Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 041

Friday, October 15 1999

• [none]
• Re: Veses Kavua
• Re: The destruction of Hungarian Jewry
• Re: Yoatzot
• Re: yoatzot
• Re: yoatzot
• Signatories
• Hungarian Jewry
• Re: Hungarian Jewry
• Chabad + Driving on Shabbos
• Re: Yoatzot
• Re: Chabad + Driving on Shabbos
• Re: yoatzot
• Yoatzot
• Re: yoatzot
• Re: Yoatzot
• Re: yoatzot
• yoatzot
• re: yoatzot

Subject: learnig, psak, yoatzot

< It is clear that there is a decrease in learning gemara in many MO circles.
< This is a serious problem which is being debated. 

<< A decrease in learning compared to what?  >>

It is no secret that the percentage of boys in Israel that go to hesder
is decreasing. The "in" programs now are the 1 year pre-army programs.
In general the programs that stress Talmud are suffering compared to
hashkafa, kabbalah, Tanach approaches.
This has been debated in various forums in Israel with various
"solutions" offered.

2. I had an article several years ago in Tradition in which I discuss
at length the issue of psak. I try to show that the idea of a gadol issuing
a psak for the "general world" is a new concept. I understand that
R. Moshe Feinstein would not (usually) issue a psak except in response to
an actual (not hypothetical) question.
In addition to halakhic considerations the concept of "siyata dishmaya"
seems to apply only to a direct psak for immediate action.

3. I understand that Rav Lichtenstein is not happy with the yoatzot
concept for an entirely different reason. He has no problem with
women becoming involved with halahkic questions. However, he is
against the concept of specialization, both for men & women.
ie he doesn't like the idea of anyone studying to be able to issue
psak in any narrow area of halacha.
Again, he did not address the specific question of these particular
women and their qualifications, he was responding to a general question.

Kol Tuv,
Eli Turkel

Chana Luntz writes in v4n39:
:             A mikvah lady presumably learns from another mikvah lady,
: and she can indeed watch until she feels comfortable she knows what she
: is doing.

Here in the greater New York area there are classes for prospective mikvah
ladies, roughly four nights. The mikvah where my wife worked required periodic
refreshers. Aside from T"H they'd also coach the mikvah lady in mentchlechkeit
issues (e.g. how to deal with shyness or making sure the newly observant would
want to return). Very importantly, they also cover how to identify signs of
spousal abuse, and what to do if you do suspect abuse.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 15-Oct-99: Shishi, Noach
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 53b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Haftorah

In v4n39, Eli Clark <clarke@HUGHESHUBBARD.COM> writes:
: It did make me think a little: I thought that, had the leadership of
: Hungarian Jewry encouraged their communities to leave Hungary, they
: would not have still been there in spring of 1944 when R. Weissmandl was
: trying to secure their escape.  But surely no one is looking to blame
: the slaughter of our brothers on fellow Jews; they were murdered by a
: modern-day Amalek, not by Zionist functionaries or leaders who did not
: know the future.  I feel certain we can all agree on that.

This is an important distinction: while being a cause is a necessary component
of culpability, the two are not identical. And, as Eli well shows, the fact
that one of the causes was itself a sin doesn't mean that the sinner is the
person culpable for anything but the sin itself.

An important principle to apply when you find a seifer attribute some calamity
to a sin. Be it the gemara's identification of the causes of churban bayis or
the Tosfos Yom Tov's linking talking in shul to Chelminiecki. Or even someone
who finds some sin in pre-holocaust European Jewry. These aren't cases of
blaming the victim. Considering the victim's actions a metaphysical cause
doesn't mean you're holding them culpable for the effects.

I don't think, though, that limiting the guilt of Zionist leadership to
ta'mod al dam rei'echa as opposed to the retzhichah itself really changes
the Yated's point.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 15-Oct-99: Shishi, Noach
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 53b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Haftorah

From: Yitzchok Zirkind
>From: "Dr. Jeffrey R. Woolf" <woolfj@mail.biu.ac.il>
>>1) In my ten years of experience as a shul Rav,I found that most women
>>would rather be mahmir in marot than ask (though about 80% of the
>>shaylos were open and shut either way). Being able to ask a
>>knowledgeable woman will only enhance TM and maybe raise the birthrate.
>This is not a straight forward Chumrah, many Kulos can come out of it as 
>well, and to keep track of all posibilities requires a strong concentration.

Precisely.  For the reasons stated above, and as articulated by Rabbanit
Henkin and the articles in the Jewish Week and elsewhere, this is why 
the yoatzot are a *good* thing.  Because the individual woman *doesn't*
have experience of anyone other than herself, and because it is widely
known that women *don't* ask the rav for situations that should be
questioned.  Remember, for the woman to ask the rav, she has to go
through an intermediary, who may or may not want to be involved, so 
she not only has to convince herself to ask, she has to convince either
the Rebbetzin or her husband to ask, and in either case, details can
be lost in transmission.  Furthermore, if women are automatically 
machmir on themselves (as Dr. Woolf suggests), that will decrease
the birthrate, and decrease mitzva observance in terms of tevillah
bizmano.  Or, if they are meikil (as R'YZ suggests), then they will
be letting themselves and their husbands into an issur karet, necessitating
extra teshuvah and an extra korban chatat when the BHM"K is rebuilt.

If the questions aren't being asked, and the penalties for incorrect
psak based on only the individual's knowledge are so great, anything
that improves this area of observance can ONLY be good.

From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
>Has anyone mentioned the role of "Mikva Lady" as analogous to the Yoatzot?

From: micha@aishdas.org (Micha Berger)
>I disagree. The mikvah lady isn't paskening, she's being an informed layperson.

I disagree.  The mikvah lady is paskening issur veheter, every bit as 
much as the shochet is paskening whether this cow is kosher or not.
Why should the preparation for niddah psak be less rigorous than that
for shechitah?  The penalties for incorrect performance of the former
are greater.

-----

By the way, what do the list's women members think of the rationale that
women will be more likely to approach the yoetzet than to ask the local
rav?  I've seen arguments on the basis of men's vs women's learning,
but what about the practical issue from those who are directly affected?

Micha Berger wrote:


> ... After all, we have no problem
> encouraging women to shake lulav ...


Heh.


---sam

Jon Baker writes in v4n
: By the way, what do the list's women members think of the rationale that
: women will be more likely to approach the yoetzet than to ask the local
: rav?

My wife isn't a member, but she believes it's true. In the city where she
worked the mikvah the problem of not asking sh'eilos is acute. The mikvah
even has an envelope in cubbyhole system to handle most k'samim anonymously.
By the estimate given here recently, 80% are open-and-shut cases, and much
of the remaining 20% wouldn't require asking more questions of the woman.
And, if such questions are asked, sometimes the mikvah lady is still relaying
the message.

She agrees with me, though, that you're presenting a false dichotomy. It's
not going to a yoetzet vs going to a Rabbi, there's also going to a mikvah
lady who'll go to the Rabbi for you. I don't think you can justify yoatzot
on the grounds of "women would feel more comfortable going to women", as
this alternative exists.

I really think the task requires two totally different steps: 1- showing
that the problems ba'alei Tosafos expressed WRT D'vorah being a shofetes
(and other such clear indications against women in religious leadership
roles) would not apply to yoatzot; 2- that the system has merit for the
women themselves above trying to direct those energies in more traditional
feminine roles. The key part to demonstrating #2 would be to show that their
interests ought to be in this direction, and not just justifying it in the
face that their interests are already.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 15-Oct-99: Shishi, Noach
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 53b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Haftorah

Might someone please post a list of the 55 rabbis that put Yigal Amir in
Cherem? Thanks.

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

Eli Clark writes that "I thought that, had the leadership of
Hungarian Jewry encouraged their communities to leave Hungary, they
would not have still been there in spring of 1944 when R. Weissmandl was
trying to secure their escape."  If you are talking about during the war,
where were they supposed to go?  With the Nazis occupying Austria,
Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia, the only open country was Romania, where
they would have been in more danger than in Hungary.  People make a point of
how the Belzer rebbe was able to leave Hungary for Eretz Yisroel, but it was
lot easier to smuggle two men out of Hungary than 800,000 men, women and
children.  If you are talking about the 1930's, there was also no place to
go to.  The United States had very severe quotas that were fully-subscribed.
Eretz Yisroel was under the 1929 white paper, and the Jewish Agency wasn't
giving out too many of their visas to Orthodox Jews.  Most of Western Europe
was closed off to immigration, and Central and Eastern Europe were no better
than Hungary.

By the way, I suggest reading Lucy Dawidowicz's take on the entire Joel
Brand affair.  It would seem that things weren't as clear cut as the Yated
makes it.

Levi Reisman

--- "Lawrence M. Reisman" <LMReisman@email.msn.com> wrote:
> By the way, I suggest reading Lucy Dawidowicz's take on the entire
> Joel
> Brand affair.  It would seem that things weren't as clear cut as
> the Yated
> makes it.
> 

For those of us who don't have the time: could you please summarize
the essence of her position?

Thanks and shabbat shalom.
Moshe

=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

In V4#40 Micha wrote:

>A parallel is the subject of driving to shul on Shabbos. The Conservative
>movement decided to tell its followers who wouldn't otherwise have access
>to Judaism that they may drive to shul and back on Shabbos. Technically,
>that's not much different than the Chabad meshulach who invites someone
>he knows will be driving to and from on Shabbos.

It has been my understanding that shluchay Chabad always offer the option
of accomodations for the whole Shabbos to anyone they invite for a Shabbos
visit who might drive, although they do not condition the invitation on making
it
a full Shabbos visit. If that is so, isn't it halachically different from the
Conservative
approach? 

Even apart from that, is there not at least a "technical" distinction between
1] telling a Jew she can or should drive on Shabbos and 2] extending a Shabbos
invitation to someone who knows perfectly well that the person extending the
invitation opposes any form of chillul Shabbos, including driving?

The anti-Chabad animus that tends to crop up on this list is incredible. How can
you even think to equate the Conservative and Chabad shitos regarding driving on
Shabbos?

Shabat Shalom,
David

In a message dated 10/15/99 8:12:52 AM EST, jjbaker@panix.com writes:

>  Precisely.  For the reasons stated above, and as articulated by Rabbanit
>  Henkin and the articles in the Jewish Week and elsewhere, this is why 
>  the yoatzot are a *good* thing. 

As many here have pointed out, all that is needed is a well trained Mikva 
lady and refresher courses, why the new title?

>    Remember, for the woman to ask the rav, she has to go
>  through an intermediary, who may or may not want to be involved,

They are allowed to ask the Rav themselves too.

>   Furthermore, if women are automatically 
>  machmir on themselves (as Dr. Woolf suggests), that will decrease
>  the birthrate, and decrease mitzva observance in terms of tevillah
>  bizmano.  Or, if they are meikil (as R'YZ suggests),

The main reason of my response to this post is to explain what I meant, I am 
not Chosheid G-d forbid Frume Yiddishe Veiber from being Meikil, what I said 
is that when it comes to a Mareh, being Machmir can lead to Kulas as far as 
Vestos, unless one calculates every possibility if it is Kosher or not, (I 
don't think this list is the place to elaborate on how that could happen). 

Gut Shabbos, Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

In v4n41, David Nadoff <david.nadoff@bkfpn.com> takes me to task. I want
to address his concerns in seriousness order, so I'm not quoting his points
in sequence.

He writes:
: The anti-Chabad animus that tends to crop up on this list is incredible. How
: can you even think to equate the Conservative and Chabad shitos regarding
: driving on Shabbos?

Chas vishalom! My intent was lihefech 180deg from the way it apparantly read
to you. I was contrasting (certainly not equating) two ways of approaching
driving on Shabbos as a means to expose someone to Yahadus: the wrong way,
which is Conservative policy; and what I understood Chabad policy to be, which
I was using to show a more correct way of doing things.

Chabad is being used as an example for how to do things correctly. Far
from any intent to express animus. Please don't confuse my fears about the
messianic splinter with my attitude toward true Chabad Chassidus.

My whole point was that the C movement, by ignoring issues of "ein morin kein"
brought about major chillul Shabbos by the rabbim. Chabad, or at least what
I understood to be Chabad policy to be, was being used as contrast. You still
got them to the Shabbos table, but by making it clear it's wrong to drive,
you don't encourage further chillul Shabbos.

: It has been my understanding that shluchay Chabad always offer the option
: of accomodations for the whole Shabbos to anyone they invite for a Shabbos
: visit who might drive, although they do not condition the invitation on
: making it a full Shabbos visit. 

Even so, they don't cancel the visit after the person declines. Again, they
make it clear that while they may think driving to shul is better than driving
elsewhere, they make it clear it's wrong. No invitations to any slippery
slopes.

: Even apart from that, is there not at least a "technical" distinction between
: 1] telling a Jew she can or should drive on Shabbos and 2] extending a Shabbos
: invitation to someone who knows perfectly well that the person extending the
: invitation opposes any form of chillul Shabbos, including driving?

I think the distinction you are addressing is exactly the one I made. The
first is saying "It's okay to drive to shul if you'd otherwise be going to the
golf course and getting no Judaism". The second is saying "I know you'll be
driving to shul, I'm not happy about it." The second lacks the offensive
hora'ah. It's clear that the invitation is permissable only because it is
"better than otherwise". No one creates a public impression that it's "ideal".

We seem to only differ on our usage of the word "technical".

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 15-Oct-99: Shishi, Noach
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 53b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Haftorah

Micha Berger wrote:

> I disagree. The mikvah lady isn't paskening, she's being an informed layperson.
> Anything that is the subject of current machlokes poskim or requires significant
> thought or research would be forwarded to the local rav. These women are really
> being trained to make the local rav redundant -- IOW, they're being placed
> in a (albeit limited) rabbinic role, no matter what we call them.
>
> I don't think that's generally true. I remember my wife telling me that the
> younger charedi mikvah ladies were paskening whether asked or not.

steve

  Some points and questions about the thread on yoatzot.

1) Rav Berger has suggested that the novel position of yoatzot is inherently
suspect, as new models of spirituality are inherently suspect.    His entire
argument can be  used verbatim against women teachers of limude kodesh in day
schools (something not found in 19th century Lita), and michlalot in general. 
Does he see a difference, and if so, what?

2)  Some of the earlier discussion which focused on the direct need that the
women yoatzot are supposed to fill, rather than the slippery slope aspect. 
Questions were raised about whether indeed there were questions about whether
there were questions that the women would not go to currently available sources
(rav, rebbitzen, mikve lady..)  

I think that the question itself betrays an enormous naivete of current mores in
MO community, which, if I interprete R Sherer's post properly, are also invading
the haredi community (part of what Rav Dr Chaim Soloveichik has described in the
subtle Westernization of haredi community). This is not directly related to the
issues of "Orthodox feminism", but is rather a  modern notion of zniut.  It is
related to the fact that so many women today will not go to a male gynecologist.
(the fact that he may have a female nurse helps, but is not enough) There is a
reluctance to discuss, or even have discussed by others (one perhaps novel
aspect of this zniut), one's intimate bodily functions with a male, even someone
in a supposedly objective, professional role.

    Part of the problem with the currently available sources is that, even if
they are sensitive and somewhat knowledgable (neither of which is necessarily
true) ultimately there is a close discussion of the facts with the male rav,
with the identity of the questioner frequently being revealed to the rav.  It is
only one step up to hand a cloth to a woman to hand to a man, and many are
reluctant to proceed.  Furthermore, if the intermediary is not learned, they
will not necessarily ask the right questions (Chana Luntz has commented several
times on the importance of  information gathering for psak), and interviewing by
proxy is not easy. Few questions therefore get asked, as has been confirmed by
several posters.  Furthermore, it is naive to think that all questions get self
paskened l'humra.

(   By the way, the yoatzot don't necessarily abrogate the role of the community
rav in setting policy, as issues that are not clear can be discussed, without
bringing the individual questioner into it.)

    Thus, while sensitivity training and opening better communications through
traditional channels  would be useful, they wouldn't fully solve the problem. 
Furthermore, before Rabbanit Henkin's program, even this wasn't being discussed. 
One can, I suppose, bemoan the rise of the new sensibility as not being based on
halacha, but that won't change it.  However, the questions betray a tremendous
chasm in the understanding of the real issues, perhaps proof (although in a
different way) of the chasm Rav Bechhofer sees rising. 

We can argue about the slippery slope- whether it exists, and even then, whether
that is enough to pasul this.  As I think that it is clear that this will
improve observance of the issur karet of taharat hamishpacha, it would have to
be a very slippery slope.

However, to suggest that there isn't a real need that this is trying to address
shows such ignorance of the reality that, for me, it invalidates the rest of the
argument.  As Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin said, uvata el hashofet asher yihyeh
bayamim hahem means that the posek has to be bayamim hahem - has to understand
the problems and realities of his community.  

Meir Shinnar

I have been gone for a while from this list, and inly now started reading it 
again.

I was particularly struck by one comment:

<<
Far more ratzon Hashem would be accomplished by providing the same money, 
training and positions as incentives to the best and brightest MO men - who, 
as I
really believe, would do far better than the women! 
>>

I find this outrageous for two reasons.  

First, what right does the writer, no matter how great hemight be or think he 
might be, have to speak for "ratzon Hashem".  I have made it a habit whenever 
I am asked something along the lines of "What does HaShem think.." to respond 
tat I am not His spokesman.  He does His own talking.

If the writer here feels that he has a person feeling for how HaShem might 
react to a certain situation, let him bring sources.  Otherwise we are left 
to assume that he is a prophet.  And I have previously addressed the issue of 
who has prophecy in this day and age.

The other difficulty I have is why he thinks that there is some inherent 
superiority to men over women when it comes to hora'ah, or any other field 
for that matter.  Throwing a compliment to MO men hardly overshadows the 
insult to all women in his remarks.

Eliyahu D Teitz
Jewish Educational Center
Elizabeth, NJ

Meir Shinnar writes in v4n41 (this issue):
: 1) Rav Berger ...

I'm not a Rav. I recommend sticking to using R' -- it's safely ambiguous
between Rav or Reb.

:           ... has suggested that the novel position of yoatzot is inherently
: suspect, as new models of spirituality are inherently suspect.

I stated that I'm not of the Chasam Sofer's school of "chadash assur min
haTorah". (Actually, I said Chazon Ish, I misspoke.)

My problem is that you're leading people to a dead end. A woman who wants
a Rabbinic leadership position will have to settle for being a Yoetzet. Women
who want to have a true minyan will have to settle for prayer groups. We're
encouraging them to pursue paths of spirituality in which they can't reach
the end goal. This might be setting them up for failure.

It might be more fruitful to guide them back to modes where there is no
such limitation.

:                                                                   His entire
: argument can be  used verbatim against women teachers of limude kodesh in day
: schools (something not found in 19th century Lita), and michlalot in general. 
: Does he see a difference, and if so, what?

But the key word in what you wrote (included in my second snippet) was
"suspect". Yes, I believe they're suspect -- not inherently wrong. It's a
question that needs real exploration. I wish we had a Chafeitz Chaim to
quell my doubts. Without him, I'm left in doubt.

To reiterate: I'm in doubt. I'm afraid of risking a slippery slope with
nothing better than merely the possibility of a positive as motivation. I
am NOT asserting it's certainly a bad idea. It just sounds that way because
the forum lead me to stress that side of the fence. Had more people soundly
condemned it, I'd be speculating on the list that perhaps there are positives
that make it worth it.

What I have yet to see is proof that this really addresses a need that can't
be filled otherwise. At least then I can do a cost-benefits analysis. (Not that
my own analysis would mean much to anyone but myself.)

The two positives I've seen so far are unconvincing:

1- Increased observance of T"H.

   To prove the increased observance is caused by the concept of Yoetzet you'd
   have to explain why the Yoetzet needs more eduction than a few sessions to
   know how to deal with clients, how to frame questions to a poseik, etc...

   If these women aren't going to the mikvah lady, why would they go to a
   Yoetzet?

2- Providing an outlet for their learning, presumably because the Yoetzet
   herself has a desire to serve the kehillah in this domain. I wrote my fears
   about this above.

   I think more learning lishmah (in accordance with the C"C), along with
   providing a leadership/advice role outside of providing halachic direction
   (e.g. Rebbetzin Jungreis) might be a more productive model.

Another real open question is defining "giving a p'sak" in distinction to
"teaching the halachah". There's a grey area there. I realize I assumed the
problem with woman Rabbis is that women can't be on the p'sak end of the
spectrum. (*) Please correct me if I'm wrong.

However, I can't see how someone studying that intensively is NOT planning
to be on the p'sak end of things. Or, to remove the double negative: It
looks to me that someone who is studying that intensively is being set up
to be a poseik on at least a limited domain of halachah.

-mi

* I apologize for the acutely conflicting metaphors of "gray area" and
  "spectrum".

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 15-Oct-99: Shishi, Noach
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 53b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Haftorah

Welcome back REDT!

I am suprised at your difficulty:

If HKBH (Hakadosh Baruch Hu) would not have made Talmud Torah an obligation
for men and only an option for women; and Din Torah (as in membership in a
Beis Din or Sanhedrin), an option for men, but not for women, then there
would be room for your objection, but, as is, I simply do not understand it.

KT,

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

----- Original Message -----
From: <EDTeitz@aol.com>
To: <avodah@aishdas.org>

> The other difficulty I have is why he thinks that there is some inherent
> superiority to men over women when it comes to hora'ah, or any other field
> for that matter.  Throwing a compliment to MO men hardly overshadows the
> insult to all women in his remarks.

Reb jeffrey Wolf wrote "Rav Warhaftig, the head of the Nishmat program,
sits on a Besdin for Dine Mamonos with Reb Zalman Nehemiah. I doubt that
he would do so if he felt that his partner, Rav W was an okher yisrael"

which RavWarhaftig? is this Rav Yaakov Warhaftig Of Har Nof? incidentally,
I learned with him in machon Ariel, he gave the shiurim in the Semichah
program there.  I haven't met many people in his league when it comes to
his tremendous knowledge of Shulchan Aruch and the poskim. He also is an
outstanding posek in the area of niddah, this would only give me even more
confidence in the women trained by him.  In fact, we also had regular
chaburos from R' Zalman Nechemiah and there was a very close relationship
between them of mutual respect. 

RYGB writes "There have been several institutions, Orthodox and not, that
were called such, but I was referring more to the concept: A seminary for
the express purpose of training rabbis, as opposed to Torah learning for
its own sake."

He then writes in responseto Ms Shoshana's reference to Hesder yeshiva's
kollelim, "Studying for semicha bechinos is not what I mean by a
semicha program."

The programs that I saw when I learned in Machon Ariel included much more
than "studying for bechinos."
Many included practical Hashgachah, courses in public speaking, computer
Torah research, lectures and seminars about dealing with social issues
such as teen delinquency and shalom bayis and much more."  However, there
is no question that 95% of our time was spent trying to master Hilchos
shabbos, niddah, availus, and issur vehetter. 

Shaul weinreb

An interesting article is available on the web. It seems to be an excerpt
from a larger article, and I can't tell whether the full title is "Women
and the Issuing of Halakhic Rulings by Chanah Henkin", or possibly just
"Women and the Issuing of Halakhic Rulings", written by Rabbanit Henkin.

In any case, those interested can read it at
http://www.virtual.co.il/channels/torah/feature2.htm

Akiva Miller
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: 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         ]