Volume 44 Number 92
                    Produced: Wed Sep 22  5:34:43 EDT 2004

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Bishul on Shabbat (was maase rav)
         [Leah Aharoni]
Book of Quotes for Occasions
         [Perry Zamek]
Bracha on Bran Flakes with Milk
         [Reuven Werber]
Following the minhag of your HOST
         [Martin Stern]
Hallel on Yamim Noraim
He / You
High Holiday Services
         [Martin Stern]
MIT's multi-denominational chapel
         [Edward Ehrlich]
Rosh Hashana prayers
         [Martin Stern]
Speckled sticks and sheep
         [Reuben Rudman]


From: Leah Aharoni <leah25@...>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 02:02:20 -0700
Subject: Bishul on Shabbat (was maase rav)

>From Martin Stern:

> 	Many years ago a rav of a suburban London congregation, a bit
> distant from the main strictly Orthodox area, told me of a similar
> incident that occurred to his wife when they were at an Orthodox summer
> camp.  On Shabbat afternoon she arose from her rest a little early and,
> feeling a bit thirsty, decided to go down to the dining room where there
> ...
> was an elderly rebbetsin sitting there who stopped her before she could
> turn the tap (spigot in US English?), took the cup away from her, opened
> the lid of the urn and proceeded to put the cup into the boiling water
> to fill it. She was a bit surprised but assumed that this must be some
> ...
> to hilchot bishul mentioning his wife's query regarding taking water
> from the urn and querying the halachic propriety of preferring to dip
> the kli sheini into the kli rishon. The gentleman immediately responded
> "The tap of the urn is broken!".

This story sounds a bit strange to me since AFAIK one would not be able
to return the urn cover after dipping a cup into a kli rishon. This
halakha applies to food that is not completely cooked (or if there is a
safek). Since the temperature of water in the urn fluctuates, I was
under the impression that the hot water urn also falls under this

Any comments?
Leah Aharoni


From: Perry Zamek <perryza@...>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 13:43:23 +0200
Subject: Re: Book of Quotes for Occasions

Rose Landowne wrote:
>I'm a little behind in my email, but there's a book in Hebrew called
>"V'zot haBracha" by Shyke Shapira which gives brachot you can put in
>cards for all occasions.  It doesn't seem to be by a wellknown
>publisher, but there are phone numbers on the title page: 02 9931075,
>for the writer, and 052 578460 for the publisher.  Also a post office
>box, but no mail code; box 1164 yerushalaim. I wonder, though about the
>mailbox address, because the phone number is one from Efrat, so maybe
>the PO box should be also.

The phone number is not in Efrat, but it is in Gush Etzion.  The PO Box
is probably a Jerusalem one. Use 91010 as the postal code. Also, the
publisher's number is a cellular phone, and the new format would be 052

Gmar Chatimah Tova
Perry Zamek


From: Reuven Werber <reuw@...>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 13:39:37 +0300
Subject: Bracha on Bran Flakes with Milk

    [ The following text is in the "windows-1255" character set. ]
    [ Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set.  ]
    [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]

Does anyone know of recent Halachik rulings on the brachot to be made
before and after eating bran flakes with milk? Please cite sources.

Gmar Chatima Tova,
Reuven Werber


From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:35:55 +0100
Subject: Re: Following the minhag of your HOST

on 21/9/04 10:59 am, Simon Wanderer <simon.wanderer@...> wrote:

> This brings to mind a question I have had for some time.
> As Carl says, some hosts do, indeed, offer guests the option of their
> own Kiddush. Some, however, do not. Whilst I am not an expert, I
> understand that the decision to be Motzei everyone with one Kiddush
> Vs. allowing individual Kiddushes is based on Halachic considerations
> (the precise nature of these is not relevant), but is treated as a
> matter of Minhag (i.e. one tends to follow his family's practice). My
> question is: do you follow the host's or the guest's minhag?
> Perhaps the question can be clarified by illustration:
> -Mr A's Minhag is for individual Kiddush
> -Mr B's Minhag is for collective Kiddush
> Scenario (i) - B is a guest at A's house:
> A offers B to make his own Kiddush; should B decline as his view is that
> collective Kiddush is preferable? But what about the following
> considerations: A would prefer B to make his own and B is a guest in A's
> house; A would (presumably) for that reason, rather not be Motzei B
> Scenario (ii) - A is a guest at B's house:
> Should B offer A to make his own Kiddush? Should B respect A's Minhag,
> or does B's position also include a repugnance of multiple Kiddush in
> his house? If B does offer, should A accept? should he respect his
> host's Minhag or follow his own practice.

Surely Mr A's minhag for individual kiddush does not mean that every
individual must make kiddush separately, only that they may do so if
they wish, otherwise women and unmarried adult children (i.e. post
bar/bat mitsvah) would do so regularly which is, as far as I am aware,
not the custom in such families. Thus Mr B can, in scenario (i), decline
the offer without offence.

As far as scenario (ii) is concerned, Mr B considers it incorrect to
have multiple kiddush makers and need not make an offer except where he
knows his guest is particular to make kiddush for himself when he could
allow the latter to follow what he considers his incorrect practice. At
the very least the guest should have asked before the proceedings began
and not insist where the host was unaware, and therefore did not make
such an offer. To do otherwise seems to me to be a lapse of derekh

Martin Stern


From: Yakir <yakirhd@...>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 13:59:44 +0200
Subject: Hallel on Yamim Noraim

<chips@...> asked:
> Where are the sources that discuss this issue?

To the best of my knowledge, it was universally accepted that Hallel is
not said on RH & YK.

This is based on the Midrash ( Masechet Rosh HaShana 32b and elsewhere):
The administering angels asked G-d: "why don't Israel say Hallel before You 
on R.H. and Y.K. ?".
He answered them: "Is it conceivable that the King sits on the throne of 
Justice with the books of the living and the dead open before Him, and 
Israel would recite Hallel ?"

As to the related more general questions e.g. is there a Mitzva of
Simchat Yom Tov (Joy of the HolyDay) on R.H. ?, is it
permissible/preferable to fast on R.H. ?, what aspects of Yom Tov apply
to Y.K. ?  etc, there is a wide range of answers and opinions.

Gmar Tov
-- Yakir

P.S. Speaking of Joy at this time of the year, something that made me
chuckle a year ago at this time was a notice I saw in a local
(Jerusalem) paper referring to a lecture/shiur on the topic of "Between
the chair and the decade" !  (hamevin yavin :-)


From: Yakir <yakirhd@...>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 10:27:12 +0200
Subject: He / You

Batya Medad:
> This year, while I was dovening, I found myself noticing something in
> the language of the prayers. We pray directly to G-d, using the simple
> second person, as if we're talking directly to a friend. It's unlike
> many languages that dictate that when speaking to someone distinguished,
> one speaks in third person.

My initial musings in response to your initial musings:

This tension in our relationship to G-d, between the sense of "kirva"
(closeness) and "yirah" (fear/awe) (maybe ahava/yira, love/awe) is
central to very much of our tefillot and to our relationship in general.
It is sometimes more overt than others, e.g. "modim anachnu lach,
sha'ata (sic!) hu ...", "we acknowledge/thank You, for You are He who
...", where we mention the You/He dichotomy. There are those that
explain that this duality is basis for every b'racha - Blessed are You -
(He) who created the fruit of the tree" etc.

This is especially so at this time of the year ("kraahu bihyoto karov",
"call Him when He is close"), when G-d "descends"/"approaches us" at the
level of King.  (For me, I find particularly meaningful the elucidation
by HaRav Goldvicht zt"l, in Assufa Ma'arachot, regarding the seeming
contradiction in G-d's Kingship, on the one hand implying our total
subjugation on the other our special status).

As I said, initial musings.

G'mar Tov,
-- Yakir.


From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 08:50:30 +0100
Subject: Re: High Holiday Services

on 21/9/04 2:13 am, Michael Kahn <mi_kahn@...> wrote:

>> With the HHD services so full of words, when does one find the time to
>> think/reflect on one's past/future actions, teshuva, and the like?
> Aren't the HHD prayers all about tshuva and serving Hashem?

Perhaps the problem is the breakneck speed with which the piyutim tend
to be recited making them virtually unintelligible to most
congregants. They are full of allusions which often make them obscure. A
good commentary would make them clearer but there is usually so little
time allowed that just saying the words is almost impossible let alone
checking their meaning.

I notice this particularly with the poetic selichot of which I find I
can only manage about half before the shats starts the next Kel
Melekh. Surely we should not be rushing through our tefillot. Since
people have to go to work in the mornings the only answer must be to
start earlier as was the original custom where mashkimim lislichot meant
precisely that, getting up to start them before amud hashachar

Martin Stern


From: Edward Ehrlich <eehrlich@...>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 13:58:04 +0300
Subject: MIT's multi-denominational chapel

I found Russel J. Hendle's account of the multi-denominational chapel at
MIT very interesting. When I was a student at Harpur College (now
Binghamton University) in the early 1970's, there was a plan to build a
multi-denominational chapel just off campus. I was the Jewish
representative at several planning meetings which seemed to be straight
out of a Doonesbury cartoon.

The Jewish students finally decided that we didn't need or want a
1) The original impetus behind the chapel was based on the mistaken idea
that it's illegal to pray at a public university.

2) We were greatly concerned that the local Jewish community would
divert the small funding that was allocated for Jewish student
activities on campus to maintaining the new building.

The chapel was never built and (at least during my time) we continued to
have Erev Shabbat services in the Kosher Kitchen.

Ed Ehrlich <eehrlich@...>
Jerusalem, Israel


From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 09:33:48 +0100
Subject: Re: Rosh Hashana prayers

on 21/9/04 3:18 am, Sholom Parnes <merbe@...> wrote:
> On the eve of Rosh Hashana (Jewish New Year) after T'filat Amidah (the
> silent prayer) we opened the Ark and the Shaliach Tzibur (prayer leader)
> chanted l'Dovid Mizmor (psalm 24) verse by verse with the congregation
> repeating each verse.
> I'd imagine that this custom is pretty universal.

This is chassidic custom and not part of the original Minhag Ashkenaz
any more than saying Mima'akim after Yishtabach during the Asseret Yemei
Teshuvah. Needless to say, Jews from Ashkenaz proper (Germany) do not
say either.

> In the Artscroll Machzor I found the notation that some congregations
> have the custom of opening the ark (no source given). I wonder if the
> basis for the Artscroll notation is based on a reflection of reality
> rather than an identifiable source.

There are many variations on the custom of when to open the ark during
the Yamim Noraim and Selichot, for example some open it for the Pizmon
and Shema Koleinu while others do not. There seems to be no real source
for these practices and so each congregation should simply continue its
own tradition - nahara nahara uphashtei (literally each river has its
own course). Trying to introduce changes only leads to heated argument
and ill-will which should be avoided especially at this time of the

Martin Stern


From: Reuben Rudman <rudman@...>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 12:20:05 +0300
Subject: Speckled sticks and sheep

An article entitled "Jacob's Cattle and Modern Genetics - A Scientific
Midrash" appeared in Tradition, Vol. 7, No. 3, pages 5-14 in 1965.  The
author, biologist William Etkin, disposed of the idea that this is an
example of the discredited Lamarkian Theory by suggesting another
approach: The timing of Yaakov's dreams concerning the impregnation of
the sheep is not given.  He suggests that the dream took place before
the agreement with Lavan and that the sheep had already been impregnated
by the time Lavan removed the white sheep.  This would remove any
objections based on scientific principles and move the discussion into
the realm of ethics - should Yaakov have entered into this agreement
with Lavan if he already knew what would happen?  Of course, it is with
Lavan The Trickster with whom he was dealing.  What are the morals
involved in tricking the trickster, especially one who is a Lavan?


End of Volume 44 Issue 92