtzei vmnuchateinu] kadsheinu

while the Artscroll has the same paragraph as

 "[Elokeinu v'elokei avoteinu rtzei vmnuchateinu] kadsheinu

The words within brackets [...] are supposed to be said on
Shabbat only.

What is the reason for the difference here?


From: .cp. <chips@...>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 20:31:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Asking a non-Jew to ask another non-Jew

}From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
}  Zev Sero <zev.sero@...> was astute enough to declare on
}Wed, 4 Sep 2002 14:18:29 -0400 :
}>If your Rabbi has said otherwise, then your Rabbi is wrong
}>(`ta'ah bidvar mishna'). It really is as simple as that.

}If that's so, then I suppose that there are lots (and lots) of rabbis in
}the world who are guilty of this error <g>.

Really? none of the Rabbis on this list have supported your and your
Rav's claim, plus I have sent email to few Rabbis not on this list, none
of whom have supported you either.

So if there are any Rabbis on this list who do support the p'sak of this
Rav in total (*including* not being allowed to stop on the curb or
crosswalk or walk across a driveway), please speak up. Else I think the
moderator shuld deem this as the mistaken belief of a das yochid and the
matter closed.



From: David Charlap <shamino@...>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 23:45:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Beyond Melitz Yosher

Nachman Yaakov Ziskind wrote:
> Don't Rashi (and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch) put forth the idea that children
> (at least young ones) die for the sin of their parents?

They state that this is sometimes the case.  This is probably based on
the fact that King David lost one of his children due to one of his own
sins.  Since it happened once, it is probably safe to assume that it
happens on other occasions, when there is no prophet to explicitly say

It would be incredibly presumptuous to claim that this is the only
possible reason why children die, however.  In the absence of direct
prophecy, no human being can ever claim to know the specific reason why
God takes any specific action.  We can only make guesses based on
precedents from Tanach and our own intuition.  I would be very shocked
to hear any halachic authority make any other claim.

Claiming that children always die because of their parents' sins would
also be incredibly callous and cruel.  Can you imagine going to a
mourning parent and telling them that they are to blame for their own
child's death?  You couldn't come up with a worse way to inflict pain if
you tried for a year.

> I realize that this idea is unpalatable, but the alternative idea - that
> G-d randomly punishes infants for no good reason - sounds worse.

Why does it have to be one or the other?  What is so terrible about
admitting the fact that sometimes we are not capable of understanding
why God does what He does?

-- David


From: Glenn Farber <Farb@...>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 15:52:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Eiruv for women too

Chaim Shapiro had asked about differential applicability of the eruv
for men and women.  

In Vol 37 #08 Emmanuel Ifrah referred to a shiur he had heard based
on Yalkut Yossef: 

> He says that even though Sefaradim hold like the Rambam that there is
> indeed a reshut ha-rabim de-orayta and that consequently, they should
> not carry within an eruv, one can be lenient as far as women are
> concerned because not carrying on shabbat forces them to stay secluded
> at home during the whole shabbat with their infants. Men who are
> obviously not in the same position should be stringent and not carry in
> the eruv.

That only takes us back to Chaim's original statement.  If one accepts
that the eruv is not within a carmelit, but rather within a reshut
ha-rabim, then hotza'ah (carrying on Shabbat) is a forbidden melakha
there.  How could the source hold that it is permissible to be lenient
with a melakha d'orayta?

A while back on the list, reference was made to the grama wheelchair
which was commissioned to protect k'vod habriot for those otherwise
stuck at home over Shabbat.  I wonder if Immanuel recalls if this
leniency used a similar rationale.

Moadim L'Simchah, 

Glenn Farber


From: David Ziants <dziants@...>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 11:40:02 +0200
Subject: Re: Havdalah and orange juice

From: I Kasdan <Ikasdan@...>
> May orange juice be used for Havdalah?

There is a difference between the orange juice concentrate that one
mixes with water (we used to call this "orange squash") and natural
orange juice. I learnt that orange squash is completely forbidden,
whereas natural orange juice could be OK depending on the circumstances.

The following is what I learnt from Shemirat Shabbat K'hilchata vol 2
chap 60 clauses 1-9 (p 243-245).

If there is no wine then "hamar medina" may be used. "hamar medina" is
defined as a local beverage that is not primarily a thirst quencher but
has importance and is drank for the honour of the meal or honour of the
guests. So the question is whether "orange juice" is considered "hamar

Clause 7 ad loc says that water, soda water and other "light drinks"
should never be used, even in case of emergency.  I was taught that
"sugared water" (ie mock flavoured drinks), squashes and fizzy drinks
all fall under these categories.

There was once a case when someone heard havdala that was made
inadvertently on a concentrate mix, and the local posek ruled that he
should repeat havdala.

Clause 5 ad loc permits orange/grapefruit juice provided it has its
local importance and is drank for honour. In Israel it certainly falls
within this category, and I believe this is also the case in the UK and
in the USA.

Here we are talking about natural juices, and I learnt that this is also
OK if diluted with a small amount of water, but not as a squash. This
still leaves the question of up to what percentage of water is allowed.

Mo'adim v'simcha and chag same'ach,

David Ziants
Ma'aleh Adumim, Israel


From: Janet Rosenbaum <jerosenb@...>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 09:41:46 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Men vs women (Boro park)

Emmanuel Ifrah <eifrah@...> writes:
> I repeat here what I heard in a shi'ur based on Yalkut Yossef (compiled
> by the son of R. Ovadia Yossef).
> He says that even though Sefaradim hold like the Rambam that there is
> indeed a reshut ha-rabim de-orayta and that consequently, they should
> not carry within an eruv, one can be lenient as far as women are
> concerned because not carrying on shabbat forces them to stay secluded
> at home during the whole shabbat with their infants. Men who are
> obviously not in the same position should be stringent and not carry in
> the eruv.

I'm not sure whether this position answers the question.

If a family takes a walk together on shabbat, this position would
require the woman always to push the stroller so that her husband
doesn't have to compromise his chumra; even though we've phrased it in
terms of chumrot and kulot, the end result is that women are performing
actions that their husbands cannot.

Moadim l'simcha,


From: chihal <chihal@...>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 16:36:45 -0500
Subject: Seating and Muslims

Shalom, All:
	Regarding outright exclusion or **even just** separate seating
for men and women in a restaurant, which means excluding observant
daughters of Israel, my wife floored me with this observation.
	The meshuga (crazy/overboard) Muslims -- Saudis, Taliban etc. --
as apposed to mainline Muslims, "jail" their women in veils and head to
toe coverings. 
	"What are they afraid of?" my wife asked. "Are those Muslims so
nuts that the sight of a woman's face or ankles will send them wild with
passion? Have they no elementary control?"
	IMHO we are obligated to raise a similar question regarding the
restaurant in the ultra-Orthodox neighborhood that excluded women as
sitting patrons.  Do those men really feel that just looking or
listening to women talk will set off base urges? Lead them to sin? 
	If they truly feel that way, what is the difference between them
and Muslims who force women into chadors and bourkas when the women
leave their homes?
	Remember, those Muslims are also driven by what they honestly
believe is piety, but the rest of the world -- including mainstream
observant Muslims and the great majority of Jews -- deems the Taliban
and Saudi take on women repulsive.
	How do other mail-jewish readers feel? 
Yeshaya (Charles Chi) Halevi
chihal@ ync.net


From: <CARLSINGER@...> (Carl Singer)
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 14:29:02 EDT
Subject: Tallis Creases

A good ironing will take out all creases -- when I lived in suburban
Philadelphia, the local dry cleaner (not Jewish, BTW) would dry clean
Tallis for free -- we were good customers, anyone, but the gesture was
much appreciated.  I always did so before Pesach.  The cure re: finding
one's own tallis -- assuming non-distinct atara -- is to have one's
initial's discretely embroidered (in white) in one corner.

Kol Tov


From: Janice Gelb <j_gelb@...>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 20:50:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Tallis in bathroom

Goldfinger, Andy <Andy.Goldfinger@...> wrote:
> Although a Tallis may originally have been merely a garment, nowadays it
> is worn only for dovening (prayer).  My understanding of the halacha is
> that anything that is specifically intended for dovening is not to be
> brought into a bathroom.  Thus, chassidim remove their gartlach (black
> belts used for dovening) before entering a bathroom even though there is
> nothing "holy" about a belt.

Another data point: the atara of many tallitot displays the bracha for
donning the tallit. That may be another reason why people tend to remove
them before entering a bathroom.

-- Janice


From: Anonymous
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 23:08:48 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Travel on (or close to) Shabbat & Yom Tov

A friend and I made plans to catch an express train to my home on Erev
Rosh Hashanah. According to the train schedule, we believed that we were
leaving plenty of time to get to our destination before the holiday.

I decided to arrive at the station 45 minutes early because I had not
yet purchased my ticket. When I got there, I saw that the express train
we had agreed to catch was cancelled, but another train to the same
location was about to leave the station. I jumped on this one, and left
a message on my friend's mobile that he should hurry. Unfortunately, he
arrived at the station just as this earlier train was pulling away.

Afterwards, I discovered that not only had one train been cancelled, but
that the next 3-4 trains had also been cancelled. My friend was left in
a situation where he would either have to find food, lodging, and a shul
at the very last minute, or violate Shabbat & Rosh Hashanah. After
speaking with somebody who he trusted, he was informed that as long as
he boarded the train and paid his fare before Shabbat, he might be able
to rely on a kulah (halachic leniency). This is what he did, and when he
arrived, he walked from the station.

I'm curious to hear what the possibilities are for a situation like
this. What kulah (if any) was he relying upon? What are the different
halachot which apply?


From: Shmuel Himelstein <himels@...>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 19:28:09 +0400
Subject: Yamim Noraim Questions

(I) In our Selichot, we have the "Shema Koleinu" section said with the
Aron open.

There are two issues I'd appreciate clarification on in this regard:

a) On what basis do some congregations say the verse of "Amareinu
Ha'azina" aloud, and on what basis do others not do so?

b) After "Amareinu" there is a verse, "Yiheyu Leratzon," which no one
says aloud. If it is supposed to be said, when is supposed to be said,
and if so, why is it to be said quietly?

(II) The next is a problem that has puzzled me for years:

When the congregation concludes Pesukei D'zimra toward the end of
"Nishmat" on the Yamim Nora'im, the Chazan of Pesukei D'Zimra stops
before the word "Hamelech." Assuming the congregation also stops at that
point (and maybe it should not), when does the congregation recite the
text from "Hamelech" up to "Uvemakhalot"? Along with the Chazan? Or does
the Congregation end its Pesukei D'Zimra just before "Uvemakhalot" and
then wait for the Chazan to catch up? The same basic question applies to
the Shalosh Regalim, when the Chazan of Pesukei D'Zimra stops just
before "HaKeil Beta'atzumot."

(III) Finally - and this is only a question for those who use Nusach
Ashkenaz - in general, the passage of "Befi Yesharim" is so formulated
that the first letters of the second word in each phrase together spell
out "Yitzchak" (Yesharim, Tzaddikim, Chassifdim, Kedoshim). In Nusach
Sefarad, the third letter of each third word in turn spells out "Rivka."
That is not the case in Nusach Ashkenaz. However, I've seen that many
Ashkenaz Siddurim, specifically for the Yamim Noraim, follow the Nusach
Sefarad arrangement, thus spelling out "Rivka." Does anyone know why the
Nusach should be changed specifically for the Yamim Nora'im? And to take
it a step further, if one davens Nusach Ashkenaz on a regular basis,
should he make that switch on the Yamim Nora'im?

Shmuel Himelstein


End of Volume 37 Issue 20