Avodah Mailing List

Volume 11 : Number 053

Tuesday, August 12 2003

• Re: Someich Noflim
• Re: minhag ashkenaz
• Re: TIDE
• Re: Ahavas Chinam?
• Re: ['kabel brachamim...
• Re: technique to allow Kohanim to visit kever - legitimate ?
• Re: Maseces Midos on Tisha Bav
• Re: RSRH
• Adv: Shabbos, 23 Elul: Ana avda deKBH?
• Re: Pinocchio and the Yetzer Hara
• Somech
• Someich Noflim
• Re: Maseces Midos on Tisha Bav
• 9th of Av talk
• Why a TC may not live to a ripe old age
• Re: TuM and TIDE
• Re: TIDE
• Re: Ahavas Chinam?
• Re: Pinocchio and the Yetzer Hara
• Re: Why a TC may not live to a ripe old age
• Re: chazal and science
• Re: mussar vs psak

In Avodah V11 #51, GDubin posited:
> in the same way HKB"H does not allow us to fall, but supports us so we 
> don't

Under that theory, isn't "somaich nof'lim" out of place in conjunction
with "m'chayeh maisim...v'rofai cholim umatir asurim..." (Divine activity
to reverse a given state of affairs) in the 2nd b'rocho of the Amidah?

All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ

R Eli Turkel wrote:
> So I would presume to say that Dr. Agus v'sayyasom were/are probably happy
> that Tosafos preserved oral and mimetic traditions but probably squirmed
> when he did so using Pilpulistic methods instead of stating more clearly
> what he was doing.

I think the position is that Tosafos didn't actually set out to do this.
Rather, if you believe that sha"s is the ultimate repository of TSBP,
and that minhag Ashkenaz is part of TSBP, then mima nafshach you're
going to end up assuming that peshat in the gemara is consistant with
minhag Ashkenaz. They weren't using pilpul to be meyasheiv the two as
much as using pilpul to make sense of the gemara, and their belief in
minhag Ashkenaz coloring their assumptions of what the gemara must mean.

Which is why they don't try to deny the obvious that most of Tosafos is
their attempts to be meyasheiv the gemara before us with other gemaros.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 The mind is a wonderful organ
micha@aishdas.org            for justifying decisions
http://www.aishdas.org       the heart already reached.
Fax: (413) 403-9905

RYGB wrote:
>>It says there that he greatly displeased R. S. Bruer who asked him; So,
>> what do you think of my Ortodox yidden?" He answered (earning R. Bruer's
>> displeasure for many years) "by comparing them to an ice cream "They are
>> koshe Jews, of course, but they exude such a ...coldness. They don't have a
>> fiery, warm heart of a Jew in Galicia".
...
>>I read someting semilar in the name of R. A. Eliah Kaplan as well.

> I tend to doubt that he said it just that way...

I seem to recall a comment of his about surprise at his success in planting
the seeds of mussar in cold German soil...

-mi

RYGB:
> Zohl zein "unearned." But much love is "unearned." Almost all love is
> "unearned." So what is the tosefes of "chinam" then?

Is this true? Bein av libeno, certainly. But bein ish le'ishto? Love is
the product of working, quite hard, at a relationship.

And even if it were true that most love was unearned, most people don't
sufficiently love beyond their own clan with any sort of ahavah, chinam
or not. Kayadu'ah the tosefes of chinam was to make the parallel to
sin'as chinam and the causes of churban bayis. Chinam need not be the
ikkar of the ma'amar.

I don't think the essence and gift from HQBH vs attribute that one
acquires on one's own is all that daq, but that's an issue of ta'am
varei'ach.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 The mind is a wonderful organ
micha@aishdas.org            for justifying decisions
http://www.aishdas.org       the heart already reached.
Fax: (413) 403-9905

Whether or not one says the pesuqim out loud, they make worthy kavanos to
have in mind while listening and answering amein.. After all, they shed
light on how generations of yiddn understood the corresponding lines of
Qaddish by showing which pesuqim they thought were relevent to the theme.

-mi

 From what I understand of this method, it is utilizing the concept that
an ohel need be only 1 cubic tefach. Therefore, the kohen has a small
ohel under each foot to stop the tumah from rising to him. Makes sense,
but what about in between his legs? Or his arms that extend beyond
his feet? Unless since rosho ve-rubo are above these mini-ohels (are
they?) then he is OK. I'm not so sure about this contraption.

Gil Student

From: "Carl M. Sherer" <cmsherer@fandz.com>
> On 10 Aug 2003 at 22:09, Zeliglaw@aol.com wrote:
>> Isn't the MB in the BH quite adamant that
>> it is better to learn after chatzos than to batul the day away?

> I believe that the BH to which you are referring (553:2 s"v v'lachen)
> is referring to Erev Tisha b'Av (while the SA is referring to Erev Tisha
> b'Av that comes out on Shabbos, the MB says that he is meikil to learn
> even on Erev Tisha b'Av during the week).

There is an interesting Levush that mentions an apparently prevelant
minhag in his time of davening maariv early at the end of Tisha B'av
(presumably so that the masses can get home and eat "on time"); after
which some stay in shul and learn their gemara seder (before nightfall).
This minhag is rejected by the Levush (and he quotes those that say
that one who is lenient on anything before nacht should be ostracized)
as the issur of Talmud Torah is all day, and the only kula after chatzos
is regarding sitting on the ground which is a minhag and not a rabbinic
prohibition. Davening maariv does not make it "night" for any of the
Tisha b'av issurim including the issur of learning.

Any thoughts on how the minhag started and on what it may be based?

Al derech ha speculation, I think that it may have been analogized to
teaching, which may be permitted, since it is a required task, and not
a pleasurable activity per se. Similarly, the historical chevra Shas
or asara batlanim was supported by the community so learning was their
"task." So why not learn earlier in the day? Because the thought in depth
(iyun) would be msameach es halev which would be assur. So the first
read-through of the blatt text was done prior to the end of the day,
since the required quota (a task) is not assur, and by the time that
the sugya would begin to be developed b'iyun, it would already be nacht!
How great were the doros harishonim who sought ways to study Torah to the
maximum allowed! On very empty stomachs! (Incidentally, some say that
the issur of learning on erev Tisha Bav is due to the fact the ensuing
pleasure from the learning will linger on into the night; So it is all
very consistent).

While the minhag was originally apparently somewhat tolerated, it was
not deemed acceptable by the poskim, as it was too "creative" of an
interpretation.

Avraham

In Avodah V11 #51, SBAbeles wrote:
> From: "Avi" <>
>> Little know fact: RSRH's name was not R' Shamshon (or Shimshon) Rephael.
>> It was R' Shamshon BEN Rephael.

> You sure his shem kodesh  wasn't Shimshon ?

Meta Bechhofer shetichyeh a'm'v'sh' insisted his name was Shamshon,
not Shimshon, and yes, that aspect surprised me, too. In the context
of our conversation, I believe she was referring to his shem kodesh,
i.e. it was Shamshon ben R'foel (as indicated by Avi).

All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ

			    Rosh Hashanah is coming.
			      Can we honestly say
			  Ana avda diKudsha berich Hu?

		  Join AishDas for our first annual program of
	 s'hiurei da'as, shmuessin, and ruachdik davening and se'udos

			    A Shabbos of preparation
			 for an audience with the King

		      23 Elul, 5763 - September 19,20 2003
				  Passaic, NJ


It's a Shabbos of AishDas's blend of mussar, machshavah and deveikus. Not
a program /about/ mussar or deveiqus, but actual immersion in the ru'ach.
A small taste of the atmosphere of Elul.

Davening with song and hispa'alus. Shi'urei da'as and that really make you
think. Pachad Yitzchak about the anniversary of the akeida. Reflections
back to the spirit of Elul in Slabodka. Practical guidance in the art of
teshuvah. Meals that border on kumzitzen.

Join us.

Email me for more info.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 A cheerful disposition is an inestimable treasure.
micha@aishdas.org            It preserves health, promotes convalescence,
http://www.aishdas.org       and helps us cope with adversity.
Fax: (413) 403-9905                - R' SR Hirsch, "From the Wisdom of Mishlei"

Re Piocchio drasha, and the comment:
> There are four possibilities:
> 1. Identifying with both the YhT and YhR
> 2. Identifying with only the YhT
> 3. Identifying with only the YhR
> 4. Identifying with neither

There is a fascinating mussar talk of the Saba MeSlabodka, R Natan Zvi
Finkel: called Binyan and Hurban. He posits that thru churban there is
another , better binyan . This is based on his interpretation of the
midrash " HKBH built worlds and destroyed them" before briat HaOlam. The
Saba seems to claim that only thru making trials / which turn out to
be mistakes we can correct them and build a better world. Just as HKBH
did. Only the failed attempt aloows an improved effort.

The sicha is pretty "radical" and worthy of a lot of study and thought,
appropriate for hodesh Av.

Some interpret the Sicha that the Saba was talking to talmidim who are
facing the world (and not being perfect, they are nichshal in thought or
deed), and doesn't take a mussar-morose position on chet, but a positive
upbeat angle.

At any rate the sicha is fascinating and open to practical interpretation
and historical analysis.

One Rav told me he believes the Saba was refering to Zionism (being a
trial to build on, and that the sicha comes from the Eretz Yisrael period
of the Saba, when he was in the Hevron-Slabodka Yeshiva after 1925.
Any comments from our Mussar mumchim?

Dov A Bloom
dovb@netvision.net.il
02-9963196
058-903727 

I would translate somech as stabilize, which would indicate a process
of rehabilitation

See tehlim 37:24

Which reads, beginning with v. 23:
Mei'Hashem mitzadei gever konanu v'darko yechpatz. Ki yipol lo yutal ki
Hashem somech yado.

These are the only two times that SOMECH is used in tehilim, which I think
strengthens my suggestion. The modern Hebrew would lend itself even more to
that interpretation the age old question is to what extent does the modern
usage reflect ancient intent.

Ari Kahn

> I would translate somech as stabilize, which would indicate a process
> of rehabilitation
...
> Mei'Hashem mitzadei gever konanu v'darko yechpatz. Ki yipol lo yutal ki
> Hashem somech yado.

Not a bad proof, although I am not 100% convinced that "Somech Hashem
l'kol hanoflim" is the same semichah as the one here.

YGB

On 11 Aug 2003 at 23:36, Allswang wrote:
> From: "Carl M. Sherer" <cmsherer@fandz.com>
>> I believe that the BH to which you are referring (553:2 s"v
>> v'lachen) is referring to Erev Tisha b'Av (while the SA is referring
>> to Erev Tisha b'Av that comes out on Shabbos, the MB says that he is
>> meikil to learn even on Erev Tisha b'Av during the week).

> There is an interesting Levush that mentions an apparently prevelant
> minhag in his time of davening maariv early at the end of Tisha B'av
> (presumably so that the masses can get home and eat "on time"); after
> which some stay in shul and learn their gemara seder (before
> nightfall). This minhag is rejected by the Levush (and he quotes those
> that say that one who is lenient on anything before nacht should be
> ostracized) as the issur of Talmud Torah is all day, and the only kula
> after chatzos is regarding sitting on the ground which is a minhag and
> not a rabbinic prohibition. Davening maariv does not make it "night"
> for any of the Tisha b'av issurim including the issur of learning.

> Any thoughts on how the minhag started and on what it may be based?

I think it would depend on when they davened Ma'ariv. I could see 
davening Ma'ariv so that you finish at shkiya and then learning until 
Tzeis. That would not be a real issur of Talmud Torah (at best, being 
mosif to Tisha b'Av is minhag). My guess is that it was very 
difficult for people in the Lvush's time to make a real seder after 
Tzeis (and likely after eating) because most people did not own 
sforim and the Batei Medrash were (IIUC) outside of town. So the 
minhag tried to accomadate them by letting them learn right after 
shkiya. They davened Ma'ariv early so that people would not make a 
mistake and think it was mutar to learn on Tisha b'Av itself late in 
the day. But this is pure speculation on my part....

> Al derech ha speculation, I think that it may have been analogized to
> teaching, which may be permitted, since it is a required task, and not
> a pleasurable activity per se. 

How is teaching Torah permitted on Tisha b'Av except with respect to 
things that are permitted to be learned on Tisha b'Av? In R. Pinkus' 
Galus v'Nechama, there are certain sichot in which there is a 
footnote on the first page that indicates that it was delivered on 
Tisha b'Av (mostly Leil Tisha b'Av) and I understood that footnote to 
be an indication that sicha may be learned on Tisha b'Av (if anyone 
thinks I'm wrong, I have a way to check...). 

Similarly, the historical chevra Shas
> or asara batlanim was supported by the community so learning was their
> "task." 

But you're not allowed to do any "task" on Tisha b'Av. Although 
there's not an outright issur m'lacha, Chazal say that one who 
"works" on Tisha b'Av will never see a siman bracha from that work. 
Why would learning be any different? 

I think it also bears pointing out that the Biur Halacha is not being 
matir learning on Erev Tisha b'Av l'chatchila. He is matir only 
because b'avonoseinu ha'rabbim, not learning means that we engage in 
prohibited forms of speech. And he considers that important enough 
that he says that because of all the prohibited speech, if he could 
do so, he would do away with the minhag of not learning on Tisha b'Av 
altogether. 

May we all be privileged to learn next Tisha b'Av together with 
Mashiach Tzidkeinu....

-- 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. 

[RAK mentioned on Areivim that he gave a talk on 9 be'Av, to which RnTK
responded:]
> So give us a little taste--what did you say?

I gave 3 talks on Tisha Bav, morning Aish Hatorah, late morning MATAN,
between mincha and maariv in the shul in Givat Zev.

The first in Aish hatorah I showed how the three sins responsible for
the destruction of the First temple GA SD AZ, are related to the first
three sins in history.

Eating a fruit and thinking you will be like G-d has elements of AZ.
Kain was guilty or SD

The situation leading up to the flood was GA - see commentary of the
Ibn Ezra.

These three sins resulted in exile, exile - and wandering, and churban.
At the golden calf all three sins were joined together, made the egel,
killed Chur, got up to party, according to Rashi this is GA. (this
whole approach is a chapter in my book Emanations - essays on holidays
<http://arikahn.tripod.com/emanations/>, if anyone wants a copy of this
article I would be happy to email it)

These three sins represent the "klipa" of Avraham Yitzchak and Yakov.
Yishamel represented GA, Esev SD, and the Arev Rav AZ. When the first
Temple period represented in emulating Yishmael, Esev, and Arev Rav,
instead of Avraham Yitzchak and Yakov the Temple was destroyed.

Second Temple is Sinat Chinam which is apparently at least equal to these
three, because the Galus has been so much longer. I developed the idea of
how Sinat Chinam is the opposite of Love your neighbor as your self. The
next verse in the chumash (Vayikra 19:19) deals with Shatnez, this seems
unrelated. Cited the Midrash that Shatnez is the result of the murder
of Hevel, and the two brothers represented wool and linen. The murder
showed that he felt his brother was generic and therefore expendable, the
resulting mitzvah, is an articulation of the world needing more Kedusha
(GRA). When we fulfill this Chok, we should have in mind the uniqueness
of each individual. This second part is based on two chapters in my book
on Chumash; Explorations <http://arikahn.tripod.com/>, Again if anyone
wants I can email the relevant chapters.

This is a synopses of talk #1, if there is interest I can try and provide
a synopsis of Talk #2 it dealt with the interaction between Chet Hagel,
Miraglim and Sale of Yosef.

Ari Kahn

[Bounced from Areivim. Subject line mine. -mi]

Yesterday I mentioned the Steipler's Chayei Olam - why people in Torah
learning may not live to a ripe old age.

I looked it up again, here's what it says:

Chayei Olam Ch. 13, pg 85-86.

(Quoting the "6th perek" of Avos:) Tanya: Torah is great is it provides
life for those that do it, both in this and the next world.

... If - after he merited a long life due to his torah learning - he
does an aveira that deserves death by Beth Din and is killed, by his
sin he has lost what he already deserved.

Similarly if he sins and deserves death from heaven and heaven thus
decrees, he has caused his own loss of what he previously earned.

(Regarding what sins could cause this) ... even somebody who merely
transgresses Divrei Chazal, Chazal say he deserves to be killed by heaven.

... Sometimes a tzadik will die before his time when in heaven they see
he is about to be spoilt Chas veSholom and will thereby lose his merits.
Similar to a farmer who knows just when to pick his figs...

The rule is that the reward Chazal promised for dealing with Torah &
Mitzvos is on condition that he doesn't do an opposite action that will
make him lose it.

(He then goes on to say that ultimately the reward will be given -
in the world to come, if needed.)

End of "quote".

You will notice:

- No mention of the possibility he is a "korban" to atone for the rest
of us.

- No blame is given to the sins of the generation.

- No hiding behind: The ways of Hashem are hidden, there's no way to
know what the deal is.

- The only "limud zchus" that a tzadik dies early is that (if he hasn't
done something to deserve it, is) he's about to go rotten.

Food for thought...

- Danny

RRW wrote:
> Unfortunately, RIETS is largely giving up on the pragmatic
> aspects of having well-rounded poskim, and is still mired in a Torah
> lishma mindset. That is why when I went to Riets - a year of ksubbos
> and a year of Baba Kamma counted, nevertheless I got zero exposure to
> hilchos Nidah, Geirus, Mikvah etc.

That was then and this is now: we did learn niddah, geirut and more, which is 
why RIETS lengthened the amount of time required for smikhah from 2 years (a 
loooong time ago) to 4 years.

Let me add that the extra time and the practical halakhah studied, including 
but not limited to tshuvot was worth every minute. (A) it increased our 
knowledge in G'd's Torah, and (b) I do get questions in many of these areas.

BTW, I agree that YU is more like the Hildesheimer seminary than Frankfurt, 
for a variety of reasons:
* Austritt doesn't play a big role in YU, and just like at the HS, YU RYs 
sometimes speak Austritt, sometimes unity, sometimes don't take sides.
* the emphasis on the particular culture of one particular place (i.e. 
Germany) doesn't play a role in either YU or HS, while it did in RSRH's 
thought, as he considered the German goyim to be on the way to achieve a form 
of humanistic shleimut
* YU uses me'hqar a lot more than RSRH would agree to. For RSRH, science and 
humanities lived within the ethical sphere, but outside that of halakhah and 
massorah. For both the HS and YU, science and humanities can tell us things 
about halakhah and massorah, although in an age of a prominent, clearly 
conservative JTS, YU treads a lot more carefully than RDTzH and RYYW used to.

However, I wouldn't say that YU is anti kehillah. YU is in fact trying to 
build up a kehillah. It is just that in recent years, this hadn't been a 
priority. Richard Joel is trying to work on that. (personal conversation)

Kol tuv,

Arie Folger
-- 
If an important person, out of humility, does not want to rely on [the Law, as 
applicable to his case], let him behave as an ascetic. However, permission 
was not granted to record this in a book, to rule this way for the future 
generations, and to be stringent of one's own accord, unless he shall bring 
clear proofs from the Talmud [to support his argument].
	paraphrase of Rabbi Asher ben Ye'hiel, as quoted by Rabbi Yoel
	Sirkis, Ba'h, Yoreh De'ah 187:9, s.v. Umah shekatav.

At 01:00 PM 8/11/2003 -0400, you wrote:

>I seem to recall a comment of his about surprise at his success in planting
>the seeds of mussar in cold German soil...

>-mi

News to me...

YGB 

At 01:08 PM 8/11/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>RYGB:
>> Zohl zein "unearned." But much love is "unearned." Almost all love is
>> "unearned." So what is the tosefes of "chinam" then?

>Is this true? Bein av libeno, certainly. But bein ish le'ishto? Love is
>the product of working, quite hard, at a relationship.

Retaining love is certainly the product of hard work, but its development 
in the first place is often based on "chen." Perhaps, indeed, we might link 
"chen" to "chinam" and find agreement...

YGB 

At 01:42 AM 8/12/2003 +0200, [RDABloom] wrote:
>One Rav told me he believes the Saba was refering to Zionism (being a
>trial to build on, and that the sicha comes from the Eretz Yisrael period
>of the Saba, when he was in the Hevron-Slabodka Yeshiva after 1925.
>Any comments from our Mussar mumchim?

Only that the Baalei Mussar of the first few doros generally tried to avoid 
comment on the political arena, so I think the reference unlikely.

YGB 

>Yesterday I mentioned the Steipler's Chayei Olam - why people in Torah
>learning may not live to a ripe old age.

>I looked it up again, here's what it says:
>Chayei Olam Ch. 13, pg 85-86.
...
>The rule is that the reward Chazal promised for dealing with Torah &
>Mitzvos is on condition that he doesn't do an opposite action that will
>make him lose it.

>(He then goes on to say that ultimately the reward will be given -
>in the world to come, if needed.)
...

Wonder what the Steipler would do with the Haflo'oh to Kesuvos 104a,
concerning Mo'ed Kattan 25b where the death of King Yehoshiah is called
"u'ba ha'shemesh ba;tzoharayim" because he died at the peak of his
fruitful leadership and not because of his own sin.

Also, the Yerushalmi Berachos 20a concerning R' Bun who died at age
28 that HKB"H takes tzaddikim early because he sees that they are good
workers and has no need to test them further, and that R' Bun accomplished
more in 28 years than most talmidei chachomim do in 100.

YGB

RAB:
> If the following question has been discussed in the past, I apologize.
> Please point me to where I can find it.

It's been discussed repeatedly, to the point that including URLs would be
unweildy. Search for "tav lemeisav" at <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah>.

First, it's a poor example of science vs halakhah. RYBS invokes Chavah's
kelalah. Saying that tav lemeisav is no longer true would require
explaining how/why "ve'el isheikh teshuqaseikh" ceased to be true.

But leaving that issue aside...

RYBS's argument was that a chazaqah is based on an unchanging feature of
the human condition. Had "tav lemeisav" happen to be true situationally,
I assume RYBS would have said chazal would have declared it a ruba
deleisa leqaman, not a chazaqah disvara.

For that matter, the examples RGStudent discusses in Torat Emet are not
declared to be chazaqos either.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                     Time flies...
micha@aishdas.org                        ... but you're the pilot.
http://www.aishdas.org                           - R' Zelig Pliskin
Fax: (413) 403-9905

RAM wrote:
> R' Akiva Atwood asked <<< When a Gadol gives mussar, quite often he phrases
> it in terms of psak (i.e. "It's assur to do X"). When should one take that
> as a psak? Always? Sometimes? Never? >>>

> To answer this question, it is absolutely critical that we define the word
> "p'sak".

> My definition of "p'sak" is "If you go against what he told you to do, then
> you've have violated a mitzvah d'oraisa or d'rabanan, whether that person
> was correct or not". If that is the definition which you use, then I believe
> that only the directives of a real Sanhedrin (or possibly a person with Real
> Semicha, i.e., uninterrupted since Moshe Rabenu) count as a "p'sak".

I wouldn't question this being a valid definition, but it's so far from
common usage as to be useless in discourse.

I also don't know how your subsequent discussion about the permissability
of going to a 2nd rav and issues of kavod harav and of shavei alei have
to do with the question of "mussar vs pesaq".

There is an example in the gemara of mussar being presented as pesaq. In
BM 83a, when Rabah bR Huna hired workers to carry barrels of wine for
him, and they accidentally (apparantly through a lack of care) broke
them. Rava, who served as the posheir between them, required Rabah to
(1) return the shirts he took from the workers as collateral; (2) not
bill them for the loss. When challenged on it, "Is that the din?" Rava
replied yes, based on "lema'an teileikh bederekh tovim" (Mishlei 2:20).

The workers then complained that they were broke and couldn't buy
dinner, so Rava orders Rabah to (3) pay them for the day's work? Again,
"Is that din?" To which Rava quotes the rest of the pasuq, "ve'orchos
tzadiqim tishmor".

This involves a basic paradox about lifnim mishuras hadin. There exists
a chiyuv in din to go beyond the exact letter of the din. (Obviously
you can't apply this recursively, im kein ein ladavar sof.)

What LMH is an actual chiyuv depends on the individual; where he's holding
and which derekh he's on. However, it's possible for a rav to say that for
a given individual, or for a given kehillah, this qualifies as "lema'an
teileikh", or, to give the maqor de'Oraisa, "ve'asisa hatov vehayashar."

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                     Time flies...
micha@aishdas.org                        ... but you're the pilot.
http://www.aishdas.org                           - R' Zelig Pliskin
Fax: (413) 403-9905

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


[ 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         ]