Volume 43 Number 30
                 Produced: Tue Jun 29 21:09:14 US/Eastern 2004

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Appropriating other Religions' Ritual Objects (2)
         [Josh Backon, Yehuda Landy]
Avot and Torah laws (2)
         [Josh Backon, Harlan Braude]
Avot following Torah
         [Joel Rich]
Child Determining Kashrut of a Sefer Torah
         [Y. Askotzky]
         [Mark Steiner]
Custom of naming after deceased family members
Headgear and Clothes
         [Martin Stern]
L'Maan Achai V'Rayai
Obligation of being the "Tzenter"
         [Shimon Lebowitz]
Quoting partial p'sukim
         [Martin Stern]
Single-handled faucet
         [Avi Frydman]
An unidentified Rashi
         [Yehonatan & Randy Chipman]
         [Caela Kaplowitz]
"Wonder" Stories
         [Joel Rich]


From: <BACKON@...> (Josh Backon)
Date: Tue,  29 Jun 2004 14:07 +0200
Subject: Re: Appropriating other Religions' Ritual Objects

Now for a little comic relief. Israeli cell phones have user selectable
ring tones with hundreds available. On more than one occasion, I have
heard Xmas carols emanating from a cell phone and rolled on the floor
laughing when the cell phone owner is a Charedi !

Josh Backon

From: Yehuda Landy <nzion@...>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 13:10:24 +0200
Subject: Re: Appropriating other Religions' Ritual Objects

Hi. I agree with your feelings and actually share/d your resentment.
However from a halachic point of view, we have a rule "ain hekdesh
lavodat kochavim" - meaning verbally designating an item for avodah
zorah, does not forbid the item. I therefore cannot see any reason to
forbid using the decorations.

            Yehuda Landy


From: <BACKON@...> (Josh Backon)
Date: Tue,  29 Jun 2004 14:20 +0200
Subject: Re: Avot and Torah laws

Milk in the udder of a shechted cow is discussed in Yoreh Deah Siman 90.
The milk itself is called "chalav shechuta" and is forbidden only
rabbinically to be cooked with meat. The udder itself needs to opened up
crosswise and banged on the wall to remove any residual milk. I won't go
into the details if the food is meant to be roasted, to be cooked
separately, or to be cooked with other types of meat, and the
differences of opinion (Rashi vs. Rabbeinu Tam vs. RIF vs. Ramban and
RAN vs. Baal haTerumot).

Josh Backon

From: Harlan Braude <hbraude@...>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 08:25:08 -0400
Subject: RE: Avot and Torah laws

> > usual explanation given there is that he first served the 
> > curds then separately served the meat, but that is not the
> > plain reading of the Torah, which simply says he served both:period.

The Torah says that Avraham Avinu stood over them as they ate. Someone
once suggested to me that he was actually watching over them to make
sure they didn't mix the dairy and meat foods. That explanation works
well with the opinion that the dishes were served concurrently.

> ... An hour between milk and meat sounds correct to me.

They were from Holland?


From: <Joelirich@...> (Joel Rich)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 08:12:42 EDT
Subject: Re: Avot following Torah

      However, as far as I remember seeing, what is common to all is
      that they only level they are assumed to be following is the
      d'oriaca level (Torah law) and it is not assumed that they
      followed all the rabannan's, chumrahs etc.

Not so-the talmud says they followed even the Rabbinic Eruv requirements.

Joel Rich


From: Y. Askotzky <sofer@...>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 09:24:30 +0200
Subject: Child Determining Kashrut of a Sefer Torah

I'd like to clarify the concept of a sheilat tinok, asking a child to
read a letter of the Torah. Here is a quote from my recently published

Occasionally a poseik, halachic authority, (or one who is expert in the
laws of the formations of the letters) will be in doubt how to rule. He
will feel there are positions in halachah to consider a letter both
kosher and passul, unfit. He will suggest that a child who knows the
aleph-beis but has not yet learned to read be asked. Such a child can
judge without any influences. One must be careful to ask the child in
such a way that he remains impartial.  It is a common misconception that
whenever someone is in doubt about the kashrut of a letter a child may
be asked. A child can only be asked if an expert in these halachos feels
that a letter falls into the realm of halachic doubt; it is not
acceptable if the doubt is due to lack of knowledge.

One who has thoroughly studied the laws of the letters, such as from the
Mishnas sofrim (Mishna Brura), yet has no or minimal shimush, practical
training, would generally not be considered an expert to be able decide
whether a child may be asked other than in clear cut cases such as the
leg of the vav being in the middle between a yud and a proper vav and
the like.

kol tuv,
Rabbi Yerachmiel Askotzky, certified sofer & examiner
<sofer@...>  www.stam.net  1-888-404-STAM(7826)  718-874-8220


From: Mark Steiner <marksa@...>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 15:00:56 +0300
Subject: RE: Christmas

First, I would like to point out that the term "Xmas" is not an
appropriate substitute for "Christmas."  The letter "X", which
corresponds to the first letter in the Greek word 'Christos' is used as
a euphemism by Christians, who regard the word Christos as too holy to
pronounce.  (Lehavdil, Jews often say "Hashem" instead of saying the
actual Divine Name.)  Thus by writing Xmas, one is actually implying
that 'Christ' is too holy to pronounce.

As for Christmas decorations in the sukkah, though they do rub against
the sensibilities of many Jews who come here, they are not formally
forbidden, since we have a rule "ein hekdesh la`avoda zara," i.e. even
decorations that are specifically designated for idolatry are not
forbidden until they are actually used for that purpose.  I agree,
however, that a case might be made that even if they are not forbidden,
they should not be used for a mitzvah.

I conclude with a true story (which is the real motive for this post): a
friend of mine from the States was visiting Jerusalem on Sukkot and
decided to go "Sukkah-hopping".  He soon found himself in the Orthodox
quarter of Jerusalem called Geulah, in a beautifully decorated sukkah.
In haredi circles, it is now customary to decorate the sukkah with
pictures of great rabbis, and this sukkah was no exception.  One of the
pictures on the wall, was of an old man with a white beard, red uniform,
red hat with a white tassel, sitting on a sled driven by reindeer.  My
friend asked a little child, "Ver is dos?"  The answer came "A rov fun


From: <chips@...>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 22:47:03 -0700
Subject: Re: Custom of naming after deceased family members

> Interested in knowing when the custom of naming newborn children
> after deceased family members began.

When I asked my Rosh Yeshiva this when in post high school yeshiva he
promptly responded Aharan haKohen & Elishava with their oldest son.

There were also Yosef's in the generation around the time of the



From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 08:53:15 +0100
Subject: Re: Headgear and Clothes

on 29/6/04 4:09 am, Edward Ehrlich <eehrlich@...> wrote:

> I always heard that Chassidic headgear (and other clothes) was based on
> that of the 18th Century Polish middle class or some group such as tax
> collectors who came from the middle class and not of the nobility.

I was not aware that there was much of a Polish middle class in the 18th
century unless this refers to the szlachta, the gentry or minor
nobility. In any case the distinction suggested is not particularly
important, what really counts is that the streimel was as much a copy of
the dress of the 'better' elements of Polish society as the top hat or
tzilinder worn by Western Jews at one time, and not a specifically
Jewish form of headgear.

Martin Stern


From: <HHgoldsmith@...>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 08:46:53 EDT
Subject: L'Maan Achai V'Rayai

Would your community like to do something pro-active for Eretz Yisrael?
Email me for details about a simple, but meaningful, weekly program
called L'Maan Achai V'Rayai, which provides spiritual, emotional, and
financial support for Israel all in forty-five minutes.


From: Shimon Lebowitz <shimonl@...>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 14:20:41 +0200
Subject: Re: Obligation of being the "Tzenter"

>  and invariably someone would call out that they needed a
> "tzenter" -- a tenth man for the minyan.
> Can anyone point to halachic (not social) discussions re: obligations to
> be the tzenter?

Your list seems like looking for excuses *not* to be the tzenter. But
what I would like to know is: is there ANY obligation whatsoever *yes*
to be one?

If I am on my way to shul (or a ball game), why does the fact that
another shul has nine men obligate me to change my plans?

The only thing I ever remember hearing about a tzenter was that it is
advantageous to be one (but I forgot the source of that too). Of course,
it might be a gmilut chasadim too, being a "nice guy" and helping them
out, but an *obligation*?



From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 09:31:42 +0100
Subject: Re: Quoting partial p'sukim

on 29/6/04 4:09 am, Mark Symons <msymons@...> wrote:

> Re not quoting part-p'sukim, there are exceptions, eg as ArtScroll
> points out, in the frequently appearing verse in Tefila "H' melech H'
> malach H' yimloch l'olam va'ed", which sounds like a pasuk in its own
> right, "H' melech" and "H' malach" are only parts of p'sukim.

"H' melech" and "H' malach" may be parts of pesukim but they are such
short phrases that it is difficult to specify which pesukim were meant,
so they hardly can be considered as quoting part pesukim.

In any case, there is an opinion that this is not a problem with "half
pesukim" where the part quoted is the whole phrase up to, or after, an
etnachta, the major punctuation break.

A much more serious problem is in the saying of kedushah where "kadosh,
kadosh, kadosh etc." is a part pasuk commencing after a zakef katan, a
much more minor disjunction. There is an opinion (not generally accepted
in practice as far as I know) that because of this one should not say
the kedushah in Yotser Or when davenning in the absence of a minyan.

In the regular kedushah in chazarat hashats this can be avoided by
listening with intent to the shats' introduction which ends with the
missing words "vekara zeh el zeh veamar" (or, for those who follow the
Mishnah Berurah instead of the Shulchan Arukh, saying it oneself).

There is a common practice in the kedushah desidra of the tsibbur saying
"veatah kadosh yosheiv tehillot yisrael vekara zeh el zeh veamar" and
then waiting for the shats before continuing. They do not seem to
appreciate that the first 5 words are from a completely separate pasuk
from the remainder, again raising the same problem of part pesukim.

Martin Stern


From: Avi Frydman <frydman@...>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 12:17:47 GMT
Subject: Single-handled faucet

Kashrus Magazine has been running an "ALERT" box for the past few issues
warning people about the problem of inadvertently using hot water when
using the faucet.  Their suggestion was to shut off the hot water
underneath the sink, as was posted recently.  I remember an ad in the
Jewish Press a few years ago that offered an "extension" to be used to
easily turn this handle without crawling underneath.



From: Yehonatan & Randy Chipman <yonarand@...>
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 18:32:28 +0200
Subject: An unidentified Rashi

     I'm wondering if anyone can help me in locating the source of an 
unidentified Rashi.  Sefat Emet, on Parshat Hukkat, begins his second 
teaching for 5631 (the first year of his teaching), with the followng 
words:  "Be-Rashi z"l:  gavoah shenitga'eh ve-heit yashpil atzmo," etc.  
("In Rashi obm:  a haughty (or "high") person who became proud and 
sinned should cast himself low").  He then proceeds as is his way to 
offer a Hasidic interpretation of this passage.  Nowhere does he 
identify the verse on which Rashi is commenting here, nor the subject, 
nor does he even  state explicitly that it is from parshat Hukkat (but 
if not, why would he open a derasha for Hukkat with these words?).  
Skimming the Rashi on the parsha, I was unable to find it.
    Does anyone know where this comes from? 
     Kol tuv,
     Yehonatan Chipman


From: Caela Kaplowitz <caelak@...>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 08:12:55 -0400
Subject: Wigs

<Rebyitzmotcha@...> said: "True. But the PHYSICAL hanaa a person feels
from wearing a wig IS considered hanaah ..."

What physical hanaah does one have from wearing a wig? Spriritual, I
grant you, but physical? A wig is very hot, pulls on your own hair if
you need to wear clips (I do) and, for the most part (depending on the
style, of course), can't be pulled back much off your face lest your own
hair show at the margins.

Caela Kaplowitz
Baltimore, MD


From: <Joelirich@...> (Joel Rich)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 08:13:50 EDT
Subject: Re: "Wonder" Stories

      >I'm not sure these stories translate well to more worldly members
      >of society(even orthodox society) .

      I don't think that worldliness must perforce carry a certain jaded
      quality.  I think that too often we assume that people who don't
      doubt are naifs.

I'm not saying what worldliness requires, just making a sociological

Joel Rich


End of Volume 43 Issue 30