Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 295

Sunday, January 16 2000

• Re: Women and Cohanim
• Fw: Intrinsic value, kashrus vs arlah
• Re: Conservatives and Rav Berkovits
• Re: Charedi vs. MO (was Re: How is Rav Soleveitchik ztzl considered modern Orthodox?)
• Re: Lithuanian Yeshivos
• Re: Conservatives
• Re: Internet and Issur Histaklus Binashim
• Who was Rabbi Kahati?
• Re:mxed seating at weddings
• Re: Conservatives and Rav Berkovits
• Re: Modern Orthodox narrow mindness
• Re: Charedi vs. MO (was Re: How is Rav Soleveitchik ztzl considered modern Orthodox?)
• Re: Internet and Issur Histaklus Binashim
• Re: Internet ban
• Re: mxed seating at weddings
• RE: Charedi vs. MO (was Re: How is Rav Soleveitchik ztzl considered modern Orthodox?)
• Re: Charedi vs. MO (was Re: How is Rav Soleveitchik ztzl considered modern Or...
• RE: Charedi vs. MO (was Re: How is Rav Soleveitchik ztzl consideredmodern Or...

> > I do not know what Mrs. Gila Atwood's profession is,

Profession? <g> I shall enlighten you then.

pretty much full time homemaker and mother,
part time writer, environmental activist, aviculturist and really small time
consultant on zoological esp. ornithological matters, (that was my major)
pretty much in that order.

Thanks for the feedback.

First off, thanks for your explanation re techeles.

> > Subject: Re: Intrinsic value, kashrus vs arlah
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 13, 2000 at 02:02:41AM +0200, Mrs. Gila Atwood wrote:

>GA   So this would seem to imply that re  mila there WAS no chisaron before
the tzivui.

>MB- This would still save  the notion of milah having inherent value, but
still Avraham didn't feel a  lack before he entered into a b'ris with HKBH.
> >
>GA   Could we say that Avraham Avinu  reached a stage in his spiritual
development where his status changed in  such a way that: something which
was not a chisaron, now becomes a chisaron?
> >
>MB- This is close to the same notion as the one I'm now  suggesting,
although not identical. I am refraining from accepting your notion that  the
change was associated with growth since Hashem expects us to do a b'ris on a
baby before kashrus becomes an issue. This implies that the chisaron of
"areil" exists on an earlier level. Yet Avraham observed kashrus first.

GA-  OK now we get to the new input.
It seems to me that this all ties together quite neatly.
I ask, somewhat rhetorically, why was it appropriate for Avraham to have his
os bris at that point in time?  Could you say that Avraham had reached a
point in his spiritual development that made a covenant appropriate, but not
before? What was Hashem waiting for?  You could perhaps argue that the orlah
was potentially a chisaron but not actually a chisaron until a bris is
appropriate.  Outside the dimension of time the mitzvah of bris is
inherently valuable.
So why does spiritual refinement not matter for the baby?  Ma'aseh avos,
siman lebonim.  Avraham Avinu set a precedent and the bris was given at that
point universally.  The bris now applies to all  of us regardless of our
spiritual place. Thereafter, the optimum time for the mitzvah is 8 days-
quite separate from the issue of kashrus.

       Since the young Avraham is described as  reasoning his way to
> > HKBH, not directly percieving His presence, I would guess the
> > latter.
     I feel compelled to guess the latter!

> > There is a cycle: thought leads to action, and action leads
> > to thought.

It seems that we're saying pretty much the same thing-  though you say it
more fully and systematically. It does indicate to me that there is inherent
value in sitting in a succa for a woman.
Now, you say that women would probably be able to accomplish this spiritual
tikun in another way.  (though what specifically I'd be at a loss to say. )

Analogy-  I have a vitamin pill. Either I could do a bit of research, look
through nutrition charts,  and acquire those vitamins through food,  or I
could simply pop the pill. I have an alternative route but since the pill is
right there, why look for an alternative route? In this case I would benefit
from the pill.
Alternatively a vitamin pill for one species is not a vitamin pill for
another since the second species manufactures the vitamin in its cells,
intestinal juices or wherever.  It doesn't need the pill, it doesn't need
another route, it already has the goods.  For him the pill would be useless,
of no benefit whatsoever.
(3rd possibility you've mentioned, zar in the kodesh, in this case the
vitamin is poison)

It seems that the mitzva of succa falls in the first category.


This takes us back to the Avos and their manner of keeping all the mitzvot.
I learned that Yaakov, in planting the rods in the watering troughs for the
sheep, was able to accomplish the same tikun as can be accomplished through
tefillin- (granted, he did have angelic guidance according to midrash
hagadol.)
Now, the capacity for  for keeping basar vechalav was clearly already there,
but before yetzias mitzrayim, tefillin were obviously not around.  Due to
the kind of yedias Hashem available to the avos they were able to bring
about the tikunim which were later effected through the avodas beis
hamikdash etc, forms of avoda not available to the avos.  Possibly their way
of keeping some of the mitzvot would not be recognisable to us, but it would
be valid for them before matan Torah. (Note also Yosef's dispute with his
brothers over keeping mitzvos as bnei Yisrael vs. bnei Noach which
constituted Yosef's diba to his father. )

Kol tuv,  Mrs GA

Chas v'Shalom. Avodah harbors no such individuals.

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



----- Original Message -----
From: Meir Shinnar <shinname@UMDNJ.EDU>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 11:50 AM
Subject: Conservatives and Rav Berkovits


> muvhak of the Seride Esh out of the fold.  This is not surprising, as some
> posters have suggested that the Seride Esh himself, as he actually was
> revealed in his letters, would not be welcome today.
>

I wish to thank R' Daniel for his insightful comments, and add my own
perspective.

Firstly, I am extremely distraught over the introduction of the appelation
"Charedi" to the American Orthodox scene. It is only very recently that the
term has come into vogue here, and I truly wish it had not. At best it is
divisive, at worst derisive, and it is inaccurate to boot. All Orthodox Jews
should be "Chared l'dvar Hashem". I belive that OU's Hebrew name is "Irgun
Ha'Kehillos Ha'Charedi'os etc." The term should be the Hebrew moniker for us
all, not for some select group to whom it is really applied to connote that
they consider themselves, in the eyes of their detractors "holier than
thou."

I would be most grateful if we do not divide Avodah into Charedi and
non-Charedi camps.

Why don't we just not use the word here?

Especially not in the context that R' Micha uses below. There, Charedi seems
to stand for "Luddite!"

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

----- Original Message -----
From: Daniel Israel <daniel@pluto.ame.arizona.edu>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 3:55 PM
Subject: Charedi vs. MO (was Re: How is Rav Soleveitchik ztzl considered
modern Orthodox?)


>
> From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
> >A chareidi approaches a new idea, venue, or invention with the question
"What
> >challenges does this pose?" Mod-O's first question is "What
opportunities?"
> >This is why mod-O is more likely to embrace the new, which is why we call
it
> >"mod".
> >
> >I assume a chareidi will correct me. But that's my first approximation.
>
> One problem I have with dividing things between MO and Charedi is it
> leaves out quite a few people.  Unfortunately, the rules seem to have
> been already set for this symantic game, and I think they are stacked
> against reasonable dialogue (not, chv"sh, by Micha, but by the "oilam"
> in general).
>
> For one thing, I associate "Charedi" with a Israeli demographic.  In
> chutz l'aretz the RW demographic is usually called "Yeshivish."  While
> there are many things the two groups share, there are some significant
> differences.  For one thing, the Yeshivish world seems to me to have a
> much larger segment that is accepting of secular education (even
> advanced degrees).  (OTOH, perhaps part of that perception is due to
> having more direct exposure to American frumkeit than Israeli, if so, I
> assume that some of our Israelis will correct me.)
>
> The other very important problem is that there is very little
> difference, in my experience, between so called "MO" who are really
> serious and committed to learning and careful observance of halacha and
> so called "RW" who are open to secular education.  For example, (and
> Micha can repudiate this claim if he wishes), I am probably very similar
> to Micha in my hashkafah (except w.r.t. techeilis ;) ) but I would never
> identify myself as MO, and I think Micha would.  While the size of the
> group (which perhaps consititutes the real "center," but is left
> unnamed) is not huge, I think it is bigger than either of the extremes
> would like to admit to.  I would guess that many of us on this list fall
> into it.
>

This is a very interesting and vaid question, the question of correlating
the Hesder Yeshivos with the "Black" (I detest the appelation Charedi, or as
some have written here, Haredi, and will go on a rampage on that shortly,
please be patient).

I cannot speak to all of the Heser Yeshivos, but I can say that Sha'alvim
represented a conscious effort by its founder to start a Yeshiva that fell
in the parameters of "Shittas Frankfurt" in R' Dessler's dichotomy. I
remember very distinctly the Rosh Yeshiva's discussion of the issue.

For many reasons, I do not think he was successful. At the very most, his
success was qualified.

In my case, this was for me a good thing. My primary Rabbeim in lomdus in
the Yeshiva were one a talmid of R' Isser Zalman Meltzer and the other of R'
Shmuel Rozovsky. One of the mashgichim was a talmid of R' Yeruchom Levovitz.
As such, I was zoche to be introduced to and grow in the classic Lithuanian
derachim of thought and analysis.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: Zuckerman, Jeffrey I. <JZuckerman@CM-P.COM>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 12:15 PM
Subject: Lithuanian Yeshivos


> Rabbi Bechhofer referred recently to "the three major Lithuanian
> yeshivos:  Chevron, Mir, Ponivitch."  Is not Har Etzion a major Lithuanian
> yeshiva?  And how about Rabbi Bechhofer's own Sha'alvim (although unlike
Har
> Etzion, Sha'alvim has fewer talmidim than any of the three that Rabbi
> Bechhofer listed)?  And how about Kerem B'Yavneh, Mercaz HaRav, and many
> other hesder and/or Bnai Akiva yeshivos that are also Lithuanian yeshivos?
> And just imagine the impact if the Roshei Yeshiva of "all" the major
> Lithuanian yesivos -- or even just the Roshei Yeshiva of Chevron, Har
> Etzion, Mir and Ponivitch -- signed a proclamation -- or even just sat
down
> together!
>
> Jeff Zuckerman
>

In a message dated 1/15/00 1:08:40 PM US Central Standard Time, 
Chana/Heather@luntz.demon.co.uk writes:

<<  That is, does the
 Conservative movement have any idealogical pull for people within
 Orthodoxy, does it pose any kind of idealogical threat for people with
 Orthodoxy?  >>

It does. The northern suburbs of Chicago are full of people with thorough 
Orthodox backgrounds who, having earned lots of money, joined Conservative 
shuls because they felt socially comfortable with their fellow congregants. 
They play tennis and golf at exclusive country clubs; they spend money on 
things that would cause jaws to drop in Rogers Park but are accepted as part 
of the typical lifestyle in places like Glencoe and Highland Park. (E.g., 
cars, designer furniture, artwork, socially prominent charities, ans so 
forth.) They wear $1500.00 suits and color-coordinated $400 shoes -- and you 
should see what the women wear. They ski three times a year in Colorado and 
Utah. But they go to shul every Shabbos, keep kosher, and spend a lot of time 
focussing on their Jewish identities. Some are quite learned, and make time 
to learn more.

No one should underestimate the force of the need for people with such money 
and taste to stick together. Is this assimilation? Maybe, although I don't 
think that's what the Haskalah movement had in mind. Or the Reform movement, 
either, which couldn't conceive of upwardly-mobile American Jews paying for 
*two* $4,500.00 Viking stoves for their kitchen, one fleishig and one 
milchig. 

I don't know what this means, other than knowing that formal Conservative 
doctrine has absolutely nothing to do with personal motivations in cases like 
these.

David Finch

> They can
> just lock trhemselves up in the closet for that matter
> and stare at the clothes on the Hangers.

I believe there is an issur of looking at bigdey tsivoynim.

Dovid Herskovic

Can someone please give me a short biography of Rabbi Kahati the author
of the commentary on the mishne.

Dovid Herskovic

 Yitzchok Zirkind, replying to Eli Clark, writes:
> If one want's to apply the Lvush that times changed, wouldn't one 
> also 
> conclude that with all the Pritzusdike advertisements that times 
> have 
> changed?  (Or can change only take place Lhatir Vloi Lesor?)

Obviously, change can go both ways.  There is a difference, though,
between the Lvush making that determination and R. Yitzchok Zirkind doing
so.

He states further:
> Another issue that I am not aware if discussed is what happens 
> during dancing 
> is there Mechitza (men watching women dancing is prohibited).

What is the specific issur in men watching women dancing, where the
dancing is not of an erotic type? And if there is such a blanket issur,
how are we to understand the Mishne in Taanis that bnos Yerushalayim
yotzos v'cholos bakramim?  And on Yom Kippur, yet!
Sadya N. Targum

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

On Fri, Jan 14, 2000 at 12:50:46PM -0500, Meir Shinnar wrote:
> 1) A poster suggested that Rav Eliezer Berkovits, zt"l, joined the Masorti
> movement at the end of his life.  This is pure lashon hara.  

Whether or not something is true has no bearing on it being lashon hara; 
here we have a purpose as this is pertinent information, though perhaps
this entire discussion is l"h.  

I am, however, uncomfortable with this discussion being on the web archive.

Micha, can this part of the thread be edited out?

> He had a far
> more lenient shita on interactions with them, and may have even have 
> spoken at one of their functions, but he never joined.  Because of the
> recent rightward trend, there has been an attempt to read  this talmid
> muvhak of the Seride Esh out of the fold.  This is not surprising, as some
> posters have suggested that the Seride Esh himself, as he actually was
> revealed in his letters, would not be welcome today.

As I mentioned in that same post, I was told by someone who was quite
disappointed, and is in no way part of this rightward trend.  This is not 
an appropriate forum to elaborate except to say that circumstances are 
such that I am certain he is well-informed on this point;  any mistakes 
were on my part in miscommunicating or misunderstanding.  My impression 
was that whatever action he took was only symbolic since it was, as I said, 
very close to his death.  

I am looking further into the matter, though.

Janet

In a message dated 1/14/00 4:06:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, Harry Maryles 
wrote <<  They can
 just lock themselves up in the closet for that matter
 and stare at the clothes on the Hangers.  Of course
 that might give some people Hirhurim, too. Perhaps we
 should just wear blindfolds during our waking hours
 and buy seeing eye dogs if we need to leave the house! >>
Those who responded to my original post (that haredim find Internet to be 
assur because of histaklus) by asking that if so it should be assur for work 
and should be assur to ride a train are halachicaly mistaken.The Gemorah Bava 
Basra 57b says with regard to histaklus that if "Ika darka achrini rasha hu." 
In other words, if it is a necessity (like going to work) one may go into 
places where they may come to histaklus, however, if there is another way to 
go then you are a rasha if you go the path that has the possibility of 
histaklus even if you don't look. Now there can be legitimate disagreement 
what constitutes a "necessity". The question is what type of Internet use is 
enough of a necessity to be matir its use. I fully understand those who feel 
that the Internet is a basic fact of life and is a necessity in todays day 
and age and therefore oppose a ban. I do not understand, however, some MO 
members of this list who are so narrow minded as not to understand the other 
perspective.

In general, it seems to me that in this discussion, as well as others that 
deal with Haredim, those in MO portray a very large degree of intolerance and 
narrow mindness. This is especially ironic because MO Jews are constantly 
portraying Haredim as narrow minded while the hallmark of an MO Jew is his 
open mindness. However, whenever a discussion of Haredim comes up, the MO are 
so absolutely sure of the correctness of their position and don't take the 
time out to understand that maybe, just maybe, there is legitimacy in the 
haredi position as well.    Furthermore, they find the need to portray 
Haredim as primitive and backward ("let them lock themselves in the closet 
and use a seeing eye dog when they go out") instead of trying to understand 
them. If anyone would take out a few minutes to study the relevant halachos 
and hanhogos they should have a very easy time understanding why for certain 
communities an Internet ban makes perfect sense.

On 14 Jan 00, at 14:55, Daniel Israel wrote:

> For one thing, I associate "Charedi" with a Israeli demographic.  In
> chutz l'aretz the RW demographic is usually called "Yeshivish."  While
> there are many things the two groups share, there are some significant
> differences.  For one thing, the Yeshivish world seems to me to have a
> much larger segment that is accepting of secular education (even
> advanced degrees).  (OTOH, perhaps part of that perception is due to
> having more direct exposure to American frumkeit than Israeli, if so, I
> assume that some of our Israelis will correct me.)

I think you are correct on this. Much of the Israeli "charedi" world is 
a lot less accepting of secular education than is its American 
counterpart. Most of the Israeli charedim I know with college 
degrees are baalei tshuva who got their degrees before they 
became Charedim. And the number of Charedim on college 
campuses in Israel is quite small. 

But I'm not sure that's unique to Israel. In fact, from what some of 
the English olim tell me, the situation in England is much closer to 
that of Israel than to the States - some people "do English" and 
some "do not," so it may be that it is actually the American 
experience that is unique. I know we have a few English on this 
list; maybe they could comment.

> The other very important problem is that there is very little
> difference, in my experience, between so called "MO" who are really
> serious and committed to learning and careful observance of halacha and
> so called "RW" who are open to secular education.  

Again, this is true in the States, but not always in Israel. The gap 
in Israel tends to be much wider. While there are definitely some 
MO who are really serious and committed to learning and careful 
observance of halacha, there are also a lot (maybe even a majority) 
for whom the M part (or the L part in dati leumi) becomes a license 
to go easy on halachic observance and look for kulas that may not 
always be there. OTOH, while there are some "RW" in Israel who 
are open to secular education, they are clearly a minority.

The other way in which Israel is different from the US is that in 
Israel there is a "uniform" that identifies you to a much greater 
extent than anyone is identified in the US. Wearing certain types of 
clothing (black kippot, colorful knitted kippot, black hats, long floor 
length skirts, jean skirts, straight plain black skirts precisely three 
inches below the knee) will clearly identify you with one camp or 
the other.

I did a lengthy post on this three months ago outlining the gap 
between DL and Charedi in Israel and why it has widened over the 
past twenty years (IMHO). If anyone missed it, you can drop me an 
email at my office (cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il) and I will be glad to 
bounce it to you.

-- Carl


Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.

Carl and Adina Sherer
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

In a message dated 1/14/00 3:46:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
hmaryles@yahoo.com writes:

> The bottom line is anyone is entitled to be machmir
>  for him/herself.  Just don't make any Takanos for
>  those who do not agree with this Chumra and want to
>  enjoy the positive side of the Net.
>  
As I understood M'ikara D'dina it was a Taakana for those who want to follow 
the guidelines of their leaders.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

In a message dated 1/14/00 4:59:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
daniel@pluto.ame.arizona.edu writes:

> I understand (although disagree) with those who wish to keep children
>  from exposure to the many parts of the Interent.  But can you explain to
>  me what (other than, perhaps, bittul z'man) is bad about e-mail?  Would
>  you allow children to use the postal system or the telephone?
>  

Have you ever received unsolicited e-mail? I have.

However my main point is that many times the sender will include a link, it 
is hard to tell the child you may not open a link what your freind sent you  
(and sometimes it is an e-mail that makes it's rounds without knowing who the 
original sender is. (that is again based on a Harchaka from the Internet 
V'abizreihu). I write all this from personal experience.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

In a message dated 1/15/00 11:00:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
targum1@juno.com writes:

>  Yitzchok Zirkind, replying to Eli Clark, writes:
>  > If one want's to apply the Lvush that times changed, wouldn't one also 
>  > conclude that with all the Pritzusdike advertisements that times have 
>  > changed?  (Or can change only take place Lhatir Vloi Lesor?)
>  
>  Obviously, change can go both ways.  There is a difference, though,
>  between the Lvush making that determination and R. Yitzchok Zirkind doing
>  so.
>  
My original quote was from the Lubavitcher Rebbe Ztz"l, to me he was capable 
of making such determination.

>  He states further:
>  > Another issue that I am not aware if discussed is what happens during 
dancing 
>  > is there Mechitza (men watching women dancing is prohibited).
>  
>  What is the specific issur in men watching women dancing, where the
>  dancing is not of an erotic type? 

When women dance in front of men, they cause them to have erotic thoughts.  
Singing often accompanies the dancing, in which case the men would be 
transgressing the prohibition of hearing a female voice.

The Ben Ish Chai, Shana Rishona, Parshas Shoftim 18, states: it is forbidden 
for women to dance by themselves in the presence of men...contemporary 
authorities strongly support this view, stating unequivocally that such 
activity is not permitted, even for the Mitzvah of gladdening a bride and 
groom."

Shulchan HaEzer 9:2 and Shevet Mussar 24 add that a woman may not participate 
in a dance group if there is a male musician involved.

(Above was taken from Halichos Bas Yisroel by Rav Yitzchak Yaacov Fuchs 
(Targum press) English edition page 112.


And if there is such a blanket issur,
>  how are we to understand the Mishne in Taanis that bnos Yerushalayim
>  yotzos v'cholos bakramim?  And on Yom Kippur, yet!

The following is taken from the Book of our Heritage by R' E. Kitov English 
edition regarding the 15th of Av.

"Since those two days were days of purification from sin, the earlier 
generations did not hesitate also to regard them as days of festivity and 
dancing for the daughters of Israel.  On these days the daughters used to go 
outside the city and dance in the vineyards, and there was no apprehension 
lest they breach the fence of chasity and modesty.  The character of the days 
as days of purification from transgression was in itself regarded as a 
safeguard that none would utilize them to commit misdeeds"

There are other answers brought in other Mforshim.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind
 

> 
> I would be most grateful if we do not divide Avodah into Charedi and
> non-Charedi camps.

But RW/LW is OK? I don't see what the difference is.

Akiva



A reality check a day keeps 
the delusions at bay (Gila Atwood)

===========================
Akiva Atwood, POB 27515
Jerusalem, Israel 91274  

In a message dated 1/16/00 1:01:45 AM US Central Standard Time, 
atwood@netvision.net.il writes:

<< But RW/LW is OK? I don't see what the difference is.
  >>

Some LW types have RW opinions on certain issues, and vice versa. Some have a 
jumble of opinions mixed with a lot of questions that might lead to opinions, 
if anyone can offer any answers. Some who are neither LW or RW are mostly 
confused and contradictory, like children. (I fall into this camp.)

To be charedi is to embrace a certain lifestyle within a certain type of 
community. The term doesn't translate well to American Jews, no matter how 
RW, unless they live in one of a dozen or so East Coast enclaves. Lifestyles 
here are more flexible, because derech eretz more more ubitquitous.

David Finch

> Some LW types have RW opinions on certain issues, and vice
> versa. Some have a

But can you *define* RW/LW? I suspect most people on the list usually use
these terms as synonymous with liberal/conservative as regards halachic
interpretation, but it's use isn't consistant.

>
> To be charedi is to embrace a certain lifestyle within a
> certain type of community.

For example?

> The term doesn't translate well to American Jews,
> no matter how RW, unless they live in one of a
> dozen or so East Coast enclaves.

I understand that -- which is why Israeli charedim are so suspicious of
American charedim.

> Lifestyles
> here are more flexible, because derech eretz more more ubitquitous.

I assume you mean derech eretz in the Hirschian sense?

If so, I assume you think most Israeli charedim don't work, correct?

Akiva



A reality check a day keeps
the delusions at bay (Gila Atwood)

===========================
Akiva Atwood, POB 27515
Jerusalem, Israel 91274

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


[ 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         ]