Volume 48 Number 22
                    Produced: Mon May 30 11:01:29 EDT 2005

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Artscroll Errors
         [Yisrael Medad]
Chometz after Pesach
         [Eli Turkel]
Heinz Baked Beanz
         [Joel Rich]
Honoring One's Parents, Rejecting Their Food (2)
         [Tzvi Stein, Akiva Miller]
Kiddish Erev Shavuot
         [Ed Norin]
Kovod Habrios
         [Ira L. Jacobson]
Lighting Shabbos Candles In The Summer
         [Shimon Lebowitz]
         [Martin Stern]
Shul hopping -- supporting shuls
         [Akiva Miller]
"Single-Use" Digital Camera (2)
         [Shimon Lebowitz, Avi Feldblum]
Supposrting Shuls
         [Stuart Pilichowski]
Women with Small Children
         [Tzvi Stein]


From: Yisrael Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 15:18:34 +0200
Subject: Artscroll Errors

I have my late mother's Artscroll which is a first edition so I don't
know if this error was corrected.

On page 636, Hallel, the 5th psalm is incorrectly identified in the
Hebrew.  Instead of Kuf-Tet-Zayin, it reads Kuf-Tet-Vav.  Maybe in
seeing 116, someone just thought of a Vav?

Funny enough, the next paragraph which is actually the continuation of
the same psalm is listed correctly.

Yisrael Medad


From: Eli Turkel <eliturkel@...>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 14:57:26 +0200
Subject: Re: Chometz after Pesach

> Very likely, even the stores themselves would not have crackers.  The
> reason is that some people are strict to not eat even chometz that was
> sold to a gentile over Pesach.  The only chometz they eat is that
> which was made after Pesach, from flour that was milled after Pesach.
> They do not want to rely on "mechiras chometz", even that which was
> done by someone else (i.e. a store, factory, or warehouse).

Chametz after Pesach is only prohibited because of a "kenas".  There is
no problem of actual chametz after Pesach. Hence, as long as the store
or factory sold it in a valid way according to most poskim it makes no
sense for there to be a "kenas"

Eli Turkel


From: Joel Rich <JRich@...>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 05:18:06 -0700
Subject: Heinz Baked Beanz

> Here's a question -- would someone please site (with sources) re:
> botul be shishim -- whether this applies only to an ACCIDENTAL mixture
> or to any such mixture (by a Jew or a non-Jew.)  For example, if
> someone uses a recipe that calls for 1 cup of milk with 61 cups of
> meat (so to speak.)
> Carl Singer

In the US kashrut organizations wrestle with this when done by a
nonJewish company. Is it considered mvatlin issur lchatchila and thus
forbidden or since they do it without asking, is it permissible once
done.  IIRC the general conclusion is since they're asking for our
hashgacha, it's generally not allowed (not sure if this is strict
halacha or optics)

Joel Rich


From: Tzvi Stein <Tzvi.Stein@...>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 07:51:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Honoring One's Parents, Rejecting Their Food

Most people have been talking about non-religious parents.  What would
you say about this type of thing hapenning when the parents are not only
religious, but *chareidi* and the father is a mashgiach in a yeshiva!
Believe it or not, this actually hapenned (in Israel)... the parents
held by the "Aguda" hechsher and one of the married kids, who was much
frumer than his yeshiva mashgiach father, did not.  He actually made his
parents *kasher* their kitchen and then stop using the "Aguda" hechsher.
(To be fair, the father claimed that this actually brought him

From: <kennethgmiller@...> (Akiva Miller)
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 08:11:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Honoring One's Parents, Rejecting Their Food

Shoshana Ziskind wrote <<< Since I've had to go to non kosher keeping
relatives a few times, and we've come up with good solutions, I'm not
sure what all the difficulty is.  It does help that I've been told I can
double wrap things and cook them in their oven. >>>

I suspect that the problems are smaller where the relatives realize that
their kitchen is not at all kosher. The bigger problems arise when they
feel that they *do* keep kosher, but their definition of kosher differs
from ours.

My mother prided herself on keeping a kosher kitchen, but when I entered
YU and started learning seriously, I realized how much was lacking. My
mother didn't realize that items other than meat needed a hechsher. What
could be treif with cheese or cookies or wine? My efforts to teach her
these things were only moderately successful, mostly because I had
severely wounded her pride by saying that her kitchen was not kosher and
refusing to eat from her pots and dishes.

I tried to praise the fact that although her level of kashrus wasn't
good enough for me, it was still far higher than 95% of the Jews in the
world.  (That percentage is just a wild guess.) I suspect that without
that praise, she would have given up and made the house totally treif. I
ended up getting my own set of pots and dishes, so that she was able to
cook for me on occasion as Shoshana described, but it is now 30 years
later, and she still feels insulted about the whole thing.

Akiva Miller


From: <engineered@...> (Ed Norin)
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 08:22:02 -0400
Subject: Kiddish Erev Shavuot

This shavuot, everything will be late.  This year, the holiday comes
just about three minutes short of the latest sunset.  Under halacha,
what is the earliest time we can make kiddish on Sunday night, Erev
Shavuot?  We live in New Jersey (USA), but it would be nice to keep the
answer generic for any location.

Ed "Shmuel" Norin


From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 14:28:33 +0300
Subject: Re: Kovod Habrios

Perets Mett <p.mett@...> stated the following on Thu, 26 May 2005,
after I had asked:

      > How does the rule that kevod haberi'ot dohe mitzvot derabbanan
      > (overrides rabbinical commandments) apply in this case?

      as has already been explained by another contributor, kovod
      habrios does not mean respect for someone else. It means saving
      **oneself** from acute embrrassment.

I am not sure.

Rashi, Berakhot 19b (dibbur hamat-hil "Kol milei derabbanan"),
establishes the principle that davar shehu midivrei soferim nidhe
mipenei (a rabbiniv\cal commandment is superseded by) kevod haberi'ot.

The Yerushalmi uses "kevod harabbim" as a synonym for "kevod haberi'ot,"
so I am not sure that Mr. Mett is right on target.

In applying the principle of "kevod haberi'ot dohe mitzvot," Hazal
permitted kohanim and nezirim to become defiled in the case of a meit
mitzva.  That does not seem to fall within the definition of saving
themselves from personal embarrassment.  The source is Penei Moshe in
the Yerushalmi, Berakhot 83:1, where he holds that "gadol kevod
haberi'ot shedohe lemitzva belo ta`aseh sha`a ahat" applies even for a
Tora prohibition.

One might compare the approaches of the Ramban and the Rambam regarding
admonishing one's fellow (parent); Ramban on Lev. 19:17 and Rambam in
Hilkhot De`ot 6:7 and 8 (one must rebuke but not shame one's fellow).

The Rama in Responsum 125 discusses a case in which he performed a
marriage ceremony on leyl Shabbat (despite the principle of "Lo tasur
mekol hadevarim asher yorukha"), in order to avoid embarrassing the
bride.  Again, not a case of saving **oneself** from acute

In Beitza 6a we learn that we may bury a dead person on the second day
of Yomtov out of kevod haberi'ot considerations.  The Meiri even permits
handling of a dead body by a Jew (and washing, and not only with cold
water) on the first day of Rosh Hashana from considerations of kevod
haberi'ot, stating that this is a violation of only a rabbinical
prohibition.  And again, not a case of saving oneself from acute

So I return to my original question, in different terms.  If because of
kevod haberi'ot Hazal permitted the overriding of Tora prohibitions
(kevod harabbim), might they not also use that principle with regard to
rabbinical kashrut prohibitions?

I am not expressing an opinion, but just asking why that thesis might or
might not be valid.

IRA L. JACOBSON         


From: Shimon Lebowitz <shimonl@...>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 15:02:05 +0200
Subject: Re: Lighting Shabbos Candles In The Summer

> The Shul which I attend has decided to daven on Friday evening at 7:10
> during the summer.  This presents a problem when the earliest time for
> lighting Shabbos candles is after 7:10.  At the time of writing I
> think the earliest time in London is 7:22, and in early July this
> moves to 7:36.

Our "early Shabbos" minyan also begins before the earliest
candle-lighting time, for the obvious reason that mincha *should* be
before "plag-hamincha", while candles can *not* be that early.

May I suggest that you go to an early afternoon "Mincha gedola", and
then come to shul for kabbalat Shabbat, after lighting your candles?

Shimon Lebowitz                           mailto:<shimonl@...>
Jerusalem, Israel            PGP: http://www.poboxes.com/shimonpgp


From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 11:37:03 +0100
Subject: Re: Quinoa

on 27/5/05 10:49 am, Jonathan Shaffer <Jshaffer@...> wrote:
> Assuming Quinoa is not Kitnios, is it nonetheless prohibited when it is
> sold from an open bin in a line of bins that contain other products that
> are kitnios? I have been in several natural food stores that sell
> products in this fashion. The same scooper is often (or at least may) be
> used for more than one product. I would be surprised if the Quinoa bin
> did not contain small amounts of Kitnios. It was my (admittedly
> unlearned) thought that in this type of store even if a particular
> product is marked kosher, one should assume that there has been some
> mixing and it is not ok to use.

Kitniot might become batul but surely a much more serious problem would
be an admixture of grain products which are chamets and lead to eating
actual chamets on Pesach.

Martin Stern


From: <kennethgmiller@...> (Akiva Miller)
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 07:40:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Shul hopping -- supporting shuls

Avi Feldblum wrote <<< Note: I would interpret Annice's statement of
"give tzedakah to the Shul" as meaning making a contribution to the
shul, not putting money in the shuls tzedakah box, which I would
describe as "give tzedakah at the shul" and does not go toward the shul,
but the shul gives out to other tzedadah situations. >>>

I have always thought that the tzedaka box in the shul DOES go to the
shul's general income. I thought that part of the reason for having it
was specifically for this reason, to enable visitors to help support the
shul financially.

Avi seems to be saying that the money in that box does not support the
shul, but is diverted out to causes which the shul deems worthy. How
common is this?

Akiva Miller

[In my current shul, and I think my previous shul, the money from the
tzedakah box in shul went to the Rabbi's Discretionary Fund, which was a
fund the Rabbi would use for Tzedaka purposes, both for people who came
to the shul, as well as individual cases in the community that the Rabbi
knew of. In this way, it was kept out of the regular shul budget and
gave full discretion to the Rabbi in how the money was dispersed. Avi]


From: Shimon Lebowitz <shimonl@...>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 11:34:22 +0200
Subject: Re: "Single-Use" Digital Camera

> [3] Store SELLS you the camera for $20.  Expecting, but not committing
> you, to exchange the camera for another and pay $11 processing at some
> future date.  Should you return the camera to the store it repurchases the
> camera from you and charges $11 plus the re-purchase price of the camera
> for processing.
> You choose not to sell the camera back to them or to use their
> processing processing service.
> Option #3 is clearly contrived, and I could not imagine the store
> constructing such a transaction.

It would not seem as contrived, if there were more than one possible
store to go to for processing.

Is this the case, or is the buyer required to come to the exact store
where the camera was acquired?

Shimon Lebowitz                           mailto:<shimonl@...>
Jerusalem, Israel            PGP: http://www.poboxes.com/shimonpgp

From: Avi Feldblum <feldblum@...>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 
Subject: Re: "Single-Use" Digital Camera

A quick tour on the net via Google indicates to me the following:

1) The manufacturing cost of the camera is below $100 but above the
   approx $20 the camera is "sold" for.
2) The camera is being sold through a chain of stores, you can bring it
   back to any of the chain stores for processing.
3) The business model clearly includes your bringing back the camera,
   and the manufacturer is putting in place protections to reduce the
   ability of the individual to download the pictures without using the
4) At the same time, the store knows that some number of the camereas
   will never be returned. The overall model assumes that the number of
   non-returned phones is small enough, so that the processing fees on
   the ones returned, along with the multiple sales of the camera itself
   will be greater than the loss from the cameras not returned.

As to the halachic implications of the above, I will leave that to



From: Stuart Pilichowski <cshmuel@...>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 14:45:19 +0000
Subject: Supposrting Shuls

Carl Singer, in a recent posting, asked for halachik sources backing up
the requirement for one to support the shul they daven in.

How about that less than often quoted fifth chelek of the shulchan
aruch? I can't imagine any valid reason for not supporting an
institution that you get benefit thereof. Is it not the only menschlech
way to behave?

Stuart Pilichowski
Mevaseret Zion, Israel


From: Tzvi Stein <Tzvi.Stein@...>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 07:46:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Women with Small Children

>How about a junior congregation? a play group in an unused space in
>shul...to teach basic modeh ani while tati and mami daven?

I have seen a few shuls where child care is offerred on selected
Shabossim.  I'd really like to see that expanded.


End of Volume 48 Issue 22