Avodah Mailing List

Volume 27: Number 127

Sat, 05 Jun 2010

• 1. pinui kevarim (Eli Turkel)
• 2. Birur - Random Thoughts (Micha Berger)
• 3. Why was Miriam sent out the camp? (Danny Schoemann)
• 4. Rav S. Schwab on (not) Saying Aleinu (Prof. Levine)
• 5. RAL and orthodox forum (Eli Turkel)
• 6. Re: [Areivim] females may not run for an elected position (Chana Luntz)
• 7. Korach's Hole (Chanoch (Ken) Bloom)
• 8. Re: [Areivim] communico-disadvantage (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: pinui kevarim (Ben Waxman)
• 10. women voting (Saul Guberman)
• 11. Chasam Sofer and pianos (AES)
• 12. Re: Chasam Sofer and pianos (Zev Sero)
• 13. ethic outside of halacha (Eli Turkel)
• 14. Re: ethic outside of halacha (Zev Sero)
• 15. ethic outside of halacha (Eli Turkel)

<<Perhaps it's the other way around, and some people's dedication to the
zionist project makes them refuse to listen to any argument in favour of
leaving kevarim alone. Perhaps this is what leads them to misrepresent
authorities in their support.>>

First I strongly object to the language that those that disagree with Zev's
interpretations misrepresent authorities. There are other valid opinions besides
his. As I have continually a number of important rabbis disagree with Zev
and his answer is that he doesnt recognize these rabbis - not my problem.
Kavod haTorah extends to rabbis not from Zev's circle.

In spite of his slur against zionism I on the contrary uphold those who try and
make my country work.

I just came from a lecture from one of the top rabbis in the IDF rabbinate on
halachic questions that they deal with. A central point is that one has
to be concerned with the entire organization and not just be machmir in
individual cases but rather have a global viewpoint. He reiterated that the
enemy know was goes on and if we are lax in discipline on shabbat they know it.
When he served during in the units he saw that incidents increased over shabbat
because the enemy knew that many soldiers went home.

Typical questions: Having training exercises on 17th of Tammuz and 9th of Av.
In many case (eg this year) these fasts come out in the middle of the week smack
in the middle of a week of training. In many cases this may the last
training they get
before the next war. A even more serious problem is that of officers
(a high percentage
of officers are religious). Evren if one can live with 20% of the soldiers not
participating it is horrible for morale and coordination if the
division chied doesnt particpate
because it is a long fast in the hot desert of the negev. It is
impossible to push
off the training exercises as the bases are fully booked.

To avoid shabbat problems the army uses various grama devices. RYSE objects and
feels that grama is suitable for an occasional problem but not as a
continuous solution
and prefers a shabbat goy. Besides that running the state on shabbat goy is not
very aesthetic or practical this might work in a hospital but
certainly not in an army.
In many cases they need to write information and they use the shabbat pen of
Zomet. In case a computer is needed they rely on the poskim that
computer writing
is temporary and so only rabbinically prohibited. In general they add
the heter that
electricity on shabbat is only prohibited rabinically. If one looks at a charedi
sefer like orchat shabbat they claim that EVERYONE holds it is a Torah
injunction
and even RSZA was only asking questions and not paskining. Of course they ignore
ROY who says it is rabbinic and many students of RSZA that also deny it is from
the Torah and of course all the poskim before CI.

A general question is the definition of pikuach nefesh. A typical
question is the current news
of the sraeli navy stopping the flotilla to Hamas which originally was
scheduled for shabbat.
 On one hand it is only food, OTOH the government feels it is
important for state policy.

BTW the gedolim that they consult are R. Nebenzahl, R. Lior and R.
Arieli. One question
they asked was about a guard on shabbat at a roadside. According to
strict halacha
once one leaves the techum he has only 4 amot. Doesn't give the
soldier much of a leeway
as he works fully loaded and sweating for many hours. R. Nebenzahl
paskened he can
walk anywhere he needs to stretch out.

In summary as opposed to Zev I applaud those zionist rabbis who look for ways to
save lives and save money in building the ER next to the hospital for
protection in
the next Hamas attack. RSYE claims it is not pikuach nefesh since it will happen
only in the future. With that attitude any future planning is
impossible for building
a new hospital or army barracks or other things which everyone
considers a pikuach
nefesh because that is only in the future. Furthermore, the sefardim
dont accept the
psak of the Nodah BeYehuda and I see no reason why a government has to accept
ashkenazi chumrot over sefardi kulot especially since the majority of
citizens are
not religious

-- 
Eli Turkel

1- We recently discussed chazaqah disvara, and I defined it as a ruba
deleisa leqaman which is backed by an explnatory rule of thumb. A
rube deleisa leqaman would be something like the ratio of non-Jews
to Jews in a town. To be a chazaqah, it would not only have to be
a statistical majority, but one with a reason -- e.g. ein adam chotei
velo lo.

2- We also recently discussed qavu'ah and the Monty Hall Problem.
Thinking about it more, I'm still convinced that qavu'ah call to ignore
majority or probability isn't related to the MHP's counterintuitive
result about where the statistical likelihood resides.

3- We have often discussed the Ran, who holds that in the case of 2
chatichos shuman and one of cheilev, all three may be eaten. I
encountered a conter-example in the Y-mi, Demai 7:4, vilna 31b. One
coin of heqdesh in a purse of 10. If the person spends all 10 coins,
ma'al bevadai. It would seem the probabilities are recombined.

OTOH, we don't say that the 6th coin turns it into a rov. So I'm
not sure what to make of this.

4- Also, a little later, we have two cases of chazaqah demei'iqara. If
a person has some fruit in his home, he can rely bechazaqah that the
fruit are still around and use it to separate maaser.

However, if he says "that which will be left on the bottom of the bottle
is now terumah lemafrei'ah", we do not rely on a chazaqah that the bottle
will still be around by then.

The reason -- the latter case is lemafrei'ah. One is relying now on
the state remaning true not only now, but some time in the future when
the bottle is nearly empty.

A chazaqah demei'iqara doesn't carry into the future, only the present.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
mi...@aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

(Re: end of Beha'aloscho, Devorim Ch. 12)

I always assumed that Miriam was sent out the camp because she had Tzora'as.

However, this cannot be, since a Metzora is only be sent out the camp
after an initial week (or 2) of Hesger; a waiting period to see if the
Tzora'as grows/shrinks.

- Why was Miriam sent out the camp?
- What happened to Miriam's Tzora'as?

The Ohr haChaim haKodosh (12:14) seems to be the only one to address
this question, by saying that Moshe's short Tefila was accepted and
the Tzora'as was cured.

Miriam was sent out the camp for a week as a punishment, as the Posuk
explicitly says "If her father had but spit in her face, should she
not be ashamed seven days".

So now we have a new type of punishment - a severe type of Niduy;
being sent out the camp for 7 days - that I don't recall seeing
anywhere else.

Are there any other ways to learn these Psukim?

- Danny

--
Danny Schoemann - doni...@gmail.com
http://mitzvoh.blogspot.com - http://halocho.blogspot.com

The following is taken from Rav Schwab on Yeshayahu.

48: 20 Assemble and come, come close together, you who have escaped 
from the nations who do not know, who carry the wood of their
graven images, and who pray to a god that cannot save.

Rav Schwab writes in part:

And who pray to a god that cannot save. They pray to lifeless idols 
who cannot possibly help them.

While the subject here is the rejection of the old-fashioned "idol 
worship," this
phrase also alludes to Christianity which has, as its central theme, 
a human being - a
Jew, no less - who is looked at as a Moshiah, savior. Yeshayahu 
foresaw the rise of
this religion, which began some 600 years after his death. and 
rejects it here together
with other forms of idol worship.

The phrase, umispallim el ale lo yoshiah, was incorporated into the 
tefllah of Aleinu,
in which we give thanks to HaKadosh Baruch Hu for forming us into
His special, chosen nation. And in it, we confirm our emunah in Him 
as the One and
Only God, to the exclusion of all others gods and forms of belief. 
The original text
of Aleinu included this sentence:  that they bow to nothingness and 
emptiness, and they pray to a god who does
not save. This clear rejection of all other forms of religion, 
including the Christian
concept of a savior other than HaKadosh Baruch Hu, eventually became a sore
point for Jews who lived in Europe because the Christians considered 
it offensive. It
was therefore removed from the official written texts of most 
siddurim in Germany
and other parts of Ashkenaz (although many people did, and continue to, recite
it anyway). The omission is quite obvious when one carefully reads the amended
text.

On a personal note, I remember that in Frankfurt, Aleinu was said quietly and
unofficially; and no Kaddish was said afterwards, so that if there 
were troublemakers
present they would not focus on it. In fact, many people would skip 
it altogether
and begin to leave shuI while others would quietly be reciting it. I 
remember one
of my friends from Telshe who was visiting me in Frankfurt remarking about the
uncharacteristic lack of decorum during Aleinu in the otherwise 
highly dignified and
organized tefillos of K'hal Adas Jeshurun.

Yitzchok Levine
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100601/192a9929/attachment-0001.htm>

several articles of RALfrom the orthodox forum can be found at

http://www.yutorah.org/search/orthodox_forum

It seems the article I quoted is from an older book and is not available on
the internet

-- 
Eli Turkel

On areivim a discussion has been going on regarding women holding elected
positions and on women voting.  

Regarding women's voting, somebody pointed me in the direction of the Edah
journal, http://www.edah.org/backend/JournalArticle/1_2_debate.pdf where a
full translation has been done of both Rav Kook's letters and Rav Uzziel's
psak (although I note that one page of the translation of Rav Kook's second
letter appears to be missing from the on line version).  The section
specifically relating to women's voting in Rav Uzziel's psak can be found in
the first section (aleph), with the rest devoted to the question of whether
women can be a candidate for election.

As you can see from Rav Kook's letters, it mostly based on a sense that
having women vote is "not Jewish" (it was a big issue politically around the
world at the time), not in keeping with the spirit of the Torah, and will
undermine the Jewish home and the place of women in it as well as leading to
the mixing of men and women.

Rav Uzziel rejects all of these statements (I did start doing a translation
of portions of it, but since it has already been done in the Edah journal
mentioned above, if you prefer it in translation, see there).  Note that so
too did the other Chief Rabbi in the piece.  Rav Hertzog, in Tchuka
L'Yisrael al pi HaTorah in section 7 on Bechirut rejects all of these
arguments, going through many in detail.  For example Rav Hertzog
specifically rejected the argument that there is an issur of b'hukotehem
(fascinatingly he makes reference to a report that the Sephardi community in
London had women's suffrage more than 20 years before this controversy) or
that there is a breach of any gederim of tzniut or because of arguments of
nashim da'tan kalot, or the psychological difficulties women may have in
voting.

RSB wrote on Areivim regarding women holding communal positions:

> Also, I have always been told, that if the community agrees - it
> nullifies the problem of Serara (Devora Shofta Et Yisrael....)

This, as you can see from the second portion of Rav Uzziel's psak (sections
2-4) which is also translated in the Edah journal I referred to above, is
the second argument used by Rav Uzziel to allow women to hold elected
positions.  His first argument is that, while the Rambam brings his din of
Serarah from the Sifri, it is not mentioned in the Talmud or in the Shulchan
Aruch, even though it should have been halacha l'maase, and hence it could
be understood to be, like many halachos, one that is not in fact halacha
l'ma'ase (he also argues from Devorah that even if you say she only poskened
for people, that is still clearly a position of serarah).  (BTW, there seems
to be a cryptic reference in the Or Sameach Hilchot Melachim perek 1 halacha
5 which seems to suggest something similar, ie that this is a din only
applicable at the time of the Beis Hamikdash, which I guess would explain
why it was in the Rambam but not in the Shulchan Aruch).

Rav Uzziel's second argument is that even if you do not accept this, and
hold that the Sifri and the Rambam are halacha l'ma'aseh, then it is a
halacha that only applies when appointments are made by the Sanhedrin, and
certainly not when they are done by communal acceptance.  The latter, he
argues, is no worse than the litigants accepting a judge who is a karov or
passul.  And he goes through various of the rishonim, (Tosphos, the Rashba,
the Ran) to show that this is how they explain the situation with Devorah,
that the people accepted her upon them as a leader and judge.

Note that Rav Hertzog, while also allowing women to run for elected
positions, has a slightly different position.  In Tchuka L'Yisrael al pi
HaTorah p97 he holds that the din of serarah described by the Rambam and the
Sifri refers only to appointments which are domeh l'melech (given that that
is the source from which the drasha is derived).  What he understands by
this is that it only applies to communal appointments which are life long,
and which are open to being inherited by the sons of the appointee, just as
is the situation with a king.  Hence elected positions, which are only for a
set term, do not fall within this category and thus women can be candidates
for and take elected communal positions so long as they are for a fixed
term.

> Shoshana L. Boublil

Regards

Chana

RMYG linked us to a photo of a perfectly round sinkhole in guatemala,
asking "was this what [Korach's hole] looked like?" To which I
responded that "mouth of the earth" that swallowed Korach's
company had lips. Some people have asked me a source for this.

The source is the Malbim on parshat Korach.

--Ken

-- 
Chanoch (Ken) Bloom. PhD candidate. Linguistic Cognition Laboratory.
Department of Computer Science. Illinois Institute of Technology.
http://www.iit.edu/~kbloom1/

On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 09:45:57AM -0700, Saul.Z.New...@kp.org wrote:
...
: like  the  republicans  learned in the age of obama,    it's all tech and 
: the newest media.  here, a review  of  how  the Israel side  doesn't get 
: it , but the left  does .  we are outnumbered , but now  outsmarted  as 
: well....

It's largely media bias. E.g. Israel put out the message that its
contributions to the wealfare of those who live in Azza dwarfs the
10,000 tons of supplies the flotilla carried. 14,000 tons EACH WEEK.
But rather than carrying that story, the NY Times et al write about
breaking a blockade.

The IHH has known ties to both Al Qaeda and Hamas, but this is presented
as "Israel claims ... the group denies", as though it's a matter of
dispute. They were involved in bombing attempts on US soil. They were
named by a suspect of the "Millenium Plot" to bomb LAX, for one example.

See this Danish report from 2007
<http://www.diis.dk/graphics/Publications/WP2006/DIIS%20WP%202006-7.w
eb.pdf>
pp 10-14 (pdf pages 14-18).

It was also noted about Hamas, in analyses about how they won the Gaza
election. An odd consequence of religious terror is that the same group
that attacks civilians is the same one that provides the most charity
to their own with the least graft.

AND Israel used the very same internet resources. Quoting the NY Times:
    The flotilla videos have proved a popular draw online, with one
    from the Israel Defense Forces attracting more than 600,000 views
    on YouTube.
(From <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/world/middleeast/02media.html>)

It was not that the IHH got its message out first and Israel then had
to defend its image. It's the number of media outlets AND the UN that
simply ran with one side's version of the story before that outrage was
pointed out. See this story from well before the flotilla being stopped
<http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/e
ng_n/html/hamas_e105.htm>
(or <http://bit.ly/9xQ5d1>), a press release from May 26th about the IHH
and its support of terrorism.


The free publicity comes from having already captured the sympathies
of much of the media and therefore having them donate the marketing
resources under the guise of news. More than being the only ones knowing
how to use the new tech.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Weeds are flowers too
mi...@aishdas.org        once you get to know them.
http://www.aishdas.org          - Eeyore ("Winnie-the-Pooh" by AA Milne)
Fax: (270) 514-1507

It always amazes me how some things simply never change. This is what
happened in the Maccabean Wars.

Ben
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eli Turkel" <elitur...@gmail.com>
. He reiterated that the
> enemy know was goes on and if we are lax in discipline on shabbat they
know it.
> When he served during in the units he saw that incidents increased over
shabbat
> because the enemy knew that many soldiers went home.
>
>

Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 01:58:14 +1000
From: "SBA" <s...@sba2.com>
I have still to hear an explanation by the Aguda Gedolim for - not only
allowing - but ordering that women vote in all Israeli elections.
(Of course the same question goes to all those who consider themselves
followers of Rav Kook's hashkafa.)
SBA

RD Aryeh Frimer just posted on the RCA blog *W*omen in Communal Leadership
Positions: Shul Presidents
http://text.rcarabbis.org/?p=931

In the article it addresses the above point.
            Amongst the scholars maintaining that women should neither run
for office, nor even vote ? not get involved at all in the political process
? was Rav Yehoshua Leib Diskin, and Rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld of the* Eidah
Haredit*, Rav Yechiel Michel Tukachinsky, who then was a leading *Rosh
Yeshiva* and *posek* in Jerusalem, and considered slightly right of center,
and last but not least, Rav Avraham Yitshak HaCohen Kook. There were many
renowned scholars, most of them in Europe and the States, who were against
women running for office, but had no problem with them voting. These include
Rav David Tzvi Hoffman, and Rav Eliezer Priel in the United States.

Something important happened in the 1920?s that changed the course of Jewish
history. Most of you know that the *Eidah Haredit *broke off from Orthodox
Judaism and started leading its life by itself. When and why did it do so?
 It did so over the issue of the women?s right to vote....

There was another group, led by Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank, who said: ?All right,
we?re not gung-ho about this idea of women voting, but there are *poskim* who
would tend to permit it *bi-she?at ha-dehak*.? And they became what?s called
Agudas Yisrael, and the women would not run for office, but they would go to
the polls and vote.

The lenient school (those who allow women voting- S.G.)included such
scholars as the former Sephardic Chief Rabbi Ben Tzion Hai Uziel, Rav
Ya?akov Levinson, and Rav Chaim Hirshenzohn. In the modern period the
lenient school has included former Chief Rabbi Yitshak Isaac Herzog, Rav
Tibor Stern, former Sephardic Chief Rabbi Eliyahu Bakshi Doron, former Chief
Rabbi Shlomo Goren, Rav Shaul Yisraeli, Dayan Aryeh Leib Grosness of London
and Jerusalem, and Rav Elimelech Turk from the United States.

Read the rest of the article which deals mostly with serara and details his
conversations with Rav Ahron Lichtenstein & Rav Nahum Rabinovitch about
women as shul presidents.  As with all of the RD Frimmer articles, they are
well researched and written.

Saul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100602/0147d8b8/attachment-0001.htm>

I recently heard that the Chasam Sofer was not a fan of pianos and
that, today, followers/descendants of the Chasam Sofer do not have
pianos in their homes.

Has anyone else heard of this minhag, and if so, can you provide a
source from the writings of the Chasam Sofer?


KT,
Aryeh

AES wrote:
> I recently heard that the Chasam Sofer was not a fan of pianos and
> that, today, followers/descendants of the Chasam Sofer do not have
> pianos in their homes.
> 
> Has anyone else heard of this minhag, and if so, can you provide a
> source from the writings of the Chasam Sofer?

In the 19th century and early 20th, a piano wasn't just a piano.  It was
a sign of "culture", and thus of haskalah.  A modern woman would want a
piano in the home, so that her daughters could take lessons and be like
the other "cultured" Jews (i.e. like the goyim, if only at a remove, and
sometimes not), and be "better" than the "primitive" and "uncultured"
Jews who had only Jewish mesorah and not Western polish.  This was
unfortunately a machla that attacked even the best families (and on the
contrary, davka the best, because the women of those families were more
likely to read books and get such notions).

Going to the theatre was also a sign of such culture, and therefore
frowned on by traditional Jews even if the play itself was "kosher". 
One need only hear older yidden pronounce the words "pyanneh" and
"teyatter" to understand the disdain that such seemingly pareve things
evoked in that era.  Today, though, a cigar is just a cigar, and a
piano is just a machine for making music.

-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher

Whether there exists an ethic outside of halacha. The two most obvious
proofs are

1. Naval Bershut Hatorah - If the Ramban feels that one cannot keep
all the mitzvot
and still be evil it implies there is a definition of evil not
formally stated in SA (not historically correct)

I am not sure if the concept of hakarat hatov is officially mentioned
in SA but it is something
we expect even from a nonJew and it certainly is not part of the 7
Mitzvot of Bnei Noach

I read a story of RMF who asked a talmid to accompany him while he
raised charity.
The tamid went to pay for his transportation but RMF insisted on
paying. After an argument
the talmid finally told his RY that if Rav Moshe was so insistent then
it nust be in SA.
Rav Moshe answered - no its not in SA but its the right thing to do
since I asked you to come.

2. Avraham's argument with G-d of Sdom - accusing G-d of not doing
justice. It certainly
implies that Avraham considered the destruction of Sdom as being
against fundamental justice
at least if some righteous people are there.
BTW it is not clear from the psukim if G-d accepted the plea if at
least 9-10 righteous
people had lived there because of the defense of Avraham or that would
have happened in
any case.
Similarly with the pleas of Moshe Rabbenu. We also see from Moshe
Rabbenu that what
the "goyim" would say is an important factor. In the sin of the golden
calf it is one of
3 arguments of Moshe and in the sin of the spies it is the only
argument of Moshe.
Hence, chillul hashem because of goyim is important

-- 
Eli Turkel

Eli Turkel wrote:
> Whether there exists an ethic outside of halacha. The two most obvious
> proofs are
> 
> 1. Naval Bershut Hatorah - If the Ramban feels that one can keep
> all the mitzvot and still be evil it implies there is a definition
> of evil not formally stated in SA

False premise: that all of Torah is in SA.  Or, more precisely, that
everything Torah disapproves of it forbids, and therefore whatever it
permits it says nothing about.   But that's not true; there are many
moral statements in Torah that don't become binding halacha.  For one
thing, one can't asser a midah; one can condemn it, but one can't
asser it.  So there is plenty of room to be a naval "birshut hatorah"
without looking outside Torah for definitions of a "naval".  Similarly
"kadesh atzmecha bamutar lach";  there is plenty of guidance in Torah
for what is "kadosh" without looking outside it.



> I am not sure if the concept of hakarat hatov is officially mentioned
> in SA but it is something we expect even from a nonJew and it certainly
> is not part of the 7 Mitzvot of Bnei Noach

It may not be in SA, because it's a midah that one can't legislate but
"shelo lihyot kfuy tovah", and condemnations of a "kfuy tovah" are all
over the Torah.


> 2. Avraham's argument with G-d of Sdom - accusing G-d of not doing
> justice. It certainly implies that Avraham considered the destruction
> of Sdom as being against fundamental justice at least if some righteous
> people are there.

"Chalilah lach" means "chulin hu lach", it's not appropriate for You,
it's not up to Your standards.  Maybe for an ordinary person it would
be OK to act in such a way; "chulin" is not "assur" or even disapproved,
but it's not "kadosh".


> Similarly with the pleas of Moshe Rabbenu. We also see from Moshe
> Rabbenu that what the "goyim" would say is an important factor. In the
> sin of the golden calf it is one of 3 arguments of Moshe and in the sin
> of the spies it is the only argument of Moshe.  Hence, chillul hashem
> because of goyim is important

This is weak, because he's not making a moral argument, he's making a
prudential argument.  It's certainly not *wrong* for Hashem to make
Himself disdained by people; it's His name and He's got every right to
do what He likes with it.  Moshe is merely pointing out that He might
not want to do this, because the consequences will be that the goyim
will think He's impotent.   Ditto when David says "lo lanu ki leshimcha
ten kavod...lama yomru hagoyim"; this isn't a moral argument, he's just
saying "never mind us, this is good for You".


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher

In a recent daf yomi Rambam says that for Ir Hanidachat that the women
and children
are also killed. Yad Ramah asks on Rambam that why should the women be
killed if they didnt
sin and for children even if they sinned they are minors.
Ramah concludes that G-d would not do any evil (ve-chalila la-kel mi-resha)

-- 
Eli Turkel


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 27, Issue 127
***************************************

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..."