Volume 48 Number 74
                    Produced: Thu Jun 30  5:30:51 EDT 2005

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Accepting Psak without reviewing (2)
         [Carl A. Singer, Gershon Dubin]
Amen to non-live voices
         [Carl A. Singer]
Amen to Non-Live Voices
         [Michael Mirsky]
Evil Doer as Part of a Minyan
         [Naomi Graetz]
Kaddish at a minyan you're not davening with (was: Phone and Tefila)
         [Mike Gerver]
Kippa at Bris
         [Ed Greenberg]
Loan Practices
         [N Miller]
         [Batya Medad]
Phone and T'fila
         [Mark Symons]
Rabbainu Tam, Shabbat and Dishes
         [Dov Teichman]
Structure of Hodu
         [Jack Gross]
Technology in the Service of Halacha
         [Abbi Adest]


From: Carl A. Singer <casinger@...>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 06:17:53 -0400
Subject: Accepting Psak without reviewing

From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <Sabba.Hillel@...>
>> Under those circumstances (only?) did Rav Pam send the person to get a
>> pesak with which he himself did not agree.

> I think that, as told, the story does *not* say that the bachur would
> have asked Rav Ploni first had he seen him.  It sounded to me as if the
> bachur asked Rav Pam because he learned in his Yeshivah.  I suppose this
> point needs clarification from Rabbi Reisman.

I question the "bochur" going to Rav Pam in the first place.  He is now
married and living / davening in some community, no longer a yeshiva
bochur.  He should have gone to the Rav of his community or shul.

In a previous posting I noted an incident similar incident where a Rosh
Yeshiva "forwarded" the questioner to their shul rav -- I believe based
on jurisdiction -- not necessarily on a difference of psak.

The fundamental problem here is that a person can pick up a telephone
and get a psak from literally 1000's of miles away while ignoring their
community.  No doubt if the community Rav thinks the problem too complex
he (the Rav) can seek assistance.

Carl Singer

From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:16:12 GMT
Subject: Accepting Psak without reviewing

From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <Sabba.Hillel@...>
>As told, it sounds as if Rav Pam sent the bachur to Rav Ploni because of
>the psak expectd, not because he normally would have asked him (had he
>seen him first).

Having been at that shiur and heard the tape, I heard it twice <g>.
However, I expect to see RYR at a wedding next week and if I have the
opportunity, I'll ask him.



From: Carl A. Singer <casinger@...>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 06:35:45 -0400
Subject: Amen to non-live voices

The story of someone answering amen to a video tape of their wedding
brings out a new dimension this issue.  We now have several different

1 - a live, unamplified, voice heard from a different room (hallway, 
courtyard, beyond an iron fence)
            Many examples

2a - a live amplified voice (microphone + amplifier + speaker) heard in 
same room.
             A large gathering, such as Siyum haShas or a banquet

2b - a live amplified voice (microphone + amplifier + speaker) heard 
from a different room.
               Consider, for example, a kohain "attending" a funeral 
from  outside the building.

3 - a live voice via telephone or radio

4a - a recorded voice being heard for the first time
                Watching / listening to the video tape of an event (such 
as a wedding.)

4b - a recorded voice being heard subsequently
                 Watching / listening to the tape of an event that you 
attended live.

4c -- a recorded voice being heard over again
                  Watching / listening to the tape that you have 
listened to on numerous occasions.

Note also that some of these situations may involve the anticipated / 
planned hearing of the brocha and others are ad hoc. 

Similarly, some of these involve your participation (such as your 
standing up for  the kaddish after a siyum.)

Finally, if you really want to twist things around -- what if you're 
listening to a tape of yourself -- do you answer amen to yourself?

Carl Singer

From: Michael Mirsky <mirskym@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 13:22:34 -0400
Subject: Amen to Non-Live Voices

Aside from the issue of whether or not you are fulfilling the mitzva at
hand by answering Amen to a Bracha recited over the phone or on a video,
I think one should do so in any case - especially if others are present.

What are we doing by answering Amen?  We are affirming the bracha being
made. If so, when you hear someone blessing Hashem through indirect,
electronic means, whether live or not, answering Amen is acknowledging
for yourself and for the people around you that you agree - it is true.

I have no source or halachic basis for this; it just seems proper to me.

Michael Mirsky


From: <graetz@...> (Naomi Graetz)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 7:30:57 +0530
Subject: Re: Evil Doer as Part of a Minyan

 Chana Luntz <chana@...> wrote:

> A) can you count a rasha [evil doer] as part of a minyan (questionable);

I've been studying a responsum of RAV PE`ALIM (part 2 OH 18)--Rabbi
Joseph Chaim ben Elijah al-Chakam (b. Baghdad, ca. 1835-1909) who asked
exactly this question: I have paraphrased this as follows:  

Question: What happens when there is only one Cohen in town and he
happens to be a shabbat violator, can he be called up to the Torah? And
what happens if in this small town there is only one Levi and he is a
pimp, can he be called up to the Torah for an aliya? 

R. Joseph qualifies the question: it wasn't stated if this is a pimp
who practices exclusively among "goyim" or among Jews as well. I
will relate to both cases. In the first case, the bottom line is that
it is alright. But in the second case, whether he brings non-Jewish
prostitutes to Jews or Jewish women to non-Jews, he cannot be called up
to the Torah. However, if it is just alleged (and not proven),
i.e. speculation that he deals in prostitution with Jews, then he can
still be called up.

Naomi Graetz
Ben Gurion University of the Negev


From: <MJGerver@...> (Mike Gerver)
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 16:17:17 EDT
Subject: Kaddish at a minyan you're not davening with (was: Phone and Tefila)

Gershon Dubin writes, in v48n71,

      I was told when I was in aveilus to say kaddish only at the minyan
      at which I was davening.  So the answer according to that pesak is
      (a) EVEN if you're inside the shul already.

I was also told this. But once, when I was davening with the early
minyan, I got there too late for the first kaddish (after "Rabbi
Yishmael..."), and asked the rabbi if I could hang around at the
beginning of the later minyan and say it then. I was told I could.

Mike Gerver
Raanana, Israel


From: Ed Greenberg <edg@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 07:47:19 -0700
Subject: Re: Kippa at Bris

Yitzhok Jayson wrote:
>> I have seen the practice of tying a kippa to the head of a baby being
>> brissed. Is anyone aware of the significance of this is minhag,
>> halacha or gemara ?

I was at a Bris yesterday where the baby was wearing a white crocheted
kippah with chin straps. I did not ask whether it was considered to be
minhag, halacha or gemara.

The Bris was for the new son of our Chabad Rabbi, here in San Jose.


(And a MazelTov Shoutout to Avrohom Dovid ben Aharon Meyer Cunin, as well 
as his parents, Rabbi Aaron and Frummie Cunin.


From: N Miller <nmiller@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 10:49:43 -0400
Subject: Loan Practices

>>'Forced' is a pretty strong word.  Is there any historical evidence to
>>support it?  Were/are Jewish money-lenders also 'forced' to adopt
>>'predatory' practices, such as those prevalent in Lakewood?

Yossi Ginzberg objects to my use of the word 'prevalent' in describing 
loan-sharking in Lakewood.

> Re Lakewood, prevalent has nasty implications that I hope were
> unintended.  Many people (I think) have at least some problems with
> the city, but implying that usury/ fleecing is "prevalent" isn't right
> or fair.

I apologize if I misunderstood.  My 'prevalent' was based on his own 
statement in M-J 48#62:

	Recently there have also been several articles in the papers re
	"predatory" lending practices, where firms purposely lend money
	to poor homeowners unsophisticated enough to borrow to fix up
	the house, which they then lose to nonpayment of the mortgage.
	I understand from acquaintances in Lakewood that this has become
	a popular industry there, as has slumlording properties in
	inner-city areas like Newark.

So I hereby amend 'prevalent' to read 'popular'.  Somehow though it hasn't 
changed the smell of things.

> Finally, there are several majorly important reasons why one should not
> engage in fleecing. Vasisem hayashar vehatov (You shall do the correct
> thing) is in the Torah, as is the sin of chilum Hashem.

I agree wholeheartedly.  I only wish that the frum world could muster
the same indignation at sins against fellow human beings as it does when
gays parade in Jerusalem.

Noyekh Miller


From: Batya Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 23:00:48 +0200
Subject: Re: Orthodox

> So, as Mike notes, you can be Orthodox in one but not other facets.
> 25 years ago, when I got my first job as a lawyer, my boss belonged to
> an Orthodox shul.  I grew up in a Conservative shul.  His favorite
> food was lobster.  I had never seen one.

I think that we've been through this before, but shul membership and
ritual observance are not always the same.  Outside of the more Chareidi
sector there's no ritual test for shul membership.  Most shuls, whether
Orthodox, Conservative or Reform are happy to take the membership dues
from Jewish families; intermarried families sometimes have a more
limited choice.  I grew up in a very traditional (rabbi was Orthodox)
Conservative shul, and I had no idea what kashrut or Shabbat or most
chaggim were.  When we moved, we joined an Orthodox shul, and we didn't
have to add any mitzvot to do so.  By attending the synagogue youth
activities I became religious.  My mother was very active in the shul,
and was Sisterhood President a number of years without having to be
shomeret Shabbat. 



From: Mark Symons <msymons@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 23:59:14 +1000
Subject: Phone and T'fila

One of Lenny Friedman's Shlock Rock songs (to the tune of Ob-la-di
Ob-la-da) refers to reciting Havdala for someone over the phone until he
knows how to recite it for himself!

Mark Symons
Melbourne Australia


From: <DTnLA@...> (Dov Teichman)
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 19:28:09 EDT
Subject: Re: Rabbainu Tam, Shabbat and Dishes

Carl A. Singer <casinger@...> writes:

> In many communities the "frummer" elements (whatever that means) hold
> by a later time for the end of Shabbos -- commonly referred to as
> "holding by Rabbainu Tam" -- this is the same Rabbainu Tam who held
> that glass dishes could be used for both milchig and fleishig.
> ...
> As soon as you mention this to apparently inconsistency Rabbain Tam
> for z'man sof Shabbos but not for glass dishes you get into some hand
> waving about glass was different then (or today) etc.  And there is no
> inconsistency in following a rav only for certain decisions.
> It seemed to me the underlying theme is really mayckil / machmir -- and
> perception of same within the community.  I strongly doubt that any
> decision re: the status of this silicone bakeware will rest on its
> physical properties as much as the surrounding issues.

Regarding inconsistency, I'm not familiar with the opinion of Rabbeinu
Tam regarding glass dishes, but since when do we hold like a certain
_Rishon_ all the time? The Shulchan Aruch actually paskens like Rabbeinu
Tam regarding nightfall, and in many communities it's not viewed as a
chumra, but as basic letter of the law. Even if someone does practice it
as a chumra I fail to see why he must practice Rabbeinu Tam's leniencies
in other areas.

(In fact, Rabbeinu Tam's nightfall (even as a leniency as to when
Shabbos begins) apparently was the norm until the Holocaust, but that's
a separate discussion.)

What do you mean by maykil/machmir perception? If a person is following
a legitimate Rov, why would he care what others think. For example, do
those who follow Rav Moshe's opinion of nightfall in New York (50
minutes) care that they are viewed as meikil in the eyes of those who
hold 72 minutes? They have a godol hador to hang their hat on.

Dov Teichman


From: Jack Gross <jbgross@...>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 20:56:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Structure of Hodu

>> The first part of Hoidu until, but not including , roimemu is a single
passage from divrei hayomim. The rest is a collection of pesukim.<<

Actually, the selection from D.H. consists of two mizmorim -- Hodu ...
uvinvi'ai al tarei'u, and Shiru ... v'hallel laShem -- as can be seen in
Mordechai Breuer's editions of Tanach, and as is noted by Rav Schwab in
his notes on Tefilla.


From: Abbi Adest <abbi.adest@...>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:42:45 +0200
Subject: Re: Technology in the Service of Halacha

I saw that on the same group and I was taken aback a bit. It definitely
left a bad taste in my mouth.



End of Volume 48 Issue 74