Volume 57 Number 77 
      Produced: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:56:29 EST

Subjects Discussed In This Issue:

A liturgical conundrum 
    ["Daniel Walker"]
delayed brit milah timing (3)
    [Mark Polster  Yehonatan Chipman  Leah S. R. Gordon]
Editing Policy (3)
    [Eitan Fiorino  Leah S. R. Gordon  Joseph Kaplan]
el erech apyim 
    [Ken Bloom]
    [Carl Singer]
Kosher Gatorade (4)
    [Tal S. Benschar  Joseph Kaplan  Steven Oppenheimer  Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz]
Qualifications for sitting on a Bet Din 
    [Martin Stern]


From: "Daniel Walker" <rabbiwalker@...>
Date: Thu, Jan 7,2010 at 05:01 PM
Subject: A liturgical conundrum

With regard to the very interesting discussion about Keil Erech Apayim. 

1.	Like Akiva Miller, most of the older siddurim I have been able to
check have KE"A before the heading "Krias Hatorah".  In some newer prints
though (including the newer Tehilas Hashem as opposed to the Siddur Torah
Ohr on which it is based) have KE"A after the Krias HaTorah heading. However
the new Chief Rabbis siddur, from which I believe Koren took their
translation has it before.

2.	Rav Eliyahu Munk in his Olam HaTefilos explains that these pesukim
are said as an extra Techina in response to the feeling of spiritual
inadequacy that the Torah Reading may engender. The Siddur Rashban gives an
alternative explanation that the Italian sages instituted KE"A as a
shortened version of Vehu Rachum for late comers to say rather than missing
leining. Both of these interpretations would seem to associate KE"A with
Krias HaTorah although they are also a part of tachanun.

3.	The dual nature of these verses at once part of tachanun but also
connected to leining may be the reason for the variatons around its
placement. In regard to headings. 

4.	Returning to Martins original post and the siddur with the missing
KE"A. The excellent sefer Ishai Yisroel quotes Rav S. Z. Auerbach ZATZAL ,
that KE"A is not said when davening alone because (similar to above) it is a
request for forgiveness before Leining.  
5.	If I remember correctly the Aruch Hashulchan says that one should
say it standing as it is a techina.

BeBirchas HaTorah
Daniel Walker


From: Mark Polster <mp@...>
Date: Fri, Jan 8,2010 at 12:01 AM
Subject: delayed brit milah timing

> ...And a bonus question:  suppose Orthodox relatives want to say a
> mishaberach for the baby.  If the baby didn't have a name yet, would
> there be a way to do that?  If the baby *does* have a name (his parents
> did tell the name already in fact), is that name used, even before a 
> bris?  Is it kosher' to do an official mishaberach for a young/pre-named
> baby?

I have not personally researched the relevant minhag/halacha, but can
relate the following practice anecdotally.  Friends of mine (a family that
is observant beyond a shadow of a doubt) experienced the birth of premature
twin boys.  They had no idea how long it would be before the boys (who are
now, thank god, both healthy and developing nicely) would be medically
cleared for brit milah.  In close consultation with their rav, they named
each of the boys in shul using the same format of misheberach that one
would use for a baby girl, giving each of them a single name.  Later, at
the brit, the boys were "named" again, each receiving a second name in
addition to the one they had been given earlier.

Kol tuv,
Mark Polster

From: Yehonatan Chipman <yonarand@...>
Date: Fri, Jan 8,2010 at 05:01 AM
Subject: delayed brit milah timing

Re:  the question of how to refer to a baby prior to circumcision, in a "mi
sheberakh" and so on:
     The standard formula is "rakh ha-nolad ben plonit"  (the tender newborn,
son of so-and-so").
    However, there is no absolute prohibition against naming the baby prior to
the brit if circumstances warrant it:  i.e., if the baby is born with a serious
illness and it seems clear that there will be a lengthy delay until the brit can
take place.  Unfortunately, I recently had sad experience with this:  the week
after last Shavuot my daughter-in-law gave birth to a baby boy, whom it soon
became evident that he was suffering from an extremely rare syndrome which
greatly impaired his immune system.  After about two weeks, when it was clear
that he would remain in the hospital for the long haul, my son, after consulting
with rabbis, gave him a name.  He was even told that giving a person a name in
some sense helps the baby spiritually, strengthening his presence in the world,
as it means he has more of an identity of his own.  Unfortunately, despite the
best possible medical care and truly heroic efforts, involving top experts in
the field, both locally and internationally, my grandson died a few days before
Rosh Hashana, without meriting to have a brit milah in his lifetime.  (the orlah
was removed  before burial by the Hevra Kaddisha, as is customary in such cases).  
   By the way, contrary to what some of discussants said, there is no halakhic
evidence that the naming has to be davka at the time of the brit.  Indeed, even
in the case of Avraham's naming Yitzhak, the Torah first says that he named him
(Gen 21:3) and only thereafter mentions the performance of milah (verse 4).  Nor
is there any mention of naming in Perek Rabbi Yishmael de-Mialh, the 18th
chapter of Shabbat, which is the main Talmudic source for laws of Brit Milah, 
nor AFAIK in the rishonim on the subject, and at best in passing in the Shulhan
   Yehonatan Chipman, Yerushalayim

From: Leah S. R. Gordon <leah@...>
Date: Fri, Jan 8,2010 at 06:01 AM
Subject: delayed brit milah timing

Thank you to everyone who wrote on-list (7) and off-list (5) to me about the
baby questions!  I guess this is a case of 12 Jews, 13 opinions.  ;)

But it does clarify that the do-immediately-when-health-allows seems to
be the usual recommendation, yet "health-allows" is sometimes defined to
be on the eighth day after an illness, and "immediately" is sometimes
defined to allow for the family to make arrangements.

The topic that seems to have the least consensus is about a name, and
using that name, before the bris.  If anyone has more thoughts on that,
and/or on naming conventions (tell before the bris?  tell the siblings
before the bris?  tell before the naming, for a girl?) I would be interested
in learning about that.

Shabbat Shalom,


From: Eitan Fiorino <afiorino@...>
Date: Fri, Jan 8,2010 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Editing Policy

> From: Akiva Miller <kennethgmiller@...>
> I would like to suggest a policy change. Namely, that the 
> editors should do no major editing of posts at all. It they 
> consider a post unprintable, it should be rejected entirely, 
> with a note to the author explaining what is wrong with it, 
> so that the author can try to make changes so that it will 
> become acceptable.

I would like to express my very strong support for this suggestion.  I've not
had the experience of such editing on mail-jewish (or have I?  I don't usually
read my posts in the digest . . . ), but I did once have a letter to the Wall
Street Journal eviscerated by the editors to the point that it was barely
sensible.  It is a pretty awful feeling to have your name associated with an
opinion that is not yours, particularly if it has been rendered illogical or
unintelligible by an editor.

Clearly, the moderators should not be involved in an interactive editorial
process with writers.  I think Akiva' suggestion is very sound because it leaves
the writer in charge of re-expressing his or her ideas.  And there is an upside
- it is likely that many submissions needed editing are composed by people who
were heated up about a topic and carried away in rhetorical excess.  Having the
opportunity to reformulate their thoughts when the heat of the moment has passed
will produce superior submissions, with better logic and more derech eretz
[loosely "proper manners" --MOD].

Shabbat shalom,

From: Leah S. R. Gordon <leah@...>
Date: Fri, Jan 8,2010 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Editing Policy

Mr. Miller addresses the editing policy of M.J below:
> Several months ago, the moderators edited a post of mine, deleting what I
> felt
> to be an important part. They did this without consulting me, and I felt
> very hurt.
> Along with my main suggestion to stop editing posts, I now offer a second
> suggestion: Reject posts only for reasons of their content.

and Mr. Jacobson addresses it as well:
> My impression of the new system of moderation is that the
> moderator(s) seem to be strict and reject or edit my postings rather
> frequently.  But I also have been given the opportunity to revise
> based on a moderator's comments.

I agree with all three of these points.  First, I do wholeheartedly
agree with Mr. Jacobson's impression that it is strict but that the recent
editorial staff always gives lots of opportunity for communication.
And I definitely wish to thank them for this huge unpaid work.

However, I also agree with both of Mr. Miller's suggestions.  I personally
also experienced a stealth "edit" a few years ago [changing the word
'misogyny' to 'polygamy'] that totally changed the meaning of my sentence,
and introduced a factual error.  I would rather have had the post rejected
and have a chance to make it more amenable.  And, I'm fine with editing
being about just the content, not the form/grammar.

I would like to see stronger limits on ad hominem statements and
unsupported assertions.  I would like to see weaker limits on the
religious range of perspectives allowed, within a halakha-respectful
environment.  I would like to see fair limits on strong language that
are applied to everyone equally.

But mostly, I figure that since I didn't volunteer to be a moderator,
I have to agree to disagree with some of the editorial decisions.
An example of that is that once I wrote a 'thank you to so-and-so
who recommended such-and-such on M.J because it worked well...' post,
and I was told that it was better just to email the guy off-list.
Ok, fine, I can live with that.

My biggest issue would be the case of the stealth-edit, i.e. the post
goes out not as one wrote it, but still with one's name attached.

--Leah S. R. Gordon

From: Joseph Kaplan <penkap@...>
Date: Fri, Jan 8,2010 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Editing Policy

I thought Akiva Miller's suggestions were excellent.  Let me quickly emphasize
that I think the moderators deserve much praise for the work they do which makes
MJ a pleasure to read, especially when compared to some other emails lists I
get.  But although I have not had my posts edited recently (I guess I'm just not
a controversial guy :-)), I would much rather have one rejected (with the reason
for such rejection given to me so I would have an opportunity to change it) than
have an editor rewrite substantive parts.  I don't mind being criticized for
what I write, but I'm not too happy if I'm criticized for what someone else's
words. As for spelling and grammatical mistakes, I think MJ should follow the
policy of Sh'ma magazine when Eugene Borowitz was the editor, which stated in
every issue:  "we do not correct typographical errors."  Obviously, with the
type of group that posts on MJ, everyone understands that EVERY spelling and
grammatical error is merely a typographical one.

Joseph Kaplan


From: Ken Bloom <kbloom@...>
Date: Fri, Jan 8,2010 at 12:01 PM
Subject: el erech apyim

> In the Sephradi siddur - both are said on Tahanun days. On non-tahanun
> days 3 verses are said. So it seems to be part of tahanun

You're misunderstanding how the Sepahradi siddur works.

In the Ashkenaz siddur there is a special list of days (separate from
the days when Tachanun is omitted) when Lamnatzeach (Psalm 20) and El
Erech Apayim is omitted, i.e. there are two different lists of days for
omitting parts of the service.

In the Sepharadi siddur, Lamnatzeach (Psalm 20) and El Erech Apayim and
Tefillah L'David (after Kadish Shaleim, a section of the service that
doesn't even exist in Nusach Ashkenaz) are omitted on any day when
tachanun is not said, i.e. there's only one list of days for omitting
things. Surely these things aren't all part of Tachanun.


From: Carl Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Fri, Jan 8,2010 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Heating

> Finally the point that has been bothering me. Heating with gas or oil is
> obviously a d'orita type of action on Shabbat. So we invoke pikoach nefesh?
> Why is this different than throwing a log on a fire or maybe this is
> permissible too. After all thermostats did not exist a century ago. 
> In Chicago when the temperature is below freezing one can measure and show
> a direct relationship between opening the door to a home and the ignition
> of the heating furnace. This is a psek resha that is nicha. Yet no one is out 
> there demanding that all homes install thermostats that avoid this problem.

I believe at issue is the phrase "DIRECT relationship" -- certainly opening
a door (presumably to enter or exit) -- may allow  some volume of air from
outdoors to exchange with some volume of air from indoors.  Given that, a
priori, the outdoor and indoor temperature are different then the indoor
temperature will change (perhaps measurably or even drastically.)  For the
record, the outdoor temperature change will be infinitesimal due to the
volume of the outdoors.

This resultant change in indoor temperature will be sensed by whatever
control devices  are present and in turn may result in the furnace turning
on (i.e., ignition.)   This is not, however, a DIRECT link from an halachic
viewpoint.   Consider in contrast (1) turning on a switch or (2) exhaling
(the air that you exhale is likely warmer than the room temperature and thus
you might set off the air conditioner.)



From: Tal S. Benschar <tbenschar@...>
Date: Fri, Jan 8,2010 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Kosher Gatorade

I am told by a friend of mine who works for a major kashrus certifying agency
that Gatorade is in the process of receiving certification and will soon have one.

Also, as the MOD indicated, there is a product called POWERADE on the market
which is very similar and already has certification.

Tal Benschar

From: Joseph Kaplan <penkap@...>
Date: Fri, Jan 8,2010 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Kosher Gatorade

Powerade has a hashgacha [kosher supervision --MOD] and is the equivalent of
Gatorade.  In fact, based on the suggestion of one of my daughters about 10
years ago, we each drink one Powerade bottle the day before a fast and fasts
have become much easier those of us who used to get headaches from fasting no
longer do so.  I also read somewhere recently that Gatorade will soon have a
hashgacha, so if that's all you can get, keep a lookout for it.

Joseph Kaplan

From: Steven Oppenheimer <steven.oppenheimer@...>
Date: Fri, Jan 8,2010 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Kosher Gatorade

Gatorade is supposedly becoming kosher.  See the following news item:

Steven Oppenheimer, D.M.D.

From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...>
Date: Fri, Jan 8,2010 at 12:01 PM
Subject: Kosher Gatorade

> From: Yaakov Shachter <jay@...>
> Is there a kosher beverage that has the properties of
> Gatorade? Can I make one, out of items that can be found around the
> house? I thank you all in advance for your replies.

> [I believe that Powerade, manufactured by coca cola, is essentially the same
> thing as gatorade, and is under supervision - MOD]

My children use Powerade before fasting and tell me that it makes a
big difference. kashrut.com has the following listing

Powerade Sports Drink ( when bearing OU): Arctic Extreme, Arctic Lime,
Arctic Shatter, Berry Blitz (for Canada), Dark Brown Burst, Fruit
Punch, Fruit Punch Powder, Green Squall, Jagged Ice, Lemon Lime, Lemon
Lime Powder, Mountain Blast, Mountain Blast Powder, Natural, Orange,
Orange Tangerine, Tidal Burst, Orange Tangarine Powder, Citrus Blend,
Flavor 23 Sour Berry, Freeze, Grape, Light Aleutian stream, Light
Arndean Chill, Mango, Melon Papaya Pineapple, Option Black cherry,
Strawberry, Option Strawberry, Strawberry Melon/Mango

There was a news article dated 8 December, 2009 in the Jewish Week,
stating that "Officials with Gatorade told The Jewish Week they are
working with the Orthodox Union on obtaining certification and expect
to have kosher drinks on store shelves sometime in 2010."

I have seen references to other products that have hechsherim (kosher
certification) but I do not know which ones would have a good effect.

If, as your email address indicates, you are in Chicago, you should
(according to some articles that I have found) be able to find it
       Sabba     -          ' "        -     Hillel
Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz | Said the fox to the fish, "Join me ashore"
 <SabbaHillel@...> | The fish are the Jews, Torah is our water


From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Thu, Jan 7,2010 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Qualifications for sitting on a Bet Din

On Wed, Jan 6,2010, Ari Trachtenberg <trachten@...> wrote:
> May a divorcee sit on a Bet Din?

Since a divorcee is a woman (the French word has an acute accent on the
first e), obviously not. I suppose what Ari means is a divorce (with an
acute accent on the e) in which case I cannot see why this should have any
relevance to his kashrut as a dayan.

Martin Stern


End of Volume 57 Issue 77