Volume 27: Number 88
Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: martin brody <martinlbr...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:32:42 -0700
Subject: [Avodah] Intelligent Design
[A] It may be that the universe is the product of Intelligent Design --
that the Creator set it up to develop along certain lines.
Toby Katz
So God intelligently designed a system that deliberately extinguished 95 %
of all life forms over a period of a few million years? Hmmm!
Perhaps a better approach is D) God created something from nothing,
including nature. Nature then created something from something
--
Martin Brody
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100324/68351a69/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 2
From: rabbirichwol...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:16:19 +0000
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Intelligent Design
> So God intelligently designed a system that deliberately extinguished 95 %
> of all life forms over a period of a few million years? Hmmm
Well the midrash does state that H' created 7 worlds and was mach'riv
7 worlds [or a similar number]
And how about the species clobbered by the mabbul?
Or the midrash that thr tanninim were knocked out when its mate was
killed IMHO this refers to dinosaurs and perhaps some cataclysmic event
left them infertile which is how I darschen this drasha.
But the real absolute answer is beyond our ken. Certainly don't know
it all - and neither IMHO does our current Torah Knowledge base have
all the answers either.
Maybe Adam HaRishon or Moshe Rabbeinu did have such hassagos...
ZP
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Go to top.
Message: 3
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 15:12:32 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Selling whiskey/bourbon
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 01:36:29PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
: Micha Berger wrote:
: >On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:42:16AM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
: >: >This seems to contradict what you said earlier. The water added after
: >: >decasking is after fermentation. Would that not make it a second
: >: >ingredient from the mash, and thus taaroves?
: >: Indeed it would. How does that contradict what I said earlier.
: >Your first words in this thread, posted Mar 22 6:41am PDT:
: >: But whiskey is *not* a taaroves, it's chametz itself.
: That's because whiskey is < 50% water. I haven't expressed a firm opinion
: about vodka and other clear spirits. *Perhaps* they can be considered
: taaroves (though that would still make them assur).
I don't get from your reply whether you currently believe that whiskey
is chameitz itself, or taaroves. Let's not bring other spirits into it
-- things are confusing enough without widening scope.
...
: >Needing dilution to be drinkable means needing dilution to be within the
: >halachic category? RRW brings sources to say "yes", but I haven't seen
: >them inside yet. Wine that needs dilution isn't yayin.
: Since when? Why the distinction between unwatered wine and unwatered
: alcohol?
Since the Y-mi. There is a machloqes as to whether one says "borei peri
hagafen" (or maybe the word is "hagefen" in their nusach) or is allowed
to make qiddush on undiluted wine. So the definition of yayin includes
the need for dilution to be drinkable.
The definition of chameitz is ra'ui la'akhilas kelev. Except according
to an LOR whose Shabbos haGadol shir I once attended, R' Menachem
Zupnik. He suggested that chameitz, like all food, is defined by regular
ra'ui la'akhilah. It's the inclusion of machmetzes, which would mean
sourdough as well, that broadens it to akhilas kelev. But in any case,
the definition doesn't revolve around adding water.
RAF noted off-list that they aren't talking about modern wines, which
are drinkable as is. Unless Shapiro's wine really is "So thick you can
cut it with a knife!" -- as their slogan once said.
My point is not that wine is necessarily different than whisky. Just
that since chazal to deal with adding water to wine explicitly and in
light of something specific to wine, I'm not sure one can extrapolate
from it to other drinks. I'm ruling out ra'ayos from it, not saying that
wine and whisky MUST be different.
Now, moving from whisky as taaroves to the question of selling chameitz
gamur...
Let me explain my vested interest. As far back as we can trace Berger
custom, which admittedly isn't that far, we didn't sell chameitz gamur.
If the star-K says I'm stuck with all the peratim of a minhag avos, I'd
like to understand the how and why.
...
: >This distinction is messy nowadays, as we haven't congeled into
: >post-WWII minhagei hamaqom. Most of our minhagei avos are minhagei
: >hamaqom of the 19th cent meqomos of our avos.
: Most != All. You're setting up an assumption that there was ever a
: place where minhag hamakom was not to sell chametz gamur, but to buy
: from shopkeepers who did, and then wondering how this makes sense.
: If it doesn't make sense, perhaps there never was such a place.
It doesn't make sense in a post-refrigerator, post-trucking economy.
Not back when people couldn't possibly keep a supermarket with huge
stock.
: >: When was there ever a kehillah that were all makpid on glatt, despite
: >: holding that non-glatt was kosher al pi din? ...
: >Chassidus down near Hungary and Romania had many such qehillos, no?
: Maybe, but not that I've ever heard.
Who do you think immigrated to the US after the war, set up shlacht-hoizen
free from the mafia infiltration that plagued the older ones, and thereby
made glatt the norm here in the US?
: >: You certainly *intend* the sale to be valid. But if you're worried that
: >: according to some opinion somewhere there may be some technical flaw...
: >IOW, you aren't sure the sale is real. That's imperfect intent, no?
: No. Your intention is to sell; you *want* to sell. You're just not
: sure that you *are* selling. Such an uncertainty has no similarity at
: all to asmachta, so why would it matter, even in theory?
Selling requires knowledge that you are selling. Definition of qinyan.
...
: >There is no such animal as a minhag she'ein hatzibur yakhol laamod bo.
: I don't see why not, so long as it isn't the minhag of the whole tzibbur.
That's not a minhag, it's a minhag chassidus, a personal chumerah,
a hanhagah tovah, but it's not a minhag. Less binding. I wouldn't have
to keep it just because my father did, and certainly not to the extent
of asking whether or not we sell whisky.
Minhag requires nispasheit, by definition. As do gezeiros, although
gezeiros require formal repeal and the lack of semichas Moshe rules
that out.
...
: Consider this: Jews couldn't have lived in Northern Europe without
: shabbos goyim. Clearly the wider "tzibbur", so to speak, i.e. the whole
: population of the village, couldn't live by the laws that most of the
: village did live by. Does that violate the categorical imperative?
: Then let it be violated.
The *shevus* of amira le'aqum excludes tzarikh rabim.
If you were saying that the minhag, which is no derabbanan, of not
selling chameitz gamur, was written to exclude hefsed meruba, then it
should not apply to the modern homeowner, who owns a pantry and
refrigerator and more food for the next day or two.
...
: Clarification: if the reason they boycott a shop is expressly to harm
: the owner, and he doesn't deserve such harm, then it's a breach of "lo
: tisna et achicha" and "vachei achicha imach". But where they don't wish
: him any harm, but merely prefer to shop elsewhere, there's no breach.
When you place a chumerah in BALM ahead of basic making sure no one
suffers economically BALC, you are sinning.
I can find limudei zekhus.
For example, we know from numerous RYSalanter stories, that this problem
dates back to the mid-19th cent CE. The people who are avoiding a store
because the proprietor doesn't share their chumerah are arguably tinoqos
shenishbe'u.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes
mi...@aishdas.org "I am thought about, therefore I am -
http://www.aishdas.org my existence depends upon the thought of a
Fax: (270) 514-1507 Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch
Go to top.
Message: 4
From: rabbirichwol...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:37:13 +0000
Subject: [Avodah] Selling whiskey/bourbon
Let's grant that m'chiras hametz works 100% halachically speaking
From a hashqafa POV
I have the following question and FWIW I have actually been asked a
similar question by a chaveir about a year ago.
For a baal habayis [not a business] is it OK to stockpile hametz before
Passover?
Or is it "better" - hashkafically speaking - to minimize one's use of
the sale of Hametz?
ZP
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Go to top.
Message: 5
From: Michael Escott <msesc...@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:13:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Kashrus
While recently perusing your archives I saw the following:
On Monday December 7, 2009 at 13:42:21, Akiva Miller <kennethgmil...@juno.com> wrote:
> I'd like to begin with a history lesson. When I was at YU in the 1970s, both
> Hershey's chocolates and Kellogg's cereals were sold in the cafeteria,
> despite not having any formal hashgacha. I cannot testify who actually ate
> them, but the fact that they were sold their says a lot about how well their
> kashrus was accepted......
:
> During the 20th century, the United States frum community developed this
> new concept of hashgachah. It began in the early 20th century with certain
> categories of food, and it grew to include other categories of food. Milestones
> were passed in the 1980s when Hershey's and Kellogg's got formal hashgacha.....
:
> I will quote now from a pamphlet entitled "The Foods We Eat", by Rabbi Yosef
> Wikler, now publisher of Kashrus Magazine, previously titled The Kashrus
> Newsletter. This pamphlet, copyright 1981, contains several articles which he
> had previously published. I quote from the article titled "Kellogg Corn Flakes",
> originally published February 15, 1980.....
:
> "Kellogg Corn Flakes is a familiar cereal in many Orthodox homes, even
> though it has no rabbi or organization attesting to its kashrus. Actually, most
> every Orthodox person eats Kellogg Corn Flakes. Do you eat food from a
> take-out store? [begin italics] Almost Every Take Out Store Uses Kellogg Corn
> Flakes. [end italics] They are used as Kellogg Corn Flakes crumbs. ... In most
> cases the heimishe take-out stores do use this product.....
:
> Finally, at the bottom of page 6: "FLASH - Kellogg's has applied for supervision
> by the V.H. - Vaad Harabonim of Boston. Watch The Kashrus Newsletter for
> further information." A short while later Kellogg's did receive VH supervision, and
> is still supervised by them today. I can't help but suspect that these articles
> contributed to that.......
:
> That issue included a reprint of the Recommended Cereals list of the Vaad
> Hakashrus of Baltimore, which included a Kellogg's Corn Flakes and other
> Kellogg's cereals. "When we inquired how information was obtained for its list,
> the Vaad Hakashrus of Baltimore responded as follows: The cereal list which we
> have prepared is based upon information which we have received from reliable
> sources who have inspected the plants or who are knowledgeable of the process
> and/or ingredients."........
Kellogg's actually had a hashgacha as early as the mid 1920s. My great-grandfather,
Rabbi Yaakov Eskolsky z"l, was the rav hamachshir from then until his petira in early
1931. My great-uncle, Rabbi Mitchel Eskolsky z"l, began assisting his father in the
hashgacha during the late 1920s and became the rav hamachshir upon the elder
R. Eskolsky's passing. I believe that he remained in this position until his own
petira in early 1959.
I received a general knowledge of this history from my father many years ago. I have
seen more specific evidence of the hashgacha in several Yiddish language ads from the
1920s that Kellogg's placed in Der Morgen Journal. Those ads listed R. Yaakov Eskolsky
as the rav hamachshir. I once saw an old poster board Yiddish ad for Kellogg's being
offered on eBay. That ad also included R. Mitchel Eskolsky as a mashgiach along with
his father. There's also an article titled "Vos Far a Bracha Men Zol Machen"
in the Degel Yisroel journal of November 1929 pp. 13,14 (see http://www.he
brewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=13155&;hilite=7d6c4664-1e0e-4582-a78
2-d3977b34e503&st=%d7%a7%d7%a2%d7%9c%d7%90%d7%92%d7%a1&pgnum=157)
that refers to this hashgacha when answering the question of what bracha to make on
various Kellogg's cereals. R. Yaakov Eskolsky mentioned that he had been giving a
hashgacha to Kellogg's cereals for a few?/several? years ("etliche yohr"). An elderly
niece of R. Yaakov Eskolsky, who attended his levaya in February 1931, recently told me
that Kellogg's sent some men to represent their company at the funeral (In my mind I of
course conjure up images of a somber contingent of Snap, Crackle and Pop in black shul
yarmulkes! :-)).
Evidence of R. Mitchel Eskolsky's tenure as rav hamachshir can be seen in six articles
from The Jewish Criterion (Pittsburgh) from the 1940s and 1950s. (The articles can be
found by going to http://diva.library.cmu.edu/pjn/index_adv.jsp and searching ALL THE
WORDS "Eskolsky Kellogg"). One can see many details of the hashgacha from a 1941 report
given by R. Eskolsky to that newspaper (see http://pjn.library.cmu.edu/books/pages.cgi?layout=vol0/part0/copy0&;call=CRI_1941_098_024_10171941&file=0019)
Regarding the period from about 1960 to 1980, I've been trying to determine (without
success) as to whether a Kellogg's hashgacha existed for part of that time. I remember
eating many Kellogg's cereals back in the 1970s except that we avoided Frosted Mini-
Wheats due to the ingredients. I do seem to remember a practice that might have been
more prevalent back then where an organization would grant a hashgacha, but no kashrus
symbol (even a K) would appear on the label of the package.
About three years ago I e-mailed Rabbi Halbfinger of the KVH to see if he knew of any
previously existing hashgachos on Kellogg's cereal. He replied that he was not aware of
any. I also have contacted Kellogg's and they didn't seem to keep track of any past
kosher supervision history other than what's going on now.
Moshe Escott
Clifton, NJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100324/12f3b6df/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 6
From: David Riceman <drice...@att.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 14:45:04 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] ksav she'i efshar l'hizdayyef
Zev Sero wrote:
> David Riceman wrote:
>> We went off to visit a sofer the other day to chat about getting
>> tefillin for my son's forthcoming bar mitzva. While talking about
>> the chemical properties of parchment he mentioned how easy it is to
>> erase letters (via razor blade), and I added that that's why one
>> shouldn't write a kesuva on parchment (see HM 42:1). The sofer then
>> told me that he had arranged to find parchment for a prominent
>> person's son's kesuva. Neither of us knew an obvious reason to
>> permit it, but we both agreed that one might exist. What could it be?
>
> What did Chazal write their shtoros on? Papyrus?
>
I don't know what archaeologists have found for the period of Hazal.
But see Bartenura Shabbat 8:2 s.v. "niyyar". And for a slightly earlier
period see Cowley's book "Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C."
David Riceman
Go to top.
Message: 7
From: rabbirichwol...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:30:46 +0000
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Selling whiskey/bourbon
Micha:
> Since the Y-mi. There is a machloqes as to whether one says "borei peri
> hagafen" (or maybe the word is "hagefen" in their nusach) or is allowed
> to make qiddush on undiluted wine. So the definition of yayin includes
> the need for dilution to be drinkable.?
Just FYI
A somailer at a koserh restaurant taught me the following
Wine until several hundred years ago was unpalatable w/o m'ziga and a
"somalier" was a professional who properly diluted it. Now - bottled
wine is pre-diluted. And afaik the few tippos mayyim added to the wine
would not create hametz in the case of matzah ashira - though AIUI that
IS the cheshash of Ashkenazim.
YaSh is AISI the same now as wine used to be IE W/O water it's
unpalatable. Forget about Passover! Drinking 190 proof grain alcohol
straight would require no brachah!
If one diluted it using water down to 80-100 proof it would ne "normal"
vodka
190 proof is designed to be used medicinally or added to other beverages
such as fruit juices.
IMHO the dilution to make a beverage palatable is NOT a taaroves at all
as per the posqim I've listed
Diluting it more, might be different of course.
ZP
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Go to top.
Message: 8
From: Zev Kleiner <zklei...@ateret.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 15:32:02 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Selling whiskey/bourbon
Is there a greater kiyum of the mitzvah of tashbitu the more you
destroy?
KT
Joel Rich
-----------------------
I don't know.
But, it seems to me that it is be'ikar a results-oriented mitzvah. The
kiyum is ensuring you have a chametz-free home, regardless of what you
actually need to do to achieve this, whether you wind down your purchase
of chametz before yom tov, or take it out and destroy it, or quarantine
and sell it and lease away its storage space.
Seems to me.
Zev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100324/70e050cf/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 9
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 15:57:34 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Selling whiskey/bourbon
rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
> Now - bottled wine is pre-diluted.
Not true.
> And afaik the few tippos mayyim added to the wine
> would not create hametz in the case of matzah ashira
It certainly would.
> - though AIUI that IS the cheshash of Ashkenazim.
You understand incorrectly. The cheshash that water added to wine will
turn flour into chametz instantly is not an Ashkenazi one; it's explicit
halacha. Matza ashira must be made with mei peros to which not a drop
of water has been added. One theory on why Ashkenazim don't eat matza
ashira on Pesach is that we're afraid that despite all our care water
may have found its way into the mei peiros. Sefardim are not worried
about this; they acknowledge that *if* water were present it would make
chametz, but they're confident that with proper care one can keep water
out. (And to go back to our earlier discussion, according to this
theory there is no reason to distinguish Pesach from Erev Pesach.
There's an issur de'oraisa to each chametz on Erev Pesach after noon,
so if we're worried about egg matzah having become chametz on Pesach
then we must have the same worry on Erev Pesach as well. Those who
permit it on EP but not on Pesach itself have a different theory for
why we don't eat it on Pesach, one that doesn't apply to EP.)
> YaSh is AISI the same now as wine used to be IE W/O water it's
> unpalatable. Forget about Passover! Drinking 190 proof grain alcohol
> straight would require no brachah!
There are people who drink zex-un-naintziger, and survive. R Meir
Itkin AH used to claim that it was the 4% water that would eventually
kill him; he lived to 96. He definitely said a bracha on it.
> IMHO the dilution to make a beverage palatable is NOT a taaroves at all
> as per the posqim I've listed
>
> Diluting it more, might be different of course.
So where do you draw the line? As I pointed out, some people do drink
nearly pure alcohol. More relevant is that 50% vodka is sold on the
open market, and presumably there are people who drink it neat. So is
the extra 10% "extra"?
--
Zev Sero The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name eventually run out of other people?s money
- Margaret Thatcher
Go to top.
Message: 10
From: rabbirichwol...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:11:41 +0000
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Selling whiskey/bourbon
RRW
>> And afaik the few tippos mayyim added to the wine would not create
>> hametz in the case of matzah ashira
RZS:
> It certainly would.
SA O"Ch 462:3
Mechabeir
Muttar lalush b'yayin af al pi she'ee efshar lo b'lo tippas mayim
shenofeles bishas haqatzir.
V'af l'chathila r'gilim leetein mayin bishas haqatzir.. Ho'eel
uch'var nistabtlu hamayyid b'yayin qodem shelash ho'issa
I mean what the Shulchan Aruch meant
What RZS means I have no idea ;-).
The case of added water could be a problem when combined with the flour
or dough at a different time - But drops of water in the wine is batteil
and poses no threat of himutz later on as per Halachah.
I wish to thank RZS for prompting me to chazer my SA lessons ;-)
[hislamdus]
ZP
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Go to top.
Message: 11
From: "Rich, Joel" <JR...@sibson.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:32:10 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Selling whiskey/bourbon
Listen here http://www.ouradio.org/ouradio/channel/ou_kosher_pre-pesach_webcast_
5770
R'schachter&belsky discusses the issues in the first portion right after bedika.
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.
Go to top.
Message: 12
From: Meir Shinnar <chide...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:33:46 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Selling whiskey/ bourbon
The discussion between RMB and RZS that minhagim should in some sense
be possibly universal seems to revolve around the following more
general issue (and I am sorry to RMB if I misrepresent his position).
There is a long section (IIRC 10 ma'amar) in Sa'adya Gaon's Nivhar
be'emunot vedeot where he examines different ethical and religious
positions - and rejects them because of particularity - because he
insists that any moral/ethical/religous position, to be defensible as
a valid position, has to be something that the entire community could
(at least in theory) adopt - that if a position is only viable because
it is dependent on other people not adopting it, that is proof that
the position is not a correct position - even if in practice, only a
few people actually adopt the position (this is different than the
Kantian imperative, but it is related)
That, I think, is in essence what RMB is arguing. It is one thing to
argue that I have a humra that I am not going to impose on the
community. To cite one example of RZS, unless turkey is such major
part of the food supply that the community could not survive without
turkey, there is no problem with an individual saying that I am
machmir a la shelah and will not eat turkey - but will not impose that
on the general community.
It is quite another to have a humra that is intrinsically dependent
on the fact that other people will not adopt that humra - and that if
everyone adopted it, the community would not be viable. the question
of this viability may be debated in any inidvidual case (Eg, whether
the community could financially survive throwing out all non glatt
meat, would according to the general position of Saadya, be a criteria
whether it is legitimate for an individual to be machmir on himself -
even if he does not require the community to sacrifice... )but the
issue of communal viability if the humra is universally adopted
remains a criterion of whether a humra is a valid option - even if it
will, in practice, be only adopted by a few.
The issue of mechirat chametz seems to fall under this rubric -
clearly, as individuals, most of us can survive easily without selling
chametz, even if we lose a few single malt scotches..... However, as
a community, we are dependent after pesach on stores having sold their
chametz..
This aspect of Rav Saadya is not one that is, TTBOMK, widely repeated
in later literature - and what RZS represents is more the aspect of
the individual drive to perfection - regardless of the impact on the
community - but the communal (communitarian?) position is one that
some of us feel is sorely lacking in much of current discussion.
Meir Shinnar
Go to top.
Message: 13
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 21:01:02 -0400
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Selling whiskey/bourbon
rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
> RRW
>>> And afaik the few tippos mayyim added to the wine would not create
>>> hametz in the case of matzah ashira
>
> RZS:
>> It certainly would.
>
> SA O"Ch 462:3
> Mechabeir
> Muttar lalush b'yayin af al pi she'ee efshar lo b'lo tippas mayim
> shenofeles bishas haqatzir.
> V'af l'chathila r'gilim leetein mayin bishas haqatzir.. Ho'eel
> uch'var nistabtlu hamayyid b'yayin qodem shelash ho'issa
Read it again: *bish'as hakotzir*. Water that is added *before*
*fermentation* doesn't count. The fermented product is 100% wine, no
matter how much water it contained. Even raisin wine, which is nearly
100% tap water before fermentation, is 100% wine after. This is exactly
what I've been saying all along.
But a drop of water *after* fermentation would make instant chametz.
--
Zev Sero The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name eventually run out of other people?s money
- Margaret Thatcher
------------------------------
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
End of Avodah Digest, Vol 27, Issue 88
**************************************
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..."