Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 199

Sunday, December 19 1999

• RE: Explicitness in Poskim
• Breakthru in Transplants
• Re: Problem kids
• RE: Praying against PEOPLE vs SIN
• Re: expenses / Israel
• re: Yossel
• re: Mechiras Chametz
• Re: Mechiras Chametz
• Re: Hei in middle of word
• More on the hei
• Re: Avodah V4 #198
• Re: alcohol in our shuls
• Was re: Reb Shlomo Carlebach and Carlebach minyanim, Now R' Avrohom Elya Kaplan
• Breakthru in Transplants--Corrected]

Carl, in responding to my "proof" that living Agunoth 
(refusal to give a get) should pray for
the death of their tormenters writes

>>>>>>>>>>
The connection to Agunoth makes sense to me, but only because 
of the drash on the pasuk where it says, v'hayoo n'sheichem 
almanos and Rashi says that means that you will R"L be lose in 
battle, and therefore your wife will be a perpetual almanah.

But again, is this brought explicitly in the poskim, and if so, where?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Carl raises a fundamental issue in halachik process. Namely suppose

---something is not explicit in poskim but
---it reasonably follows (say by a fortiori methods)from similar cases

Do "we (you and me)" have the right to say that this is Halacha. 

In other words to what extent are we bound by explicitness in halacha.

In passing, since Carl is a lawyer I point out the fundamental fact that
almost all legal cases use methods of generalization and inference.

I would really like to see this discussed (a discussion based on ACTUAL
experience vs strict readings).

Russell Hendel; http://www.shamash.org/rashi
___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

Rabbi Moshe Tendler, at the 3rd Religion and Science conference
announced the following breakthru in transplants. The following
seems technologically feasable

---we can clone a person from one of his cells
---wait till the resulting fetus is at the 144 cell stage
---destroy the fetus and take out a desired organ
---transplant that organ into the original patient.

Such a procedure is
---perfectly admissable halachically
---has no problems of transplant rejection
---seems technologically feasable now

Rabbi Tendler also mentioned some related odds and ends in
passing: Vis. the church has come out against cloning and placed
pressue on America till America prohibited federally funded clones

However private sectors can still do it. One industry made a big 
contract with the firm that produced "dolly" since they have 
perfected the technique of cloning (In passing...dolly was the
276th try or something)

Russell Hendel; http://www.shamash.org/rashi
___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

I know that at least in Chassidishe circles where one went to yeshiva and 
the like is not so important (in comparison to  middos, yichos, the example 
they will set for their kids in terms of having a learning seder, etc.).

>From: "Carl M. Sherer" <cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il>
>Reply-To: cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
>To: "Alan Davidson" <perzvi@hotmail.com>, avodah@aishdas.org
>Subject: Re: Problem kids
>Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 14:45:23 +0200
>
>On 18 Dec 99, at 19:21, Alan Davidson wrote:
>
> > Special high schools are all fine and well but isn't 17 too late in many
> > cases and does this really address the structural issues
> > involved?  (Those who know me know I'm a Sociologist).
>
>I think you're right. Having special Yeshivas for 17-21 year olds is
>better than nothing, but it addresses the symptom and not the
>problem. My recollection of the Jewish Action article I read over the
>summer (I've lent it out and I haven't tracked down the Jewish
>Observer yet) is that if kids go off the derech R"L, the ages at
>which they are most at risk are 13, 14 and maybe 15.
>
>This past week in
> > Flatbush, there was a 19 year old boy raised in a frum household who 
>died of
> > a heroin overdose
>
>Hashem Yerachem....
>
>and one of my neighborhood shuls which has a Friday night
> > program for alienated kids from frum backgrounds (some have re-entered
> > yeshiva, some haven't -- some still live with their families, some 
>don't)
>
>Are there any kind of drop in centers for the kids in the US? In
>Israel, we have drop in centers that cater to kids who want to leave
>fruhmkeit R"L, and I think someone runs a drop in center along the
>beach in Tel Aviv for kids who are interested in becoming fruhm.
>
> > had Rav Aaron Twerski speak to both the kids and a good number of 
>parents
> > last evening and he said you have to view these sorts of situations as 
>an
> > Eglah Arufah (we are all ultimately to blame according to Torah).  Sure
> > there are "problem parents", "problem kids", even "problem Rabbonim" in 
>some
> > of the yeshivos but the issue is broader than that -- does every bochur 
>who
> > ever wishes to get married need to learn in Lakewood or Mir or Chaim 
>Berlin
> > or Torah VaDaas until their early 20's -- or is this a goal which while
> > lofty, not all kids are cut out for (emotionally and in some cases
> > aptitude-wise) and shouldn't be pressured towards?
>
>The problem with that kind of approach is that it tends to absolve
>everyone. It's everyone's fault and therefore it's no one's fault. Keep
>in mind that with the egla arufa, at the end of the day, the Beis Din
>itself went and asked for Kapara on behalf of the city's residents.
>The analogy today would be for our leaders (note - I did not specify
>Rabbinic leaders - see below) to try to reverse the trends that make
>kids in the fruhm community feel inadequate if they are not brilliant
>talmidei chachamim (BTW - how does this explain the girls?).
>
>In my experience, the Gdolim demonstrate a lot more
>understanding of not every kid being cut out to be a gadol baTorah
>than do a lot of the lay "leaders." Often the societal pressure
>seems to come more from the followers than from the leaders.
>Often the leaders are pushed into saying the things that the
>followers want to hear. I can't get into a lot of specifics without
>going into things I have heard off the record, but I know this is true.
>
>There are many programs for kids who are not cut out to sit and
>shteig forever. But what happens to kids who go to those
>programs? Who tells the other kids in the neighborhood to
>ostracize them? Who tells the other kids in the neighborhood that
>they're a bad influence, which then becomes a self-fulfilling
>prophecy?
>
>Cf. the Meiri in Arvei Psachim on the origin of "zugos."
>
>IMHO the most important point in a child's life in terms of
>determining whether or not they will remain fruhm, is where you
>send them to high school, a decision that is made around their
>bar/bat mitzva. How many eighth grade Rebbeim/Moros realize the
>enormity of that responsibility? How many give recommendations
>that are inappropriate because they don't care? Or because they
>want the elementary school to look good?
>
>-- Carl
>
>
>Carl M. Sherer, Adv.
>Silber, Schottenfels, Gerber & Sherer
>Telephone 972-2-625-7751
>Fax 972-2-625-0461
>mailto:cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il
>mailto:sherer@actcom.co.il
>
>Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for my son,
>Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
>Thank you very much.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

Gil.Student asks the excellent question regarding my proposal
that Agunoth pray for the death of those who are denything them
gets.

>>>>>>>
Attention ba'alei dikduk:

I've seen people mention Beruriah's diyyuk of "yitamu chatayim" chatayim 
velo chotim.  Am I the only one who is perplexed by this?  Doesn't
chatayim 
mean people who are ingrained in sinning while chotim means people who 
occasionally sin?
<<<<<<<<<<<


I interpret this as both a HALACHIK and PHILOSOPHICAL question.
Here are the main points of the answer

1) As far as I know neither the Sifrah's permission for workers and
widows to
pray against tormentors nor Bruryah's advice not pray for the cessation
of
SIN vs SINNERS is brought down in RISHONIM.

2) BRURYAH's advice to pray for cessation of SIN vs SINNERS in my 
opinion should be interpreted as a general guideline which however has
several important exceptions such as
--2a) workers unfairly treated 
--2b) widows/orphans
--2c) similar groups (like agunoth)

3) As I pointed out in previous postings the EXCEPTIONS listed above
COME FROM PRIMARY SOURCES---the Sifrah and Sifray

4) I consider it a Christian position not to mention these exceptions.
It is one thing to say that Jews should USUALLY be merciful. It is
another thing to deny widows/agunoth the right to pray against
their tormentors. Furthermore, someone praying for death does
not necessarily get all her prayers answered...eg he might be 
hospitalized with some illness and decide to give her the get

5) Several postings have already emphasized that my prayer 
advice should only be followed AFTER trying other means (talking
to the person; social pressure etc).

6) I emphasize that a person denying a piece of paper to a woman
and thereby imprisoning her is a thoroughly evil person...the great
Jewish philosopher Gersonides said that the mercy to the wicked
is cruelty to the righteous...this is her only way to freedom What
is a greater Chillul hashem....a) seeing agunoth running around
or b) seeing people who cause agunoth dying from anguished
women's prayer

7) At the 3rd international conference I was just at there was
emphasis on all the "prayer experiments" in the literature....Prayer
does work and this is an established scientific fact. 

I hope the above answers all concerns

Russell Hendel; http://www.shamash.org/rashi/
___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

harry maryles wrote: << al l this bolsters my argument that the
standard of living (B'Gashmius) is greater in the US than in
Israel.  >>

The way I usually put it is that the "standard of living" ("ramat
ha-chayim") is higher in the U.S., but the "quality of life" ("eichut 
ha-chayim") is higher in Israel.

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick

R' Micha Berger wrote: <<
Actually, JofN is a mistranslation of Yeishu haNotzri. Of Nazareth would be
"haNotzarti". >>

Actually Nazareth in Hebrew is pronounced  "Natzrat"  -- at least that is
how it is pronounced on the radio (compare Tzfat, Efrat, etc.). 
It is an Arab town.  The newer Jewish town nearby is called "Natzrat Ilit".

So "of Nazareth" would be "Natzrati" (cf. Tzfati, Efrati).    (As far as I
know, the kametz under the nun is not a kametz katan. Anyone know 
for sure?)

<<They recognize this as well, which is why some surmized he was
a nazir; but that's a worse fit: it would be "haNazir" (no?) and would
assume that a tzadi was transliterated identically to a zayin. >>

I think the confusion here derives from the similarity in English between
the word "Nazarite" (a nazir) and the word "Nazarene" (someone hailing
from the town of Nazareth).


Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick

David Finch wrote: <<
I'm not sure that there really is a down-to-earth practical difference
between a legal fiction and a workaround in most contexts. A workaround, as
I
understand the term, is a halachic loophole that allows one to adhere to the
words of halacha, and maybe even its spirit, where it would be impracticable
or even impossible to carry out the requirements literally. A legal fiction
is somewhat more abstract and symbolic, like kinyan chalifin with a
handkerchief or fountain pen. Legal fictions, at least as I understand them,
are endorsed by Torah, if not exactly created by it -- they are logical
devices used in Gemorrah to fit all the pieces together. Workarounds have
more prosaic origins, and may or may not be Torah-true. But to the extent
they are accepted by the rebbonim and followed by the community, they are
sort of balebatish equivalents of legal fictions that serve almost identical
purposes.  >>

The above, as a functionalist, teleological analysis, is correct as far as
it goes.  But halacha looks to the process as well as to the ends.
It's not just the bottom line that counts.

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick

In a message dated 12/19/99 12:14:04 PM US Central Standard Time, 
shlomog@mehish.co.il writes:

<< But halacha looks to the process as well as to the ends.
 It's not just the bottom line that counts. >>

You're right. RYGB made the same point. Wouldn't you agree, though, that some 
workarounds seem more focussed on the bottom line than on the integrity of 
the process? My point was that if the workarounds are nonetheless accepted as 
halachically correct (which means they can't be too careless or absurd) and 
they are accepted within the community, then they function much the same way 
as the logical devices we call "legal fictions," itself a term borrowed from 
the English common law.

David Finch

R' RussHendel stated initially that the letter hei in the middle of words is not 
pronounced.  Later he agreed that the opposite was true, i.e., that
a hei in the middle of a word is always pronounced.

While his second decision was closer to the fact than the first, it too was not quite 
accurate. 

First a bit of background.  The klal for some thousand years or so has been that a 
letter without nikkud was not pronounced (except for final letter of a word). A letter 
with nikkud,  of course, is pronounced.  

Where there is a difference between keri and ketiv, the nikkud is that of the keri and 
the letters of the keri are written in the margin without nikkud.  The nikkud has no 
connection with the written word and does not indicate how it could be read..  When a 
written word is not pronounced at all (ketiv ve-lo keri), it is written in the text without 
nikkud. When a word that is not in the text is pronounced (keri ve-lo ketiv), the nikkud 
of the keri is written in the text without any letters.  

Thus the alef of bereshit or of Yishmael or Ha-R[e]uveni is not pronounced. The best 
example is in shem Havaya. It is vocalized with the nikkud of  Shem Adanut. If it is to 
be pronounced as Elokim, it has the nikkud of Elokim.  The translators who 
transliterated the shem Havaya using the nikkud of shem Adanut erred.

The reason I wrote above "the klal has been" is because the Koren tanach broke the 
tradition.  They decided that todays amei ha-aretz might pronounce shem Havaya as 
it is written with the existing written nikkud and to avoid this they omitted all nikkud. 
They made similar changes in the ketiv u'kri rules. According to the ancient tradition 
we can now omit shem Hashem from our reading of the Koren Torah.  I'm afraid there 
are   those today who would approve of this as a good starting point i.e., until they can 
achieve Ki mi-Tzion tetzei Torah  (tetzei ve-lo tachzor) {grin?}


And back to the hei:  If the hei inside a word has nikkud it is pronounced.  Most internal 
hei's have nikkud.  However, Pada[h]tzur (Bamidbar 1,10) and Assa[h]el (Shmuel B 
2,19) have un-nikkuded hei's that are not pronounced. The hei in Pedahel (Bamidbar 
34,28) has a sheva nach and is pronounced as is the first hei in bohshama[h] (Vayikra 
26,43). 

And with connection to the above, a hei with a mapik is also always pronounced. And 
without connection, a mapik-hei, ayin, or chet at the end of a word is preceded by an 
added patach. Preceded by, not followed by.

Hei hei, ot azoi  (or azei for Litvaks to make it rhyme)

bivrakha, 

David.

I just saw that R' Mechy Frankel got ahead of me on the hei ride. But he also gave me 
opportunity for another comment.

He wrote:
 Ruvain, spelled with a "silent" aleph. this has nothing at all
to do with "unpronounced' shivoh nochs.

Reuven, however, is written with a pronounced alef. There is a sheva na' under the 
resh.  It is  Ha-Ruveini that has the silent "omitted"  alef that makes the shuruk the 
nikkud of the resh.

And as I believe R' Mechy said, all sheva nachs are "unpronounced" because they 
simply end the consonant that precedes them and let you start with the next syllable 
(or next word, for those who consider all pronounced last letters to have an unwritten 
sheva nach).

D.

A recent poster said the following:

> Of course RYGB is right here in essence.  From the point of view of strict
> definition we could use initials HOS as opposed to MZ, (though we know the
> former usually, not always, implies the latter.

This is precisely the the type of misinformation I have been writing about.
Sexual
attraction to same-sex individuals does not usually lead to MZ.  A
significant majority
of adolescents who have such feelings ultimately identify and function as
heterosexuals.
Sexual orientation, sexual attraction and MZ are very different phenomena.
If we are
careless in our dealings with these issues we risk being shofech damim.

Melech

M. Press, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology, Touro College
mpress@ix.netcom.com or melechp@touro.edu

On Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:59:21 EST Zeliglaw@aol.com writes:
> In our generation, perhaps the simcha from alcohol is a chumra smavei 
> lididai kula(good intentions yielding a poor result). perhaps, we
should 
> avoid the potential for real Chilul Hashem and urge that we discourage 
> unsupervised teenagers from getting drunk. I would reccomend that we
spend less time on "vnahpochu" and more time on tzedakah. Again, I urge
all list members to go through the sections in Minhagei Yisrel (Sperber)
and rethink our Simchas Purim.
>                                              Zeliglaw@aol.com

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01BF4A67.E1752160
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> If you measure depth and superficiality by the extent of engagement in
> analytical discussion,  I hear your point, but in all due respect, and =
to my
> pain,  it seems that you are missing ours.
> Fine - we value the contribution of such thinking and many chassidim =
are in
> agreement about the importance of chochma, bina & da'as. If you do =
ever
> peruse a volume of Likutei Mehoran and study the translation and notes =
you
> will see a discussion of spiritual matters which in themselves are far =
from
> superficial.
> Rather than judge the apparent descent of the member of your shiur in
> relation to his previous acumen, perhaps you could look deeper-  ask
> yourself WHY such a brilliant student changed his derech and what he
> achieved in terms of his yiras shamayim, his menshlichkeit, and his =
real
> avodah in this world. Better still, ask him.
> Please understand-  I'm not attacking you here, I'm inviting you into
> relatively unexplored territory for your own ultimate good. You are =
welcome
> to bring all your analytical talents with you :-)
>  Mrs. G. Atwood.

Let me note that in the original essay R' Avrohom Elya praises =
Chassidus. It is truly a brilliant essay, very worthwhile. to quote the =
mere snippet I have translated:

Mussar does not disagree with Chassidus. Mussar is often satisfied with =
the Jewish strength of Chassidus; its capacity not to submit to the =
environment; its heartfelt openness bein adam l'chaveiro that softens =
petty superficial European etiquette; its readiness to dedicate itself =
to a lofty purpose, and so easily sacrifice for that purpose normal =
conditions of life; its youthful fervor in mitzvos, which extends well =
into old age.

Mussar, however, also has a significant criticism of Chassidus: It sees =
Chassidus as too external, too theoretical and abstract. The Chasid =
deludes himself into thinking that he is getting more out of Chassidus =
than he actually is. Chassidus deals with profound thoughts and great =
deeds, but it remains outside the essence of the Chasid. Chassidus =
penetrates the depths of the greatest Torah problems - between both Man =
and G-d, and between Man and Man - but it penetrates too little the self =
of a person, so that he might engage in a reckoning as to where he =
stands in relation to his World and in relation to his obligations in =
his World... The average Chasid deludes himself into thinking that a =
nigun that he sings wells up from his heart, and that the dveykus that =
he experiences has its source in his soul, even though it is entirely =
possible that these are transient moods, not associated with his true =
essence.

One should not judge hastily. We cannot say even to the simplest Chasid, =
when he experiences dveykus, that he does not truly cleave to G-d. But =
that constant self-critique: "Perhaps I am deluding myself;" the query =
that should accompany every step in life: "Have I not strayed in this =
instance from the path?"; and, finally, all that is encompassed in the =
thought that serves as a necessary precondition for Shivisi Hashem =
l'negdi tamid ["I have placed G-d before me always"], namely, the =
thought, "I have placed my "self" before me always," - all this is more =
prevalent in Mussar than in Chassidus...

The essay is of the type that may be described as "Why I am not a Chosid =
despite it ma'alos". My statement about Breslov is similar. Breslov has =
many ma'alos - but a Chassidus that deprives an adherent of Iyun, is =
impossible for me to accept as a derech.

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL 60659
http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila    ygb@aishdas.org

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01BF4A67.E1752160
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&gt; If you measure depth and =
superficiality by the=20
extent of engagement in<BR>&gt; analytical discussion,&nbsp; I hear your =
point,=20
but in all due respect, and to my<BR>&gt; pain,&nbsp; it seems that you =
are=20
missing ours.<BR>&gt; Fine -&nbsp;we value the contribution of such =
thinking and=20
many chassidim are in<BR>&gt; agreement about the importance of chochma, =
bina=20
&amp; da'as. If you do ever<BR>&gt; peruse a volume of Likutei Mehoran =
and study=20
the translation and notes you<BR>&gt; will see a discussion of spiritual =
matters=20
which in themselves are far from<BR>&gt; superficial.<BR>&gt; Rather =
than judge=20
the apparent descent of the member of your shiur in<BR>&gt; relation to =
his=20
previous acumen, perhaps you could look deeper-&nbsp; ask<BR>&gt; =
yourself WHY=20
such a brilliant student changed his derech and what he<BR>&gt; achieved =
in=20
terms of his yiras shamayim, his menshlichkeit, and his real<BR>&gt; =
avodah in=20
this world. Better still, ask him.<BR>&gt; Please understand-&nbsp; I'm =
not=20
attacking you here, I'm inviting you into<BR>&gt; relatively unexplored=20
territory for your own ultimate good. You are welcome<BR>&gt; to bring =
all your=20
analytical talents with you :-)<BR>&gt; &nbsp;Mrs. G. =
Atwood.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Let me note that in the original =
essay R'=20
Avrohom Elya praises Chassidus. It is truly a brilliant essay, very =
worthwhile.=20
to quote the mere snippet I have translated</FONT>:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIR>
<DIR><I><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D2>
<P align=3Djustify>Mussar </I>does not disagree with <I>Chassidus</I>. =
<I>Mussar=20
</I>is often satisfied with the Jewish strength of <I>Chassidus</I>; its =

capacity not to submit to the environment; its heartfelt openness =
<I>bein adam=20
l'chaveiro </I>that softens petty superficial European etiquette; its =
readiness=20
to dedicate itself to a lofty purpose, and so easily sacrifice for that =
purpose=20
normal conditions of life; its youthful fervor in <I>mitzvos</I>, which =
extends=20
well into old age.</P><I>
<P align=3Djustify>Mussar</I>, however, also has a significant criticism =
of=20
<I>Chassidus</I>: It sees <I>Chassidus </I>as too external, too =
theoretical and=20
abstract. The <I>Chasid </I>deludes himself into thinking that he is =
getting=20
more out of <I>Chassidus </I>than he actually is. <I>Chassidus </I>deals =
with=20
profound thoughts and great deeds, but it remains outside the essence of =
the=20
<I>Chasid</I>. <I>Chassidus </I>penetrates the depths of the greatest =
Torah=20
problems - between both Man and G-d, and between Man and Man - but it =
penetrates=20
too little the self of a person, so that he might engage in a reckoning =
as to=20
where he stands in relation to his World and in relation to his =
obligations in=20
his World... The average <I>Chasid </I>deludes himself into thinking =
that a=20
<I>nigun </I>that he sings wells up from his heart, and that the =
<I>dveykus=20
</I>that he experiences has its source in his soul, even though it is =
entirely=20
possible that these are transient moods, not associated with his true=20
essence.</P></DIR></DIR>
<DIR>
<DIR>
<P align=3Djustify>One should not judge hastily. We cannot say even to =
the=20
simplest <I>Chasid</I>, when he experiences <I>dveykus</I>, that he does =
not=20
truly cleave to G-d. But that constant self-critique: "Perhaps I am =
deluding=20
myself;" the query that should accompany every step in life: "Have I not =
strayed=20
in this instance from the path?"; and, finally, all that is encompassed =
in the=20
thought that serves as a necessary precondition for <I>Shivisi Hashem =
l'negdi=20
tamid </I>["I have placed G-d before me always"], namely, the thought, =
"I have=20
placed my "self" before me always," - all this is more prevalent in =
<I>Mussar=20
</I>than in <I>Chassidus</I>...</P></DIR></DIR>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The essay is of the type that may be =
described as=20
"Why I am not a Chosid despite it ma'alos". My statement about Breslov =
is=20
similar. Breslov has many ma'alos - but a Chassidus that deprives an =
adherent of=20
Iyun, is impossible for me to accept as a derech.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer<BR>Cong. Bais Tefila, =
3555 W.=20
Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL 60659<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila">http://www.aishdas.org/baistef=
ila</A>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
<A=20
href=3D"mailto:ygb@aishdas.org">ygb@aishdas.org</A></FONT></DIV></FONT></=
BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01BF4A67.E1752160--

[This is a repost-sorry for the error..rather than correct it I am
sending the whole post...I neglected to mention that they are
using STEM cells to enlarge/repair cloned organs since stem
cells adapt to the organ they are placed with]

Rabbi Moshe Tendler, at the 3rd Religion and Science conference
announced the following breakthru in transplants. The following
seems technologically feasable

---we can clone a person from one of his cells
---wait till the resulting fetus is at the 144 cell stage
---destroy the fetus and take out a desired organ
---transplant that organ into the original patient.
---we can they use stem cells to repair/enlarge the organ

Such a procedure is
---perfectly admissable halachically
---has no problems of transplant rejection
---seems technologically feasable now

Rabbi Tendler also mentioned some related odds and ends in
passing: Vis. the church has come out against cloning and placed
pressue on America till America prohibited federally funded clones
However private sectors can still do it. One industry made a big 
contract with the firm that produced "dolly" since they have 
perfected the technique of cloning (In passing...dolly was the
276th try or something)

Rabbi Tendler also said that they consider stem cells the greatest
breakthru of the 20th century

Russell Hendel; http://www.shamash.org/rashi
___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

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


[ 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         ]