Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 301

Tuesday, January 18 2000

• Re: Agunot
• Use of Charedi on Avodah
• Sridei Aish
• Taxonomy
• Re: Rav Aharon Schechter, shlit"a
• Internet
• Women Dancing and Simchas Torah dancing
• Re: mixed dancing
• Re: use of chareidi on Avodah
• Re: mixed dancing
• Re: Internet
• Re: Do the Masses Need Sanitized Gdolim
• Re: Fw: Intrinsic value, kashrus vs arlah
• Labelling
• Re: Ad absurdum arguments
• Re: boro park eruv
• Re: Motzoei Shabbos
• Mixed seating at weddings
• Re[2]: Charedi vs. MO
• Re[2]: mixed dancing
• NY TIMES etc.

----- Original Message -----
> Forgive a few dumb questions. Where was this psak of Rav
> Moshe? Was it not published in the Igros? And why (whether
or not
> it was published in the Igros) did it take so long for the
Beis Din
> here to find it?
>
> - -- Carl

The questions are far from dumb, and I'm not sure I have all
the answers.

From what I was told:

It was not published in Igrot.  Rumour has that it was
hidden (and I'm not touching this rumour with a 10-foot
pole!)

All I know is that it came to light 2 days ago and has been
since authenticated and handed out in the Beit Din in Tel
Aviv.

Shoshana L.  Boublil

> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 23:32:09 EST
> From: Kenneth G Miller <kennethgmiller@juno.com>
> Subject: Re: use of chareidi on Avodah

> I think the whole point of this thread is that we should be fighting
> these stereotypes. Yes, we are human and we do succumb to categorizing
> people we know, and even more so regarding people we don't know. But we
> should be congnizant of this tendency and we should be consciously
> fighting it.
> 
> There are plenty of situations where I am surprised to find that a person
> aligns himself in a certain way regarding a certain issue. But I try to
> engage my brain before my mouth says anything stupid. Why should I be
> surprised that he doesn't fit into the box that I had imagined him to be
> in? I certainly fight for my own independent thinking!
> 
> A Shabbos at my shul has a very nice mix of black hats of varied brims,
> and kipot of all types (not to mention the variety on the other side of
> the mechitza). And also have exactly one member with a beautiful
> streimel. A friend recently wondered out loud why the streimel-wearer
> comes to this shul. I answered him simply, "I like it here. You like it
> here. Why do you think he wouldn't like it here?"

I am beginning to reluctantly draw the conclusion that this sort of 
fighting and categorizing is an inevitable result of the growth of 
Jewish communities to the size where we can have an 
infrastructure of only "black hats" or only "kippot srugot." 

I think that anyone who grew up "out of town" (read - outside the 
five boro's of New York City, Wetschester, Long Island and certain 
close-in suburbs of New Jersey) who has maintained contact with 
their childhood friends has at least some friends who are in "the 
other camp." Today "in town" has extended to places like Chicago 
which is represented so vocally on this list. 

Similarly, in Eretz Yisroel, people who grew up anywhere outside of 
Bnei Brak and certain neighborhoods in Yerushalayim probably has 
friends in "the other camp." But today you can grow up almost 
anywhere in Yerushalayim, and in several other cities in Israel (or 
pockets within cities in Israel) and not ever come into contact with 
anyone who is not like you. The walls around our communities are 
being extended.

I think part of it is our own desire to have our children grow up to be 
like us and to have our hashkofas olam, which we see as being 
more likely to happen if we shield them from other hashkofos. I'm 
not sure there is a one to one correlation there, even within 
families. But the flip side of that is that we are raising a generation 
that cannot see beyond the color of someone's yarmulka or shirt, 
the length of their skirt or the type of covering on their hair.

No solutions - I share Akiva's frustration. But one observation that 
gives me some hope. There is still a basic goodness in Am 
Yisrael. We still share the traits of being rachmanim, bayshanim 
v'gomlei chasodim. I have seen that constantly through the many 
different people from all walks of life with whom we have come into 
contact through Baruch Yosef's illness. While it is true that most of 
the Chessed ORGANIZATIONS in Israel are run by people who 
would characterize themselves as Charedi, the dispensing of all 
chassodim within the hospitals and clinics, from the biggest to the 
smallest, come from people from all walks of life, and are given to 
people from all walks of life. Translation (without getting into a lot of 
specifics) - most of BY's doctors have been chiloni, yet their 
(emotional) caring for this little Charedi-looking boy with peos that 
now reach his shoulder, fat cheeks and an infecting smile, is 
genuine and without regard to his or his parents religious or 
political views.

Just a little early morning food for thought.

-- 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

Since the Sridei Aish has been a big topic of conversation on this 
list off and on for the last several months, I thought I might mention 
that I saw a poster in Geula last night that his Shailos and Tshuvos 
and his Chiddushim al haShas, have been republished and made 
available on his yahrtzeit last week (4 Shvat). If anyone is 
interested, drop me a line and I can try to find out more.

-- 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

>Taxonomy? We stuff kishkes, not rabbis.

You're thinking of taxidermy. Point taken, though.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

I'm just catching up on two weeks of Avodah and apologize if this post
seems out of touch.  I just note that I have been at  least one wedding
recently which had some mixed tables and at which Rav Aharon stayed for
the meal.  I shall ask him soon about the various comments on this issue
but I would suspect that the issue is at best more complex than has been
represented here.

Melech

M. Press, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology, Touro College
mpress@ix.netcom.com or melechp@touro.edu

I just read in the financial section of YEDIOT that Network Associates
is launching a special computer program called "Cyber Cop" (sp?) for
the Charedi users of the Internet. The program will be updated daily with
all "off the limit" websites whose access will be automatically blocked.

Josh

R' Sadya writes:
> R. Mordechai of Pawtucket, on the Mishna of "bnos yerushalyim cholos
>  bakramim", responds:
>> I understood that Mishnah to refer to a group of women walking in a 
circle, 
>> not exactly a dance. (This is the same idea I have seen used to permit a 
>> "Siman Tov UMazel Tov" dance for a Chasan after his Aufruf Aliyah on 
Shabbos, 
>> despite the prohibition against dancing on Shabbos.)
>  
>  Rashi on the Mishna refers to the posuk at the end of Sefer Shoftim. 
>  There, the Mtzudos translates the word as "rikuday simcha." 

True, but Rashi's purpose is to define "Cholos," a la the circle. veHa 
Raayah, they were doing this on Yom Kippur, when the prohibition against 
dancing certainly applies, and we can't rely on the Tosafos you mention 
further along about "beYameinu."

> As for the
>  issur of dancing on Shabbos, Tosfos in Beitzah 30a, d.h. Ain mtapchin,
>  says that the issur does not apply byameinu, since we lack the knowledge
>  to be m'saken kli shir. (If not for that heter, how do we justify dancing
>  on Simchas Torah, which is a lot more than "walking around in a circle"?)

Simchas Torah dancing has been controversial for that reason for centuries. 
See Mishnah Berurah 339:8, citing "Acharonim."

Mordechai
Cong. Ohave Shalom, YI of Pawtucket, RI http://members.tripod.com/~ohave
HaMakor! http://www.aishdas.org/hamakor Mareh Mekomos Reference Library
WEBSHAS! http://www.aishdas.org/webshas Indexing the Talmud, Daf by Daf

<< Nonsense. Of course he knew of the issur. He was trying to make it stick
 with a cherem. Is that not obvious? >>

No.  I can think of no other place where you need a cherem or even an issur 
drabbanan to probhibit that which (acc. to your claim) is already prohibited 
min haTorah.  The issur d'oryasa of lo tasuru is to gaze at a women with 
erotic intent (l'shem hana'ah) - not everyone who sees a women (even dancing) 
gazes erotically.  That's why you need the cherem.  

As for walking behind a women halacha l'ma'aseh, I think for most of us who 
venture forth on the city streets it is inevitable that women cross our path, 
yet we still go about our business, (see IG"M 56).  Leaving the IG"M aside, I 
would imagine the source of the heter is based on the simple fact that for 
most people walking down a street does not elicit an erotic reaction.  
L'mashal, the Levush (discussed by Eli Clarke) applied the same logic to 
mixed seating at weddings, and the roots of the sevara are really in Tos. 
Kiddushin 81 regarding hishtamshus b'nashim.  To use another example: halacha 
l'ma'aseh, what is the din with regard to shaking hands with a women?  The 
issur relates back to a chashash hirhur, and those who are matir do so 
assuming that a handshake cannot be misconstrued as an erotic gesture in 
today's work environment.  Obviously, in these areas one must tread with 
caution and not arbitrarily apply kulos, but by the same token to brandish 
about issurei d'oraysa without regard to other factors is wrong.    

On Mon, Jan 17, 2000 at 11:32:09PM -0500, Kenneth G Miller wrote:
: <<< I was looking for a nicer term than "ultra-O" that describes those
: properties that "Yeshivish" and "Chassidish" have in common. >>>

: My personal favorite is "Shomer Mitzvos".

Too general. There is some element that mod-O does /not/ aspire to that these
two communities do. Shemiras haMitzvos isn't it.

: <<< That something that makes it unsurprising to find a Belzer Chossid in
: Lakewood, but surprising to find him in YU. >>>

: I think the whole point of this thread is that we should be fighting
: these stereotypes.

Agreed. To go back to my Orthodox thought-space, no one actually adheres
perfectly to any of the attractors. No one believes exactly the "Yeshivish"
party line, with 0 exceptions.

OTOH, I think it does little good to pretend these points in ideological
space don't exist. It's a *sociological* reality that we as a community have
to bridge. IOW, if you want more shuls like yours, where:

: A Shabbos at my shul has a very nice mix of black hats of varied brims,
: and kipot of all types (not to mention the variety on the other side of
: the mechitza). And also have exactly one member with a beautiful
: streimel.

To get there we have to know why things are the way they are. BTW, the same
is true of most of the shuls in Passaic as well.

In addition, there are *ideological* reasons why certains sets of beliefs are
more stable than others. Why these points in the thought-space are centers
of population. I think it's interesting to explore the relationship between
Torah uMaddah and Zionism. Why is it that there is a strong tendency (albeit
not a necessary connection) for an adherent in one to believe in the other?
How does it differ from RSRH, who believed in TIDE but was anti-Zionist?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 18-Jan-00: Shelishi, Beshalach
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 101a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

On 18 Jan 00, at 8:45, C1A1Brown@aol.com wrote:

Leaving the IG"M aside, I 
> would imagine the source of the heter is based on the simple fact that for 
> most people walking down a street does not elicit an erotic reaction.  

I think that depends on the way the woman is dressed and the 
man's personality. The answer is probably a lot different for teenage 
boys than it is for adults. In any event, I think that walking behind a 
woman who is not dressed tzniustically is likely to elicit an erotic 
reaction in some people. I don't think you can just discount it and I 
don't think there is any heter in that situation. 

> L'mashal, the Levush (discussed by Eli Clarke) applied the same logic to 
> mixed seating at weddings, 

Does the Levush distinguish between married couples and single 
people? For example, the halachos of yichud are completely 
different for a married woman (where the heter of baala ba'ir can 
often negate any issur of yichud) than they are for a single woman. 

To use another example: halacha 
> l'ma'aseh, what is the din with regard to shaking hands with a women?  The 
> issur relates back to a chashash hirhur, and those who are matir do so 
> assuming that a handshake cannot be misconstrued as an erotic gesture in 
> today's work environment.  

I think those who are matir to do so are only matir to do so 
b'dieved. As I understand it, the heter only applies when the woman 
offers her hand first and would not apply if you know that she is 
fruhm and is offering her your hand because she doesn't know that 
you are also fruhm (this was a common problem in my New York 
days when many men did not wear kippot to work - see Igros 
Moshe OH 4:2). I would argue that the heter applies only because 
you are less likely to have hirhurim where the woman extends her 
hand first and you are shaking it only so as to avoid embarassing 
her.

-- Carl


Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
Telephone 972-2-625-7751
Fax 972-2-625-0461
mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il

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

On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 11:08:00AM +0200, BACKON@vms.huji.ac.il wrote:
: I just read in the financial section of YEDIOT that Network Associates
: is launching a special computer program called "Cyber Cop" (sp?) for
: the Charedi users of the Internet. The program will be updated daily with
: all "off the limit" websites whose access will be automatically blocked.

Do they say how this will differ from the other such programs? See
<http://dir.yahoo.com/Business_and_Economy/Companies/Computers/Software/Internet/Blocking_and_Filtering/>
for a list of filters, and
<http://dir.yahoo.com/Business_and_Economy/Companies/Internet_Services/Access_Providers/National__U_S__/Filtered_Access/>
for a list of pre-filtered internet providers -- basically the Christian
Right's answer to (lehavdil) TorahNet. I notived a greater focus on pornography
than on violence. And, of course, it would take a frum service to block out
missionaries and apikursus.

Network Associates are a well-known security software vendor. They aren't
particularly Jewish. I can't see why there offering would be more oriented
toward this market than any other would.

More importantly, note that this is another incomplete acceptance of the
proposed takkanah.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 18-Jan-00: Shelishi, Beshalach
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 101a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

See Erich Fromme's "Escape from Freedeom".

The philosphy is that all kinds of hero worship is an abdication of both one's 
individual freedoms AND responsibilties.

It is not a co-incidence that we call hero-worship "idolizing".

It is also no co-incidence that Mosheh Rabbeinu's name is omitted from the 
Haggado (with one brief exception).

Ani v'lo Mal'ach.

Lo lvado rouy lehispallel.

The process of people abdicating their own "tzelem Elokim" and putting heroes on
pedestals, has been going on for a long time in a lot of societies and is NOT 
unqiue to America.

Rich Wolpoe





______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Do the Masses Need Sanitized Gdolim 
<snip>
  In american society people do what they can to 
escape assuming responsibity for their actions (I have 
a substance abuse problem, I'm seeing someone, I had a 
horrible childhood, etc).  These claims are made not 
as a way to understand someone's actions but to avoid 
the consequences of said actions.

<snip>

On Sun, Jan 16, 2000 at 01:12:37AM +0200, Mrs. Gila Atwood wrote:
: 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?

I think we reach convergence on this, and it also answers my question WRT
a baby getting a b'ris. Yes, milah only has meaning to a ba'al b'ris. IOW,
orlah is only orlah when speaking of a ba'al b'ris. Avraham Avinu required
a particular level in order for HKBH to enter into that b'ris, therefore
until he reached that level, Hashem didn't make the b'ris, orlah wasn't orlah,
and therefore milah was pointless.

A baby, however, inherits membership in the b'ris. Therefore, while Avraham
had to wait for a particular level of development, a child does not. This would
explain why, as you later write:
:                     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.

: 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.)

Perhaps, this is news to me. That's not to say, though, that Yaakov Avinu did
or didn't actually put on kosher tephillin. The ma'amer Chazal assumes the
latter. The fact that the two are connected on the teleological level doesn't
mean he didn't do both.

: Now, the capacity for  for keeping basar vechalav was clearly already there,
: but before yetzias mitzrayim, tefillin were obviously not around.

And yet the matzos of parashas Vayeira are taken as indication that the
mal'achim showed up on Pesach! I'm not so sure I'd take your "obviously" as
a given.

Getting on to the other subject, eino metzuveh vi'oseh in general:
: 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.

This is the advantage of scj: you get to explain Yahadus to a group that
includes many Jewishly-ignorant people, and some outright hostile ones. And,
because the discussion goes in circles, you get to practice your lines of
reasoning until you have them well honed.

: 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. )

As we're at a loss to fully explain any mitzvah, particularly a di'Oraisa,
I'm not going to try to get more specific. I'm taking it as a given that the
method exists, because this indirect line of reasoning says so.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 18-Jan-00: Shelishi, Beshalach
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 101a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

>>>Taxonomy? We stuff kishkes, not rabbis. <<<

Taxonomy refers to the scientific study of classification.  You are correct, though, that it should be applied to the world of natural history, not groups of people.

I think there's much misunderstanding here because people aren't clear on what
a reducio ad absurdum (RAA) is. This is a off topic, but for the sake of shalom,
I'm posting it to the list anyway.

The following is the Encylopedia Brittanica on-line entry for RAA
<http://members.eb.com/bol/topic?eu=64595&sctn=1>:
: (Latin: "reduction to absurdity"), in logic, a form of refutation showing
: contradictory or absurd consequences following upon premises as a matter
: of logical necessity. A form of the reductio ad absurdum argument, known as
: indirect proof or reductio ad impossibile, is one that proves a proposition by
: showing that its denial conjoined with other propositions previously proved
: or accepted leads to a contradiction. In common speech the term reductio ad
: absurdum refers to anything pushed to absurd extremes.

Reducio ad absurdum is representable in symbolic logic. Basically you're
saying that if A implies a falsehood, A must be false. Therefore, the fact
that A implies B says nothing about the truth of B. It's as true as algebra.

One mis-application of the idea that was brought here:
: Another argument might be the Religious attitude to Israel. I think it is   
: perfectly rational that one can be theoretically opposed to the State without 
: that requiring him to take the argument to the "absurd" degree of meeting
: with Arafat and Farakhan.

RAA doesn't say "take the position to absurd extremes". It says that if an
argument *could* be taken to absurd extremes, the argument must have a flaw
somewhere. If the reason why someone is opposed to the state is such that it
would justify someone plotting with Arafat against other Jews, that reason
must be incorrect somehow. Therefore, it can't be used justify anything, even
his opposition to the state. Some other reason for opposition may be valid,
but not this one.

If A doesn't really imply a falsehood, then the RAA falls apart. Reducio
ad absurdum is a kind of syllogism. But a syllogism is only as good as its
assumptions. An application of RAA is an argument, and just as possibly
flawed as any other. Which gets us to why the Rihal supported tradition
over philosophy. People can argue either way. But that doesn't make the RAA
itself useless, any more than the Rihal's complaint stopped other Rishonim
from writing sifrei machshava. Perhaps more so, as here we're talking not
about philosophy in general, but the usability of a particular kind of
logical inference.

More importantly, it doesn't make RAA a flavor of ad hominem, which is what
many here are claiming. RAA is about the viability of an argument, not
about comparing the people who believe it's conclusion to those who believe
in the absurd or obviously false one.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 18-Jan-00: Shelishi, Beshalach
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 101a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

RS Newman wrote:

>>have been following this topic in jewish press.  can't get a feel for what
is going on on the ground. are people really going to use it?>>

I live in Flatbush, not BP.  But from what I've seen and heard no one is using 
or going to use the eruv.  Who wants to be meikel in this day and age?

D & E-H Bannett wrote:

>>I often put on the radio or TV a few hours after havdala to hear the news and 
sometimes hear the announcer say Shabbat Shalom.>>

Maybe they were speaking from the korbanos perspective of halailah holech achar 
hayom.

Dr. Meir Shinnar writes that "Mehitzot at nonhasidic weddings are very
recent."  This is correct.  However, it is equally correct that women
dancing is also very recent.  At pre-war and recent post-war German and
Litvishe weddings, women did not dance at all, and men only very briefly.  I
have been told that the only thing about the Chasidim that Reb Aharon
objected to was their conduct at weddings, which he considered much to wild.
Now the chasidic wedding of his time was far more restrained than the
yeshivishe wedding of our time.  Kal veChomer ....  Reb Yaakov made his
oldest children's weddings without a mechitza.  He used a mechitza for the
younger children's weddings.  When asked about it, he said that Chofetz
Chaim stopped eating gebrochts on Pesach in his last years because he said
the matzos were not as reliable as when he was younger.

Levi Reisman

I heard a description as follows:

Loosely:

Chassidim are a alogous to the middos of Yitzchok Avinu, iow they combine
Yiro'h and Gevuro and also the mido of Yitachok to "laugh" or to "play" 

Carrying this analoagy one step further:

Yeshivishe types model Yaakov Avinu (yosheiv Ohalim)
MO'S" model Avrohom Avinu (Chessed, openness to the outside)


Rich Wolpoe



______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
h).

Chassidim are the Yotzei Min HaKlal that prove the Klal 
(exception to the rule that prove the rule, so to speak) -- 
on one hand they do perform many types of Avodat Hashem with 
Simcha -- on the other hand they are among the most fearful 
of "what will this do to us/ how will the yetzer utilize 
this against us?"

<snip>

Shoshana L. Boublil

w/o having seen the sources there is an obvious chiluk.

Walking behind a woman on the street is a perhaps innocentt by product of simply
wlaking in the street, while mixed dancing is "pre-meditated".

Rich Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: mixed dancing 


<< The SA EH 21 says one is not allowed to walk behind a woman.

 Lomadnu dancing me'kal va'chomer.
  >>

Do you mean to tell us that you are noheg halacha l'ma'aseh not walking 
behind a woman???  Lo tasuru if women are dressed properly???

See Kol Bo (66) who cites a cherem placed by MaHaRaM Rotenberg on mixed 
dancing.  (Guess the MaHaRaM also forgot lo tasuru?)

fwiw I was at Ner Yisroel when they banned Times and Newsweek. (circa 1967)

One guy quipped, the reason Times and Newsweek was banned was beause they were 
showing more of what's coming off instead of what's going on! <smile>

Rich Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Avodah V4 #299 


<< Yated itself uses the Internet in a way that has been halachically
 > approved by the special beis din established for Internet issues (e.g., 
 > when it downloaded the NYTimes article).    
 > Comments anyone?>> >>

One question: Along with all of the authoritative restictions on Internet and 
other such smut, has anyone heard "meiachorei hapargod" (perhaps at the 
pre-registration session of last Thannksgiving weekend assembly of gedolei 
Torah) if the New York Times itself was prohibited from being sold, read or 
brought on to the premises of the august assemblage? 

Follow-up question: Has anyone taken a look at the advertisements these days 
in the NY Times especially in Sunday's magazine section?

Follow-up to the follow-up question: Any talk heard in or around Torah 
Umesorah about restricting the delivery of and the study of NY Times in the 
classroom

chaim wasserman

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


[ 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         ]