Volume 6 Number 31

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Conservative Responsa
         [Meylekh Viswanath]
Day School Curriculum (Hebrew)
         [Barry Siegel]
         [Gerald Sacks]
Nail Clippings and Burial
         [Gary Davis]
Raw Meat and Beacon
         [Shlomo Pick]
Right Handedness in Halakha
         [Meylekh Viswanath]
Right-Handedness in Halakha
         [Hillel Markowitz]
Sending Away the Mother Bird (2)
         [Morris Podolak, Danny Skaist]


From: <VISWANATH@...> (Meylekh Viswanath)
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 10:50:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Conservative Responsa

Regarding the Ra'ah's psak on what can be deoraysa, I may have misstated
his position.  It is possible that he held the general rule that for
something to be deoraysa, it has to have been known/in existence at the
time of the beys ha-mikdesh.  My rabbi (rather than the Ra'ah) might
have suggested the application to electricity.  This would clear up the
anachronism pointed out by Yosef Bechhofer.  In any case, this is not
the halakha.  As to the question of Zeev Kesselman, who writes:

	Furthermore, electricity by this reasoning is a late
        development: what about striking a match, or planting potatoes?,

one may distinguish between the essential ingredient involved in
striking a match (creating fire through friction) or planting potatoes
(comparable to planting any other tuber), which existed at the time of
the beys ha-mikdesh and that in electricity (what the essential
ingredient here is not clear) which did not exist as a man-induced
phenomenon.  At some level of generality, there is nothing new under the
sun, so one must be careful not to push the level of comparison too far.

Hillel Markowitz brings a distinction to bear between electricity and
the internal combustion engine which is interesting (though one could
think of counterarguments) and is consistent with the distinction that I
have suggested above:

     There is a difference between electricity and the internal combustion
     engine.  While neither were used at the time of Matan Torah (tho the
     flying saucer nuts claim the aron was a powerful condenser and contained
     a radio (:-)) the internal combustion engine is an actual example of a
     fire.  The fact that the fire is used for transportation rather than
     heat does not matter in our case.  One is still burning a fuel.
     Electricity on the other hand is a totally different physical process.

Zeev Kesselman also asks why restrict the rule to what was known at the
time of the beys ha-mikdesh, why not ma'amad har sinai?  Don't we learn
some shabbes laws from the beys ha-mikdesh?  

In any case, I will obtain the precise source of the Ra'ah's opinion from
my rabbi.  When I last asked him, it was shabbes, and so I was not able
to write it down.  Bli neder, I will ask him asap.



From: <sieg@...> (Barry Siegel)
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 93 14:11 EST
Subject: Day School Curriculum (Hebrew)

Try contacting TORAH U'MESORAH in New York City, I believe they have
suggested curriculum's for day schools.

I was meeting with the principal of our local day school (The Rabbi
Pesach Raymon Yeshiva in Edison, NJ) and he showed me the school's
curriculum for Judaic studies.  It was a large, thick, binder covering
grades K-8.  He told me that it was developed over time and part of it
was straight from the TORAH UMESORAH recommendation.

Barry Siegel
Edison, NJ


From: Gerald Sacks <sacks@...>
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 93 09:17:30 -0500
Subject: Lice

Kibi Hofmann says that lice "come from something too small for the unaided eye
to see."  I haven't had any personal experience, but I've been told that louse
eggs are visible -- you just have to know what to look for.


From: Gary Davis <davis@...>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 14:29:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Nail Clippings and Burial

I always thought that burial of nail clippings had something to do with
burial of dead human flesh in general, and that the relationship to
domination by women and other consequences was a subsequent development,
perhaps a "fence" to add force to the basic reason.  I have no citation
for this belief, but I have a feeling that it has something to do with
the treatment of miscarriages.  I hope this does not offend anyone.
Shabbat shalom.


From: <F12013@...> (Shlomo Pick)
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 93 09:07 O
Subject: Raw Meat and Beacon

shalom re: raw meat and chicken.  some of the nigerian u.n. peace
keeping troops will eat a whole raw chicken.  As far as raw meat is
concerned the talmud tells that when yom kippurim fell on friday,
certain kohanim (the bavliyim) whose "da'atam yafa aleihem" (mod. please
translate [not sure I can do much besides a literal translation - and
not sure even on that: whose knowledge sat properly on them ?  Mod.])
would the korban chattat on friday nite - shabbat - raw as it was
forbidden to broil it both on yom kippurim and on shabbat. i guess for
those people, raw meat would not be muktza.  as far as chicken is
concerned - are hilchot shabbat determined by what jews generally do or
by what even non-jews do - i believe that is a disagreement among poskim
( among them the Chebiner rav is his responsa dovevei meisharim).

re: beacon products - some of them appeared on a rabbanut super-sol in
bnei brak - some had a hachsher and some did not - usually those with
gelatin and glycerine did not. i pointed this out to the mashgiach of
super-sol and he removed those without from the shelves.  the hechsher
was by way of a sticker added on in hebrew but i do not recall whether
it was an israeli rabanut or a south-african one who signed the label
that could have been easily stuck on anywhere.  

yours shlomo

From: <VISWANATH@...> (Meylekh Viswanath)
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 93 09:52:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Right Handedness in Halakha

Regarding Ben Pashkoff's question on acts that require the use of the
right hand, are there any acts that _require_ the left hand (for a
right handed person)?  My question is motivated by the observation that
in Hinduism, where normally the use of the right hand for ritual acts is
obligatory, many ritual acts dealing with the dead (such as 'yortsayt"
ceremonies) must be performed with the left hand.

From: <hem@...> (Hillel Markowitz)
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 93 19:11:42 -0500
Subject: Right-Handedness in Halakha

>This past Shabbat when the Sefer Tora was wrapped, the person holding it
>wanted to put it on his left shoulder. Immediately he was told no, on
>the right. This got me to thinking about how often there is a preference
>for Right over Left in minhag.

At a shiur in our shul in Baltimore, Rabbi Kaganoof was speaking about
the order of dressing.  One should put on the right shoe first then the
left and then tie the left.  The reason for the tieing is to remind you
of the tefillin.  However, he said that the words we translate as
"right" and "left" actually are "stronger" and "weaker".

When my son had to look up a halacha on writing a sefer torah, he found
that the shulchan aruch speaking about writing a sefer torah says the
sofer must use the "right" hand.  The meforshim point out that a left
handed person is considered to have his "right" hand on the left side
of his body.

Hillel Markowitz    <H_Markowitz@...>


From: Morris Podolak <morris@...>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 93 03:58:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Sending Away the Mother Bird

I would like to add just a little bit to what has been said about
sending away the mother bird.  There are actually two mitzvoth that are
connected. 1: Not to take the eggs when the mother bird is there.  2: To
send away the mother bird.  Obviously the two go together.  If one takes
the eggs without sending away the mother bird, he violates the first of
these commandments.  He can correct this by going back the next day and
sending away the mother bird.  It sounds strange I know, but that is the
din.  This is similar to the situation Ben described where you can
"correct" the sin of stealing by returning the stolen property with the
proper additions.  If, however, the mother bird is sent away at the time
the eggs are taken, there is absolutely nothing wrong.  The question is
do we have to go looking for an opportunity to do this mitzvah.  The
first-order halachic answer is "no", but it must be qualified.  The ARI,
a 16th century kabbalist, explained that every one of the 248 parts of
the body corresponds to a different positive commandment.  The doing of
a positive commandment somehow affects completeness of the person doing
it. It is therefore important not to neglect any positive commandment.
This is probably the reason so many people go out of their way to do tis
mitzvah.  Morris

From: DANNY%<ILNCRD@...> (Danny Skaist)
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 93 08:39:26 -0500
Subject: Sending Away the Mother Bird

>Ben Svetitsky     <fnbenj@...>
>the beginning of Hilchot Shechita (Laws of Slaughtering) in the Mishneh
>Torah.  He lists five mitzvot of shechita: "...(4) Not to take the
>mother with the young. (5) To release the mother if one did take her
>with the young."
>There is NO separate positive mitzvah of releasing the mother!  This

We are not discussing mitzva #5 but mitzva #4.  "Not taking the mother WHEN
YOU TAKE THE YOUNG".  It is in fact a negative commandment.
"Sending away" the mother, in mitzva #4, does not mean releasing her from
captivity, but means chasing her off the nest BEFORE taking the eggs/young,
for the express purpose of being permitted to take the eggs/young.
It is a positive action that is required to fulfill a negative commandment.
Like finishing up the korban pessach so there won't be any left over.



End of Volume 6 Issue 31