Avodah Mailing List

Volume 08 : Number 025

Monday, October 22 2001

• Re: varying minhogim re number of neiros Shabbos - two vs. one per family member
• Re: saying Vayichulu on Friday night after shmoneh esreih
• Re: saying Vayichulu on Friday night after shmoneh esreih
• saying Vayichulu on Friday night after shmoneh esreih
• Re: saying Vayichulu on Friday night after shmoneh esreih
• because of the accompanying malochim.
• Re: saying Vayichulu on Friday night after shmoneh esreih
• Re: Birchas Habonim
• Re: rambam's iqqorim
• Re: saying Vayichulu on Friday night after shmoneh esreih
• Re: Lechem Mishna shape
• Techeles
• Re: Dr. Singer on tekhelet
• Re: Techeles
• Re: arba minim at Kotel
• Re: daf yomi question
• Re: Two questions on the Daf Yomi
• Neiros
• Re: saying Vayichulu on Friday night after shmoneh esreih
• Tekhelet and the lev haivri
• Re: Techeles
• Re: Techeles
• Re: saying Vayichulu on Friday night after shmoneh esreih
• Re: neiros Shabbos
• Fwd: Re: Ha'Chovel
• Re: Fwd: Re: Ha'Chovel
• Re: Neiros
• Re: Birchas Habonim

I was asked about my maqor on what was used for neiros Shabbos.
It's
    Keilim miTequfat haMishnah vehaTalmud
    Museon haAretz
    Museon haQaramiqah
    Printed by Arieli Press Ltd, 2nd ed 1979

-mi

From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
> However, I always wondered... If you hold by this shitah, do you make a
> point of not davening Friday night with any qerovim? If you're going
> to treat Vayechulu like eidus, wouldn't this invalidate the kat? Also,
> what about Qiddush once you get home?

My friend R. Sholom expressed similar arguments to me. 

Also, R. Joshua Hoffman told me that the Chazon Ish writes about it in
his sefer on Shabbos (anyone know exactly where?) and says there is no
need to say it with someone else. He thought that he was a yochid in this.

Mordechai

RHS was mfakpek WRT saying vayechulu with eidim, since ain eidus ba-leilah.

Kol tuv,
Moshe

AFAIK the source for having someone else is the MB Siman 268:19.

Chaim G. Steinmetz
cgsteinmetz@juno.com

At 09:24 PM 10/20/01 -0400, Phyllostac@aol.com wrote:
>Many people seem to believe that Vayichulu after shmoneh esreih on Friday
>night must be said with someone else, as it is like eidus (testimony)....

There's a Tziztz Eliezer on it, I think vol. 14 or 14.

Kol Tuv,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

From: MPoppers@kayescholer.com
> ....I privately speculated to SBA that Friday night, when Daddy comes
> home from shul, may have been considered an auspicious time because of
> the accompanying malochim.

See the Otzar Hatefilos siddur (IIRC b'shem the Bsomim Rosh) 3 reasons
for Friday night - one being that the accompanying
malochim also say 'omein' on the brochos..

SBA

Phyllostac@aol.com writes:
> Many people seem to believe that Vayichulu after shmoneh esreih on Friday
> night must be said with someone else, as it is like eidus...

> Recently someone (R. Sholom) told me that the Chazon Ish, IIRC, was
> mifakfeik on this. According to him it is not really necessary, as the
> eidus comparison is not be taken too literally...

One comment might me to look at the Mishna Brura 268:19, who says that
it should preferably be said with a minyan, but should be at least two.
Then he brings two opinions as to whether an individual should say it
alone. I would say that that's reason enough to explain why some are
careful to say it with someone else. (It's because of the eidus aspect
that we say it standing up.)

But I don't believe the eidus analogy was meant to be taken so far as
to disqualify krovim. If it was supposed to be taken literally, there
would have to be three dayanim sitting. Besides, since when did witnesses
testify simultaneously? It was first one and then the other. Obviously,
the comparison extends only to there being two people saying it.

<<< The KSA [131:16] writes that it is a minhag for both fathers and
mothers to bentch their children on Erev YK. But I don't know of any
mother who actually does so. SBA>>>

My wife does as well. She saw this at the home of one of her
rabbi-teachers. Also, FWIW, the Artscroll siddur uses the word "parents"
in the instructions there.

I previously mentioned my gratitude to all those who have contributed to
this topic. I am impressed by the wide variety of minhagim, and how each
has its own specialness which makes it appropriate for those who do it
each way. For those who are considering adopting one or another of the
procedures which have been discussed, let me point out another idea:

When my children are away for Shabbos, either at a friend or yeshiva
or camp or whatever, I try to reach them by phone and give them their
bracha on Erev Shabbos afternoon. When that is not practical, I try to
do it at some other time within the Wednesday-to-Tuesday spread which
relates to each Shabbos. I'm not sure how well this option would work
for those who give these brachos silently.

(No, I have no sources for this practice. I think I came up with it on
my own. It just seemed natural. If other people do this, I'd like to
hear about it.)

Akiva Miller

From: "Michael Frankel" <michaeljfrankel@hotmail.com>
> Guys, guys -- you're losing sight of the ball. The issue is not whether
> the majority agreed with rambam...
>                 The TUM focus is rather on whether some disagreed and
> whether such disagreement caused them to be regarded as heretics. To
> which he answers yes to the former and no to the latter....

While we are discussing methodological points and not just the facts,
I'd just like to toss in a comment of the Rambam in his famous letter
regarding the validity of astrology

"I know of course that it is possible to search and find isolated opinions
of some of the sages in the Talmud and Midrashim whose views contradict
[what I have said]... These statements should not trouble you because
one doesn't simply discard a clearly established halacha and revert back
to the initial analysis. Similarly it is not appropriate to discard a
well validated principle and simply rely on a minority opinion of the
sages instead. That is because the sage [is not infallible and ] might
have erred by overlooking some important facts or hints when he stated
his views. Alternatively he might have stated his view only concerning a
unique situation that had been presented to him and he had not meant to
state a general principle. This caution is illustrated by the fact that
many verses of the Torah are not meant to be taken literally - as has been
clearly established by impeccable proofs. Therefore they are explained
in a way that makes sense rather than taken literally. The general rule
is that a person should never easily toss aside his well considered
views... His eyes should look unflinchingly forward and not backwards."

                                             Daniel Eidensohn

On Sun, 21 Oct 2001, Chaim G Steinmetz wrote:
> AFAIK the source for having someone else is the MB Siman 268:19.

and in thre MB with comments from the Chazon Ish in the back he says there
is no need.

From: RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com
> FWIW, I grew up with square Challos that were made in a way to resemble a
> composite of 6 small rolls - something like today's break-way Challos...
> Thus lechem mishna with these Challos would be tantamount to "shtayim
> she'heim Shtaym esrai"

FWIW, I started buying (when the women in my household don't bake)
elongated Challot, as opposed to round or elliptical ones, after reading
(I believe in the Kaf HaChaim) that the combination of one's two hands
(5 fingers each) with the straight Challah, and the Perusah, which is the
small piece that one eats, together form Yud Kay Vav Kay, where the 2
"Kays" are the 2 hands, the straight Challah looks like a Vav and the
small Perusah is the Yud.

Stuart Goldstein  

There is an expert on the list who has a wonderful essay that resides in an 
early version on my hard drive on the topic, Rabbi Chaim Twerski. If he 
grants permission, I would be happy to post it here.

[He did. However, you can find that essay on the web already, at
<http://www.tekhelet.com/pdf/tw01.pdf>. Response to the article from
R' Aaron Goldstein along with further emails from both RCT and RAS is
available at <http://www.aishdas.org/articles/itc_mail.htm>. -mi]

For the sake of informational purposes only, I note that I wear Techeles,
two blue strings tied like the Radhzyner, on my tallis kotton, but
"regular" white strings on my tallis gadol (that's both weekday and
Shabos TG).

Kol Tuv,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

On Saturday 20 October 2001 20:33, you wrote:
>                                     Oh - the unscrupulous Italian
> chemist story - this is a fabrication. Rabbi Herzog made up the story
> in his dissertation, but he was honest enough to state that this was
> entirely a speculation without any shred of evidence to any part of the
> whole story. Rabbi Herzog speculates on the why's of puzzling unresolved
> matters throughout his dissertation. He wasn't trying to fool anyone.

Could anybody elaborate? Where did rav Herzog state he made up the story? 
Where is the story quoted and taken seriously (I mean what was Ptil's source 
for quoting this story)? Why did rav Herzog make up such a story? Does that 
raise any questions of credibility in this matter?

Arie Folger

In a message dated Mon, 22 Oct 2001 10:30:54am EDT, "R' Yosef Gavriel
Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> writes:
> For the sake of informational purposes only, I note that I wear Techeles,
> two blue strings tied like the Radhzyner, on my tallis kotton, but
> "regular" white strings on my tallis gadol (that's both weekday and
> Shabos TG).

What was your reasoning for differentiating between Talis katan and gadol
(pshara?)

KT
Joel RIch

R. Gershon Dubin: <I wonder if there is any element of lulav nitel shiva
bemikdash included in this practice.>

R. Carl Sherer: <Yes, that's why Rav Elyashiv (and thousands of other
people, including me) go to the Kotel during Chol haMoed -- to be choshesh
for the Rambam and the possibility of there being a d'oraysa even today. I
thought it was understood when I mentioned Rav Scheinberg's tnai of matana
al mnas l'hachzir even during Chol HaMoed (sorry I wasn't clearer).>

R. Yitzchok Willroth: <Funny, Briskers don't go on Chol HaMoed for
precisely the same reason...>

R. Lawrence Teitelman: <Even if their Daled Minim didn't meet the
de-Oraysa standards, wouldn't they still be fulfilling (the Rabbinic)
Takanas RYBZ to take it "All Seven [Days]" which is all they would be
fulfilling if they don't go.>

I ask m'hila of everyone who has been involved in this discussion and
certainly of R. Elyashiv and R. Sheinberg for not understanding, but I
must be missing some things.

This is the way I have learned the issues:

1) according to the rishonim who are holeq on the Rambam and interpret
miqdosh vs. g'vulin as Beis haMiqdosh vs. everywhere else, there is
of course no point whatsoever of being by the Kotel. The Kotel is the
retaining wall of Har haBayis according to everyone, and therefore not
only outside the Beis haMiqdosh but also outside Har haBayis.

2) According to the Rambam, miqdosh means the city of Yerushalayim. So
there is a difference between being in Yerushalayim vs. outside, but
there is NO difference between being in Yerushalayim, being at the Kotel,
being inside Har haBayis, or being inside Beis haMiqdosh. One can argue
(probably correctly) that Yerushalayim according to the Rambam means
only what is inside the walls of the old city that Hazal were m'qaddesh,
which excludes all of the new city and some of the Old City as well,
but it certainly includes the Jewish Quarter, according to everyone. So
there should be no difference between davening in one of the shuls in
the Rova' haYehudi and at the Kotel.

3) According to the Rambam, taqqonas Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai applies
only up until the time when the Beis haMiqdosh is rebuilt, may it soon be
so. At that point, as he says in Hil. Lulav, once again the lulav will
be taken outside Yerushalayim only on the first day of Sukkos, and in
Yerushalayim all seven days. Therefore, since everybody (correct me if
I am wrong) takes the lulav and makes a b'rokho on it all seven days,
we are holding that the Beis haMiqdosh has not been rebuilt. According
to the Rambam, when the Beis haMiqdosh is in its Hurban, there is NO
difference between miqdosh and g'vulin (since, according to the Rambam,
all of the Yerushalayim is in Hurban halakhically), and everywhere the
first day is d'orayso and all other days are d'rabbonon. This applies
to the New City, the Old City, the Jewish Quarter, the Kotel, and the
places on the Har haBayis that one could go (if we knew where those
places were, to reference another thread), as well as Chicago, London,
and Melbourne. There is no d'orayso for the other 6 days even in the
m'qom haMiqdosh, according to the Rambam, if people take lulav on the
other 6 days outside Yerushalayim.

According to 1) or 2) or 3) there is no point whatsoever in going to
the Kotel.

There MAY be a point in davening in the Rova' haYehudi. As Micha has
said, there is an idea that you are m'qayyem something if you can see the
m'qom haMiqdosh. There are several nice locations in the Rova' haYehudi
where you can see a lot of Har haBayis, and ignoring our quibbles about
where the Beis haMiqdosh actually would be, it is certainly somewhere
there. And if you want to reenact in your mind bringing the lulav to
the Beis haMiqdosh when it is rebuilt, it may be a nice idea to take
lulav where you can see the m'qom haMiqdosh. But you cannot from the
Kotel plaza, so what is the point? I would venture to say that taking
lulav at the Kotel, like the mass birkat Kohanim which has become the
custom in recent years, and like davening at the Kotel is strictly an
emotional thing. There is no halakhic point in any of these, no hiddur
'al pi halokho, but people may feel uplifted from the experience. That,
of course, is a matter of taste, v'al ta'am vareiah etc. But halokho
is dovor hashove l'khol nefesh, and as far as I can tell, there is no
halakhic inyan here at all. I would also point out, in my self-appointed
role as one of the list's historians, that all of these are new minhogim
that do not go back beyond '67, so they scarcely can be claimed to be
"minhag Yerushalayim." [Since our non-moderator non-moderates the
list, it appears to me that anyone can appoint himself to whatever
non-function on the list he likes, as long as he maintains his function
and others do not protest. Upon protest, I shall be happy to abdicate my
non-position. R. Micha's is the only non-position which involves a lot
of work, and I'm sure he will inform us when other list members start
clamoring to take over his responsibilities.]

Can someone enlighten me as to what the s'voro is that people have so
that I can quibble with it?

As to R. Willroth's comment regarding Brisker's not going to the Kotel:
I assume this means talmidim in Yeshivas Brisk. The Soloveitchik family
did not go to the Kotel ever to daven, so why would hol haMo'ed be any
different. And like R. Teitelman, I am left bewildered about the s'voro.

Even if you are curmudgeonly enough to ignore all of my well-reasoned
arguments above about why there is no inyan to go to the Kotel
specifically, if you DID think there was an inyan and you might possibly
be m'qayyem a mitzva d'orayso, why would you not run to go? Because of
a sofeq that you might not be m'qayyem the mitzva in its most m'huddar
form? The only argument NOT to put yourself in a situation where you might
be m'qayyem one of HQB'H's mitzvos would be if you were losing something
by putting yourself in that situation. I argued that that is the case
by sofeq t'kheles. But here if your lulav were posul, what would you
be losing? The punishment for making a b'rokho l'vattolo is exactly the
same, as far as I know, for a b'rokho l'vattolo over a d'orayso mitzvo
as over a d'rabbonon mitzvo. So what is it that you are losing by going
to the Kotel? Again I am bewildered, and need some explanation so that
I may quibble some more.

Seth Mandel

In a message dated 10/19/01 3:27:01pm EDT, levaynim@optonline.net writes:
>                        The netziv was asked as to the permissibility of
> having a special Kriyas hatorah as part of of a Hachnasas Sefer Torah
> procession. He answered that one may do so only on Monday and Thursday
> as those days were part of the Takanah as opposed to other days. Perhaps
> the meaning of the term mafsik here is to be understood to the exclusion

IMHO Lav Davka that is how he learns the Gemara, but in any case "Ee
Tanya Tanya"

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

>> Bkitzur, here it means language and Brmiza.

> How is that different than Rashi 

It is a combination of the Rashi's in Sotah and Yevomos.

> and why is the fact that the man knew chochmas yevanis relevant to the story?

Because he did not want those on the inside to understand what he was saying 
to those on the outside.

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

R' Yitzchok Zirkind:
> This Minhag is brought and explained in the Lkutei MAHaRYaCH.

The Likutei MAHaRYaCH was a talmid of the grandfather of the Satmar
rebbe....

See also "Pardes HaMelech" a sefer that discusses Minhagim of Ruzhiner
chassidim on Shabbas and their sources where this is brought as
halacha. In the footnotes, they work hard at showing this is not a
Lubavitch only inyan citing the above work as well as Belzer chassidim's
"Dvar Yom b'yomo", the CHasam Sofer....a sefer called "Mateh Moshe" (who
is this by???) which is cited by the Lubab. Rebbe in Likutei Sichos 11,
289 as one to see but that he did not have in hand....they write that
this minhag follows Shabbas 23b where the gemara says lighting candles
is a way to have talmidim hachamim as well as many other reasons people
have already cited....

Chaim

In a message dated 10/21/01 4:29:57pm EDT, RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com writes:
> Perhaps w/o a 2nd person there is mamash no need to make up a missed
> Vaychulu. IIRC according to Tosafos Vayechulu is ONLY a din a on YT
> shechal beshabbos because on those occasions Vayechulu is omitted from
> the Amidah....

The Eliyohu Rabba Al Asar (O"C 268) says that even for the reason of
Y"T Shechal Bshabos a Yochid need repeat every Shabos, he adds other
reasons which require a Yochid to repeat, while as mentioned by many the
M"B that requires 2, while according to the Taz it should not be said
standing, the Rav in Kuntres Achron # 2 (268) holds that a Yochid does
say it and standing, and see Kaf Hachayim # 36 that even women should
say it standing.

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

Michael Frankel  writes
>                               By what perspective has r. schlesinger
> been transmuted into a "poseq of great stature"?. Surely the idea would
> have sounded odd to his 19th century contemporaries who deliberately left
> his name off of public "pisqei halochoh" precisely because of his light
> weight status. The lev ho'ivri certainly ought not be (and never was)
> accounted a work of p'saq...                               r. hillel
> lichtenstein who, unlike his son-in-law r. akivah, was an acknowledged
> talmid chochom, who waged an uncompromising crusade against not only
> reformers but against frumme yidden who might be tainted with the
> slightest shemetz of modernizing tendencies -- such as learning and
> qal v'chomer/chas v'sholom speaking the local language....

Akiva yosef was truly a firebrand but I think for us to decide who was
really a "poseq of great stature" or for that matter "a poseq of NOT
GREAT stature" best be left to He who knows these things.

However , this not wide appreciated individual wrote quite a number
of books including, lev haivri, naar a hivri, a 5 vol perush on
chumash'kollel haivrim which was his vision of a religious, agricultural
society in Israel. He actually attempted to purchase a large plot of
land south of chevron for that purpose but it failed. Ultimately ,
Petach Tikva was partly his brainchild. He envisioned a mostly learning
but also working idyllic society. He formed a organization called chevra
lemaan hchzarat ateret leyoshna for setteling Israel. Another book ,
bet yosef chadash. He was instrumental in preventing a Reform orphanage
from opening in Jerusalem and chevron. He wrote many tshuvot , in fact
there is even a Lev Haivri Institute with unpublished manuscripts and
his great grandson told me that there are over 2000! unpublished tshuvot.

He is most well known for his blowing the shofar on Rosh Hashana whenit
fell on shabbat in 1881.Rav Tukichinsky in Ir Hakodesh Vehamikdash writes
that Rav Salant said whoeve wants to go hear I will not prevent. The
tone of Tukichinsky is one of Rav Salants acceptance of the Issue.

Clearly he was no slouch and a major figure in the Yishuv Hayashan. His
sharp tongue got him in trouble with the kollelim when he suggested
monetary impropriet and he experienced death threats.

To indicate that he was his father in laws lackey is incorrect. He
was a brilliant, thinker, halachist, a prolific writer, who is little
appreciated today.

Dr. Ari Greenspan

At 10:35 AM 10/22/01 -0400, Joelirich@aol.com wrote:
>What was your reasoning for differentiating between Talis katan and gadol
>(pshara?)

Why make statements?

Kol Tuv,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

: At 10:35 AM 10/22/01 -0400, Joelirich@aol.com wrote:
: >What was your reasoning for differentiating between Talis katan and gadol
: >(pshara?)

On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 04:08:44PM -0400, RYGB wrote:
: Why make statements?

Since every time I've seen you, the tzitzis on your tallis qatan were worn
outside, I'm not sure how that's less of a statement.

In any case, are you arguing that techeiles today is a hiddur, a safeiq,
or something else? Is this a question of not being chayav enough to warrant
perishah min hatzibur?

Please elaborate.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 For a mitzvah is a lamp,
micha@aishdas.org            And the Torah, its light.
http://www.aishdas.org                       - based on Mishlei 6:2
Fax: (413) 403-9905          

The comparison to Eidim is brought in the Klei Nosi'm Al Asar, OTOH we find 
Al Derech Zeh, WRT saying of Korbonos in the morning that are Unishalma Porim 
Sfoseinu, nonetheless it does not require a Kohein and can be said sitting, 
(S"A Horav Mahadura Basra 1:9 vs. S"A Horav Mahadura Kamma 1:14), but cannot 
be said by night.

[In a second email... -mi]

In a message dated 10/22/01 9:51:10am EDT, targum1@juno.com writes:
> Besides, since when did witnesses

The Klei Nosi'im Al Asar deal with this question.

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

In a message dated 10/21/01 11:02:50am EDT, RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com writes:
> Hypothesis: A lo plug takkanah was paskened so that all New Mothers
> had to add a candle So if they did light fine. And If they missed
> no one would know because ALL new Mothers added a candle regardless.
> Thus the New Mother would be relieved of the pressure to light during
> her first Shabbos.

While the Sevara behind this is nice, since Al Pi Halacha, an Ones need not 
make up, then no one would need to light another candle, further so called 
Takana would need be recorded.

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

From a Chicago "Talmid":
>The other side of that is that the Christians tend to embody Chessed (at 
>least now-a-days) without regard to the mitigating force of Din.  For 
>example the concept of turn the other cheek.  We, on the other hand, have 
>a much more precise method balancing the two (Tiferet).

Great He'oroh!

BTW, I hope everyone is aware that Rav Yosef's seudah on today's daf is the 
source of Bar Mitzvah celebrations. Interesting the tzu shtell between this 
RY and his statement about "Kamma Yosef Ikka b'Shukka" in Pesachim 68.

Kol Tuv,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 04:11:44PM -0400, RYGB quoted a Chicago "Talmid" who
wrote:
: The other side of that is that the Christians tend to embody Chessed (at 
: least now-a-days) without regard to the mitigating force of Din.  For 
: example the concept of turn the other cheek.  We, on the other hand, have 
: a much more precise method balancing the two (Tiferet).

And Islam seems to have forgotten chessed, following what they believe to
be din alone.

"Turn the other cheek" is akin to Yeshaiah 50:6, where the navi speaks of
offering his cheek to someone who tore out his beard. Yet also to the
derogatory comment of and Eichah 3:30, where offering a cheek to someone
who hit you is part of the aveilus and kapparah.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 For a mitzvah is a lamp,
micha@aishdas.org            And the Torah, its light.
http://www.aishdas.org                       - based on Mishlei 6:2
Fax: (413) 403-9905          

In a message dated 10/22/01 12:24:13pm EDT, hgschild@hotmail.com writes:
> a sefer called "Mateh Moshe" (who
> is this by???) which is cited by the Lubab. Rebbe in Likutei Sichos 11,

The Sefer Mateh Moshe from a Talmid of the MaHaRShaL (5300-5366), is brought 
in the Likutei Sichos as a source that the 2 candles correspond to husband 
and wife, (as is the reference to the E"R).

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

On 21 Oct 01, at 22:31, kennethgmiller@juno.com wrote:
> When my children are away for Shabbos, either at a friend or yeshiva
> or camp or whatever, I try to reach them by phone and give them their
> bracha on Erev Shabbos afternoon. When that is not practical, I try to
> do it at some other time within the Wednesday-to-Tuesday spread which
> relates to each Shabbos. I'm not sure how well this option would work
> for those who give these brachos silently.

I also try to catch my kids in advance if they are not going to be home
for Shabbos. With the son who is in Yeshiva, that often means giving
him his bracha Sunday morning if the following Shabbos is an in Shabbos.

-- 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.

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


[ 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         ]