Avodah Mailing List
Volume 04 : Number 450
Monday, March 20 2000
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 09:54:14 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: Sheva, Chataf and Mordechai
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 10:38:25PM +0200, D & E-H Bannett wrote:
: When they don't ignore the sheva na' completely, most Ashkenazim pronounce
: it as a mild e (eh) sound.
I think this implies greater consistancy than is real. Yes, the shiva na is
often given the same sound as is a chirik chaseir, but not consistantly.
This leads to the oddity that "yihyeh" (chirik, sh'va nach, segol) often
ends up pronounced as though it were "y'heeyeh" (chirik, chirik malei,
segol).
The phonetic schwa is actually a neutral vowel. The shift from patach through
kamatz and cholam to shuruk is one of greater and greater rounding of the
lips. Whereas patach-segol-tzeirei-chirik is a continuum of greater closure
of the back. The patach gets its name from the fact that both positions are
open.
If you think of the front and back rounding as seperate axis, you get a
square with patach, chirik and shuruk at three of its corners -- and schwa
would be much of the territory in the middle. Where it lies in relation to
center is how chatufos differ from schwa na.
(Note that the vowels on each side are made malei by writing in the semivowel
(yud /y/ or vuv /w/) that involves the same part of the mouth. In all
probability, "lo" (meaning "to him) has a vuv for the same reason the English
"blow" ends in a "w".
German and French have sounds in which both front and back are slightly closed,
such as the vowel in the French "dieu". English doesn't, and I don't know
of a traditional havarah that has such a sound, either.
Schwa sits somewhere in the middle, no particular rounding giving the vowel
character. Therefore RDB's observation that:
: In all these words, the sheva is not a normal vowel sound but a weak, mild,
: tint of the respective vowel, just a faint hint of the vowel sound.
is true of many languages.
: R' Shlomo Almoli
: (circa 1500), after detailing the different sounds, states
: that the differences are vanishing and "In most places, all shevas are read
: as a segol".
Which is seen in transliterations to still be common amongst American
Asheknazim. (c.g. "Bereishis")
While we're on the subject, is a chataf-kamatz read as a schwa colored by a
kamatz katan or kamatz gadol. I picked up the former when I started working
on "Ashirah Lashem", but I have no recollection of where.
Mechy Frankel later writes:
: And that is for consideration of the interesting
: question as to how chazal's hebrew (and moshe's for that matter) actually
: sounded compared to what the tiberian masoretes proposed and compared
: to what we do.
Why would anyone but a Levi want to reproduce Moshe's pronunciation of
Hebrew? For all I know I'm from Shevet Efraim (my ancestor just happened to
be in Malchus Yisrael at the right time) and I should drop the /sh/ sound.
My point is, there never was any one "correct" pronunciation.
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 19-Mar-00: Cohen, Tzav
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 11b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 22
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 09:59:03 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: The Holocaust and the Pope (and the RW)
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 06:30:02PM -0500, DFinchPC@aol.com wrote:
: As a religion of joy, hope, and engagement with HaShem, Judaism can be hurt
: as well as helped by Holocaust remembrance. If we're beyond self-pity and
: victimization, then that's what we really should be celebrating at this point.
Hear, hear.
Sometimes I think the centrality of the Holocaust in the mindset of many
Jews is because it's the only emotional motivation they have left for
Judaism. Stripped of halachah, the religion's philosophical depth and
everything else that makes it worthwhile, how do you keep little Stephanie
from intermarrying? Guilt! How can anyone give away what so many died for?
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 19-Mar-00: Cohen, Tzav
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 11b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 22
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 10:08:44 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: Proper Jewish Fashion
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 09:32:15AM -0500, Yzkd@aol.com wrote:
: Lhalacha Lmaseh we see Bpoeil that the garb has changed from Golus to Golus,
: whether this was out of Oines not to be persecuted, or to make life easier,
: Soif Kol Soif Sheiris Yisroel LO YAsu Avlah, so there is Heter...
This reminds me of a discussion on scj, in which someone posted Schechter's
definition of "Catholic Israel / Klal Yisrael", in which Schechter omits to
explain the bit that makes it non-circular.
In this case, "sh'eiris Yisrael" is taken to mean those Jews who remain, and
who remain observant. Yet you are also using the quote in the reverse, to
assert that what the surviving kehillah does can't be avlah. Your definition
of "shi'eiris" and "avlah" are mutually dependant, making a two-step circle.
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 19-Mar-00: Cohen, Tzav
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 11b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 22
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 10:19:51 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: birkhat ha-gomeil
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 12:19:23PM -0500, Gershon Dubin wrote:
: Is there another situation where one person can be motzi another with a
: birchas hashevach, as opposed to birchas hamitzva or birchas hanehenin?
How about Chazaras haShatz?
: If not, why can a husband be motzi a wife and all those people bentching
: gomel seriatim cannot be yotze with one person's brocho?
Perhaps because the husband and wife are benching gomel for the same chessed
from HKBH.
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 19-Mar-00: Cohen, Tzav
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 11b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 22
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 11:23:37 -0500
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Subject: Re[2]: Proper Jewish Fashion
IIRC the Baal haTanya makes a three-ring circle (almost a pun)
on Yisroel Oraisso v'kudhsa brich hu = chad hu
Richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Proper Jewish Fashion
Author: <avodah@aishdas.org> at tcpgate
Date: 3/20/2000 11:07 AM
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 09:32:15AM -0500, Yzkd@aol.com wrote:
: Lhalacha Lmaseh we see Bpoeil that the garb has changed from Golus to Golus,
: whether this was out of Oines not to be persecuted, or to make life easier,
: Soif Kol Soif Sheiris Yisroel LO YAsu Avlah, so there is Heter...
This reminds me of a discussion on scj, in which someone posted Schechter's
definition of "Catholic Israel / Klal Yisrael", in which Schechter omits to
explain the bit that makes it non-circular.
In this case, "sh'eiris Yisrael" is taken to mean those Jews who remain, and
who remain observant. Yet you are also using the quote in the reverse, to
assert that what the surviving kehillah does can't be avlah. Your definition
of "shi'eiris" and "avlah" are mutually dependant, making a two-step circle.
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 19-Mar-00: Cohen, Tzav
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 11b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 22
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 10:30:31 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: Moshe Rabbeinu
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 09:32:29AM +0200, Carl and Adina Sherer wrote:
: Good point. But the Kohanim were the Kohanim with all of the
: restrictions that go with that within 120 days after Matan Torah. If
: everyone had divorced their wives there would have been a lot of
: ineligible women out there, even if not immediately at the time of
: Matan Torah.
I assume that no matter how we'd hold WRT whether the avos had the same din
as a Yisrael, chezkas kashrus did apply to them. Otherwise, the women couldn't
marry kohanim -- as they became Jewish above the age of three!
And the situation was unique in another way -- the Kohanim were geirim. I
wonder what the din of a woman would be who is neither a gerushah, a nisu'ah
nor a besulah, nor was bo'el anyone other than the kohein who is the husband-
to-be.
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 19-Mar-00: Cohen, Tzav
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 11b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 22
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 18:30:37 +0200
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: How can we condemn the church if we do not live up to
On 20 Mar 00, at 9:59, richard_wolpoe@ibi.com wrote:
> im ein ani li mi li!
>
> uch'sheani leatzmi - ma ani?
I'm not sure what you're getting at. I was simply saying that our
responsibilities towards fellow Jews come before others.
-- 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.
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 10:25:16 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: Mordochai and More; medical alert
: 6. Rbannett remarks that there are nine spelling differences between
: the Breuer?Keter and the "normal chumoshim'.
According to R' Matis Blum (author of "Torah Loda'as") our "normal chumashim"
are products of the fact that the printing house in Soncino printed the
chumash first, which means that all subsequent chumashim were compiled in
comparison to a Sepharadi one.
: But that was
: all before the ashqenazim threw in the towel and essentially adopted
: the sephardi girso'os for their torahs.
R' Blum credits Soncino with the publication in Ashkenaz of chumashim that
place aliyos in the Sepharadi locations. Normally this isn't an issue -- except
for parashas Ha'azinu. It's been a while since I davened by him, so I forgot
whose aliyos for Ha'azinu R' Blum uses instead.
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 19-Mar-00: Cohen, Tzav
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 11b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 22
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 10:17:35 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: Tav L'Meisav
Tav Limesav differs from cheireish in two ways:
1- Cheireish isn't a din of chazakah, it's an umdinah. As I said earlier, I
think RYBS's point is that chazakos aren't umdinos -- which has the
advantage of making them distinct from a ruba dileisa likaman.
2- R' Kook says that halachah can only change lichumrah in light of scientific
advance. (As has been written here before ad nauseum.)
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 19-Mar-00: Cohen, Tzav
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 11b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 22
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 09:04:38 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Livin' in the US
In v4n427, Harry Maryles wrote:
: But I hate to think that
: this is the message that we want to send to G-d: If
: you want us to be Frum, oppress us.
Moshe states this truism quite eloquently in Parashas Ha'azinu. And the
phenomenon is basically the backbone of seifer Shoftim.
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 19-Mar-00: Cohen, Tzav
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 11b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 22
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 09:26:23 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: Yissachor-Zevulun Learning Arrangement
On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 09:46:56PM -0600, Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer wrote:
: But further thought led me to reconsider, that as by
: definition all sachar for non-Jews seems to be b'hechrech gemuli, so there
: should be some residual similar component by Jews as well.
I don't understand why you make your assumption. Why can't non-Jews have
sechar seguli? Doesn't the Nefesh haChaim's explanation of the connection
of mitzvah to sechar apply to the 7 mitzvos B'nei Noach as well?
Along similar lines, Gil Student asked about how acharonim can even question
whether non-Jews can do teshuvah.
The Techeiles Mordechai quotes Eruvin 62a and the Rashi ad loc, which states
that "vehashiv es hagezeilah" only applies to Jews. He comments on "Mikol
asher ya'aseh ha'adam lachato biheinah", noting that "ha'adam" includes
non-Jews. (See Tosafos A"Z 3a, which says that this is the difference between
"adam" -- as in "adam ki yamus ba'ohel", and "ha'adam.) However, from the text
about teshuvah "viharah ki yecheta vi'asham, viheishiv..." the T"M notes
that the word "ha'adam" is lacking, implying that teshuvah -- at least of
the word mentioned in the pasuk -- isn't available to non-Jews.
I think the question isn't about repentence, but about full teshuvah, which
the Ramban defines as machshavah, dibbur (vidui), and ma'aseh (korban).
In particular note that the word "Yehudi" implies that we have a special
relationship to vidui and hoda'ah.
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 19-Mar-00: Cohen, Tzav
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 11b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 22
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 10:12:53 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: Ayin Tachas Ayin
Thanks to RD Hojda (BTW, how do you pronounce your surname?), I had the
opportunity to look through R' Coopeman's comments on these words.
He doesn't touch, however, the quote Rich and I were debating, where the
Rambam says it's "mipi hashmu'a", an expression I do not take to be identical
to "dirashah". Instead, he asserts that everyone holds that the peshat is
recommending removing the fellow's eye, and that halachah follows derashah,
not peshat. Both of which need to be understood, though.
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 19-Mar-00: Cohen, Tzav
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 11b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 22
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 11:26:55 -0500
From: Gil.Student@citicorp.com
Subject: Re: berachah at the seder
RE Turkel wrote:
>>I was discussing with our local rabbi a problem of making a beracha at
a second seder for Israelis coming to Russia to help. He said that one could not
make a beracha on a safek yomtov even if both days were safek.
That lead to the question of what would have been done in Bavel in the days of
the second Temple wherever the messengers did not reach. Did that mean they made
a seder on both possibilities both without any berachot because each day was a
safek? What about tefillot for yomtov?>>
I believe that this was a big machlokes halachah lema'aseh between the Rambam
and the Chachmei Luneil. I think most of it can be found in the Kessef Mishnah
if you can find the place in the Rambam, which shouldn't be too hard. IIRC, the
lomdus was whether Yom Tov Sheini is a vadai chiyuv mita'am safek or a safek
chiyuv. Mv"R R. Mayer Twersky wrote an article about it in one of the Beis
Yitzchak journals around '93/'94.
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 18:32:00 +0200
From: "Akiva Atwood" <atwood@netvision.net.il>
Subject: RE: Sheker VeChazav
> The Intel story, (despite your assertions
> about the reasons for their reloction, which may be
> part of the reason they left) is as I stated it. It
> was published in a national Israeli newsmagazine. The
R' Harry --
IN the eyes of the Israeli media, the charedim are to blame for
*everything*.
You want to bring *that* as a proof?
Akiva
A reality check a day keeps
the delusions at bay (Gila Atwood)
===========================
Akiva Atwood, POB 27515
Jerusalem, Israel 91274
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 18:37:20 +0200
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il>
Subject: Re: Moshe Rabbeinu
On 20 Mar 00, at 10:30, Micha Berger wrote:
> And the situation was unique in another way -- the Kohanim were
> geirim. I wonder what the din of a woman would be who is neither a
> gerushah, a nisu'ah nor a besulah, nor was bo'el anyone other than the
> kohein who is the husband- to-be.
That's like the case of boel arusoso b'beis chamav, which while
frowned upon would still be mutar for a Yisroel. I'm not sure though
whether she would be mutar to a Cohen.
-- 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.
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 11:38:31 -0500
From: "Stein, Aryeh E." <aes@ll-f.com>
Subject: RE: Proper Jewish Fashion
According to R' SZ Auerbach, the reason for wearing a yarmulka is "2)
malbush ivri/yehudi" (and it was the derech of gentile men (but not gentile
women) to be bareheaded.
If the reason was "1) Kisuy Rosh [i.e., yiras shomayim]", then all females
(including single women/girls) should wear a yarmulka.
KT and a Freilechen Purim
Aryeh
aes@ll-f.com
=====================================================
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 11:27:37 -0500
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Subject: Re[2]: Proper Jewish Fashion
Simple Brisker Torah <smile>
There are TWO dinnim in wearing a yarmulke
1) Kisuy Rosh - this is NOT a d'oraisso for men
2) malbush ivri/yehudi
<snip>
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 10:40:43 -0600
From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: Moshe Rabbeinu
On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 06:37:20PM +0200, Carl M. Sherer wrote:
: That's like the case of boel arusoso b'beis chamav, which while
: frowned upon would still be mutar for a Yisroel. I'm not sure though
: whether she would be mutar to a Cohen.
With the added kineitch that the Kohein was a non-Jew at the time, so not
even frowning need be involved.
-mi
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 18:48:34 +0200
From: "Carl M. Sherer" <cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il>
Subject: Re: Mordochai and More; medical alert
On 20 Mar 00, at 10:25, Micha Berger wrote:
> R' Blum credits Soncino with the publication in Ashkenaz of chumashim
> that place aliyos in the Sepharadi locations. Normally this isn't an
> issue -- except for parashas Ha'azinu.
In Truma there are two ways of placing Shlishi (one after the
Shulchan and one after the Menorah). I'm not sure which is
Ashkenazi and which is Sephardi, and I usually do it whichever
way is most common in the Chumashim in the shul where I am
leyining.
-- 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.
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 11:39:04 -0500
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Subject: Re[2]: birkhat ha-gomeil
IIIRC ishto kegufo was invoked by some cahver on the list already as a chiluk...
Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
: If not, why can a husband be motzi a wife and all those people bentching
: gomel seriatim cannot be yotze with one person's brocho?
Perhaps because the husband and wife are benching gomel for the same chessed
from HKBH.
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 19-Mar-00: Cohen, Tzav
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Rosh-Hashanah 11b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 22
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 11:49:01 -0500
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Subject: Re: Megilas Esther & Sheimos/Tasmania
lkeacha mordeachi lo l'vas
L'vas = L'vais
Bitehco = veitcheho
Just as Mordechai's Bas was his wife, so too the dibros allude to ishtecho via
vitecho
Good purim
Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
PS (And almost a Purim Torah:) BTW talking of Tasmania, some
time ago I read a book called (I think) History of Jews in
Tasmania which relates a story from the early days of the Hobart
Hebrew Congregation. The Shul Board had passed a resolution that any person
found to be working on Shabbos be fined the amount of 2 shillings
and sixpence. One Sunday they called in and fined a certain
member whose wife had opened their store on the previous
Shabbos. The husband claimed, however, that wives were not included
in the Issur of working on Shabbos. His proof was that in the
Torah it is written - Lo Saaseh Bo Melcoho - Atto Uvincho Uvitecho
Avdecho VeAmosecho - whilst "Ishtecho" doesn't get a mention....
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 11:48:53 -0500
From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
Subject: Proper Jewish Fashion - Purim Alert
funny quote in Bentwich's bio of Schechter
"if Shechter goes on ranting one more time about Catholic Israel - I am going to
start Protestant Israel!"
and the Pope is in Israel, how appropos for Purim! And he is wearing a white
yamrkula - Yom kiPurim indeed!
Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
This reminds me of a discussion on scj, in which someone posted Schechter's
definition of "Catholic Israel / Klal Yisrael", in which Schechter omits to
explain the bit that makes it non-circular.
In this case, "sh'eiris Yisrael" is taken to mean those Jews who remain, and
who remain observant. Yet you are also using the quote in the reverse, to
assert that what the surviving kehillah does can't be avlah. Your definition
of "shi'eiris" and "avlah" are mutually dependant, making a two-step circle.
-mi
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 12:12:19 EST
From: Yzkd@aol.com
Subject: Re: ve-laharog
In a message dated 3/20/00 8:28:31 AM Eastern Standard Time,
micha@aishdas.org writes:
> :> Burim Sameach
>
> : Ein Bur Yerei Cheit :-)
>
> Chayav adam/inish livsumei biFurei ad dilo yada...
>
Actualy behind the smiley I had in mind what Poskim write that if one will
lose his Yerei Cheit one should not imbibe.
Purim Someiach to each and all
Yitzchok Zirkind
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 12:16:50 EST
From: Yzkd@aol.com
Subject: Re: Burim
In a message dated 3/20/00 9:27:54 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Leah2girls@aol.com writes:
> va'yaritsuhu min habur
prononciation is different Hab*o*r, (the plural is Boros). in any case Yosef
was Mordechai's great grandfather.
Happy Purim
Yitzchok Zirkind
Go to top.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 12:19:56 EST
From: Yzkd@aol.com
Subject: Re: Proper Jewish Fashion
In a message dated 3/20/00 11:09:17 AM Eastern Standard Time,
micha@aishdas.org writes:
> making a two-step circle
a Hachana to Purim Ad Dloi Yoda! :-)
Kol Tuv
Yitzchok Zirkind
Go to top.
*********************
[ 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 ]