Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 7

Sun, 11 Jan 2009

• 1. slippery slope (Eli Turkel)
• 2. Psak Computer (Rich, Joel)
• 3. Re: [Areivim] Efrat's rabbi: Same-sex couple can raise a family (Harry Maryles)
• 4. yosef and the 10 Martyrs, ahavat yisroel (Eli Turkel)
• 5. Halacha: How to prepare if you are going to be drafted on Shabbat (Shoshana L. Boublil)
• 6. Chabad on Arba Minim (Baal Tosef?) (Harvey Benton)
• 7. 7MBNoach: Stricter or Less-Strict? (Harvey Benton)
• 8. Re: Chabad on Arba Minim (Baal Tosef?) (Zev Sero)
• 9. Re: 7MBNoach: Stricter or Less-Strict? (Zev Sero)
• 10. Re: 7MBNoach: Stricter or Less-Strict? (Allan Engel)
• 11. 10 B'Teves on Shabbos (Danny Schoemann)
• 12. Re: 10 B'Teves on Shabbos (Zev Sero)
• 13. Re: 10 B'Teves on Shabbos (Richard Wolpoe)
• 14. Torah Geography & Dream Brachos (Gilad Field)
• 15. answering Amen to various brachot (Shlomo Pick)

<<However, the KY is clear that it is appropriate for a poseiq to not only
take into account the halachic merits of an issue, but also the question
of where it would lead. It's not always dismissable as "politics".>>

Agreed that a posek can take a larger view of the question. However, the
result is that different poskim from different communities come up
with different answers
i.e was is an appropriate psak for meah shearim is not for Raanana
(where I live) or
for NewYork.
Thus a woman reading a ketuba might be inappropriate in communities
where women do not
appear in public but is perfectly legitimate in a community where
women frequently
give public speeches in many different forums.
This of course leads to the existence of "many torot" which lo
titgogedu was supposed to
eliminate.

BTW we once had a discussion of a automatic psak computer. Such a
computer of course could
not account for such extra-halachic issues

-- 
Eli Turkel

 


BTW we once had a discussion of a automatic psak computer. Such a
computer of course could not account for such extra-halachic issues

--
Eli Turkel
_______________________________________________




I think I would disagree  in theory in 99% of the cases- just need a
bigger computer and better fuzzy logic/AI programmers and poskim who can
detail how they reach a decision. Of course it's hard to detail how you
would react to a black swan.  
KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.

(This post is being redirected to Avodah at the request of the the
list-owner. I had written a lengthy post about the propriety of? a
homosexual couple - whether male or female - raising a child (via adoption
of artifical insemination). In the course of trying to determine whether
there is any justification for that, I made the?comment that there is no
Issur of Yichud for two mlaes or two females sharing a bedroom. I received
the following response which includes an excerpt from my original post. My
reply follows - HM)
?
--- On Wed, 1/7/09, Moshe Y. Gluck <mgl...@gmail.com> wrote:


R' HM:
I am not sure about that. But even if he's right there would have to be
several conditions attached. The couple would have to commit to living a
Halachic lifestyle. Admitting that they are attracted to members of the same sex
is not a sin. Only acting on it is. And there is no sin in two males or two
females living in the same house and sleeping in the same bedroom at night.
-----------


Beis Shmuel there.
Just looked at it. IIUC?both?Nosei Kelim you mention there say?that in the
Mechaber's?country?prominscuity in MZ?was common and therefore people
should distance themselves from Yichud - as The Mechaber states. But in
their countries - which I assume means Europe - it is only a Midas Chasidus
- a meritorious practice and not a requirement. 
=========================
?
Just looked at it. IIUC?both?Nosei Kelim you mentioned? say?that in the?
Mechaber's?country?- promiscuity in MZ?was common and therefore people
should distance themselves from Yichud - as the Mechaber states. But in
their countries - which I assume means Europe - it is only a Midas Chasidus
- a meritorious practice and not a requirement. 
OTOH if they are single it is Assur?for them to sleep in the same bed together.
?
I do not see this as definitive halacha forbidding two men sleeping in the
same room. As the Mechaber points out at the very beginning of the Siman
-?Jews (i.e. males in the context of this Halacha)?are not suspected of MZ
so Yichud is not Assur for them.?One can possibly say that religious Jews
are not suspected of MZ. IOW?even if they are gay - they will abstain.
?
But I will admit that if two men are attracted sexually to each other then
it is at least common sense not sleep in the same bedroom together. Ein
Apitropus L'Arayos. But Halacha L?Maaseh? I?m not so sure.

?
HM


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090109/b6bd8494/attachment-0001.htm>

In a shiur I heard today from the rabbi of Yakir (in the Shomrom) he
talked about
Yosef and the importance of Ahavat Yisroel for everyone. He brought
several issues
which we have discussed in the past

1. In Otzar HaMedrashim (Bar Ilan CD)
HKBH put in the mind of the Caeser to read Chumash and he came to
kidnapping etc..
leading to the connection of the 10 Martyrs to the sale of Yosef. ...
Yishmael Cohen Gadol went to heaven and met Gavriel. Gavriel told him that he
heard from behind the curtain that 10 sages will be killed by the
Romans. R. Yishmael
asked why and the angel Gavriel answered "Because of the sale of Yosef who was
sold by his brothers, every day the "midat hadin" complains before the
heavenly throne
R. Yishmael asked hasn't G-d found anyone until now except for us? and Gavriel
answered that HKBH has has not found a generation with 10 such righteous people
like the sons of Yaakov and therefore HKBH punishes (poreah) from you

2. In a similar vein Medrash Esther Rabbah pasrha 7, DH ko haratzim ba
states that since the 10 sons of Yaakov sold their brother while engaging in
food and drink so G-d will repay them and so it says "The king and Haman
sat to drink"

3. R. Kook in Orot 148 states that "ahavat yisroel is not just a good
feeling (avodah hergershit)
but also a major project (miktzoah gadol ba-torah) ... and it comes
from the belief in G-d
and especially when everything holy is being trampled ...
We must love even the great sinner who has left the path of G-d
(gam be-nefesh ha-nesogah me-od, asher sarah harbeh mi-derech hashem)
" (end quote)

To quote the famous phrase we pray that sins should end and not the sinners
The brothers of Yosef sinned by not extending brotherly love to their
brother and we
must repay by stressing ahavat yisroel

4. The rabbi at the time of the expulsion from Gush Katif asked his
congregation (Yakir)
what would be their attitude if the US granted citizenship to all
those in favor of
the expulsion. Many answered they would be happy if they left EY for the USA.
The rabbi explained that they were mistaken since we dont get to
choose who is part
of klal Yisroel. We need everyone in EY. We can disagree and fight for
our beliefs but
not at the expense of disowning part of Jewry.
Hatred just leads to further hatred and eventually civil war.


-- 
Eli Turkel

Lieutenant colonel Rabbi Eyal Krim published the instructions at:

http://www.inn.co.il/News/News.aspx/183953


Shoshana L. Boublil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090110/88cf68e3/attachment-0001.htm>

Chabad (and perhaps other Chasidim) have a custom of taking
numerous Hadasim with their Lulavim.? I
was wondering if this is Baal Tosef??
Going further, would taking additional Etrogim (say 3) and/or Lulavim (5?)
together with the Hadasim and Aravot be considered Baal Tosef?? 

?

I asked someone, and he told me that taking additional units
of the ?Arba Minim might not be a
problem, but that taking for instance a non-Arba Minim fruit, like an apple,
would be?.. HB

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090109/55361d38/attachment-0001.htm>

?We recently had in the Chumash the episode (according to
Chazal) of the Brother?s of Joseph arguing their status (Jew vs. non-Jew)
regarding the issue of Ever Min Hachai.

?

The Brothers held themselves to be Jews, and thus were able
to eat of a still moving animal that had been killed for eating (more maikel)
without violating AMHachai.? Joseph held
that the Brothers were considered (pre-Siani?) as non Jews, and thus were bound
by the more strict (machmir) law of the Sheva Mitzvos Bnei Noah (7MBN) in
regard to the AMHachai halacha. 

?

But 1. We have the concept of Maalin Bakodesh ? and 2. Specifically
with regards to Geirus, we say that if 2 sisters converted to Judaism, though
they are technically permitted to the same husband in Judaism because of their
new status, we don?t allow it, so that people should not say that the Sisters
went from a higher standard (pre-Geirus) to a lower standard (post-Geirus).? It appears from this, that we hold Judaism to
be of a higher standard in strictness than the 7MBN.

?

Here we have 2 cases at apparent odds: 1. Aver Min Hachai
where Judasim is LESS strict than the 7MBNoach. ?and ?2.
the inyan mentioned (re the 2 sisters) where we don?t want people to say they
went to a lower standard after converting.?
This means we hold Judaism to be MORE strict than the 7MBN.

?

I was always under the impression that Judaism is more strict
in the laws that it has in common with the 7MBN??.? For instance belief in shitfus is ok for a
non-Jew, but not for Jews. 

?

Is the EMHachai Halacha just an exception?? Are there other
exceptions??? Kol Tuv, HB

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090109/dd7f18ec/attachment-0001.htm>

Harvey Benton wrote:
 
> Chabad (and perhaps other Chasidim) have a custom of taking numerous 
> Hadasim with their Lulavim.

Not just chassidim.  The rishonim quote customs of taking 68 (gematria
lulav), 69 (gematria hadas), or 70 (like the parei hachag).  The Tur
quotes Rav Amram as saying that the custom in his yeshivah was to take
no fewer than 68 hadassim, and some took up to 70.


>  I was wondering if this is Baal Tosef?  
> Going further, would taking additional Etrogim (say 3) and/or Lulavim 
> (5?) together with the Hadasim and Aravot be considered Baal Tosef? 
>
> I asked someone, and he told me that taking additional units of the 
>  Arba Minim might not be a problem, but that taking for instance a 
> non-Arba Minim fruit, like an apple, would be?.. HB


This is an open SA, OC 651:14-15.  Adding an extra species is bal tosif.
Adding an extra lulav or etrog may or may not be bal tosif, but it's not
allowed.  But one may add as many hadassim and aravot as one wishes.

The Rambam  (Lulav 7:7) encourages adding to the hadassim but rules that
one may not add to the aravot, but he later changed his mind and allowed
extra aravot as well.   The Rosh suggested that the Rambam changed his
mind completely and allowed extra lulavim and etrogim as well, at least
to the extent that if one did add a lulav or etrog it would not be pasul,
but almost all poskim disagree with this, and hold that the Rambam only
changed his mind about aravot, and that an extra lulav or etrog is still
forbidden (see, e.g., Bach).


-- 
Zev Sero                                     May the light of Chanukah
z...@sero.name                                brighten your life

Harvey Benton wrote:

> But 1. We have the concept of Maalin Bakodesh ? and 2. Specifically with 
> regards to Geirus, we say that if 2 sisters converted to Judaism, though 
> they are technically permitted to the same husband in Judaism because of 
> their new status, we don?t allow it, so that people should not say that 
> the Sisters went from a higher standard (pre-Geirus) to a lower standard 
> (post-Geirus).  It appears from this, that we hold Judaism to be of a 
> higher standard in strictness than the 7MBN.

On the contrary.  The basic halacha is that this is permitted; but in
order to prevent the *perception* that they have gone down in kedusha,
the rabbanan forbade it.  Without this later takanah, it would still
be permitted.  In this and a few other instances, where the difference
was glaring, the chachamim legislated to close the loophole; but they
didn't do so in all instances, and the default is that there are many
details in which the 7 mitzvot are stricter than the 613.


-- 
Zev Sero                                     May the light of Chanukah
z...@sero.name                                brighten your life

There is an opinion that under certain circumstances, abortion would be
muttar for Jews but not for non-Jews. The Mishna in Oholos that regards the
mother's life as paramount over the unborn child applies only to Jews.


ADE

2009/1/10 Harvey Benton <harveyben...@yahoo.com>

>    We recently had in the Chumash the episode (according to Chazal) of the
> Brother's of Joseph arguing their status (Jew vs. non-Jew) regarding the
> issue of Ever Min Hachai.
>
>
>
> The Brothers held themselves to be Jews, and thus were able to eat of a
> still moving animal that had been killed for eating (more maikel) without
> violating AMHachai.  Joseph held that the Brothers were considered
> (pre-Siani?) as non Jews, and thus were bound by the more strict (machmir)
> law of the Sheva Mitzvos Bnei Noah (7MBN) in regard to the AMHachai halacha.
>
>
>
>
> But 1. We have the concept of Maalin Bakodesh ? and 2. Specifically with
> regards to Geirus, we say that if 2 sisters converted to Judaism, though
> they are technically permitted to the same husband in Judaism because of
> their new status, we don't allow it, so that people should not say that the
> Sisters went from a higher standard (pre-Geirus) to a lower standard
> (post-Geirus).  It appears from this, that we hold Judaism to be of a
> higher standard in strictness than the 7MBN.
>
>
>
> Here we have 2 cases at apparent odds: 1. Aver Min Hachai where Judasim is
> LESS strict than the 7MBNoach.  and  2. the inyan mentioned (re the 2
> sisters) where we don't want people to say they went to a lower standard
> after converting.  This means we hold Judaism to be MORE strict than the
> 7MBN.
>
>
>
> I was always under the impression that Judaism is more strict in the laws
> that it has in common with the 7MBN??.  For instance belief in shitfus is
> ok for a non-Jew, but not for Jews.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090111/1e457fa1/attachment-0001.htm>

In response to one of my Halocho-a-day posts kitzur.com/7zq2
(http://halocho.blogspot.com/2009/01/halocho-244-fasting-on-shabbat-
is.html)
people keep on writing in informing me that if 10 B'Teves were to
[theoretically] fall on Shabbos, we would fast.

Over the years I've heard this from various people.

Where does this Halocho come from? The SA in OC 550:3 says "if these 4
fasts fall on Shabbos that are deferred to Sunday."

Thanks

- Danny

Danny Schoemann wrote:
> In response to one of my Halocho-a-day posts kitzur.com/7zq2
> (http://halocho.blogspot.com/2009/01/halocho-244-fasting-o
> n-shabbat-is.html)
> people keep on writing in informing me that if 10 B'Teves were to
> [theoretically] fall on Shabbos, we would fast.
> 
> Over the years I've heard this from various people.
> 
> Where does this Halocho come from?

The BY brings this in the name of the Avudraham, ultimately based on the
pasuk "be'etzem hayom hazeh".

Since it's only a hypothetical, I don't think it counts as a psak din,
and I speculate that if it were a practical question that needed a psak
then the halacha would be paskened otherwise.  It seems to me that if
this had been actually practised when there was kidush hachodesh al pi
hare'iyah, then there would have been some mention of it in the gemara.
The fact that the earliest mention of this idea is in the geonim tells
me that they were engaging in harmless speculation, not rigorous psak.
If kidush hachodesh is renewed before Moshiach comes then the BD that
does so can also pasken this question; and once Moshiach comes it will
become a yomtov anyway, so it will be just like any yomtov that falls
on Shabbos.


> The SA in OC 550:3 says "if these 4
> fasts fall on Shabbos that are deferred to Sunday."

That refers only to the three that can fall on Shabbos; since this one
can't, there's no need for the SA to address the case.

-- 
Zev Sero                    A mathemetician is a device for turning coffee
z...@sero.name               into theorems.                   - Paul Erdos

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Danny Schoemann <doni...@gmail.com> wrote:

> In response to one of my Halocho-a-day posts kitzur.com/7zq2
> (
> http://halocho.blogspot.com/2009/01/halocho-244-fasting-on
> -shabbat-is.html
> )
> people keep on writing in informing me that if 10 B'Teves were to
> [theoretically] fall on Shabbos, we would fast.
>
> Over the years I've heard this from various people.
>
> Where does this Halocho come from? The SA in OC 550:3 says "if these 4
> fasts fall on Shabbos that are deferred to Sunday."
>
> Thanks
>
> - Danny
> ____


I think this is another perfect mis-understanding. This  is the ONE fast of
the four that falls pn FRIDAY and we fast anyway.

Plus we DO fast fast kabbals Shabbos until tzeis even though this is no
slam-dunk.

So these factors - IMHO - cauesd a  a perfect mis-understanding leading
people to BELIEVE that if it DID fall on Shabbos we would fast. But had they
consuled SNOPES.COM as you did it is ibviously false - a pashut Kal vachomer
from tisha b'av.

-- 
Kol Tuv - Best Regards,
RabbiRichWol...@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090111/01e41ca3/attachment-0001.htm>

2 unrelated questions:

1) The Gemara, in Bava Basra 25b (it is also in the first perek of
Gittin), wants to prove that Bavel is north of EY by quoting a Pasuk
in Yermiyahu.  Why should we need a pasuk to teach us geography? This
seems a bit strange to me.  Anyone have any thoughts on that?

2) I saw in Sha'arim Metzuyanim B'Halacha (on KSA 50:3) where he
quotes from the Pri HaSadeh (anyone know who he is?) Who says that if
someone makes a bracha in a dream (because he dreamt he was drinking
water) and he wakes up thirsty he needs to make "another" bracha.  He
gives 2 reasons for this: 1) He wasn't a bar chiyuva while he was
sleeping, and 2) the water was not considered "l'fanav" (in front of
him) in that bracha.
I don't have access to the full teshuva - but the whole question
sounds very odd to me.  what would even be the hava amina that a
bracha in a dream could apply to real life?

If anyone has any insight - i would be grateful.

Thanks,
gilad field

In an Areivim post concerning the issue of answering Amen I wrote the
following:

 

>I remember hearing from m"vr HaRav Herschel Schachter that answering 

>Amen to a bracha is not only an agreement to the bracha itself, but how 

>it came about. He then criticized those chuppot where there are 

>talmidei chachamim present but the honors go to the chasan's friend, 

>cousin, etc.  Under those circumstances, I remember Rav Schachter 

>saying that one should not answer amen to the brachot, nay, it was 

>forbidden to answer Amen, for the bracha came about in a manner that 

>was mezalzel betalmidei chachamim.

>I have seen this take place, and with Talmidei chachamim amiteeyim, 

>they were never phased by this, as their very essence is humility.  And 

>thus the zilzul has been increased.

>Bebirchot hatorah

>Shlomo Pick

 

To this I received the following response and which was also posted in
areivim:

>I lived in Elizabeth, NJ from 1968 to 1974. Rav Teitz regularly came on
Sunday mornings to daven in the Bais Yitzchok shul on Bellevue Street. (For
those who do not know much about Elizabeth, Rav P. M Teitz, ZT"L, was THE
rov of the city. He was the rov of the 4 Orthodox shuls in Elizabeth. See
http://tinyurl.com/63gryd for more about Rav Teitz and his amazing
accomplishments in building Orthodoxy in Elizabeth, NJ.)

 

>One Sunday morning an obviously Sefardi fellow whom I had never seen before
was davening for the Amud. After a moment or two Rav Teitz stopped him and
said, "You can pronounce any word the way you want except for HaShem's name.
You cannot say A--nai (that is, pronouncing a kamatz as if it were a pasach
as some Sefardim do.). You must say A--noi (pronouncing the kamatz with an
Ashkenaz pronunciation.) Your pronunciation is Chol for us and we cannot
answer Amen.

 

>Since then I am often in doubt when some Israelis or a "real" Sefardi daven
for the Amud. Should I answer Amen or not? Usually I do not answer Amen.

 

>Not so long ago the fellow who davened Maariv in a shul not far from me
used the Sefardic pronunciation of HaShem's name. I brought this to the
attention of the Rov, and he said he would look into it. I told him the
story about Rav Teitz. He has yet to get back to me.

 

My answer to this was: "sufficiently Torah related to warrant the extra
attention and wider audience of Avodah." And so I am presenting it here:

 

When Rav Teitz was the rav of Elizabeth, and I presume that then most of the
minyanim and pronunciation was ashkenzis, as was in the 50s, 60s and perhaps
early 70s.  Nonetheless, there are teshuvot from rav kook zt"l Orach
Mishpat, no. 16,17; Seridei Eish 1:6; ziz Eliezer 7:28 dealing with the
issues with the Seridei Esh being most lenient (however cf. igrot moshe,
orach chayim 3:5, 4:23 and then 4:65 which tends to be more lenient).  See
also Har Zvi, I, no. 4 that the only issue seems to be the name of G-d
(Adnus, noi at the end or nai).

 

However, nowadays, when one is brought up with Sephardic pronunciation of
Hebrew both in the states or in Israel, I have heard of no one who has
called their pronunciation into question.  

 

In my minyan here in bnei brak, where rav chayim kanyevski's son is the Rav,
harav Shlomo Kanyevski, rosh yeshiva of tiferet zion and kiryat melekh, one
prefers that the chazzan daven with an ashkenazic pronunciation, but no one
has held it to be meakev.  Moreover, all the Sephardim, teimain, etc who
join us in our minyan pronounce their berachot in their native nusach, and
we all answer amen to their berachot.  On the contrary, it would probably be
forbidden not to answer amen.  We includes two grandsons of rav Elyashiv,
the above mentioned rav shlomo kanyevski and his cousin the mot"z rav
avraham zvi yisraelson.  So it would be pretty clear that one should answer
amen to any bracha made by a sephardi Yemenite or someone brought up with a
Sephardic pronunciation.

 

I will add, that many gedolim here hold and actually practice that for
parshat zachor, one should hear other readings by those who have ancient
traditions such as Yemenite.

 

Like I said, eretz yisrael is more chareidish and chenyukish than chul, and
I have yet to see someone not duchan or get an aliya because of Sephardic
pronunciation or anyone would not answer Amen.  The most chassidish satmer
or chanyakish man will daven with a sefardi chazzan at the kotel.

 

Elsewhere, from Jerusalem to bnei brak, to nyc and most other towns outside
of NYC, I have not seen such kepeida in the past 20 years, and consequently
one should answer amen to those brachot and not separate himself from the
zibbur.

 

The only place where one must be scrupulous (contrary to the chumra
mentioned above) is in parashat Zachor which is the only kriya that is
d'oraita (and maybe parashat para according to tosophot)  that one should
hear in his native pronunciation (and then if possible to hear it in
Yemenite, adenite, gerbanite, Iranian, etc). [see Mikrai Kodesh by Rav Zvi
Pesach Frank, purim, p. 88 for the stringency of Zachor, and then p. 97 for
megillah reading and notes there].

 

In most of the stringent rulings, the question was should one change his
pronunciation, and those answers said no, but no one said that if he did
change you could not answer his bracha.

 

Rav teitz's ruling seems to be a da'at yachid only applicable to Elizabeth

(then?) and it would appear that what rav teitz did appears to be applicable
ONLY to his own town, just as he had the authority to prohibit meat that did
not his have approval to be sold there.  Nonetheless, I am not so sure other
posekim would hold of his pesak. Since I know that most rabbanim may not
care to oppose a legitimate mesorah of pronouncing hashem's name of adnus, I
doubt that most or even any of them would agree with this pesak (cf eg
Igerot moshe, even haezer, 4:108 at the end).

 

In any case, I would be interested if :

 

1)       there are really other posekim who say not to answer amen to a

different pronunciation?

 

2)       What is the actual practice today throughout the world, especially

the yeshivashe world? Are they machmir on the accepted practice of what the
Olam of all colors, creed, race, and eidah, does at the Kotel?

 

Bebirchot haTorah

 

Shlomo Pick

 

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20090111/93a2ad21/attachment.htm>

------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 7
*************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."