Volume 49 Number 27
                    Produced: Mon Aug  1  6:46:38 EDT 2005

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

         [Ira Bauman]
         [David Charlap]
Credit cards for shul dues
Family splitting for summer
         [Eliezer Wenger]
gederot (g'derot) vs. gedarim (g'darim)
         [Ira L. Jacobson]
The Husband Being Absent/Away from the Family
         [Yisrael Medad]
Kaddish Minhag Chabad (3)
         [Meir, Eliezer Wenger, Elazar M. Teitz]
Kashrus Question
         [Andy Goldfinger]
Memoirs of 19th c. Vilna and Radziner Rebbe
More on Hitpael, correction
         [Ira L. Jacobson]
Qaddish Pronunciation
         [Martin Stern]


From: <Yisyis@...> (Ira Bauman)
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 22:27:10 EDT
Subject: Re: Aramaic

      Don't take this the wrong way, but have you learned in yeshiva?
      In my exprience Aramaic was taught concurrently with Talmud.  When
      a new word, idiom or grammatical structure was encountered in the
      text, it was explained, so that it would be recognized again.  As
      with Hebrew, the roots of words were pointed out to help us
      recognize related words later on our own.  Aramaic was taught in
      much the same way as Hebrew... concurrently with the text.  I'm
      sure there's a fancy name for that method of language instruction,
      but not being an "educator" I can't name it.

I went to Yeshiva in the sixties.  When I was in high school, I
questioned why our education in Navi was minimal, our Aramaic and our
conversational Hebrew, non-existent.  The answer I always got was that
when you learn gemara, you absorb those disciplines as well.  Thirty
five years later, I can prepare a blat gemara, but, according to my
Israeli chavrusah,my knowledge of Nach and my conversational Hebrew are
both laughable , and my best friend is Marcus Jastrow.

I don't think my experience is unique.  Mastery of any area of knowledge
requires a dedicated effort in that area.  My yeshiva was wrong in
assuming that we could seamlessly incorporate all different aspects and
skills involved in Torah thought by simply poring over a Gemarah.  Any
modern curriculum must incorporate these other areas into their

 Ira Bauman


From: David Charlap <shamino@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 10:13:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Cellphones

Carl A. Singer wrote:
>> I'm sorry, these "studies" sound to me like they were bought and paid
>> for by anti-cellphone advocates.
>> [snip]
>> Put another way, if phone usage has no affect on accidents, then you
>> should expect to find the percentage of accidents involving phones to be
>> equal to the overall percentage of phone usage.  If 100% of the
>> population should start using phones while driving, then you will
>> obviously find phone-usage in 100% of accidents.  But this statistic
>> will mean nothing, except to a political hack looking to scare the
>> population.
> This isn't debate 101.  Are we advocating bad science -- if we dislike
> what a study says then do we poo-poo it as corrupt then conjecture a
> false hypothesis.  Apply the above logic to cigarette smoking and lung
> cancer and you'll see the hole.

I've been following this subject in the news for many years.

The anti-phone advocates are not working from a premise of "there are
suddenly more accidents, what happened to cause them?"  They are
starting from a premise of "we want cell phones to be banned, what
information can we dig up to force polititians to agree."

Their motivation calls the credibility of all their studies into
question.  And because it's politically correct to ban things that most
people like to use, nobody with a dissenting opinion seems to get a

This is getting to such an extreme that we now have people claiming that
talking on the phone with a headset is more dangerous than driving
drunk.  If anybody seriously believes this, they need to think about
that statement again.  If the road was full of drunks, we'd be up to our
eyeballs in corpses on the highways.  But we're not, even though the
road is full of people talking on phones.

-- David


From: Anonymous
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 21:42:50
Subject: Credit cards for shul dues

An interesting controversy recently came up at our synagogue's board
meeting.  We will, of course, ask our Rabbi for Psak, but wanted to get
a sense of what other synagogues are doing in regard to this.

We have many members who cannot pay their full dues when they come due
in August.  Historically, we've gone with "head checks" -- For example,
someone who owes, say $400, can write four $100 checks dated Aug, Oct,
Dec, February and our treasurer deposits them accordingly.

It was recently suggested that we allows credit card payments.  That is
have someone pay $400 in August via a credit card.  There is, of course,
a fee that the synagogue would pay for such transactions, but we would
receive the money in a more timely fashion.

A much more interesting element has been brought to our attention.  Some
fear that people will end up increasing their credit card debt and
paying the rather high credit card interest rates because they choose to
pay their dues.  This has been compared to putting a stumbling block in
front of a blind man.


From: Eliezer Wenger <ewenger@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 16:17:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Family splitting for summer

 From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <Sabba.Hillel@...> 
> From the way the situation is written (such as the halacha of a father
> taking a child to the Bais Hamikdash), it seems that the families did
> go to Yerushalayim for the Yomim Tovim (especially Pesach). See the
> discussions about people leaving the farms empty and mal'achim
> protecting them as well.  Also the discussions about the Olei Regel
> seem to imply that it was full families and not just the men who went.

I'm not denying that there were families that went for the Sholosh
Regalim, however there was no obligation for them to go as is clearly
stated in the first Mishna of Chagiga. We find that Penina and Chana
used to go to Shiloh, but after Shmuel was born Chana stopped going
until Shmuel was weaned. The only point that I was trying to make was
that we cannot compare the situation of family splits for vacation
purposes, to family splits where the purpose is for the husband / father
to obtain more Yiras Shamayim, which will hopefully make them more
effective fathers / husbands during the rest of the year as wass the
situation of Aliyah leregel, Yarchei Kallah or visitng one's
Rebbe. Those type of family splits were approved by the Torah.
Regarding the family splits that take place every summer in many locales
is something which the Rabbanim need to interpret.

Eliezer Wenger


From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 13:17:55 +0300
Subject: Re: gederot (g'derot) vs. gedarim (g'darim)

Gilad J. Gevaryahu stated:

      The only dictionary in my collection that gives both gader (with
      kamatz tzere) and geder (with segol segol) is Yaakov Prost, Milon
      Ivri Chadash meIvrirt lePolanit uleGermanit,, Levov, 1912, and
      this is a rather archaic.

First of all, the word geder when used to mean a definition is indeed a
literary usage.

Now, with regard to plurals: The plural of gader is g'derim (sheva tzere
hiriq) or g'derot.

The plural of geder is g'darim (sheva qamatz hiriq).

Or in other words, the plural of fence can be anything but "g'darim".

IRA L. JACOBSON         


From: Yisrael Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 22:21:20 +0200
Subject: The Husband Being Absent/Away from the Family

Eliezer Wenger rejects comparison of summer separations and the custom
of Chassidim going away for Yom Tov to their Rebbes and leaving the
wives and children at home.

In three of his examples (a) Rebbe for Yom Tov, (b) Mekabel Pnei Rabbo
and (c) Yarchei Kallah it would seem that the comparison holds because
he seems to be looking at the situations only from the male side, not
the family side.  From the family side, it doesn't make a difference
sociologically, psychologically or otherwise.  The fact is that the male
is not home and in a Jewish family life setting, one would think that it
is better for the family to be together, at least that was what the
original posting was about, if I remember correctly.  For example,
visiting a Rebbe was to get more Yirat Shamayim, he writes.  Does the
family get more Yirat Shamayim?  Do they count?  Did some Chassidim get
a chance to drink liquor and smoke a pipe more than at home?  Did they
assure the sustenance of their family financially before going or did
they depend on the Rebbe, as much as the Rebbe depended upon them?

As for his fourth example, Aliyah L'Regel, I think he errs in stating that
> it was only on Succos after the Shmittah year (once in every 21 Yomim
> Tovim) that the women and children also had to be there for Hakhel.

I pointed out in a feminist-related posting that women that women were
present and that men carried the children up the steps.

Yisrael Medad


From: <meirman@...> (Meir)
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 06:31:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Kaddish Minhag Chabad

From: Harry Weiss <hjweiss@...>
>You left out the Chatzi Kaddish before the Amidah  of Maariv making 18.

So what does Kaddish mean when it is there seemingly (to me) to separate
parts of the service; how did Kaddish get that role, and , why does
there need to be so many?

As far as shortening one's parents time in Gehinnom, aiui, surely any
shortening comes off the later end.  (To take time off the beginning end
would require some place to put hir soul until the time to start began.)
So if, for example, one says 16 Kaddishes in a day, or whatever the
minhag is in one's community, wouldn't the deceased be in Gehinnom that
day, while a day came off the far end.  And eventually, unless hir time
ended earlier because of the deceased's own merit, he will have spent 6
months in Gehinnom before the days at the front bump into the cancelled
days at the end.

<meirman@...>  Baltimore, MD, USA

From: Eliezer Wenger <ewenger@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 16:06:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Kaddish Minhag Chabad

Harry Weiss <hjweiss@...> pointed out 
> You left out the Chatzi Kaddish before the Amidah  of Maariv making 18.

Yep, that was an oversight.

<jf@...>  wrote 
> You can add to that list of Kaddishim the half kaddish after Shemoneh
> Esray at ma'ariv of Motz'ay Shabbos

I was making a list of the regular three Tefilos during most of the days
of the week. If I wanted I could have added the Kaddish Yasom sad after
Aleinu of Kiddush Levana as well as the Kaddish Yason said after Aleinu
at the end of a Bris Milah.

Eliezer Wenger

From: Elazar M. Teitz <remt@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 12:07:13 GMT
Subject: Re: Kaddish Minhag Chabad

The listing of the kadeishim brings up a sore point.  Three of the 17
are for Mishnayos after each of the t'fillos.  However, it should be
pointed out that the kaddish d'rabbanan was instituted for saying after
public learning, not for an individual learning in a room where nine or
more other men happen to be present, but are not participating in the
learning of the mishnayos.  Too many Chabad advocates, who happen to be
davening in a non-Chabad minyan, will mumble a mishna under their breath
and then say a kaddish d'rabbanan.  One may be sure that such a kaddish,
being improperly said to begin with, is of no value in terms of granting
the 90-minute reprieve from heavenly judgment for the departed, if
indeed there is such a reprieve to begin with.



From: Andy Goldfinger <Andy.Goldfinger@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:25:58 -0400
Subject: Kashrus Question

Botas (Spanish wine flasks) are made of leather.  Here is a web site
from a vendor:


What are the kashrus implications of putting wine in containers made
from animal skin?

-- Andy


From: <Shuanoach@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:46:49 EDT
Subject: Memoirs of 19th c. Vilna and Radziner Rebbe

Does anyone know of any late 19th century memoirs of life in Vilna by
rabbis?  Also, anyone know where might i find stories and biographical
details about R. Gershon Henokh Leiner, oen of the Radziner Rebbes? (i'm
looking for books)


From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 13:18:26 +0300
Subject: Re: More on Hitpael, correction

I had stated:

      That vehisgadilti vehisqadishti appears in Ezekiel I have already
      stated.  But what leads to the conclusion that the first two words
      of qaddish must be "yisgadal veyisqadash" continues to escape me

What I meant to write, of course, was "yisgadel veyisqadesh."

The logic still eludes me.

Then I wrote:

      biblical hitpa`el.  As I have noted peviuolsy.

I meant "previously," of course.

I apologize for my errors.

IRA L. JACOBSON         


From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:20:07 +0100
Subject: Re: Qaddish Pronunciation

on 27/7/05 10:27 am, Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...> wrote:
> An example of the reflexive sense in Aramaic of the root qof dalet shin
> is in itqad'shat (Nedarim 50a), she betrothed herself.

This cannot be a reflexive formation since nobody, whether male or
female, can be betrothed to themself. The phrase "she betrothed herself"
must be understood as meaning "she caused herself to be betrothed".

Martin Stern


End of Volume 49 Issue 27