Volume 56 Number 96 
      Produced: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:07:26 EDT

Subjects Discussed In This Issue:

Chatzi kaddish [half kaddish] after Torah reading 
    [Joel Rich]
eat from a vessel that was not toiveled (2)
    [Rabbi Meir Wise  Akiva Miller]
First Moon Landing / Tisha B'Av. 
    [Steven Pudell]
    [Perets Mett]
Intermarriage and Niddah 
    [Rabbi Meir Wise]
Kaddish after Alainu 
    [David Ziants]
Kadish yatom together Was: Chatzi kaddish [half kaddish] after Torah 
    [David Ziants]
MOL suf 
    [Rabbi Ed  Goldstein]
Online Tisha B'Av Shiurim at WebYeshiva 
    [Jeffrey Saks]
ratzon chachamim 
    [Joel Rich]
Time of Sunset (2)
    ["David E Cohen"  Abe Brot]
Tisha B'av:  Online Educational Resources 
    [Jacob Richman]
Translation - Sack's Koren Siddur 
    ["Lawrence Myers"]
translation of Shema Yisrael 
    [Irwin Weiss]


From: Joel Rich <JRich@...>
Date: Fri, Jul 24,2009 at 06:01 AM
Subject: Chatzi kaddish [half kaddish] after Torah reading

> Actually the original Ashkenazi custom was that only one person would say any
> kaddish yatom (mourner's kaddish) and the present regrettable 'custom'
> of all saying it together in such a way that nobody can hear anything nor answer
> "Amein, yehei shemei rabba" only became current in the last 200 years. 
> It is based on a comment by Rav Yaakov Emden that he preferred the Sefardi
> custom where all mourners say it in unison. 

>From various shiurim [classes --MOD] I have heard I suspect the primary cause
was the disagreements over who should be the one to say the kaddish and the
solution was to let all say it. The Sefardi custom was likely used as an
explanation (after
all, do we generally allow such a transfer of customs?)

She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu,
[That we may see the consolation of Jerusalem and her rebuilding quickly in our
days.  --MOD]

Joel Rich


From: Rabbi Meir Wise <Meirhwise@...>
Date: Fri, Jul 24,2009 at 09:01 AM
Subject: eat from a vessel that was not toiveled

In reference to toiveling dishes.  This is a Torah requirement no less  
than eating kosher food.  We read about it a couple of weeks ago after  
the war with Midian.

When acquiring vessels of a non-Jew one is required to immerse them to  
remove impurity (even new dishes that do not need to be made kosher)  
and add the sanctity of the Jew.  Whilst not affecting the kashrut of the food
it is nevertheless  forbidden for Jews to use such dishes.  The responsa tzitz
Eliezer, igrot Moshe and minchas Yitzchok are full of these laws.
The most lenients view is that if one could eat the food without the  
dish, for example a sandwich, then if served with a sandwich on an  
untoiveled dish one can procede.  Soups, cholents etc would be forbidden by all

Again I would ask that people who do not know the sources or rationale  
of this mitzvah refrain from mocking it in a public forum.  The comparison with
the host wearing shaatnez [forbidden linen/wool mixture --MOD] was [not
appropriate].  If the host asked you to put in the jacket then if it contained
shaatnez it would also be forbidden.

Why not look at the sources or ask a rabbi before writing in on such  

With best wishes
Rabbi Meir Wise, London

From: Akiva Miller <kennethgmiller@...>
Date: Fri, Jul 24,2009 at 01:01 AM
Subject: eat from a vessel that was not toiveled

In Judaism, there is a mitzvah to immerse our cooking and eating utensils in a
ritual bath, called a mikveh. This does not apply to all utensils, but it does
apply to many. This will depend on the function of the item and the material it
is made of, and this is not the topic of this thread.

This thread does concern the halacha that if an item is subject to this mitzvah,
then we are not allowed to use it until it has been properly immersed.

This law is totally separate from the laws of kosher food. If the law was
violated by taking kosher food, and cooking, preparing, and/or serving it in
utensils which should have been immersed - but weren't - the food remains
totally kosher, and it may be eaten. The catch is that you'd have to eat it with
your bare hands, or with utensils which don't need to be immersed, or you can
somehow transfer it to utensils which *have* been immersed. You just can't eat
it with utensils which still need to be immersed.

<chips@...> asked:
> What [did] Rav Moshe Feinstein do when [he]
>  encountered such a sitaution[?]

I have no idea what he actually *did*, but I can quote from his writings, where
he tells us what we ought to do. He discusses this question in his "Igros
Moshe", in Yoreh Deah Volume 3, Section 22, last paragraph: (The translation is
mine; where I added anything, I put my words in brackets.)

"Someone is eating in a hotel or restaurant or similar, where they do *not*
immerse their utensils, and they place in front of him some pieces of meat or
similar food, served on a metal or glass utensil. He isn't really using it [the
plate] for the needs of the meal. Even though utensils which are used for dry
things are indeed also considered "meal utensils", and they must be immersed --
but since the food does not become forbidden [by being in an unimmersed plate],
in a difficult situation (Hebrew: b'shaas had'chak) one can allow (Hebrew: yesh
l'hatir) picking up the food with his hands, or with something that does not
need to be immersed [such as a plastic fork], and to eat it. But in a situation
where the food *needs* the utensil, such as a soup, or liquid foods, [which are
not on a plate but in a bowl] it is forbidden to eat from it until it is
immersed. It is considered a "meal utensil", because you need it for the needs
of the eating, and at the time of the eating."

Akiva Miller


From: Steven Pudell <SPudell@...>
Date: Thu, Jul 23,2009 at 10:47 PM
Subject: First Moon Landing / Tisha B'Av.

Immanuel Burton wrote:
> The astronauts who first landed on the moon forty years ago returned to
> Earth on 24th July 1696, which corresponds to Tisha B'Av 5729.  Has
> anyone seen any comments about the significance (if any) of such a
> landmark event and achievement coming to a conclusion on Tisha B'Av
> itself?

No.  Rabbi Nosson Kaminetsky (Sp?) tells the story (in his YU speech
from a few years ago) of his father watching the moon landing...and the
significance his father attached to that event.


From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Sat, Jul 25,2009 at 11:01 PM
Subject: Get

Leonard Paul wrote:
> One of the articles reported a woman by name whose husband's lawyer  
> had advised him not to give his wife a GETT. The woman went before a non- 
> Jewish local magistrate who was very sympathetic to her plight and issued  
> an order that the husband gives a GETT.

Not at all clear that such a get, given under duress ("get meuse"), is  
indeed valid.

Perets Mett


From: Rabbi Meir Wise <Meirhwise@...>
Date: Fri, Jul 24,2009 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Intermarriage and Niddah

On the subject of marrying out versus sleeping with a niddah - I  
wouldn't recommend either!  And discussing which is worse is futile and  

I only bother to write to correct a false impression that marrying out  
is a lesser crime than nidda.  The Mishnah in keritot states that  
sleeping with a niddah is punished by karet [excision from the Jewish people
--MOD] which is the highest punishment, but the Talmud in avodah zara 23b states
that non-jewesses are considered nidda from birth!

If a Jew marries out he is not only sleeping with a nidda but helping  
to destroy the Jewish people.  Reb Moshe Feinstein clearly states that the
category ben or bat nidda is not to be taken into account nowadays when looking
for a potential partner as many women go swimming...

See My late rebbe Reb Getzel Ellinson's books "haisha vehamitzvot".
My rosh yeshiva Maran Rav Nochum Rabinovitch clearly stated that  
intermarriage is worse.  I think part of the argument is that one can  
always do teshuva even after any sin - see his yad peshuta on hilchot  
teshuva of the rambam.

With best wishes
Rabbi Meir Wise, London


From: David Ziants <dziants@...>
Date: Fri, Jul 24,2009 at 04:01 AM
Subject: Kaddish after Alainu

Normally I davern in Ashkenazi shuls, according to my minhag, but 
occasionally I find myself going to a sephardi (aidot hamizrach) bet 
k'nesset.  One thing  that has become clear to me  is that their custom 
is not to say kaddish yatom [Mourner's Kaddism --MOD] after alainu.

Is someone able to enlighten why the Ashkenazi and Sephardi customs 

Many years ago, I was in a Sephardi shul and at that time I was saying 
kaddish for my father.  Someone started saying kaddish after alainu so I 
saw no reason to join in.  It turned out that the person was saying a 
chatzi kaddish [half kaddish --MOD], and although I quickly completed the
mourners' kaddish, I somehow felt I did something wrong. Was this chatzi kaddish
similar to the after kriyat hatorah kaddish?

With my saying kaddish now, and also often leading the tephilla, I find 
it a little challenge to accommodate the other kaddish sayers. 
Sometimes it is a short pause whilst nusach sepharad (the chassidic 
nusach) add "v'yatzmach..." at the beginning. Also aidot hamizrach have 
a list of extra "shebachot" (praises) towards the end, and then they say 
"lanu ulchol yisrael" whilst I the synchronise the "lanu" with "alainu 
(ulchol yisrael)".

Ma'aleh Adumim, Israel


From: David Ziants <dziants@...>
Date: Fri, Jul 24,2009 at 03:01 AM
Subject: Kadish yatom together Was: Chatzi kaddish [half kaddish] after Torah

Martin Stern wrote:
> In some large Ashkenazi communities like Amsterdam this problem was to some
> extent avoided by having all the mourners go to the front of the shul and
> say kaddish together in unison there, but most others do not do so, giving
> rise to the cacophony commonly heard nowadays.

At least two of the ashkenazi shuls in my neighbourhood in Ma'aleh 
Adumim ask that kaddish sayers stand together, whether at the front or 
near the bimma.

So this issue of finding ways that kaddish is said together, is catching on.


From: Rabbi Ed  Goldstein <BERNIEAVI@...>
Date: Sun, Jul 26,2009 at 11:01 AM
Subject: MOL suf

Why is it mol suf and not mool soof [in last week's Torah reading --MOD]? if
someone has access to minchat shai, he might explain. todah.  

Rabbi Ed  Goldstein
Hewlett NY


From: Jeffrey Saks <jeffreysaks@...>
Date: Wed, Jul 22,2009 at 05:01 AM
Subject: Online Tisha B'Av Shiurim at WebYeshiva

Our sages have taught us that one who grieves over the destruction of
Jerusalem will merit to see its rebuilding. Join Rabbi Chaim Brovender, Rosh
Yeshiva of WebYeshiva, and Rabbi Yitzchak Blau on TIsha B'Av, Thursday, July
30th, for two sessions of Kinot and special shiurim in memory of former
WebYeshiva faculty member and beloved teacher, Rabbi Jay Miller. (To
register for the online classes, http://webyeshiva.org/tishabav).

First Session

9:15-11:30 AM Israel time
Explanatory Kinot Service with Rabbi Brovender
Rabbi Brovender will explain the themes of the various Kinot, with a close
examination of the text and ideas. What was the historical background of the
Kinot? Who are the authors of the Kinot? What themes in the Kinot resonate
in modern times?

12:00-1:00 PM Israel time
Aggadot HaChurban with Rabbi Blau
Rabbi Blau will take a deeper look at the Aggadot HaChurban (stories dealing
with the destruction of the Temple) including Bar Kamza, R. Zecharya and the

Chatzot in Jerusalem is at approximately 12:45 PM

Second Session

5:30-7:00 PM Israel time
Second Explanatory Kinot Service with Rabbi Brovender
Rabbi Brovender will explain the themes of the various Kinot, with a close
examination of the text and ideas. What was the historical background of the
Kinot? Who are the authors of the Kinot? What themes in the Kinot resonate
in modern times?

All texts and materials will be provided online by WebYeshiva.
Both sessions are free and are open to WebYeshiva students and to the

To register, http://webyeshiva.org/tishabav
For more information about WebYeshiva, visit www.WebYeshiva.org


From: Joel Rich <JRich@...>
Date: Sun, Jul 26,2009 at 06:01 PM
Subject: ratzon chachamim

I'm reviewing the sugya of pidyon shvuyim  [redeeming captives]  (gittin 45a). 
It occurs to me that to the best of my knowledge the only discussions of whether
something was historically done "Brtzon chachamim"  [with the approval of the
rabbis] are all mishnaic.  In general when the gemara brings a proof from a
maaseh shehaya [case history]  iirc the question of brtzon chachamim is not
raised except here (by abaye) and similarly by abaye in moed katan 18b. Note
that it doesn't seem that abaye had a mesora [tradition]  that the actions were
against the ratzon, he just seems to posit it as a possibility.  Isn't it always
the case that it is a possibility-why doesn't the gemara posit this every time?
 Perhaps it knew the halachic result it wanted???

She-nir'eh et nehamat Yerushalayim u-binyanah bi-mherah ve-yamenu

Joel  Rich


From: "David E Cohen" <ddcohen@...>
Date: Sun, Jul 26,2009 at 06:01 AM
Subject: Time of Sunset

Richard Fiedler wrote:
> According to the Astronomy department of Cornell University
> even a 1500 meter rise in altitude would only change the time
> of sunset by one minute.
> Yet the algorithm that is in common use by the Jewish
> Community appears to be a minute for every 200 meter rise.

My understanding is that the formula is more or less:
extraDegrees = arccosine(R / (R+A))
where      R = the radius of the Earth (the distance from the center
               of the Earth to sea level)
           A = the altitude of the observer (above sea level)
extraDegrees = the additional number of degrees below the (sea-level)
horizon that the sun has to be before an observer at altitude A will see it
go below the horizon.  The number of minutes that this will take, of course,
depends on the depression angle of the sun, which varies with the season and
with latitude.

(Note that if this is correct, the delay in sunset does NOT vary linearly
with altitude.  The first 200 meters above sea level have much more of an
effect than the next 200 meters...)

>From my perch here in Neve Daniel (in the Judean Mountains), 984 meters
above sea level, with nothing of higher altitude getting in the way between
here and the Mediterranean Sea, my empirical observations match the results
of this formula, and I observe sunset about 5 minutes (on average) after the
time given by the various calculators for sea-level sunset at my latitude
and longitude.

-- D.C.

From: Abe Brot <abrot@...>
Date: Sat, Jul 25,2009 at 04:01 PM
Subject: Time of Sunset

I ran Jerusalem on 22 July 2009 on my program and it gave sunset at 7:43
for sea level and 7:48 for a 900 meter altitude, which explains the
difference found by Richard Fiedler.

Apparently he received incorrect information from the Cornell University
Astronomy Dept.

Another source of difference between civil and hallachic tables is that
the civil tables define sunset when the center of the sun's disk crosses
the horizon, while the hallachic table takes sunset when the entire disk
disappears. The difference is about 2 minutes.

Abe Brot
Petah Tikva


From: Jacob Richman <jrichman@...>
Date: Tue, Jul 21,2009 at 08:01 PM
Subject: Tisha B'av:  Online Educational Resources


Tisha B'Av is the saddest day on the Jewish calendar because
of the incredible series of tragedies which occurred on that 
date throughout Jewish History.

Tisha B'Av means "the ninth (day) of the Hebrew month of Av." 
Tisha B'Av primarily commemorates the destruction of the first
and second Temples, both of which were destroyed on the ninth 
of Av (the first by the Babylonians in 586 B.C.E.; the second 
by the Romans in 70 C.E.). 

Although this day is primarily meant to commemorate the
destruction of the Temple, it is appropriate to consider on 
this day the many other tragedies of the Jewish people, many 
of which occurred on this day, most notably the expulsion of 
the Jews from Spain in 1492. 

You can learn more about this Jewish fast day (July 30, 2009) at:

May we see the rebuilding of the Temple in our days and that
Tisha B'Av becomes a day of celebration.



From: "Lawrence Myers" <lawrence@...>
Date: Fri, Jul 24,2009 at 05:01 AM
Subject: Translation - Sack's Koren Siddur

Mark Polster wrote:
> In MJ Vol. 56, #92, Martin Stern wrote:
>> A closer look at the source would show that the word beshem carries the
>> ta'am (musical / punctuation mark) tippecha which separates it from the
>> following word. This would suggest the meaning "called out loud: Hashem".
>> However there is one possible objection in that it often happens that in
>> this particular sequence of te'amim in a verse the tippecha has replaced
>> the expected mercha which would join it to the following word rendering 
>> the
>> phrase "and He called out in the name of Hashem".
> While Martin is, of course, quite correct in saying that the sequence
> mercha-tippecha often swaps for tippecha-mercha, anecdotal evidence that
> at least Rav Aharon Lichtenstein, shli'ta, feels that in this instance
> that is not the case.  Around twenty-five years ago (when I was somewhat
> less careful about these matters than I try to be now) I was leining in
> his presence on a fast day and inadvertently read "Vayiqra (tippecha) /
> b'shem Hashem", and (not the sort of thing one forgets...) he corrected me
> on the trup!  On that basis, I must conclude that at least Rav Aharon
> feels that the correct understanding of the pasuk is most assuredly the
> former rather than the latter of the two possiblities.

And that is why the pointing is "v'shem" and not "b'shem" HaShem.  Whereas 
in other places where the Tipcha is on Vayikra the next word is "b'shem"
Lawrence Myers


From: Irwin Weiss <irwin@...>
Date: Fri, Jul 24,2009 at 07:01 AM
Subject: translation of Shema Yisrael

Interesting discussion. I enjoyed the comments of Arnie Resnicoff.

The word "Shema" is, of course, typically translated as "Hear!"
What concerns me, to borrow a phrase from a Simon and Garfunkel song from 1966,
is people "Hearing Without Listening".

I don't think I need to elaborate. You can conceive easily of what I mean.

Irwin Weiss
Baltimore, MD


End of Volume 56 Issue 96