Volume 58 Number 79
Produced: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:59:27 EDT
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Administravia
[Akiva Miller]
Being a Zionist is a curse?
[Martin Stern]
Converts (3)
[Martin Stern Carl Singer Lisa Liel]
Dishwashers (4)
[David Tzohar Carl Singer Perets Mett Leah S.R. Gordon]
Kolmos?
[Perets Mett]
Minhag for a newlywed couple
[Sam Gamoran]
Think about these examples carefully.
[Martin Stern]
To the males of this list - A woman's status as a Jew
[Marilyn Tomsk]
Who married Cain? (2)
[Lisa Liel Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz]
Young Israel of Cleveland (was "Hungarian")
[Carl Singer]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Akiva Miller <kennethgmiller@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Administravia
In MJ 58:77, the Mail-jewish team wrote:
> Some people are still sending submissions as attachments which the
> Shamash system cannot handle. As a result, they are not being
> published. If you have done so, please resubmit as an email instead.
I think there's a possibility that some people may be doing this without
realizing it, especially if they click "Reply" rather than simply
writing a new email. If anyone out there finds that Shamash is rejecting
their posts, I suggest checking the following:
When you write your email, if it is possible to change the font (like
making it bold or italic), then your email program may be sending it
out in "Rich Text Format", and Shamash might be receiving it as an
attachment, even though you did not ever click "Attach A File". If this
is happening, you should look at the many options avaialble in your
email program, and make sure that the email format is set to "Plain
Text".
Akiva Miller
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Being a Zionist is a curse?
Jeanette Friedman <FriedmanJ@...> wrote (MJ 58#78) quite a revealing
account of the Munkczer's opinions, ending with the comment:
> Being a Zionist is a curse? Really?
in her reply to my comment (MJ 58#74):
> As far as the Minchas Elazar was concerned this was probably
> a much worse outcome, as Jeanette will, no doubt, confirm.
Unfortunately, I think she missed my point. I was not saying that being a
Zionist was a curse, only that in line with his Weltanschauung, the Minchas
Elazar would have considered it as such.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 06:01 AM
Subject: Converts
Mordechai Horowitz wrote (MJ 58 #76):
> I was learning Sefer HaChinuch and its commentary on last week's parsha took
> the mitzva to establish a king to say all Jewish offices of any type of any
> authority should only go to born Jews.
>
> This would ban converts from heading the kitchen committee by its logic.
I fear that Mordechai has misunderstood the Sefer HaChinuch. The word
serarah, which he translates as authority, implies the ability to order
people around like a king. I think that the kitchen committee's authority is
much more limited and probably would not infringe on this.
As far as shul rabbis are concerned, there would seem to be distinction
between those primarily engaged in pastoral work, for which a ger should be
equally eligible, and those expected to give halachic rulings (as opposed to
advice) based on their own reasoning rather than merely quoting a textual
source. It is possible that a ger may be debarred from the latter and that
would be the source of Young Israel's position.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 08:01 AM
Subject: Converts
Mordechai Horowitz wrote (MJ58#76):
> I was learning Sefer HaChinuch and its commentary on last weeks parsha took
> the mitzva to establish a king to say all Jewish offices of any type of any
> the authority should only go to born Jews.
> This would ban converts from heading the kitchen committee by its logic.
> I have not looked in detail at other opinions on this issue.
I'm afraid that the above construct may win debate points but does not
resolve the matter. It clearly extends the apparent Young Israel policy beyond
its intended boundaries. If this were mathematics it would be an example of
reduction ad absurdum.
There is, btw, significant on-line discussion dated around December 2007,
re: Young Israel's policy -- much heat, little light. Of relevance to this
forum is that several question the halachic basis for the policy.
Carl
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Lisa Liel <lisa@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Converts
Mordechai Horowitz <mordechai@...> wrote (MJ 58 #76):
>Batya Medad <ybmedad@...> wrote (MJ 58 #75):
>
>> As far as I'm concerned, Young Israel has made a very serious mistake
>> in their reading of Hebrew. "Ger" is stranger, but "ger tzedek" is
>> convert. We are midarayta forbidden to discriminate against converts.
>> http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/2010/07/bad-definition-and-translation
>> -fouls.html
>
> I was learning Sefer HaChinuch and its commentary on last weeks
> parsha took the mitzva to establish a king to say all Jewish offices
> of any type of any authority should only go to born Jews.
>
> This would ban converts from heading the kitchen committee by its logic.
>
> I have not looked in detail at other opinions on this issue.
It goes back at least to the Rambam in Hilchot Melachim. He says
that "mi-kerev ahicha" (from the midst of your brethren) means "ad
she-imo miYisrael" (until his mother is Jewish). I assume that's
from the Gemara. The problem is that the Rambam applies this to all
appointed positions. And it seems fairly clear that he's referring
to hereditary positions and positions granted by a sovereign or noble
power. Not functionaries elected in a shul election.
Beyond that, I don't see what possible difference there can be
between shul president and webmaster when it comes to this. Either
both of them should be subject to this rule, or neither of them. And
that applies both to converts and to women, who are in the same category here.
Lisa
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Tzohar <davidtzohar@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 08:01 AM
Subject: Dishwashers
In most domestic dishwashers there is a microswitch on the door which
prevents the dishwasher from working if the door is open. When you close the
door on shabbat you are preparing it for operation even if it is not turned
on. This is a psik reishei (an action with a certain and irreversible result)
and as such is forbidden.
There are also 3 chumrot:
1-avsha d'milta, forbidden because it makes a lot of noise.
2-uvdin d'chol- Forbidden because its usage is the same as that during the
week.
3-The dishwasher heats the water to a temp. higher than 45 degrees cel.
thereby 'cooking it" There are some authorities who forbid this even if the
timer turns it on.
Dishwashers in institutions do not have a microswitch and the chumras are
evened out by the fact that the dishwasher prevents tircha yeteira (much
extra exertion) which one should avoid on shabbat if possible.
David Tzohar
http://tzoharlateivahebrew.blogspot.com/
http://tzoharlateiva.blogspot.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Dishwashers
Immanuel Burton (MJ58#76) writes:
> According to the English edition of Shemirath Shabbath Ke-hilkhatah (volume
> 1, chapter 12, paragraph 35), one may not use a domestic dishwasher on
> Shabbath even if it will be turned on by a time-switch that was set before
> Shabbath. One may, however, do so on Yom Tov provided that the dishes will
> be needed again that day and that the machine will be turned on by a
> time-switch set before Tom Tov so that one does not commit any direct action
> to switch the machine >on or off or otherwise regulate its operation.
> Amongst the questions that I have on this are:
> (1) What is the reason that dishwashers may not be used on Shabbath even
> with a time-switch?
> (2) In what way is Yom Tov different in this respect?
> (3) Why is this ruling qualified by the word "domestic"? Does it imply
> that the Halachah would be different for a commercial dishwasher in a
> non-domestic setting?
In partial answer to why Yom Tov vs. Shabbos - two approaches.
(1) One may not do work on Shabbos for Chol -- An example is that after
Mussaf on Shabbos, some do not fold their tallis before putting it away - as
this would violate such a prohibition -- the tallis not being used again
until chol (Sunday)
(2) and I think this is a stronger approach -- one may not benefit from work
done on one's behalf on Shabbos. For example, one may not give one's car to
an auto mechanic a few minutes before licht benching with the understanding
that he's expecting the work to be completed by Saturday evening. (Knowing
that the work will, by force, have to be done on Shabbos.)
I can only speculate re: the "domestic" -- consider this example: Could it
be that a restaurant or a hotel caterer might have a need for clean dishes
motzei Shabbos after serving a Friday evening meal -- and thus it would lose
parnosa (livelihood) without this exemption.
Carl
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Dishwashers
Immanuel Burton <iburton@...> wrote (MJ 58#76)
> According to the English edition of Shemirath Shabbath Ke-hilkhatah (volume 1,
> chapter 12, paragraph 35), one may not use a domestic dishwasher on Shabbath
> even if it will be turned on by a time-switch that was set before Shabbath.
> One may, however, do so on Yom Tov provided that the dishes will be needed
> again that day and that the machine will be turned on by a time-switch set
> before Tom Tov so that one does not commit any direct action to switch the
> machine on or off or otherwise regulate its operation.
>
> Amongst the questions that I have on this are:
>
> (1) What is the reason that dishwashers may not be used on Shabbath even with
> a time-switch?
>
> (2) In what way is Yom Tov different in this respect?
One difference is that the mlocho in a dishwasher is bishul (heating the
water in the dishwasher) which is forbidden on Shabbos and permitted on
yomtov. Closing the door of the dishwasher causes the bishul to take
place.
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Leah S.R. Gordon <leah@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Dishwashers
In Mail.Jewish vol. 58 #76 Immanuel Burton writes:
> According to the English edition of Shemirath Shabbath Ke-hilkhatah (volume
> 1, chapter 12, paragraph 35), one may not use a domestic dishwasher on
> Shabbath even if it will be turned on by a time-switch that was set before
> Shabbath. One may, however, do so on Yom Tov provided that the dishes will
> be needed again that day and that the machine will be turned on by a
> time-switch set before Tom Tov so that one does not commit any direct action
> to switch the machine on or off or otherwise regulate its operation.
My first suggestion would be if possible to consult an earlier edition, in
Hebrew. I have found astounding differences between the two (one that comes
to mind is the permissibility/not of using nail polish to stop a run in
one's stocking on shabbat). Pretty clearly the translation sticks in a
number of prohibitions that are imaginary, unless the Hebrew edition is
somehow not to be trusted. So maybe this is one of them. At any rate, I
know of many Orthodox Jews who have psak to do a dishwasher timer, provided
that certain conditions are met around what switches are set before shabbat,
what happens with the LED, etc.
--Leah S. R. Gordon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Kolmos?
In Mail-Jewish (58#78):
> Attached to the English edition of the Chareidi weekly paper/magazine Mishpacha
> two weeks ago was their monthly literary/hashkafic (philosophical outlook)
> supplement called "Kolmos" ("quill pen" as in the writing instrument used by a
> Torah scribe).
Why do they call it Kolmos? Surely the word is kulmos!
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sam Gamoran <SGamoran@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 04:01 AM
Subject: Minhag for a newlywed couple
Jack Wechsler <wechsler@...> wrote (MJ 58 #76):
> My recently married son-in-law told me of a minhag from his native country
> (South Africa) where a newly married couple puts honey on their bread on
> shabbat instead of salt for the whole first year of marriage. I wondered if
> anyone else has heard of this minhag and what it's roots are. I only know of
> the minhag of replacing honey for salt on Rosh Hashanah - shana tova umtukah.
I don't know about the newlyweds' minhag. However our family's minhag for the
new year is to substitute honey from Rosh Hashanah through Simchat Torah.
Regards,
Sam
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 06:01 AM
Subject: Think about these examples carefully.
Jeanette Friedman <FriedmanJ@...> submission (MJ 58#77) should be a
warning to all those who are so narrow-minded that they cannot tolerate
legitimate differences of opinion or practice.
I have just one query: what does the acronym WTG signify? The only thing
that came to my mind in the context of "adult daughters [who] are a little
Modern" was "wearing tight garments" but that seems unlikely in the context
of eleventh century Northern France!
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Marilyn Tomsk <jtomsky@...>
Date: Tue, Aug 17,2010 at 07:01 PM
Subject: To the males of this list - A woman's status as a Jew
Suppose the shoe was on the other foot - would you be that compliant with the
little you receive as a woman? The second rate status? The guilt implied
because of a woman (Eve and the apple from the Tree of Knowledge) way, way back
in time - if it did happen. That was one woman in countless generations of
women since. The talk of 'get her pregnant all the time' - 'we need lots of
kids.' Until her life is nothing compared to cries of endless babies and kids
and their needs and demands. Have you spent one day - less alone day after day
with children? How would you feel being used like an animal for breeding?
Would you accept all that? I doubt it. That is - inhuman.
Marilyn Tomsky
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Lisa Liel <lisa@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Who married Cain?
Scott Spiegler <scottspiegler@...> wrote (MJ 58 #76):
>Yes, it does say that, but that seems to only beg the 2nd part of my
>question, which is - if they keep marrying bonim u'vanos, how do they every
>get out of the problem of only marrying within the same, biological family?
Perhaps God created Adam and Eve with sufficient genetic diversity
that it wasn't a problem.
Lisa
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Who married Cain?
Scott Spiegler <scottspiegler@...> wrote (MJ 58#76):
> Sammy Finkelman <sammy.finkelman@...> wrote (MJ 58#75):
>
>> It says in the Torah for every generation from Adam "Vayoled Bonim
>> U'Vanos" - and he (gave birth to - what's the right English word here)
>> sons and daughters.
>
> Yes, it does say that, but that seems to only beg the 2nd part of my
> question, which is - if they keep marrying bonim u'vanos, how do they every
> get out of the problem of only marrying within the same, biological family?
The next generation are first cousins, which are not necessarily
forbidden. The generation following are second cousins, that is even
more separated. Thus after a relatively few generations, and with the
expansion of the numbers, the rules against incest can begin to take
effect. Actually, there were royal families, such as Egypt, in which
brothers and sisters continued to marry as a matter of policy.
However, in modern times, consider the royal families of Europe who,
while not violating the laws against incense, kept marrying among each
other. It is said that World War I broke out when it did, because
everyone regarded Queen Victoria as the matriarch of the family and
would not go to war until after she died.
There are also references to the "sister by the father and not the
mother" as being permitted. This was the excuse used by Avrohom to
Avimelech. While it was not true (she was the daughter of his
brother), it was regarded as a legitimate excuse.
This was actually used as part of the explanation of who the sh'vatim
[tribes] married as well.
Sabba - ' " - Hillel
Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 18,2010 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Young Israel of Cleveland (was "Hungarian")
Steven Oppenheimer (MJ58#77) discusses the Young Israel in Cleveland Heights
circa 1970-74.
Just a bit of clarification (and perhaps other Clevelanders might clarify my
clarifications -- as although some my family remains in Cleveland, I for the
most part left in 1968 after college.)
The balabtim involved with the Hebrew Academy and the Young Israel had the
vision to build a dual purpose building on Taylor Road in Cleveland Heights --
it was the Hebrew Academy (day school) with an "auditorium" that was suitable
for use as a synagogue. As the community moved further East a "Youth Center"
was built -- this was a full-functioning stand alone synagogue building in South
Euclid, the adjacent suburb. The two buildings being less than two miles apart.
Rabbi Spero alternated Shabbosim. In recent years the Young Israel has
migrated still further East to Green Road. The "Marmorisher" shul was a
separate, unrelated, entity.
Carl
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 58 Issue 79