Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 038

Thursday, October 14 1999

• Re: Women Yoatzot
• Re: Objections to Women Yo'atzot
• hacnasat orchim in westchester County (non avodah)
• Re: Building cities
• yoatzot
• Re: Women Yoatzot
• Re: yoatzot
• Unsolicited psak?
• Re: Women Yoatzot
• Fw: Avodah V4 #37
• Re: Building cities
• The destruction of Hungarian Jewry
• Re: objections to women yoatzot
• Re: Avodah V4 #37-demise of mizrachi
• Re: Building cities
• Re: Subject: the women clergy issue

----- Original Message -----
From: Kenneth G Miller <kennethgmiller@juno.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 9:53 PM
Subject: re: Women Yoatzot


> In large communities the rav is often overloaded with questions from
> others and can spare only small amounts of time with each person. In

I find this very hard to believe. I think, with rare exception, the
overwhelming majority of rabbis in MO communities would be overjoyed to
receive more halachic inquiries for both the congregants and their own
sakes. Perhaps you refer to some overloaded RW poskim. There are such - and,
the fact that they are almost invariably RW is part of the phenomenon that
is problematic.

As someone pointed out, I forget whom, maybe  RET, this specific
manifestation of the problematic phenomenon is taking place in EY for a
reason. There is, in EY, very little of the communal rabbinic model we have
here. There are very few RZ types in such positions, when they exist, to
boot. This manifestation will exacerbate the problem.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: Clark, Eli <clarke@HUGHESHUBBARD.COM>
To: avodah list <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 3:27 PM
Subject: Objections to Women Yo'atzot


> One point mentioned by RYGB is that, over time, women will displace men.
>  I think that is unlikely here given the high barriers against entry
> into the rarefied level of halakhic expertise.  After all, in the modern
> orthodox community a woman is free to become a doctor, but very few do
> so because the process is long, arduous and difficult to achieve while
> starting and raising a family.  Certainly, mastery of Halakhah is no
> less challenging!  (Indeed, it seems to me not a coincidence that
> Yo'etzet Zimmerman is also an MD.)  For that reason, I just cannot see a
> stampede of women into the bet midrash.
>

I do not agree. In reality, as we all know, the knowledge of 80 blatt of
Yoreh De'ah sufficient to pass some perfunctory bechinos, is not too hard to
obtain. It is much easier than achieving your MD. The Litvishe yeshiva world
knew this very well, and was therefore eish lehava against Battei Midrash
L'Rabbonim and anything other than Torah Lishma and Torah l'shem Gadlus
b'Torah. I agree we will not see a stampede of women into the Beis Medrash
of a Litvishe yeshiva-style institution such as Lakewood or RIETS. It is no
accident, however, that this program was co-sponsored by Ariel - the modern
equivalent, or closet extant analog, of a Beit Midrash L'Rabbonim.

> I am sure there is also a slippery slope argument against the yo'atzot
> program.   Would anyone care to articulate the real halakhic and/or
> policy reasons why women -- who are qualified -- should not be allowed
> to get involved in the halakhic process?
>

I do not feel that is necessary. Inexplicably, the MO leadership that backed
this development did not consult me before going ahead with it :-). I wager
that R' Lamm did not even consult the RIETS 5 before endorsing the
development, much less check with R' Elyashiv or RZN Goldberg, etc. So, it
is a moot point whether I can prove to you or anyone on this list that this
development is good bad or indifferent. L'mai nafka mina? The MO are not
interested in the opposition and the RW are not interested in the
development. Real dialogue is a thing of the past, likely never to be seen
again ad bi'as Go'el Tzedek (b'meheira b'yomeinu!).

My expression of opposition was and is purely a response to one of our list
members who boldly and confidently stated something to the effect that no
one can have any reaction but joy or satisfaction at this development.
Neither he, R' Wolff (please forgive me if that is mispelled), nor I, can
state with any degree of certainty that this development will lead to
positive or negative long term effects. Nor does he, and his colleagues,
care what I or anyone else thinks on the matter. But, it my purpose to
dispute that assertion, and note that there is significant room for doubt,
trepidation, and anxiety as to where this will lead (or be lead).

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

Fellow Rabbis,
..
Some relatives of mine have to relocate (for employment purposes) to the
Hawthorne area (White Plains NY) in the immediate future.
They have 2 wonderful children, aged 13 and 5. (9th grade and kindergarten)
It would be of great help, if you could most kindly advise as to:
appropriate accommodations in the area that are both walking distance from a
shul and near to a Jewish day School ( and a close commute to Hawthorne -
without having to get stuck in traffic).
recommendations as to shuls/day schools /Jewish study
programs etc.
organizations in the area that help one to get "acclimated"  (hachnasat
orchim etc.)

Kindly advise at your earliest convenience.

Thank You

Sincerely
Chaim
integrity@technologist.com

The Torah Sheleima quotes the Pirkei d"rabbi Eliezer 21 stating that both
Cain and Hevel had twin sisters and that they were permitted to marry their
sisters.

Josh

R Eli Clark writes
<<
I am sure there is also a slippery slope argument against the yo'atzot
program.  Would anyone care to articulate the real halakhic and/or
policy reasons why women -- who are qualified -- should not be allowed
to get involved in the halakhic process? >>

I agree completely. As far as I can tell all the objections are not
halakhic or even pseudo-halakhic. They all come down to the sliipery slope
argument. I get the impression that RYGB allows women to lead kallah
classes and mikvah ladies to make decisions only because this has been
done from time immemorial. Had women giving kallah classes been a recent
innovation he might (?) also object to that.
This amounts to a restatement of "ein chadash tachat hashemesh"

However, one persons slippery slope is another persons stagnation.
There are certainly rabbis around who object to every innovation be
in education (computers/multimedia new approaches) to every new idea in
feminism to new approaches to learning Torah/Talmud.

I personally find any connections between yoazot and decreasing the
rabbis authority or decreasing learning for men very strange.
It is clear that there is a decrease in learning gemara in many MO circles.
This is a serious problem which is being debated. However, any connection
between this and women learning or "paskening" is spurious.

Kol Tuv,
Eli Turkel

In a message dated 10/14/99 12:11:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu writes:

<< 
 I find this very hard to believe. I think, with rare exception, the
 overwhelming majority of rabbis in MO communities would be overjoyed to
 receive more halachic inquiries for both the congregants and their own
 sakes >>
Maybe, but the MO Rabbis I know put in very long days and have little "spare" 
time.  The question becomes what responsibilities would they and their 
congregants be willing to trade off.

Kol Tuv,
Joel Rich

In a message dated 10/14/99 8:21:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
turkel@math.tau.ac.il writes:

<< 
 I personally find any connections between yoazot and decreasing the
 rabbis authority or decreasing learning for men very strange.
 It is clear that there is a decrease in learning gemara in many MO circles.
 This is a serious problem which is being debated. However, any connection
 between this and women learning or "paskening" is spurious.
 
 Kol Tuv,
 Eli Turkel
  >>
A decrease in learning compared to what? 

Kol Tuv,
Joel Rich

> it?  there are many historical resonances here.   To note just relatively
> recent events, there was the - apparently unsolicited - halachic opinion
> offered by the RIETS 5 (don't know who exactly, but certainly including my
> old chaveir and classmate R. Willig and, i think, R. Schachter) concerning
> women's tefiloh groups (no way jose).  I recall the assertion as well that

At least one of them was approached for psak by Rabbi Louis bernstein, who
at that time was president of the RCA. It was later made clear that Rabbi
Bernstein was acting on his own, and not as an agent of the RCA. 

Ask them.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: <Joelirich@aol.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 1999 7:52 AM
Subject: Re: Women Yoatzot


> In a message dated 10/14/99 12:11:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu writes:
>
> <<
>  I find this very hard to believe. I think, with rare exception, the
>  overwhelming majority of rabbis in MO communities would be overjoyed to
>  receive more halachic inquiries for both the congregants and their own
>  sakes >>
> Maybe, but the MO Rabbis I know put in very long days and have little
"spare"
> time.  The question becomes what responsibilities would they and their
> congregants be willing to trade off.
>
> Kol Tuv,
> Joel Rich
>

I have been asked offline by two people to explain a post I sent in
yesterday, so, I will do so publicly as well.

Someone asked me if I am wrting in this enigmatic style because I believe
that "ha'mevinim mevinim", and I confrim that this is the case. I may have
been wrong in that belief.

Quote from me:

> >
> > <<< It is very likely that these women will issue far more correct and
> > accurate psakim than their male MO counterparts. They probably will.
That
> > is not an objection - how could it be? But it is precisely the problem.
> > V'dok! >>>
> >

Inquiry:

> > Several of your recent posts have been very enigmatic. And the most
recent example is at the
> > beginning of this letter, <<< V'dok! >>>
> >
> > Getting back to the first paragraph here, you feel that it is likely
that
> > these women will pasken better than their male MO counterparts, and that
> > that is the *problem*. I am mystified. Is this some sort of turf war,
> > where you are fighting for the men to be able to hold their territory? I
> > thought the goal was to do the ratzon HaShem, and if a woman can teach
me
> > that better than a man, what is the problem?
> >

My response:

> Let us examine this one example. The only reason these women will pasken
> better than their male counterparts is because, due to the Orthodox
Feminist
> agenda, money is being thrown at them, special training provided for them,
> and positions (for influence) provided for them. It is a turf war - but in
> the opposite direction than the one you describe - by Orthodox Feminists
> (OF's) and their supporters determined to stake their claim to as much
> Halachic turf as possible. I do not believe the motivation of the OF's is
> pure unadulterated ratzon Hashem. Far more ratzon Hashem would be
> accomplished by providing the same money, training and positions as
> incentives to the best and brightest MO men - who, as I really believe,
> would do far better than the women! But, re'eh zeh peleh - the best and
the
> brightest MO minds are not today in the rabbinate - look at the list of
contributors
> to the current, and all issues of the MO journal "Tradition".
> V'im ba'arazim nafla shalhevers, ma ya'anu azuvei kir?
>
> So, I hope what I said is clear:
> These women will pasken better because the resources etc. that should have
> gone into making emes'er morei horo'o and gedolei torah is being deprived
> the boys and being given the girls. This is, in my opinion, bad.
>

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

In a message dated 10/14/99 6:36:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
BACKON@vms.huji.ac.il writes:

> The Torah Sheleima quotes the Pirkei d"rabbi Eliezer 21 stating that both
>  Cain and Hevel had twin sisters and that they were permitted to marry their
>  sisters.
>  

see Rashi Breishis 4:1, Vayikra 20:17, in Breishis 3:8 he refers to the 
Gemara Sanhedrin 38b and see Tos. there.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

From S B Abeles <sba@blaze.net.au>
Subject: The Destruction of Hungarian Jewry

The following article appears in this weeks Yated Ne'eman (US edition)
and may in some way be related to the earlier discussion of Rabbi
Teichtal and his
views. Whilst many have heard of this sad chapter in our history - it
may however
remind those who continue to blame the Gedolim for the decimation of
European Jewry
- to have another think.


Gleaning Selective Lessons From Israeli Atrocities
by Moshe Schapiro

        It’s fascinating how history gets written—and sometimes
rewritten.
        For example, take the recent recommendation sent out by Israel’s
Education
Minister Yossi Sarid to all civic teachers to commemorate the upcoming
43rd
anniversary of the Kfar Qassem massacre, when Israeli troops in 1956
shot 47
Arab residents who violated a curfew imposed on their village.
        “We do not seek to hide or obscure,” said Sarid in his letter,
“but to deal
with our shame openly and honestly. A confident person who is sure of
his
path should not hesitate to expose his flaws as well.” Sarid urged
teachers
to mark the massacre’s anniversary by discussing the related issues and
events with their students.
        The military court that tried the soldiers who were involved in
the
incident rejected their argument that they were merely following orders.

“The obligation to obey an order,” ruled Justice Benjamin Halevy at the
time, “ends when the order is obviously not legal—that is, when it is
blatantly and obviously wrong.”
        Sarid feels it is important to give Israeli students “the tools
to know how
to listen and discern an illegal order, to keep their eyes open and
identify
the black flag.”
        Though the lesson Sarid wishes to impart to Israel’s
impressionable youth
is no doubt important, one can’t help but wonder why he chose this
particular incident to drive the point home. True, defenseless women and

children were killed in Kfar Qassem, but in that tragedy only 47 people
perished.
        A few years earlier in Hungary, more than 1,000,000 people were
slaughtered
when some Zionists in Palestine felt bound to follow their superiors’
orders.
        The incident is well-documented, but it’s still not being taught
in Israel.
It happened in the spring of 1944, when Rabbi Weissmandl was engaged in
intense negotiations with the Nazis to ransom more than 500,000
Hungarian
Jews in exchange for 10,000 trucks. Hungarian Zionist leaders insisted
that
the deal would have to be approved by their leaders in Palestine, so
Eichmann allowed a Hungarian Jew, Joel Brand, to fly to neutral Turkey
and
meet there with high-ranking Zionists and lay out the plan.
        Brand arrived safely to Istanbul, but the group of influential
Zionists who
met him there—following the orders of Moshe Sharett, who would one day
serve
as Israel’s Prime Minister—convinced him to cross the border into
British-controlled Palestine.
        British soldiers were waiting for him on the other side. Joel
Brand was
apprehended and spirited away to a villa in Cairo, where he remained
under
guard until after the demise of Hungarian Jewry. Eichmann sent them all
to
the ovens when Brand failed to return on the agreed-upon date.
        Many historians claim that the demise of Hungarian Jewry was
deliberately
planned by Zionist leaders in Palestine.
        The Zionist attitude to the fate of European Jewry is
illustrated
poignantly in a letter to Rabbi Weissmandl by Nathan Schwab, a senior
Zionist official who was stationed safely in Zurich:
        “You in Slovakia must remember that eventually the Allies will
win. And
following victory, the world will again be divided just like after World
War
I. This would be the first step. When the war is over, we will take all
measures to assure the creation of a Jewish state.
        “As for the cries reaching us from your region, know that all
nations,
members of the United Nations, are making tremendous sacrifices. If we
do
not bring sacrifices of our own, what right will we have to come to the
table after the war, when they will divide up the countries? A part of
the
nation must be sacrificed for the good of the whole.
        “This all applies for the masses. As for you, I will send you
sufficient
money to arrange your escape.”
        When Rabbi Weissmandl realized the implications of the message,
he kept
staring at it unbelievingly, until every letter became etched deeply
into
his mind. The evidence was incontrovertible—the Zionists in Palestine
fully
intended to sacrifice Hungary’s 1,000,000 Jews in exchange for a Jewish
state. And that is exactly what they did. Every last one of them.
        Now, Sarid could have used this episode just as well as the Kfar
Qassem
massacre to drive the point home, especially since it has yet to appear
in
Israeli history textbooks. Students would not only learn how to discern
black flags, they would also pick up a few basic historical facts along
the
way. Yet Sarid chose the massacre of 47 Arabs in Kfar Qassem.
        Come to think of it, Sarid could just as well have recommended
that his
civic teachers mark the anniversary of the sinking of the Altalena, an
Irgun
ammunition ship with Jewish fighters on board which was sunk by Palmach
fighters—Yitzchak Rabin among them—off the coast of Haifa. Yet another
case
of soldiers following “black flag” orders.
        Or how about the ongoing enigma of the missing Yemenite
children, dozens of
whom were kidnapped and sold in the 1950’s by Zionist officials? Of
course
it’s hard to lay the blame on any particular individual because the
investigation has been going for decades now and has yet to produce a
single
decisive piece of evidence, but it stands to reason that the order came
from
the upper echelons. Yet another case of following “black flag” orders
that
Sarid could have used to illustrate the lesson.
        Yet Sarid chose the massacre at Kfar Qassem. One cannot help but
wonder
why.
        Who was it that said, “We do not seek to hide or obscure, but to
deal with
our shame openly and honestly. A confident person who is sure of his
path
should not hesitate to expose his flaws as well.”
        Those are mighty courageous words. Too bad Sarid doesn’t dare to
back them
up with equally courageous deeds.


SBA

In v4n36, Joel Rish <Joelirich@aol.com> asks:
: I think we're getting to the nub of the issue.  Would the objections cease if 
: instead of using the title yoetzet we used the title mikva-lady(and perhaps 
: only allowed consultations at the mikveh?) As is often the case I think we're 
: debating a "public policy" issue.

I agree that this really is the nub of the issue.

When my wife was a mikvah lady she received many taharas hamishpachah questions
-- all but the obvious (e.g. a not-yet-observant woman asked whether mikvah
was on the seventh day or after seven days) of which she referred to the
local rav.

I see a need to increase the number of women in the role. After all, there are
fewer mikvah ladies than rabbanim. I don't think there are enough to feel that
there's enough for each shy wife to have someone they feel comfortable talking
to. Even including the women who give T"H refresher courses.

Therefore, I can see the role classes. Shouldn't be much more intensive than
standard T"H refresher courses, though; we're talking about someone who knows
when to ask a rav -- if it isn't in a standard refresher course, it's something
most women would have to bring to a rav. They even require more attention to
pointers on tact, social work, and psychology. With a certificate, so that
people can feel comfortable coming to her.

So, if we can solve the problem with much less investment, why the intensive
program, full degree and title?

The only additional benefit to the program under discussion that I see is
reducing the Rabbinic workload.

However, I don't hear complaints that the total load borne by local poskim
is overwhelming their numbers.

Second, this observation is a statement that the program is creating
quasi-Rabbanim -- exactly what Mrs Henken clearly states she is not trying
to do.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 14-Oct-99: Chamishi, Noach
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 53a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

 I lived through some of the events being discussed in this thread,and knew 
people on both sides of the issue who were intimately involved with the sale 
process. R.Ahron WAS asked for a psak before the sale went through, but he 
was told the group doing the buying was like the Boy Scouts-or some such 
similar group.I thin that the group actually told Mizrachi it wanted the bldg 
for their scout branch, or something along those lines. I know who the person 
 who told Mizrachi that RAS should be consulted is -I had a relative who was 
on the sale committee.Said person was concerned about the nature of the group 
 that wanted to buy-Nishiren Shoshu, an aggressively missionary branch of 
Buddhism, that was becoming  a political force in Japan,and had as its goal 
the conversion of 1/3 of the world, if I remember correctly. R.Ahron was not 
told this when the question was posed.He was only told that Mizrachi wanted 
to sell the building to a scouting group,and he said of course that's 
alright.The sale subsequently went through.When R.Ahron found out what was 
really going on he made an investigation of that  group, gathering whatever 
material was available about it.I saw some of the material that was 
gathered.He also wrote to a doctor of divinity at the University of Chicago 
about the group,and based on what he learned, he said Nishiren Shoshu is 
idolatry and Mizrachi cannot sell the building.I personally saw the letter 
that R.Ahron received from that doctor of divinity. I also saw a letter from 
R.Ahron to Mizrachi almost pleading wiith them not to go through with the 
sale. My recollection is that he told this to Mizrachi BEFORE the sale went 
through,and they did not listen to him.The rest is history. 

In Avodah 4#37, DGlasner posted:
> In an effort to redirect the highly politicized and sometimes heated
discussions about the role of women as morot hora'ah to a more
academic (generic sense) and calmer discussion of parshanut... <
Forgive me, but I find this statement a bit ironic, considering that, many
moons ago, you had a rather expansive view of Avodah's purpose.  My
tuppence (which, granted, are not worth much) is that said thread (unlike
the Chicago/RAS one) has generated more light than heat....
> The Scripture tells us that after being sent into exile East of Eden
for murdering his brother, Cain began a career as a builder of cities
(boneh ir). <
Forgive me, again, for throwing in a thought which actually is tangential
to your subsequent questions.  One way of looking at the Kayin vs. Hevel
issue is that Kayin, as a farmer, was attached to the land while Hevel, as
a shepherd, wasn't (Rav E. Samet, in a d'var Torah I received via the
Yeshivas Har Etzion VBM, excellently [IMHO, esp. as he brings Rav Hirsch's
comments as support ;-] accentuates this point while analyzing the relevant
p'sukim -- I'll mail a copy to all who request it via e-mail), and that
man's attachment to ground can be a source of difficulty (viz. the
descriptions given Noach in B'raishis 9:20 and Aisav in 25:27, as opposed
to those given Ya'akov Avinu, Moshe Rabbainu, Dovid HaMelech, etc.) -- from
this viewpoint, I wonder whether "boneh ir" reveals that Kayin really
didn't learn his lesson (see RaMBaN's comments).

All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ

This is an excellent example of the difference between Eretz Yisrael and
Galut:

>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 13:56:58 PDT
>From: "Alan Davidson" <perzvi@hotmail.com>
>Subject: the women clergy issue
>
>actually (putting on my sociology hat for a second -- I still am officially
>a doctoral student), the situation is a bit more complex than has been
>stated -- what has tended to happen in most [liberal]religious movements
>which have granted expanded levels of participation to women is they tend
to
>become women-dominated (not so much in terms of the pulpit b/c even in not
>yet frum branches of Judaism ordained females tend to teach in day schools
>versus congregations) but in terms of who tends to show up and play a major
>role in the life of the shul -- men tend to withdraw (which might say as
>much about male motivations for attending as it does about any real change
>in religious sentiments/attitudes.


I hope the men on this list will forgive me, but Judaism has always been
"women-dominated" <g>.  It is not the shul which is the center of jewish
life -- it is the home, and as we say in hebrew the woman is "akeret
Habayit" the mainstay of the home.

In Israel the shul does not have the same social role that it has in the
states.  So this whole discussion on "women dominance" is irrelevant (and a
bit funny, I must say).

One of the lacks of the modern age is information aimed at women and their
needs.  There are libraries full of books teaching the men how to become
closer to Hashem.  There are very few books for women -- books which address
a woman's daily life and how she can utilize all those repetitive tasks she
is expected to do daily, to become closer to Hashem.

But while a generation ago just doing the laundry could take a whole day,
now with electricity women finally have the time to pay attention to their
spiritual life beyond the Shabbat Afternoon Shiur at shul.  I'm sorry, but
the response: "by supporting your husband's limud you are doing your part"
just isn't enough for women who live nowadays.   The generalistic answers
that tell women "but you are raising your kids, taking care of home and
hearth -- you are blessed! also don't answer b/c men don't accept their
daily duty of supporting the household as _the_ way of getting closer to
Hashem - the men also study and _do_ special mitzvot.  So women are
looking -- each one on her own level.  Some have the time and go into full
time study of sha's, torah etc.  Some spend their time on Jewish philosophy.
But there are still too few books that respond to the special spiritual
needs of women.

Taharat HaMishapachah studies answers this at least in part.  It is geared
to a woman's life and experience.  It includes torah, halachah and jewish
philosophy (if anyone hasn't read Rav Chaim David HaLevy's book on THM -- I
highly recommend it).  This a sphere where it is acceptable for women to
write books and study.  The obvious next step is the creation of a group of
experts that know more than the expert Kallah councellors already know.

Whether this is another sphere where if the community accepts them then they
can actually inform the women who ask them of the halachah or even go the
next step and render a psak is another question.


Shoshana Boublil (nee Skaist)

Le'ilui Nishmat my great aunt, Anne Lopin A"H, who passed away this week in
Chicago
..

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


[ 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         ]