Volume 9 Number 91
                       Produced: Tue Nov  9 21:14:48 1993

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Classical Music with Religious Content
         [Sharon Hollander]
Judaism "mipi ollelim"
         [Lon Eisenberg]
Pronunciation of Divine Name
         [Alan Cooper and Tamar Frank]
Rashi's Torah (2)
         [Michael Broyde, Arthur Roth]
         [Josh Klein]
Showering on Shabbos/Yom Tov (2)
         [Allen Elias, Isaac Balbin]
Stamp/Stationery Collectors
         [Mark Katz]
Stripes on Tallit Gadol/Katan
         [Elliot Lasson]
Tastykake info
         [Arnold Lustiger]
Why M&Ms became Kosher (2)
         [Andy Jacobs, Ophir S Chernin]


From: <sjh@...> (Sharon Hollander)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 19:48:33 -0500
Subject: Classical Music with Religious Content

      Does anyone know if there are any halachic problems with listening
to classical music that has religious content, such as requiems, masses,
chants, etc. (aside from any problems associated with music in general).
Are there any distinctions based on your motivation for listening, the
actual content of the piece, and the language it is in (in other words -
if it is in latin and you don't understand it at all does that make a

 Sharon Hollander, <sjh@...> 


From: eisenbrg%<milcse@...> (Lon Eisenberg)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 06:12:55 -0500
Subject: Judaism "mipi ollelim"

Just to add an other story:
When we lived in Rehovot and our friends' son (Nathan Gamoran, the son of
Sam Gamoran whom many of you know) was in "gan", I asked him:
"Nathan, what is a Christmas tree?"
His response:
"I'm not sure, but I think it's a tree you put fruit on for TuBeShevat."

Unfortunately, today he knows better!


From: Alan Cooper and Tamar Frank <ACOOPER@...>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 09:23:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Pronunciation of Divine Name

This is to support Mike Gerver's observation that many people,
apparently inadvertently, revert to /noy/ in the pronunciation of the
divine name while otherwise pronouncing words in the Sephardi manner.
Two other words in which I have often noticed vestigial Ashkenazi
pronunciation are /yisrO'el/ and /bOrukh/.  Part of this "Ashkephardic"
problem stems, no doubt, from generational transition.  Having been
taught entirely in Ashkenazic, and feeling perfectly comfortable with
that, I nevertheless do not wish to undermine the beautiful Israeli
pronunciation that my kids are bringing home from school.  I sometimes
find myself singing aloud in Sephardic, while continuing to daven
privately in Ashkenazic.  Is this totally weird?

Alan Cooper


From: Michael Broyde <RELMB@...>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 12:30:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Rashi's Torah

One of the questions asked about an extra *yud* in Rashi's torah and
whether that torah was then kosher.  Rama, in O.C. 143:4 notes explictly
that extra yuds or vuv do not invalidate a torah from use.  While there
are exceptions to this rule, that is the normative rule of halacha.

From: <rotha@...> (Arthur Roth)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 09:34:12 -0600
Subject: Rashi's Torah

    This is in response to Gedaliah Friedenberg's concern regarding
evidence that a word in "Rashi's Torah" did not contain a "yud" that is
present in our sifrei Torah today.
    Unfortunately, it is known that early Torah scrolls were not
completely consistent regarding whether words were malei or chaser
(i.e., "full" or "missing" with respect to a vav or a yud when the
vowels cholam or chirik appear).  Since the days of Ezra, all words in
Torah have been universally "standardized" in this respect.  I will not
comment on the philosophical problem this raises with respect to the
principle of Torah l'Moshe Misinai (giving of the Torah at Sinai) other
than to mention that these types of differences don't change the
meanings of the words, notwithstanding attempts by various mepharshim to
"explain" some of the "missing" vavim and yudim, including (obviously)
the one Gedaliah Friedenberg refers to.
    The above fact affects the halacha when a sefer Torah is found to be
written incorrectly vis a vis today's "standardized" sifrei Torah with
respect to malei and chaser.  Such a Torah should not be taken out to
read from l'chatchila (to begin with), but if the error is found after
the Torah has already been taken out, we continue reading from it
This halacha comes either from the Mishna Brura or directly from the
Shulchan Aruch, and it is fundamentally different from the case of a
missing or extra letter of any other type, which always requires a new
sefer Torah immediately.  If my instant recollection serves me right
(not sure on this point), I believe we should read from a sefer Torah
with malei and chaser "errors" even l'chatchila in a case where no other
sefer is available and the alternative is to skip the Torah reading
    Thus "Rashi's Torah" was certainly not pasul in his day, and it
would not even be pasul in the full sense of the word today.
    Finally, let me mention that if a malei/chaser "error" is found in
an actual sefer Torah, it is quite likely that there is another error
not too far from that place, and it should be looked at more carefully
than just fixing the known "error".  That is because a sofer is required
to count letters periodically (not sure how often --- may be every
sidrah or every perek or even every open or closed paragraph) to make
sure that the number of letters he has written in the latest section of
his sefer Torah corresponds to the correct number, which sofrim have
lists of to check their work against.  So if the sofer counted
correctly, a missing letter in one place implies that there's an extra
letter someplace else, and vice versa.

Arthur Roth


From: Josh Klein <VTFRST@...>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 08:47 N
Subject: Samaritans

Although Elhanan Adler says that he's only seen one notice in the
Samaritan newspaper about a Jewish girl marrying a Samaritan, a close
friend of mine whose long-time boss is a Samaritan says that it's not
unusual. In fact, my friend's boss is halachically Jewish, and the boss'
brother also married a Jewish girl. What's not usual is for a Samaritan
girl to marry a Jewish man.  In this respect, the Samaritans are
evidently like Moslems, in that the men can marry women from
'closely-allied' religions, but women can't 'marry out'.  Does anyone
know if religious affiliation by Samaritans is carried in the paternal
or maternal line, or if it makes a difference?  

Josh Klein - VTFRST@VOlcani


From: Allen Elias <100274.346@...>
Date: 09 Nov 93 11:46:31 EST
Subject: Showering on Shabbos/Yom Tov

According to Shemiras Shabes Kehilchoso (14a) as quoted in Bayit Yehudi
(vol.1 p.163) if someone is accustomed to washing their entire body
everyday then they may wash themselves also on Shabes with water that
was heated before shabes. But one must be careful not to wringe the hair

Rabbi Ovadia Yossef says one may use water heated on shabes in a solar
water heater.

From: <isaac@...> (Isaac Balbin)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 03:04:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Showering on Shabbos/Yom Tov

  | From: Jonathan Katz <frisch1@...>

  | With all this discussion about whether or not showering is permitted
  | or not, I have yet to see someone explain why washing one's *entire*
  | body should be different than washing *part* of one's body.  Could
  | someone explain?

First let me say that the topic under review is Yom Tov---not Shabbos.
You can't heat water on Shabbos even if you fall in the mud!

As to your question:

the difference is that there was a problem with people who actually went
to Shvitz (sauna) as opposed to wash. As a result they banned washing of
the whole body (that would keep you away from the public shvitz baths)
and let you wash those parts of you that were dirty. Shvitz Baths are
NOT Shove Lechol Nefesh (something most people do) and as such are
forbidden on Yom Tov.  They are in the category of things which some
people do for enjoyment. (mugmar is another example)

I have argued (as have some others) that Showers are not covered by the
original ban because they were not invented then and because one doesn't
cover one's body (or most of it) with water and it should be considered
washing in parts.


From: Mark Katz <mark@...>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 05:25:26 -0500
Subject: Stamp/Stationery Collectors

Are there any avid stamp/stationery collectors out there? My chavruso is
missing one first day cover - the most recent Israel aerogram with a map
of Israel/the world on it - issued about a year ago

I/he is particularly keen to hear from any people in Israel of the
address of good Israeli philatelic bureaus/shops

I may be able to contact them on my visit next week to Israel to
participate in the sponsored 250 mile bike ride from Ashkelon to Eilat
to support Ravenswood (are any other JM's going?)



From: <Elliot_David_Lasson@...> (Elliot Lasson)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 19:48:36 -0500
Subject: Stripes on Tallit Gadol/Katan

What is the source or origin of the practice of having stripes on the
tallit gadol/katan?  When did this practice begin.  I remember hearing a
reason, but cannot recal what it was.

Elliot D. Lasson, Ph.D.
14801 W. Lincoln, #104
Oak PArk, MI 48237


From: <alustig@...> (Arnold Lustiger)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 09:23:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Tastykake info

Our LOR, who is Rabbinic corrdinator for the OU, says that Tastykake
first approached the OU for hashgacha, and was rejected because of
problematic ingredients and process. They then approached another
Kashrus agency and was similarly rejected. They subsequently received
hashgacha from KOA.

His psak: "Not recommended".

Arnie Lustiger


From: dca/G=Andy/S=Jacobs/O=CCGATE/OU1=<DCAALPTS@...> (Andy Jacobs)
Date: 9 Nov 93 06:32:48 GMT
Subject: Re: Why M&Ms became Kosher

From: <rya@...> (Rani Averick) 

> I wish I could remember who told me this, but recently I heard why M&Ms 
> became kosher. Apparently, one of the major breakfast cereal companies 
> (General Mills, I think) wanted to put a package of M&Ms in one of
> their brands of cereal as a special promotion for kids. However, they
> couldn't go ahead with the promotion, because the cereal is under
> hashgacha, and the M&Ms were obviously unacceptable inside a box of 
> kosher cereal.

I don't know if this is the actual event you are referring to, but I seem
to remember a few years ago, that a General Mills product had such a
promotion with M & M's, and the boxes of cereal that normally contained
an O-U, did NOT!  So it certainly didn't stop them from going ahead with
the promotion, but it may have caused enough inconvenience to start some
dialogs (or perhaps there was another event that was canceled).

 - Andy

From: Ophir S Chernin <osc4@...>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 03:26:16 -0500
Subject: Why M&Ms became Kosher

I remember when many kosher cereals would include packages of various
non-kosher snack-foods.  I was told that the hashgacha on the box was in
reference to the cereal only and NOT to the included candy!  My wife
confirms my memory of these treif candies in the kosher cereal boxes.
She says that in Camp Morasha they used to take the treif candies and
give them to the non-Jewish cleaning lady who worked in the camp.

Kol Tuv.


End of Volume 9 Issue 91