Volume 45 Number 08
                    Produced: Sat Oct  2 23:27:16 EDT 2004

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

         [Stephen Phillips]
Birth control (formerly "Unmarried girls")
         [Martin Stern]
Dairy Label (3)
         [Jack Gross, Carl Singer, <FriedmanJ@...>]
Dairy Label - repackaging
Eruv Tavshilin
         [Gershon Dubin]
"micro"/"macro" evolution
         [Leah S. Gordon]
Mincha during work
         [Tzvi Stein]
No Repetition of Amida
         [Joshua Hosseinof)]
Regarding the Madonna Discussion
         [Joseph Ginzberg]
Yemenite customs- No repetition of Amida
         [Ben Katz]


From: Stephen Phillips <admin@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:21:12 +0100
Subject: Re: Abortion

> From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
> on 27/9/04 1:09 am, Leah S. Gordon <leah@...> wrote:
>> Which brings me to a related concern--surely you are not suggesting that
>> abortion is antithetical to halakha.  Indeed, there are cases where
>> abortion is required by halakha (which means, actually, that any kind of
>> Christian "pro-life in all cases" stance is not halakhically
>> appropriate).

> In reality the Jewish position on abortion is based on the priority of
> the mother's life to that of the unborn foetus. The latter does have
> some halachic status of its own and so cannot be killed without due
> reason. It is this which distinguishes it from Christian "pro-life"
> stance.

> The consequence is that, effectively, abortion is either obligatory or
> forbidden depending on the individual case, the difficult problem facing
> a rav is deciding from the particular circumstances which applies. There
> certainly is no such thing as an elective abortion permitted by
> halachah.

Perhaps, though, the Christian "pro-lifers" have a point. I always
thought that the prohibition of killing as one of the 7 Noahide Laws was
absolute and that non-Jews could not rely on the din of "Rodef" [a
pursuer]. If that is correct, then a Jewish woman having to have an
abortion should presumably have it performed by a Jewish doctor.

As to the question of an elective abortion, surely there are cases where
it is permitted, but not necessarily mandatory, for a woman to have an
abortion. I believe that the Tzitz Eliezer (Harav Eliezer Waldenberg) is
quite lenient in such matters.

Stephen Phillips


From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:06:11 +0100
Subject: Re: Birth control (formerly "Unmarried girls")

on 24/9/04 10:54 am, Nathan Lamm <nelamm18@...> wrote:

> Some couples do not want (or cannot support) children at that early
> stage, and are taking steps (and yes, halakhically allowed) to prevent
> pregnancy.

I find the existence of such a hetter for newlyweds very difficult to
believe except where either the husband has children from a previous
marriage, in which case he has already fulfilled the basic mitsvah of
peru urevu, and the wife's life or health is endangered by pregnancy.

If only the latter is true (and not a very short term condition) it is
highly doubtful if the husband would have been allowed to marry that
wife in the first place.

If she had not disclosed such a long term inability to bear children
then the marriage would probably never have been valid in the first
place (kiddushei ta'ut).

Any comments?
Martin Stern


From: Jack Gross <jbgross@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 07:57:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Dairy Label

> From: Yisrael & Batya Medad <ybmedad@...>
> A dairy label on a loaf of bread, a cake, box of cookies, candies, etc
> is insufficient, because the label is frequently thrown out before the
> dairy food is finished.  It's fine on a one-portion wrapped
> cookie/pastry, lollie pop.  There is no way to enforce that the food
> will be stored in its original label.

But then again: the Siman of Tzura (distinguished shape of the loaf,
serving as notice or reminder that it is not parve) may be gone before
the loaf is finished, yet there is no requirement that the bread be
finished in one sitting.  So, arguably, the only legislated requirement
may be that the baker or supplier include a reminder for the consumer.

From: Carl Singer <casinger@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 07:26:15 -0400
Subject: Dairy Label

>A dairy label on a loaf of bread, a cake, box of cookies, candies, etc
>is insufficient, because the label is frequently thrown out before the
>dairy food is finished.  It's fine on a one-portion wrapped
>cookie/pastry, lollie pop.  There is no way to enforce that the food
>will be stored in its original label.

I'm not sure that I agree:  

With BREAD, yes, definitely -- bread is usually (normally?) parve and we
have long required that milchig bread be distinguished in shape (not
packaging) specifically because one might be fooled by the RARE
occurrence of milchig bread (in the kosher milieu)

But to extend that to candies & cookies & cakes which frequently are
dairy is a stretch.  I suspect putting them into a milchig container, a
milchig cabinet or a milchig serving dish (as with the cake) should be

Carl A. Singer

From: <FriedmanJ@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 08:56:27 EDT
Subject: Dairy Label

If it's such a huge probelm and you are all so concerned, Stick the
bread in a ziplock plastic bag and use a permanent marker to write M for
milchig, D for dairy or Chet for Chalav on the bag, a long with any
other message you need to convey about the bread: ie:

"Milchig bread, do not use with meat or parve 
 PLEASE put bread back in the bag and into the fridge,

If someone doesn't care, it doesn't really matter, now does it?


From: Anonymous
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 08:27:53
Subject: Dairy Label - repackaging

The discussion re: dairy bread (and then to candies) brings to mind the

A local store sells repackaged candy -- that is plastic (8 oz?) tubs of
candy that have clearly come from a larger package.  The individual tubs
are labeled with a printed label (like meat has) with the brand name,
variety, hescher and ingredients -- and weight (again, like meat --
price / pound and total price) ---

My objections are as follows:  

Nutrition information is missing -- in essence per law  these are not 
labeled for individual sale.
More handling means more chance for errors:  kashruth, labeling, etc.
More handling leave more chance for contamination

Is this common practice in other communities


From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:48:07 GMT
Subject: Eruv Tavshilin

From: Yehonatan Chipman <yonarand@...>
<<   To reiterate: one may not cook on Thursday afternoon of Sukkot or
   Shmini Atzeret for the next day, nor for the subsequnt Shabbat!>>

Which also precludes doing melacha at all during bein hashemashos (twilight) since there's a possibility of doing melacha on the first day for the second.



From: Leah S. Gordon <leah@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:23:50 -0700
Subject: "micro"/"macro" evolution

I wrote:
>> There is overwhelming evidence for natural selection and evolution,
>> including definite antibiotic-resistant bacteria development.

Martin Stern wrote, in part:
"Leah is confusing microevolution, i.e. changes within a species, which
is well documented, and macroevolution, i.e. one species evolving from
another with which interbreeding is not possible, for which there is no
conclusive evidence."

This is a somewhat unfair criticism.  Scientifically, "micro" and
"macro" evolution are the same--except for the time scale.  If you
believe in very long time scales (i.e. evolutionary time), then clearly
"macro" evolution is the most workable hypothesis.



From: Tzvi Stein <Tzvi.Stein@...>
Subject: Mincha during work

I wonder what the halacha is on davening mincha during work?  Is the
employer obligated to allow it?  Can he dock pay for it?  Interestingly,
when I was working in Israel for a small, frum employer, I did not get
paid for the time I walked to shul, davenen and walked back.  When I
later worked for a large company (not frum), there was a minyan in the
building and the employer was not makpid on docking pay.


From: Joshua Hosseinof) <JHosseinof@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 11:03:08 -0400
Subject: No Repetition of Amida

Regarding the non-repitition of amida of musaf in various communities,
to this day that custom is still followed by some Sefardic communities -
Spanish-Portuguese, Turkish (Seattle), and North African, and apparently
Yemenite as the original posting indicated, among others.  Rav Ovadia
Yosef of course does not prefer this custom, and he insists that all
sefardic communities (in Israel) today should say musaf with a full
repitition.  See Yechaveh Daat vol 5 #12 for a full explanation of the
custom which is based on a teshuva of the Rambam, which Rav Ovadia Yosef
feels was merely a hora'at sha'ah (a ruling given for that specific time
and place) and no longer applies, especially not in Eretz Yisrael where
the Shulchan Aruch is the marei d'atra.

The custom that Mike Gerver observed in his mixed office minyan, is more
a question of halachah than of custom.  The question is, how do you
accomplish "tefillah betzibbur" ("praying with the public" would be the
best translation).  The standard way is to have a silent shemoneh esreh,
and then the repitition by the chazzan.  But when you are pressed for
time, is just the "heicha" kedusha enough to accomplish tefillah
betzibbur?  And if yes, then at what point should the other members of
the minyan start saying their shemoneh esreh - at the same time as the
chazzan, or after kedushah?

On the one hand, if everyone starts their shemoneh esreh at the same
time as the chazzan then no one will be answering amen to the first
three berachot, or even worse, someone who is saying their shemoneh
esreh might get confused and answer amen accidentally which would be a
hefsek for his own shemoneh esreh.  Another issue for when to start
shemoneh esreh is kavanah - most chazzan's, especially at a heicha
kedusha minyan, will rush through the first three berachot to get to
kedusha, while the individuals praying might want to say it more slowly.
Mishnah Berurah 232:4 seems to imply that you do need at least one
person to answer amen for it to be considered tefillah betzibbur.  See
also Shulchan Aruch O.C. 109:2 and the Rem"a there which would seem to
explain why Sefardim start with the chazzan, and ashkenazim wait until
after hae-l hakadosh.

I do however seem to recall hearing that Rav Soloveitchik held that in a
heicha kedusha minyan one should start saying shemoneh esreh at the same
time as the chazzan.  Yalkut Yosef for sefardim also agrees with that
position.  Without checking the sources, offhand I could not say whether
either Rav Soloveitchik or Yalkut Yosef holds that way as a requirement
to fulfill tefillah betzibbur, or if they just felt it was the preferred


From: Joseph Ginzberg <jgbiz120@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:04:04 -0400
Subject: Regarding the Madonna Discussion

Passed on for reflection, without editorial:

Last week (erev erev Yom Kippur) I passed by the "Imagine" memorial for
John Lennon, and noticed that it had 26 apples placed around it.

The "Chakal Tapuchin Kadishin" of Elul with the shem?

Yossi Ginzberg


From: Ben Katz <bkatz@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:15:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Yemenite customs- No repetition of Amida

>From: <MJGerver@...> (Mike Gerver)
>This gives rise to an interesting phenomenon at workplace mincha
>minyanim in Israel (which is where most Israelis daven mincha, certainly
>during the winter). These minyanim typically include about equal numbers
>of Ashkenazim who mostly daven nusach sephard, and people who daven
>eidut mizrach (including nusach Baladi). And, to avoid wasting their
>employers' time, the Ashkenazim typically daven with a hekeh kedushah,
>i.e. the shliach tzibur starts the shmoneh esreh out loud, everyone says
>kedushah together, and then the shliach tzibbur continues silently with
>"atah chonen..." while the rest of the tzibur begins the shmoneh esreh
>silently from the beginning. But I have noticed that those who daven
>eidut mizrach (judging by which siddur they are using) will start
>davening silently together with the shliach tzibbur when he begins the
>shmoneh esreh, and continue silently with "atah chonen..." after the
>kedushah. In other words, they interpret the Ashkenazi hekeh kedushah as
>a Baladi skipping of the repetition of the shmoneh esreh! At least I
>think that's what's going on. Maybe someone can offer another

         I think you are reading too much into both of these.  I have
seen ashkenazim do heycha kedushot both ways: starting with the hazan,
saying ata kadosh and continuing with ata chonen OR waiting till after
the kedusha and then saying a regular amidah.

Ben Z. Katz, M.D.
Children's Memorial Hospital, Division of Infectious Diseases
2300 Children's Plaza, Box # 20, Chicago, IL 60614
e-mail: <bkatz@...>


End of Volume 45 Issue 8