Volume 44 Number 57
                    Produced: Wed Sep  1  6:02:42 EDT 2004

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

         [Avi Feldblum]
Brit - kvatter/in - nidda issues
         [Gershon Dubin]
         [Tzvi Stein]
Following the minhagim of the husband
Followup on Clothing
         [Fran Glazer]
Gaps in Halacha Observance (2)
         [Tzvi Stein, Eli Delman]
Laxity in putting on Tefilin
New Mother Not Leaving House?
         [Shimon Lebowitz]
Pasuk for Leib (3)
         [David Curwin, Eliezer Wenger, Elazar M Teitz]
Rinat Yisrael Siddur and Rabbi Shlomo Tal
         [Gilad J. Gevaryahu]
Stam yeynam and yayyin nesech
         [Harold Greenberg]
Vegetarianism - Two more reasons
         [Leah S. Gordon]


From: Avi Feldblum <mljewish@...>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 05:36:30 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Administrivia

Hello All,

Just a quick note to say that after this mornings issues, we may be off
the air for a few days and return either before or after Shabbat. 



From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:18:36 -0400
Subject: Brit - kvatter/in - nidda issues

> If this is one of the reasons why we have middle people in the
> ceremony, then this would mean, that the lady who receives the baby from
> the mother could not be a nidda if handing him to her husband. (Having a
> non-married couple, I assume would be a less of a problem as the laws of
> "harchaka" = "distancing" are less strict.)
> Would their be a preference in finding a couple to do this where the
> wife is obviously pregnant, thus publicly not a nidda? That way one
> limits the potential embarrassments when approaching people.

My experience has been that you ask the couple beforehand if they'll
accept the honor.  If they decline, for nidda reasons or other, their
confidentiality has been maintained.  I've never seen it done by a
couple where the wife is pregnant BTW, but it is often given as a segula
for childless couples, even if newlyweds.



From: Tzvi Stein <Tzvi.Stein@...>
Subject: Re: Clothing/Sleeves

> The gemora in Mishna challa and Brochos 24a discuss the question as to
> whether a woman who happens to be kneading dough stark naked [is this
> something that was common at the time of the gemora or was it merely a
> hypothetical?] is required to go and clothe herself in order to make the
> bracha to take challa.  And the conclusion of the gemora is that she
> need not go and clothe herself, so long as she is sitting down in such a
> way that she effectively covers the key parts

I'm not sure whether kneading dough stark naked was common or
hypothetical, but keep in mind that (a) it was a great deal more
difficult to clean clothes in those days (b) how messy kneading is and
(c) the fact that people had much less clothes in those days.  In fact
many people had only one garment.


From: etzion <atzion@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:55:37 +0200
Subject: Re: Following the minhagim of the husband

1) The law of woman following the man's minhagim is based on the
principle of shalom bayit Consequently if the husband doesn't mind there
is no reason why a woman can not continue to hold her own minhagim .

2) The Maharsham holds that the obligation of a family to follow the
parents minhag is only on deeds-not on prayers.Consequently she can
continue to daven her own nusach

3)AS anyone who lives in Israel knows there are many synagogues where
the congregations follow the nusach of the Baal tefila- whether it is
Ashkenaz' Sefard' or Adot Mizrach.Baalei Tefila daven as they wish. All
nushchaot are kosher! Likewise a women should be free to daven as she is


From: Fran Glazer <fsglazer@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:53:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Followup on Clothing

Chana Luntz wrote:

"But this [discussion of whether a woman may make a brocha when in the 
mikvah] is all vis a vis the woman herself, what about the woman vis a
vis other women.  Well this is a maklokus rishonim [dispute among the
rishonim] between the Rosh and the Rashba.  The Rosh holds that for a
woman to make a brocha in front of another woman, the other woman must
be clothed to the same extent required as for a man (I think this was
the position already suggested to you on this list).  However the Rashba
holds not like this, but rather a woman can make a brocha in front of
another woman, just so long as the key parts are covered (ie as per

Does saying Amen constitute a brocha?  Doesn't the person who says amen
get "credit" for saying the brocha, too?  So does this mean that the
shomeret (mikvah attendant), who listens to the brocha of the woman who
is immersing in the mikvah (and is therefore not clothed), should not
say amen to her brocha?



From: Tzvi Stein <Tzvi.Stein@...>
Subject: Re: Gaps in Halacha Observance

>Ira Bauman asked <<< for example the discussion I am learning right now
>in the last chapter of Pesachim about the the text of Havdalah, seem as
>if they are being tackled for the first time.  I'm sure this was not so
>but what was the mechanism here? >>>

See the book The Dynamics of Dispute: The Makings of Machlokess in
Talmudic Times (Amazon link: http://tinyurl.com/4jycx )
It discusses your question in exhaustive detail.

From: Eli Delman <eli.delman@...>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:26:04 -0400
Subject: RE: Gaps in Halacha Observance

After the Anshei Knesses HaGedola formulated the text for Havdalah, its
practice was on and off for a while, see Berachos 33a, where such
reasoning is used to explain how there could be differences of opinion
in the proper way to recite "Atta Chonantanu".

In Megillah 21b, the Talmud deals with the question of how the Aliyahs
are apportioned on Rosh Chodesh. The text ("Parshas Rosh Chodesh Keitzad
Korin Osah") would appear to indicate that is indeed "being tackled for
the first time". The Sifsei Chachamim there, however, comments that they
definitely knew "how" the verses are divided, since it is a common
practice, but they were looking for the logic behind the resolution.



From: etzion <atzion@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:45:04 +0200
Subject: Re: Laxity in putting on Tefilin

See the introduction of Rabbi Moshe Couchi author of the Halachot
gedolot where he states that he preached in France on the importance of
putting on Tefillin daily-and thar due to his efforts the Jews once
again took on the Halacha of daily observance of Tefillin


From: Shimon Lebowitz <shimonl@...>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 18:45:09 +0200
Subject: Re: New Mother Not Leaving House?

Martin Stern <md.stern@...> commented:
> Whether the husband say "hagomel" on her
> behalf or she does so herself (which is not a widespread custom) 

I also do not remember this custom being common *in Hutz la'Aretz*, but
now that I live in Yerushalayim I see it a lot. Women after childbirth
say Hagomel in our shul after kriat haTorah, and when the baby was a boy
I have also seen it done at the brit.  (I have this funny feeling that I
saw it done at a sholom zachor too, when the birth was early enough in
the week that the mother was already home, but I am not sure I trust
this memory).

I do not remember *ever* seeing a husband say the brocha for his wife,
except possibly Rav Henkin (who perhaps will read this and answer). I
say "possibly" because I am *sure* I heard him say Hagomel *for someone
else*, but I no longer remember if it was for his wife or another family
member for whatever reason.

Ketiva veChatima Tova,
Shimon Lebowitz                     mailto:<shimonl@...>
Jerusalem, Israel                   mailto:<shimonl@...>


From: David Curwin <tobyndave@...>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:29:02 +0200
Subject: Pasuk for Leib

> One of my best friends' Hebrew name is Leib (Lamed-Yud-Yud-Beit).  He
> is looking for the right passuk he should say at the end of the amida,
> beginning with Lamed and finishing by Beit.  I could not find one for
> him in the few different siddur editions I have."

I've put up a list of all the p'sukim at:


I guess he can pick one that best fits him....


From: Eliezer Wenger <ewenger@...>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:13:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Pasuk for Leib

Breishis (Genesis) 27:9

From: Elazar M Teitz <remt@...>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:38:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Pasuk for Leib

     One possibility is "L'hatzil mimaves nafsham, ulchayosam bara'av."
(T'hillim 33:19)

     You might also inform your friend that the correct spelling of Leib
is with one yod, not two.

Elazar M. Teitz


From: <Gevaryahu@...> (Gilad J. Gevaryahu)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:00:36 EDT
Subject: Rinat Yisrael Siddur and Rabbi Shlomo Tal

Rose Landowne says (MJv44n34):
> .... but I just wanted to point out that in the late 1960's, while
> teaching in Machon Gold, Shlomo Tal (and he was also the head of the
> school at the time) the editor of the Rinat Yisrael sidur, was known as
> "Mar Tal", not "Rabbi".

I only realized now that I did not respond to the question by Rose
Landowne. Was Shlomo Tal a Rabbi or not? Shlomo Tal was the author of
many articles and books, mostly dealing with liturgy. He will be
remembered the most for his contribution as the editor of Siddur Rinat
Yisrael. I think that Rose Landowne is correct that Shlomo Tal did not
use titles before his name. I can relate that when he came to my Bar
Mitzvah and gave me a book as a present, he signed it "Mishpachat Tal."
Shlomo Tal was a very modest man, and did not call himself with any
titles, but indeed, in at least two of his books listed at the National
and University Library in Jerusalem he did call himself "Rabbi."  See:

When he died (1998), Yeshivat Har Etzion put a condolenses note to his
daughter and family where it says "On the passing of your father Rabbi
Dr. Shlomo Tal," so he had a Ph.D. too.

Retired Israeli Supreme Court Justice Tzvi Tal is the brother of the
late Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Tal.

I browsed today the archives of MailJewish to see what was written about
him by us, MailJewish members, and we indeed contributed a great deal.
Look for example about the significance of the version of the poem by
Sol Stokar "yedid nefesh" and why Tal went back to print the original
version in the
siddur. http://www.ottmall.com/mj_ht_arch/v12/mj_v12i04.html

Gilad J. Gevaryahu


From: <shaviv@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:24:23 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Stam yeynam and yayyin nesech

On both of these topics see the extensive discussion and references in
the excellent recent book by Prof. Haym Soloveichik: "Yeynam - sachar
b'yeynam shel goyim - al gilgulah shel halachah b'olam ha'maaseh" / Tel
Aviv, 2003 / Am Oved "Alma" / ISBN 965-13-1587-3.  (Let me take this
opportunity, too, to recommend www.booksinternational.com as an
outstanding and efficient online source for ordering books published in

The title may be more or less translated as : " 'Their wine' - trade in
the wine of Gentiles - on the fate of halachah in the real world". The
English title in the book is given as: "Principles and Pressures -
Jewish trade in Gentile wine in the middle Ages" !

Most of the book is about the trade (and the accompanying halachik and
other sources) in yayyin nesech in early medieval France and Germany.
Somewhere in the footnotes we are promised a further book on the history
of stam yeynam.  It is eagerly awaited. Meanwhile, someone should
translate this fine and important book into English. It is unlikely to
make the ArtScroll list.


From: Harold Greenberg <harold.greenberg@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 18:25:37 +0200
Subject: Vegetarianism

In an article in Time Magazine - Should You be a Vegetarian? -
http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020715/story.html July 7, 2002
-Steven Davis, professor of animal science at Oregon State University,
points to the number of field animals inadvertently killed during crop
production and harvest. One study showed that simply mowing an alfalfa
field caused a 50% reduction in the gray-tailed vole (mouse)
population. Mortality rates increase with each pass of the tractor to
plow, plant and harvest. Rabbits, mice and pheasants, he says, are the
indiscriminate "collateral damage" of row crops and the grain industry.

It seems that many vegetarians do not take the deaths of these animals
into account.  How can they think that vegetarians are more humane?



From: Leah S. Gordon <leah@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 08:07:46 -0700
Subject: Vegetarianism - Two more reasons

Martin Stern and his responders have come up with reasins 1-6 for
Vegetarianism (and then discussed the Jewish implications of all).  I
suggest two more reasons, one of which was mentioned also by Adina

7. Eating meat means it is too long until one can enjoy milchig foods
again.  Don't laugh!  Some of us really enjoy our dairy snacks.

8. Eating meat means it is inconvenient to have a very small kosher
kitchen.  For instance, in tiny apartments and/or dormitory suites,
often the kitchen is so small that if you had both milk and meat, errors
would be almost inevitable.  (Some might say that you could have just
meat and parve, instead of just milk and parve, but I would not choose
that as a woman, needing tons of calcium in my diet.)



End of Volume 44 Issue 57