Avodah Mailing List

Volume 03 : Number 111

Monday, July 5 1999

• re: Recent Deliberations on Avodah
• Sheep mentality & anesthesiology
• Re: fasting depending on ratzon of people (M"B question)
• Re: Avodah V3 #110
• re: Recent Deliberations on Avodah
• Re: Dante and fervor
• Modern Orthodox Dormitory Yeshivos
• Maharal and Tycho Brahe
• [none]
• secular
• bal tshuve movements
• thinking for oneself
• Liberal Arts
• R. Soloveitchik & liberal arts
• tisha b'av list
• Gedolim and Contemporary Science
• Re: R. Soloveitchik & liberal arts
• Re: thinking for oneself
• Re: Recent Deliberations on Avodah

RYGB wrote:

> Subject: Recent Deliberations on Avodah
> 
> I was somewhat perturbed by some of the recent deliberations on our
> list. I was dismayed to think that I could not recommend our list as a
> showcase for Orthodoxy because of bickering about persons and groups -
> not exclusively issue oriented. This is, of course, not true about all
> the strains of conversation that are running simultaneously here, but
> is very true about the "Sheep Mentality" and "Charedi School" threads.

I see your point, but actually I've found that some of the postings on
these issues have been among the better-thought-out and more interesting
ones recently.  And these are urgent issues, for sure.

Freda Birnbaum,
granddaughter-in-law to Dr. Nathan Birnbaum
wife to Jacob Birnbaum, founder of the grass-roots Soviet Jewry movement

I have been scored by more than one writer, on- and off-line, for
misrepresenting the nature and date of the post-partum situation and the
woman's insistence on posing a she-ayla.  I sit/stand corrected as to the
facts.  I would just state the obvious to those of us who have had the
misfortune of dealing with doctors: as a group they are very aggressive
about certain types of treatments, including surgeries.  Thus, on that
basis, we can judge the lady's skepticism favorably.

That said, I would respectfully suggest that in order to expect this lady to
realize that--again assuming as I have been corrected that it was a weekday
incident--she should sign and get on with saving her life, a certain amount
of education is necessary: (picking up on yet another's comment) people can
not be expected to think for themselves in Torah-related decisions if there
has been no or very poor chinuch WRT the most elementary principles of any
given area of Torah/halacha wherein you expect them to think for themselves.
(This last sentence is not intened to play off the chareidi vs. Mod-o
dichotomy presented recently by R' Micha.)

<< 1) Can anyone give me an explanation of siman taf-kuf-nun/mishna brura
 alef  ( viasur lifrotz geder )?  Which halachos/minhagim/divrei neviim
 are up for a vote, and how does this work? >>

It is a special din by the tzomos - see R"H 18 where the gemara darshens 
based on the divrei kabbalah of the navi that if there is a sh'as hashmad 
then fasting is obligatoty; if there is shalom (Rashi=peace with non-Jews, 
Ramban=bais hamikdash standing) then there is no need to fast; if there is no 
shmad and no shalom then it depends on the ratzon of the people.  The point 
of M"B is  minhag avosainu b'yadeinu; the vote has already been cast.

Yesh lachkor whether the vote was an affirmation of the chiyuv m'divrei 
kabbalah, or is it a new independent mechayev - see the B"Y citing the 
machloket Tos. and Ramban on rechitza b'chamin that may be this issue. 

 Also I was thinking what would be the din if one breaks the fast b'shogeg 
acc. to Nesivus that one cannot break lo tasur b'shogeg perhaps there is a 
nafka minah bet. the kabbalah b'razton ha'am and the divrei kabbalah of the 
navi (though perhaps the kabbalah of the am works m'doraysa midin neder - I 
need to think this one out better...)

-Chaim B.

David Eidensohn wrote:
<< Rav Lichtenstein's approach to secular studies is uniquely his. >>
That is hardly so.

And as far as the Rov, Rav JB Soloveichick, not having a secular book in his 
hands the last 25 years of his life, how then did he footnote the essays he 
wrote where secular sources are quoted?

chaim wasserman 

On Mon, 5 Jul 1999, Freda B Birnbaum wrote:

> I see your point, but actually I've found that some of the postings on
> these issues have been among the better-thought-out and more interesting
> ones recently.  And these are urgent issues, for sure. 
> 
> Freda Birnbaum, granddaughter-in-law to Dr. Nathan Birnbaum wife to
> Jacob Birnbaum, founder of the grass-roots Soviet Jewry movement
>

Ture, the issues are relevant, and how they are discussed is really the
crux of my contention. For those who have read the recent issue of Jewish
Action, the phrase "how will it play in Peoria" should be an elegant
description of how one should carefully consider the content and wording
of one's posts. Such consideration may lead to more palatable postions and
phrasing, and above all, to remind ourselves to enrich, not snipe.

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

On Sun, 4 Jul 1999, Shalom Carmy wrote:

> The topics addressed by Dante and Augustine are very different from
> Akdamot or Selihot. Setting them in competition with each other is
> therefore a doubtful enterprise. 
> 
> More to the point: Fervor and literary value and the kind of
> psychological insight that is useful for heshbon ha-nefesh are very
> different things.  Fervor is when a crowd loudly roars approval of
> itself, or when an individual asserts wild propositions of which he or
> she knows nothing and clinches them by adding exclamation points. 
> 

In fact, I think, not enough has been said in this discussiion to
elucidate the differences between the schools of thought that are
*pro*-secular studies in Judaism. Just as a springboard, we can identify
several off the bat (apologies for oversimplification):

Maimonidean Torah u'Madda: Pro philosophy and sciences, with little use
for the humanities and/or literature if any.

Modern Torah u'Madda: Pro all areas of secular study.

Gr"a Torah u'Madda: Pro sciences and limited arts (such as, specifically,
music) with little use for philosophy, if any.

RYBS Torah u'Madda: Similar to the Gr"a, but with much more regard for
philosophy.

Hirschian Torah im Derech Eretz: Pro all areas of secular study, including
a strong positive attitude towards culture, literature and the arts - but
with the caveat that they all be adjunct to and subordinate to Torah and
its standards, and that their study be delineated by yiras shomayim.

RALichtenstein: While, even after RSC's analysis, I find REC's quote from
RAL's essay to strong for my palate, it seems that his perspective is more
similar to Hirschian TIDE - but beyond it, in that I cannnot see RSRH
encouraging the study of Augustine.

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

Rich Wolpoe made the following suggestion:

<<OK, so how about a Modern or Centrist Orthodox sleepaway yeshiva that would
foster an intense Modern Orthodox hahskofo with the same does of "mesiras
nefesh" that so-called chareidi institutions foster?>>

My reply carries a fair bit of generalizing, so I will qualify it with the
obvious disclaimer that these statements are not universally true:

There are many people who are nominally in the Centrist camp, although they are
not fervent talmidim of the Rav and their neshamos do not reverberate with his
hashkafos.  Rather, the lifestyle within this camp is viewed as being more
convenient and less demanding than that of the Litvishe yeshivishe velt, and
that is certainly attractive to some.  As a result, a good part of the student
body at such an institution would quite possibly come from homes that are
possibly somewhat more casual about halacha, and less inclined to allow the
rebbeim there to guide their children to a more intense level of avodas hashem.

This may also explain why so many Centrist parents send their children to
chareidi schools.  There may be fundamental differences between the ideologies,
but one may be better able to assume that the child's friends homes take
halachic matters very seriously.

That's just an idea, and I hope I haven't offended anyone with it.

Meyer

In V3 # 107 Rich Wolpoe spoke of the Maharal as:

	"a personal acquaintance of Tycho Brahie". 	

As far as I can tell, there is no evidence whatsoever that the Maharal ever
met Tycho Brahe, although they were contemporaries in Prague at the end of
the 16-th century. Perhaps he is confusing Maharal with his (and Rema's)
student David Gans, who writes (in his astronomical text "Nehmad ve-Na'im)":
	" This writer too was present  there (at Tycho's observatory outside
Prague) three times, each time for five consecutive nights and I sat with
them (the astronomers) in their observation chambers and saw the wonderful
things they were doing ..."
	
	Let me move on to a related subject, that has been discussed on this
list a number of times. The GR'A is often cited as an example of a "gadol"
who had knowledge of so-called "secular" subjects based on his knowledge of
Euclidian geometry and a bit of number theory
via the translations of his student Boruch of Shklov. However, it should be
borne in mind that there is no evidence that the GR"A was familiar with the
revolutionary work of Newton (the latter died when the GR"A was 7).
Expanding this, allow me two queries:

[1]  Is there evidence that any post-medieval "gadol" was personally
acquainted with any contemporary scientific luminary? 

[2] Is there evidence that any post-medieval "gadol" was personally
acquainted with contemporary scientific thought (i.e. the groundbreaking
thought of his day, not the textbook stuff) ? 

Saul Stokar

I received the following message. Any comments from our Chicago crowd?

>>
I enclosed the following...........dean (juli's husband) was shot 6 times as 
he stood on a corner talking with our friend gidi sapir (who was shot in the 
back as he pushed his 2 kids down) as they made their way back from shul 
friday night....

time will heal the wounds, none are life threatining...the doctors said they 
will have to leave in several of the bullets.....they were fired on at point 
blank range, about 5 feet, and were hit with rounds from a 22 calliber 
weapon....it is only by hashems grace that they weren't murdered.....

Dean is at Illinois Masonic Hospital in Chicago, juli spent a fitful shabbat 
with him and i spent last night with him...he is feeling better....notes 
should be emailed to me and phone calls of support to juli at 
(773-764-2520)...

Dean's hebrew name is "dovid pesech ben meira", please say tehillam for him 
and all the victims...please circulate this to all who know Dean.

<<

> 
> Just a request for clarification. My understanding - as a curious outsider -
> is that Rav Lichtenstein's approach to secular studies is uniquely his.  An
> acquaintance who was close to Rav Soleveitchik told me that in the last 25
> years of his life - he never saw Rav Soleveitchik with a secular book.
> 
From stories I have heard from family members this is not true.
I suspect it is one more point in the attempt to redefine Rav Soloveitchik.
Certainly in the 1970s he spoke with many college groups and quoted all
the secular philosophers and gave no hint that his disavowed them.

Eli Turkel

I am surprised that no one commented on the remarks of David Herskovic
on bal tshuve movements. Though there are more qualified people than me
on this list I cannot let it pass.

>> But even more disturbing is when the tshuve movement is a means for
self deception. Often individuals with talent but with little prospect
for a career in the yeshive world and also without the will to hold down
a job or ability to prosper in commerce vent their frustration at
their inability to channel their talents in the wider world by
convincing themselves that in reality the majority of 'fraye' want to be
frum if only they were shown the way and were ridded of the negative
influence of the secular media. <<

The few people I know in the Baal teshuva yeshivot like Ohr Sameach
and Aish haTorah are highly dedicated individuals who in fact
have frequently given up better jobs in other fields to dedicate their
lives to helping others.
We can dispute the the use of Torah codes and their use in contacting
the less religious but to call it quakery and use it as a personal
attack on the organizers is beyond the pale of the Torah.

All yeshivot today are staffed by full time personnel and I see no
reason that ball teshuva yeshivot should be different. Using volunteers
works only when it is not a serious and large effort. In the long
run professionals are needed aided by volunteers. I heard Rav
Soloveitchik say that he prefered the gemara way when all rebbes
had their own income and taught for free. However, today that is
simplt not practical.

David Herskovic did mention differences between Israeli and UK
movements. That brings me to my second point.

There was a recent article in the jerusalem Post claiming (no statistics)
that in Israel most people coming to bal tshuve yeshivot are either
American or else sephardim (He probably meant "lower class"). There are
relatively few professionals who come to these yeshivot. On the
other hand it is not uncommon in the US to go to places like wall street
and see baale teshuva lawyers, accountants, brokers etc. Even the
universities have their share. It is very uncommon to see a recent
baal teshuva in an israeli university.

This reporter did not blame the ball teshuva yeshivot but rather the
religious parties in Israel. His claim was that because of religious
legislation that personal religion became a political issue and so
introduced a hatred of religion in the professional society. Hence,
someone with spiritual problem would look elsewhere besides the
"established" religion. 

I have been reading several quotes recently from various Israeli charedi
leaders that American chareidi are not really chareidi. Among one
example was that if someone saw a Jew driving on shabbat in Williamsburg
no one would react to such chillul shabbat. It is accepted as part of
American life.
Based on the above I would claim the opposite. The Israeli who leads
the protests against chillul shabbat by the secular does more harm
to religion than the quiet person in Williamsburg. It may make the
person feel good that he protested but it does not lead to any
constructive events.

Eli Turkel

There have been several posters recently condemning the discussion
on "sheep mentality". While the name of the topic is not the best
nevertheless the essence of the debate is real.

I used to attand a shiur from a rav from Bnei Brak and one of his
comments was that "one is not allowed to think for himself". The
gedolim think for us and we just follow instructions. Hence, one
is not allowed to read Moreh nevuchim since Rambam has already
solved our problems and we shouldn't think about them. If there
are newer problems then it is for the gedolim to come up with
solutions and not the average 'rabbi".

If someone asked him a "shaila" for which he could not quote a
teshuva from a major posek he would refuse to answer. He was not
worthy to give his own personal opinion.

Rav Moshe Feinstein writes that he hopes that people will read
his teshuvot and use it as a guide to form their own opinions.
He did not want people to blindly follow his psak without understanding
it. Unfortunately, that has not happened.

Certainly the message I received from Rav Soloveitchik was that
everyone should think for himself.

In summary while the name "sheep mentality" has bad connotations
nevertheless the debate about thinking for oneself is one that
divides many charedi/MO debates. Its connections to Daat Torah are
obvious.

Kol Tuv,
Eli Turkel

On the subject of whether liberal arts is good for the Jews:

Consider the question of "Jewish music". If you come to what passes for
Jewish music (say music for weddings, to take a specific example) with an
appreciation of music and poetry honed by the secular liberal arts, then
certain things become very clear very quickly. For instance:

With the exception of Piamenta and a few other groups, nobody out there
is writing Jewish music with any attention to the accent to be placed on
words. Even simple English songs have the ACcent on the correct
SYLLable: take

  YANkee DOOdle went to town, RIding on a POny

Read it out loud and then sing it (admit it- you know the tune) and you
will see that the accent is in the right place. This is true  for
Shakespears's sonnets and even (!) plays (try writing a few lines in
iambic pentameter if you think this is easy). 

Now, l'havdil, consider the song whose chorus is

YeRUshalim, YeruSHAlayim 

Which miftah in Hebrew has the accent on the "sha"?

If you think this is an uncommon phenomenon, I beg to differ. It is
generic.

A similar tirade regarding the tunes - which are generally simplistic,
trite, or else (in good situations) stolen from good non-frum songwriters
(we all knew that Bob Dylan/Zimmerman is Jewish - my aunt used to play
cards with his mother - but did you know that Arlo Guthrie's mother was
Jewish?) should follow, but it is being suppressed since I see I am
overdoing it.

Anyhow, my point is that it wouldn't hurt us at all to learn a little bit
from the "umot ha'olam" on how to write music for such songs. 
(One could also learn from contemporary Israeli songwriters - Naomi
Shemer, for instance. This need not involve kol isha since there are
several volumes of her songs - with music in standard (goyish?) musical
notation published). 

If you are really serious about this, then the fact
remains that the writing of Plato and Arisotle about poetry and music are
the intellectual basis for our current understanding of these matters. 

(Not that contemporary songwriters actually read these: Dylan once said
that he got his tunes from the air where they were "blowing in the 
wind". Arlo said that he just wants to stand down-wind from Dylan.)
    


---------------------------------------------------------
Claude (Chaim) and Rivka Schochet
Math Dept		04-834-6049 home (also for short faxes)
The Technion		04-829-3895 office
Haifa, Israel 32000     04-832-4654 office fax
                        When calling from US, dial 011-972-4-8xx-xxxx

> 
> Just a request for clarification. My understanding - as a curious outsider -
> is that Rav Lichtenstein's approach to secular studies is uniquely his.  An
> acquaintance who was close to Rav Soleveitchik told me that in the last 25
> years of his life - he never saw Rav Soleveitchik with a secular book.
> 
> Did Rav Soleveitchik subscribe to Rav Lichtenstein's approach at any point?

Rav Soloveitchik's commitment to the importance of a liberal arts
education should be evident to anyone who reads his major writings. It is
attested to in print by both R. Yitzhak Twersky z"l and, l'havdil bein
ha-hayyim la-hayyim, R. Lichtenstein and by R. Moshe Lichtenstein, in
various eulogies. On many occasions when I consulted him about educational
questions, he continued to advocate with vigor the cultivation of breadth
and depth in one's general education. I will omit his private comments
about "insensitive" individuals who lack such breadth in order to spare
the feelings of such individuals.

Talmidim are not clones, however close in their general orientation.
Overall, if I may communicate my own impressions, I would say that in
practice R. Lichtenstein's idea of the place of secular studies is more
restrictive than his father in law's. In the years that I attended his
shiur, R. Lichtenstein recommended the study of the humanities but was a
bit reserved about the sciences. The major reason was that the humanities
relate directly to self-understanding, to self-knowledge and knowledge of
other people, to the ability to think and communicate clearly about human
problems, which stand at the center of religious life, whereas mathematics
and physical science is of limited value for these purposes.

A secondary reason was that a student of the humanities could devote a
limited amount of attention to these subjects over the course of a
lifetime and still deploy them creatively: some of the greatest
intellectual figures are people who are not lifelong specialists in any
one field of scholarship. By contrast, a scientist who does not continue
to keep up to date will soon have nothing to contribute. R. Lichtenstein's
assumption was that, except for a very small minority of people with
peculiar endowments, the typical ben Torah with a good general education
will devote his primary talents to Torah. Such a person might still have
valuable insights, based on a literary education, and may even be able to
offer courses in the humanities, without feeling obligated to read every
journal in the field.

R. Soloveitchik, in addition to his mastery of the humanities, and
particularly the general literature dealing with religion, was
passionately interested in mathematical physics, and regretted the fact
that the pressures of "tsorkhei tsibbur" (his words) prevented him from
making a more substantial contribution to general philosophy of science.

Two points about the Rav's reading matter in his last years, one purely
biographical, the other of general relevance. From about 1980 on the Rav
had great difficulty handling printed matter. When I was with him, most of
the time, during those years, he was unable to turn the pages of a
manuscript unaided. He continued to work and to give shiurim, but it was
certainly not the time to roam libraries and devour print omnivorously. it
was a triumph of his total commitment to harbatzat Torah that he was able
to keep going as long as he did.

On a more general level: Giving value to secular studies does not imply an
imperative of "ve-dibbarta bam," so to speak, in accord with which one
must study philosophy and literature day in and day out. One may value a
certain study, yet reach a point of diminishing returns. Either you have
gained whatever you are likely to gain from a discipline, or you find it
necessary to concentrate on other things. To take a simple example: The
Rav considered the study of Greek philosophy important, and he thought
(correctly) that a knowledge of Greek was a desideratum to that end. When
we were reviewing the footnote on Plato in the 1978 Tradition, a question
came up about the precise wording. The Rav was no longer confident of his
command of ancient Greek grammar (a madrega I had never come close to).
What was the natural solution? To hunt for a grammar book and work it out
ourselves? Of course not. He suggested I ask someone whose Greek was not
rusty. (This was not as easy as you'd think: Dr. Feldman was out of town.)

R. Lichtenstein has several times referred to a remark of T. S. Eliot. At
Harvard, Eliot pursued a Ph.D. in Philosophy, which he eventually
abandoned. One of his fields was Indian philosophy, for which he undertook
the study of Sanskrit. There came a moment when he realized that he had
gotten what he wanted out of Sanskrit. Regretfully, because he still
enjoyed it, he brought his study to an end.

I hope that these comments do something to slow down the great machines of
biographical revisionism, and also contribute something of a positive
nature to those for whom, yirat Shamayim, true self-understanding and
understanding of the world are important.

I'm trying to compile a list of post beter events which happened on Tish
b'av. I already have some of the obvious ones ie the expulsion from spain
1492. As well as the fact that Germany declared war in WW1 on Tishbav (I
think 1914). A little less known one is the fact that The treblinka death
camp was opened on Tisha b'av. If any one knows others please let me know.
Also the purpose of this is to recognize the ever present yad Hahsem even
in tragedy and hopefully inspire us to do a complete teshuva
E.G.

Dr. Stokar asked which Gedolim were familiar with contemporary scientiifc
advances. I believe the Rogatchover explained Tohu va'Vohu on the basis of
atomic theory. This, however, is from memory, and I amm cc'ing RYZ who may
have seforim handy to look this up.

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

Shalom Carmy wrote:

> Rav Soloveitchik's commitment to the importance of a liberal arts
> education should be evident to anyone who reads his major writings

> On a more general level: Giving value to secular studies does not imply an
> imperative of "ve-dibbarta bam," so to speak, in accord with which one
> must study philosophy and literature day in and day out. One may value a
> certain study, yet reach a point of diminishing returns. Either you have
> gained whatever you are likely to gain from a discipline, or you find it
> necessary to concentrate on other things.

Thank you for your reply. The above quotes are what I view as the crux
of what I wanted  clarified. There is thus no inherent contradiction
between an observation that Rav Soleveitchik was not seen reading
secular books for the last 25 years of his life - and that he valued
and utilized secular thought.

My question was based on the quotes from Rav Lichtenstein which seem
to place a strong imperative on *mastering* secular thought and
*immersion* in them. In my limited research  I have not come across a
comparable statement by Rav Soleveitchik. I assume if it existed it
would have been cited in Rabbi Lamm's Torah UMadda (1990)- whose best
quote is from Rav Hutner (page 196). I am also extrapolating from a
few articles by Rav Lichtenstein which seem much more imbued with
secular ideation and allusions. There obviously was never a question
about Rav Soleveitchiks mastery of secular knowledge. The issue is
simply whether he agreed with the stated position of Rav Lichtenstein?

If I understand your answer - you are asserting that both are merely
asserting that secular studies are critical to be able to articulate
and comprehend fully the human condition and that once one is
articulate and sensitized - there is no need to devote significant
time to them. The most meaningful distinction between them is simply
whether scientific thought is as valuable as the humanities.


To reiterate my question. Did Rav Soleveitchik ever made a comment
that was equivalent to that of Rav Lichtenstein?

                                        Daniel Eidensohn

On Mon, 5 Jul 1999, Eli Turkel wrote:

> 
> There have been several posters recently condemning the discussion on
> "sheep mentality". While the name of the topic is not the best
> nevertheless the essence of the debate is real. 
> 

It is not the topic but the purpose of the conversation that I find
pointless. Since we are a self-selected group of "thinkers" (pat on
collective backs) regardless of the camp with which we affiliate
elsewhere, what exactly is the point of the discussion other than "my
(outside of Avodah) camp is better than your camp?"

> Certainly the message I received from Rav Soloveitchik was that everyone
> should think for himself. 
> 
> In summary while the name "sheep mentality" has bad connotations
> nevertheless the debate about thinking for oneself is one that divides
> many charedi/MO debates. Its connections to Daat Torah are obvious. 
>

I believe that this is not true. As one poster noted today, R' Meyer
Shields, not as many people in the Centrist camp as you might think if you
live in NYC are ardent students of RYBS. In fact, the further from NYC
you go, the less you find, to the point that in Detroit and Chicago they
are a truly endangered species.

The reality is, in fact, that most people of all stripes are not
interested in "thinking." Thinking is nerve-wracking, tension-provoking
and anxiety-causing. Angst is only fun for existentialists. I venture with
confidence that the proportion of "thinkers" in neither camp is greater
than in the other. Which is why we are all here, of course, to overcome
that deficit amongst ourselves. 

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

My family took a bungalo for the summer, which means that I won't be around
weekends until the end of August. I read a few issues while I was up in the
Catskills this past weekend, and thought I'd have to post yet another
administrative request to get the list back in line. I had hoped my recent
comments, though mild, would have made the point.

Instead, let me just post a "me too" to R' YGB's post, and hope that no
further lecturing is required.

Is it so hard to remember that insulting the means of worship of a segment of
the frum population is not within the limits of darchei no'am that you agreed
to when joining this list?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for  5-Jul-99: Levi, Matos-Masei
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H O"Ch 334:43-335:4
http://www.aishdas.org                                    
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Kuzari III 65-68

*********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]