Volume 48 Number 11
                    Produced: Thu May 26  5:46:35 EDT 2005

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

         [Avi Feldblum]
Artscroll (2)
         [Perets Mett, Martin Stern]
Change in Halacha (was: Quinoa)
         [Perry Zamek]
Heinz baked beans
         [Leah S. R. Gordon]
Minyan & The Great Divide
         [Bill Bernstein]
         [Perets Mett]
         [Carl Singer]
Shabbas Brachot and gende
Shabbas Brachot and gender
         [Akiva Miller]
Shul hopping -- supporting shuls
         [Annice Grinberg]


From: Avi Feldblum <feldblum@...>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 05:35:07 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Administrivia

Hello All,

This is just a personal request, if there are any members of the list
who are involved with the Sociology or Social Work departments of any of
our Israeli institutions (e.g. Bar Ilan, Hebrew U, etc), especially
anyone who might be knowledgeable in the area of a non-Israeli
interested in going there for graduate work, please contact me at

Thanks in advance, and now back to our regularly scheduled programming.



From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 13:05:35 +0100
Subject: Artscroll

David Roth wrote:
> What is an example of a mistake in Artscroll?

I find the Artscroll Sfard sidur to be a mishmash, on occasion not much
improved on some previous editions of the Nusach Sfard sidur.

To take one example;

Nusach Sfard custom is to follow the nakdishokh kedusho with ato
kodoish, but after the keser kedusho (at musaf) minhogim vary - some say
ato kodosih and other say l'dor vodor.

Polish sidur printers could not be bothered with all the additional
expense of setting up separate type for Ashkenaz and Sfard sidurim
(wihout computers, manual typesetting was extremely labour intensive).
They took the line of least resistance, and left things in the Sfard
sidur, so long as it was usable.

There is no valid reason to include l'dor vodor after the nakdishokh
kedusho (with the advent of computer typesetting, every other sidur
publisher has removed it).

Artscroll has put l'dor vodor in after every kedusho. I would call this
a mistake.

Perets Mett

From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 12:21:38 +0100
Subject: Re: Artscroll

on 24/5/05 10:36 am, David Roth <davidyonah@...> wrote:

>> From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
>> Even Artscroll, which is generally much more carefully edited, has
>> several errors, some having been accepted by the general public because
>> previous editions have carelessly printed them.
>> Just because something has been printed does not make it correct, or
>> even acceptable!
> What is an example of a mistake in Artscroll?

I will just give two examples, one to the text of the tephillot and one
to the notes, references to Machzor for Pesach (Ashkenaz version).

page 408, 610, 1006 has the words "retsei vimnuchateinu" to be added on
Shabbat before melekh rachaman racheim aleinu ... This error crept into
earlier machzorim and was adopted as a consequence by many, but not all,
communities. At the very least it should state "in some communities this
is added" rather than let it pass without comment, just as it notes
regarding Addir addireinu in Kedushah shel Mussaph on Shabbat Chol
Hamoed. In the Siddur p. 686 the phrase does not appear.

page 964 in the notes it states (s.v. tokhalenu) "If it (the bekhor) is
unblemished, the Kohen brings it as an offering within the first year of
meat."  This contradicts the last mishnah in Eizehu mekoman which we say
every day.

Given time and patience, I would probably be able to find others but
these came to mind during Pesach.

Martin Stern


From: Perry Zamek <perryza@...>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 14:18:51 +0200
Subject: Change in Halacha (was: Quinoa)

I had asked:
>Could Martin or anyone else suggest a parallel case where something is
>generally accepted as forbidden, and yet we should keep an open mind,
>in case there might be some heter [permission]?

And Martin Stern had answered:
>How about allowing (among Ashkenazim) several people to say kaddish
>together which was until 200 years ago considered forbidden.

I was actually thinking more in terms of a halachic issue that is
currently subject to reconsideration/open mind. The reason why I thought
about a current issue is to see whether the dynamics of such change
operated in both the toward-chumrah and toward-kula directions (for want
of better terms, I used chumrah and kula, although the issues may be
issur and heter).

As an aside, I wonder if the issue of smoking on yom tov, which, today,
is probably not "davar hashaveh lechol nefesh" (something that most
people enjoy), falls into this category of halachic change. It is clear
that some people still feel that they may smoke on yom tov, even though
many poskim and rabbis have already ruled, on the above grounds, that it
should not be done (I don't recall names - however, I have seen, prior
to yomtovim, posters in haredi areas quoting various rabbonim - perhaps
over 20 in number - as stating that it is forbidden).

Any other suggestions in contemporary halacha, in either direction?

Perry Zamek


From: <leah@...> (Leah S. R. Gordon)
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 04:47:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Heinz baked beans

> From: <StephenColman2@...> (Stephen Colman)
> A number of people have mentioned, quite correctly, how important Kovod
> Habrios is, and as a result, when somebody claims to be 100% kosher, we
> should accept that and eat at their house.
> However, life is really not that simple. There are many different
> However, I would go further. In many cases ignorance plays a major part.
> I remember as a boy going to a (religious) friend's house to play, and
> was quite surprised to find a product (Heinz Baked Beanz) being offered
> for lunch. This product was/is without any Hechsher and definitely not
> acceptable by the London kashrus authorities. However, that family - out
> of ignorance - used it - still calling themselves 'kosher'. Being

This must be a UK/US difference, then, because on this side of the pond,
Heinz Vegetarian Baked Beans are under the OU, and have been at least as
far back as my childhood.  (Is it possible that your friend was eating
imported American 100% kosher beans?  I've heard of taking other
American food products abroad if they are hard to find locally...maybe
their family liked beans.  If so, you were indeed an honored guest to
share the cache.  :) )

--Leah S. R. Gordon


From: Bill Bernstein <billbernstein@...>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 09:15:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Minyan & The Great Divide

I do not know what to make of R' Teitz's comments in M-J 48-4,

<<If the person is aware of the prohibition of Shabbos and violates it
publicly, whether for spite or for personal benefit, his shechitah is
not kosher, the wine he touches is prohibited, and he does not count to
a minyan.>>

I do not know whether this is a statement of halacha l'maaseh or a 
restatement of the classic sources in Shas and poskim.

My puzzlement comes from having seen several authorities to the contrary
and of which I am reasonably sure R' Teitz is aware of.

First, the Binyan Zion haChadashos 23 writes about a mechalel Shabbos
who touches wine and whether this makes the wine forbidden.  After
citing the sources he gives reasons why this is not applicable today,
among them that many who are mechalel Shaboos nonetheless say the
Shabbos tefillos and kiddush and therefore cannot be said to be in the
category of an idol worshipper.

Further, in Binyan Zion 64 he is asked whether "b'farhesia" (publicly)
requires the act to be done in the presence of 10 Jews who could serve
as witnesses.  I believe he answers affirmatively.

Finally in Melamed L'Hoil 29 he is asked specifically about counting a
mechalel Shabbos in the minyan. After going through the classic sources
again he concludes that today things are different.  People violate
Shabbos through ignorance.  He even quotes the Sho'el uMeishiv that Jews
from America do not become possul (unfit) for minyan since they are in
the category of Jews raised among non-Jews.  Rav Hoffmann zt'l concludes
that one who can go to a minyan of entirely shomer shabbos Jews should
do so but a minyan that counts non-Shomer shabbos Jews is also
permissable.  I also recall but do not have the reference handy of a
teshuva in the Igros Moshe that holds this way.  As best I remember he
brings proof from the Meraglim, who were certainly sinners.

Bill Bernstein
Nashville TN


From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 12:44:54 +0100
Subject: Minyon

Immanuel Burton wrote:

> I am intrigued by the practicalities of stating that non-frum people
> don't count towards a minyan.  For example, say one is in an airport
> and one assembles ten people for a minyan - is one really going to
> conduct a survey of all one's fellow travellers to assess their
> 'eligibility'?


For starters, I would like some reason to believe that they were Jewish.

Perets Mett


From: Carl Singer <casinger@...>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 07:15:48 -0400
Subject: Quinoa

Looking at the various responses -- it seems we've broken the mold re:
how one makes personal halachic decisions.  Unless we grant smicha to
the web the "assay lecha Rav" (bluntly -- find yourself a Rabbi) seems
to be falling into disregard.

This Pesach, for example, at least a dozen different "guides" were
available on line.  Not only do they provide specific information, but
they also vary greatly in their approach.  Rabbi Machmir would have you
buying everything from the specialty providers (Hadar, etc.) or
abstaining entirely from certain foods, while Rabbi Meychel says you
don't need to.  Rabbi Machmir says most medicines are a problem and
Rabbi Meychel says virtually all medicines are fine.

What it be fair to say that some people have a predisposition to
stringency or non-stringency and then find sources (on line or in
person) to support their bias.

The process by which one makes personal halachic decisions certainly has
an information gathering phase and perhaps the web can be helpful, but
not at the expense of taking the community Rav out of the picture.

Carl Singer
Passaic, NJ  07055-5328
See my web site:  www.ProcessMakesPerfect.net      


From: <aliw@...> (Arie)
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 18:42:12 +0200
Subject: Re: Shabbas Brachot and gende

 <Dagoobster@...> (Chaim) wrote in 48/03

>I have seen two ways in which the Shabbas Brachot a father gives his
>children on Friday night are administered.  The first is by age,
>irrespective of gender.  The second is all male children followed by
>all female children.  Which is preferable?

Both my grandfathers z"l, my father ybdl"a and I all bentch our 
children in order of age. Wouldn't an order based on gender imply 
favoring one sex over another (whether male or female children go 
first) ? How would the kids react ? What should they think ?



From: <kennethgmiller@...> (Akiva Miller)
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 17:46:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Shabbas Brachot and gender

Chaim Shapiro wrote <<< I have seen two ways in which the Shabbas
Brachot a father gives his children on Friday night are administered.
The first is by age, irrespective of gender.  The second is all male
children followed by all female children. >>>

I have two sons and a daughter. My practice has always been to give them
their brachos in no particular order. It usually ends up being in order
of who is closest to me and standing up coming first, while those who
are sitting and relaxing get theirs later.

Useful data point: I have seen many families where the brachos are given
between Kiddush and Washing. That never made sense to me, as it seems to
be an inappropriate interruption between Kiddush and the meal. So I try
to do it upon returning home from shul, either before going to the
table, or on outr way to the table.

Akiva Miller


From: Annice Grinberg <annicey@...>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 12:06:39 +0200
Subject: Re: Shul hopping -- supporting shuls

We belong (pay dues) to two shuls here in Rehovot.  However, for daily
services and Shabbat mincha/maariv, my husband davens several other
shuls in the area because of various factors, including davening times,
proximity to our home and insuring that a minyan exists for that
particular service.  (It's often a struggle to get 10 men.)  His
approach is to give tzeduka on a regular basis to those shuls in which
he davens, but is not a member.  (Not to say that we don't give tzeduka
to the shuls where we are members.)



End of Volume 48 Issue 11