Avodah Mailing List

Volume 11 : Number 009

Wednesday, May 7 2003

• RE: Pesach Shiurim
• Re: Writing a Sefer Torah
• Re: Burial on Yom Tov
• Re: Women answering amen to shehechiyanu in kiddush
• Re: Miracles (not) in Halacha
• somchin al haness
• Re: Miracles in Halacha
• Re: somchin al haness
• To: Avodah - High Level Torah Discussion Group
• Re: Hallel and Sefira
• Re: Hallel and Sefira
• Re: Writing a Sefer Torah
• Re: Miracles (not) in Halacha
• Gratitude to your enemy?
• Re: Writing a Sefer Torah
• Gedolei Yosroel and Hester Panim
• Re: Rabbi Slifkin, are you there?
• Re: Keriah on seeing the Kosel
• Re: Talmud on computers
• Re: Nefilas Apayim
• Re: your mail
• Re: Nefilas Apayim
• Re: Nefilas Apayim

> When at Ner, I was once told that someone at the Star-K water-proofed
> (with a spray coating of some sort) a piece of matzah and used
> water-displacement to arrive at the shiur that one sixth of an average
> hand matzah is a k'zayis. Noda B'Yehudah x2 gets you to a third of a
> matzah. With machine, it came to quarter and NodaB'Yehudah half.

It was R' Heinemann who conducted these experiments. R' Heineman (who
used to be magid shiur in NIRC) gives a weekly halacha shiur at NIRC on
Motzei Shabbos. One of the regular participants organized and compiled
his notes and published a pamphlet/sefer with all of the R' Heinemann's
shitos regarding hilchos pesach. In the sefer, he writes as follows:

"According to R' Heinemann's experiments concerning the volume of a
whole piece of matzah, one hand-made matzah displaces three beitzos
(5.7 fluid ounces). Based on this, one would need a third of a hand
matzah to fulfill the mitzvah of eating matzah according to the more
stringent opinion of egg sizes (that eggs are half the size today as they
had been). The matzah used in this experiment was a Tselem Poppa matza.
Machine made matzos is two beitzos (3.8 fluid ounces).

"The experiment was conducted as follows: Each matzah was first sprayed
with a plastic coating. This would ensure that all the air bubbles in
the matzah would be included in the volume recorded, as halacha dictates.
The matzos were then taken and placed in a bowl filled with water and
the amount of water that each matzah displaced was put in a graduated
cylinder to determine the volume of a beitzah (or kezayis according
to the stringent opinion). (The matzos could not put into a graduate
cylinder because of their size).

According to R' Heinemann, for motzi matzah (i.e., two kzaysim) one
should eat one-half of a machine matzah and 1/3 of a hand matzah (10.25"
diameter).

(I only eat machine matzos on Pesach, so I don't have to worry about the
wide discrepencies in the size of matzos. FWIW, R' Heinemann uses hand
matzah for motzi-matzah at the sedorim and uses machine matzos for the
remainder of Pesach.)

KT
Aryeh

I wrote;
>3. We simply hide behind the Rosh to buy the most popular versions: - - 
>With the odd letter missing / malformed - - With typos

To which Reb Gil Student responded:
> Since most of us are not writing sifrei Torah right now, it seems like
> the best option until we have the ability to commission a sefer Torah.
> That, and writing/buying a letter in someone else's sefer Torah (which
> *might* be some sort of a kiyum).
> I would also direct the chevra to R' Chaim Volozhiner's comments in
> Ruach Chaim that buying sefarim is a kiyum in "havei misabek be-afar
> ragleihem".

1. I'm aware of the fact that buying seforim is very popular - but can
we prove (or disprove) that we are doing anything related to the mitzva
of writing a Sefer Torah - at least according to the Rosh - by doing so?

2. Those who are relying on the Rosh - and therefor relying on the
reason behind the Mitzva (to learn from the Sefer) - how would they
explain that "writing/buying a letter in someone else's sefer Torah"
has any relevance to the mitzva? Whne will they ever get a chance to
learn from their (shared) Sefer?

Lastly, what's the reason that so many people "ignore" this mitzva? Sure
it's expensive, but so are cars, vacations, etc. Besides which, there's
always the DIY option. In All For the Boss, Rebbetzin Shain mentions
that her father instructed them to buy a Sefer Tora when they bought a
new apartement - a great practical way to do it - just add it to your
mortgage.

- Danny (who spent 10 years writing his own ST)

Please continue davening for a Refua Shleima for Chaya bas Naomi Zehava.
Thanks.

Re: Avodah V10 #145
From: T613K@aol.com
> In Avodah V10 #144, From: Moshe Shulman <mshulman@ix.netcom.com>
>> At any rate, despite RMF's psak Satmar buried a meis on the FIRST day
>> of YT when it fell on a Friday .

>  As a member of the Chevra Kadisha here in Miami, I am curious about the 
> tecnicalities of burying a mes on yom tov. ... Funerals simply
> are not done on YT here ... Is everything in walking
> distance wherever there are Satmar communities...?
> The tahara building, the cemetery? Or do people drive on YT in order to
> fulfill the mitzva of timely burial?

Did anybody ever answer my question? HOW do they do burial on Yom Tov,
in those communities where they do? Do goyim transport the body, dig
the grave?

Do Jews go to the cemetery, and how do they get there?

Toby Katz

remt@juno.com wrote:
>> Rabbi Sternbuch in his book "Moadim U'Zmanim" also makes the point
>> that answering Amen [to Shehechiyanu in Kiddush] by a woman who has already
>> made a Shehechiyanu [when she lit candles] is
>> a Hefsek between the Bracha and tasting the wine and states therefore
>> she shouldn't really answer Amen.   But he makes another point, that since
>> her Bracha is made before the Yom Tov actually begins, and that since
>> it is better to make the Bracha at night when all the Mitzvos are then
>> required, it is not considered a Hefsek at all.

> I assume that he would agree that were the woman making kiddush after
> having lit candles, it would be a b'rachah l'vatalah for her to repeat
> Shehecheyanu. Thus, she is no longer m'chuyeves in the b'rachah, and thus
> it cannot be argued that since it would have been better to say it then,
> it's not a hefsek.

He in fact does say it Assur to answer Amen. IIRC, he was simply
stating a possible Limud Zchus for those who do answer Amen.

HM

At 01:15 PM 5/2/03 -0400, Gil Student wrote:
>What would be the din if eidim zomemim say that Reuven and Shimon
>could not have witnessed an event in Israel at 2 pm because they were
>in NY at 1:30 pm and Reuven and Shimon respond that they transported
>al pi neis to Israel?  Would Reuven and Shimon be huzmu or not?

>What if Reuven killed Shimon with eidim and hasra'ah and, during the
>trial, Shimon walks into court and confirms that Reuven killed him and
>he was just resurrected?  Would Reuven be put to death or not?

>I know these seem like silly cases, but a beis din has to look into
>every possibility before executing someone.  Are batei din allowed to
>take miracles into account and, if not, why not?

Isn't this talui on the sugyah of "gamla parcha?"

Kol Tuv,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org  or  ygb@yerushalmionline.org
essays, tapes and seforim at: www.aishdas.org;
on-line Yerushalmi shiurim at www.yerushalmionline.org

Re: Avodah V11 #8
From: "Jonathan Baker" <jjbaker@panix.com>
> RAA:
>> The Baal HaTurim says Yaakov did three things to prepare for his meeting
>> -- Prayer, gifts, and arming for battle. He doesn't make any distinction
>> between them.

>> I never claimed only prayer was enough -- I just said that prayer was
>> a form of hishtadlus.

> None of which supports R'n RF's contention that learning *is* sufficient
> hishtadlus, ...

If I stay home and take care of my children, and rely on my husband
to provide parnassah, am I being somech al haness for my parnassah?
Am I putting in "no hishtadlus"? Conversely, if I keep his children--our
mutual children--alive, fed and cared for, would he be justified in saying
I have contributed nothing to our family's welfare? If he does not take
care of them himself, is HE being somech al haness for their survival?
Obviously we have a partnership in which each contributes something
vital and neither can live without the other.

R'n Rena never said that yeshiva students need no other hishtadlus
than learning Torah. It's just that there is a division of labor, and
not every single person in the country has to do the SAME hishtadlus.
We need each other.

You posit that those who learn Torah full-time are somehow being
somech al haness if they do not also serve in the army and contribute
to the physical defense of their country. You would be correct if,
without yeshiva students, there WERE no army. But there is. The frum
community in Israel cannot physically survive if the country is not
physically defended by soldiers and policemen, and we owe them a huge
debt of hakaras hatov, as Yonasan Rosenblum recently wrote in an article
reprinted in arvm. But equally, if Tsahal thought IT could survive for
a single day in Eretz Yisrael without the zechus of talmidei chachamim
learning Torah day and night, THEY would be relying on a nes. Because in
E"Y, nissim ARE teva. WE DO NOT SURVIVE WITHOUT TORAH.

Toby Katz

RGS:
> I know these seem like silly cases, but a beis din has to look into
> every possibility before executing someone. Are batei din allowed to
> take miracles into account and, if not, why not?

Probably for the same reason we don't acquit someone who was chovel his
father, even though there is a chance that the chovel-ee was actually
not his father, i.e. rov. (Otherwise, we could just as easily say that
the person might have had no biological father, and that his generation
was spontaneous. We reject this claim in other fora as well.)

Meyer

R'n TK:
> You posit that those who learn Torah full-time are somehow being somech al 
> haness if they do not also serve in the army and contribute to the physical 
> defense of their country.  You would be correct if, without yeshiva students, 
> there WERE no army.  But there is.  The frum community in Israel cannot 

No, you're ignoring the Rambam. Now, you are free to disagree with the
Rambam, but ignoring him is not kosher. Ref's to Hil. Melachim.
  1) In a milchemet mitzva, everyone goes out to fight. (7:7)
  2) Defense of Jews is a milchemet mitzva.  (5:1)

> physically survive if the country is not physically defended by soldiers and 
> policemen, and we owe them a huge debt of hakaras hatov, as Yonasan Rosenblum 
> recently wrote in an article reprinted in arvm.  But equally, if Tsahal 

And the Haredi community puts itself in socio-political and economic
peril by not participating in either the Army or in Sherut Leumi.
Because without a discharge or exemption paper from the army, most gainful
employment is closed to them. And the "throw a thousand into the mill"
idea of R' Dessler for producing gedolim is not working. There are a
lot of intertwined ideas in this "status quo", many of which have not
worked out as well in practice as was hoped.

I believe R'n Freedenberg's ideas on this before yours, because you,
like I, have chosen to remain in America. R'n Freedenberg is part
of the system. Just as there is criticism of Americans willing to
"fight to the last dead Israeli", so too it seems just to look askance
at outsiders who insist on the continued existence of a system that only
hurts the Haredi community socio-economically.

I'd like to hear her response.

> thought IT could survive for a single day in Eretz Yisrael without the zechus 
> of talmidei chachamim learning Torah day and night, THEY would be relying on 
> a nes.  Because in E"Y, nissim ARE teva.  WE DO NOT SURVIVE WITHOUT TORAH.

And, as the Gemara in Megillah 3a-b explains about Yehoshua and the
angel, the two functions are supposed to be INTEGRATED, not SEPARATE.
Even among the shvatim, with Issachar / Zvulun, was the one who was to
study COMPLETELY freed from military service in a milchemes mitzva?
Was the one who was to engage in trade COMPLETELY freed from the mitzva
to learn every day (v'hagito bo yomam volaila)?

And if you say that the Army today totally neglects Torah (which it
doesn't), since when does a "he's not doing his job, therefore I don't
have to do mine" argument work?

RGS:
> What would be the din if eidim zomemim say that Reuven and Shimon
> could not have witnessed an event in Israel at 2 pm because they were
> in NY at 1:30 pm and Reuven and Shimon respond that they transported
> al pi neis to Israel?  Would Reuven and Shimon be huzmu or not?

Definitely huzmu. See Makkos 5a that for nhora bari and gamla parcha
lo chayshinan. Rashi explains that gamla parcha is a species of very
fast camels. When the Rambam paskens this Gemara (Edus 19:1) he says we
only judge based on what is "common and known to all." Obviously if the
witnesses can prove, and not just claim, their extraordinary abilities
they would be exempt from punishment as liars.

Shlomo Goldstein

> Anecdotally it seems that many people do not answer BHBS but only amen
> to the shatz's bracha. 

Perhaps, these individuals follow the Chizkuni and other Rishonim who
hold and imply that Sefira is dependent on Beis Din . I once heard RHS say
that RYBS questionned the whole premise of BHBS from a MA that raised the
notion of how can a mortal man offer a blessing to Him and His Name. It
seemed like a contradiction in terms. That might be why many donot say
BHBS during Chazaras HaShatz as well.

Steve Brizel
Zeliglaw@aol.com

In a message dated 5/5/2003 11:51:19 AM EST, Zeliglaw writes:
> Perhaps, these individuals follow the Chizkuni and other Rishonim who
> hold and imply that Sefira is dependent on Beis Din . I once heard RHS say
> that RYBS questionned the whole premise of BHBS from a MA that raised the
> notion of how can a mortal man offer a blessing to Him and His Name. It
> seemed like a contradiction in terms. That might be why many donot say
> BHBS during Chazaras HaShatz as well.

1.I'm referring to congregations where the common practice is to answer
BHBS to chazarat hashatz.

2.More likely reason for followers of R'YBSs opinions not answering BHBS
to chazarat hashatz is to be yotzeh "Tfillat Hatzibbur"

KT
Joel Rich

Danny Schoemann wrote:
>1. I'm aware of the fact that buying seforim is very popular - but can we
>prove (or disprove) that we are doing anything related to the mitzva of
>writing a Sefer Torah - at least according to the Rosh - by doing so?

I can't prove anything within the shitah of the Rosh, but we are at
least being yotzei according to some acharonim.

>2. Those who are relying on the Rosh - and therefor relying on the reason
>behind the Mitzva (to learn from the Sefer) - how would they explain that
>"writing/buying a letter in someone else's sefer Torah" has any relevance to
>the mitzva? Whne will they ever get a chance to learn from their (shared)
> Sefer?

Being machmir for other shitos in the rishonim.

>Lastly, what's the reason that so many people "ignore" this mitzva?  Sure
>it's expensive, but so are cars, vacations, etc.

1. It's expensive
2. We have a meikel shitah on which to rely
3. Very few people's parents, rabbonim, or roshei yeshiva
wrote/commissioned sifrei Torah
4. It's expensive

Does anyone know if RYBS wrote a sefer Torah?  R' Moshe Feinstein?
RAYH Kook?

Gil Student

RYGB wrote:
>Isn't this talui on the sugyah of "gamla parcha?"

Yes, thank you. That is exactly it.

The Gemara in Makos 5a says that if eidim zomemim say that eidim were
with them in one place in the morning and they were testifying that
they saw something in another place in the evening, we check to see if
the eidim could have traveled that distance in the necessary time to
have been with the eidim zomemim and still witness what they claimed
to have seen. But, the Gemara asks, this is obvious! However, one
might have thought that we account for the possibility of a super-fast
("flying") camel through which the eidim could have traveled the long
distance and this comes to tell us that we do not.

The Gemara in Yevamos 116a relates the case of a get with an unusual
name that was written in one place and the only person with that name
was witnessed to be in another place on the day the get was written.
Are we concerned that this get might be good? Rava says, yes, here we
are concerned because he might have a super-fast camel, or jumped from
one place to the other (Rashi: using the "Shem"), or started proceedings
in his place that continued elsewhere.

In Yevamos we are concerned for highly unusual possibilities, including
miraculous possibilities, while in Makos we are not. Tosafos in Yevamos
offers two explanations for this difference. Rabbeinu Tam says that in
Yevamos it is plausible that an estranged husband would go to extreme
lengths to hurt his wife while there seems to be no reason why a potential
witness would go to such lengths. Rabbeinu Menachem says that witnesses
should have said so and since they did not we can assume they are lying.
See also the Ritva in Makos for other opinions. The Tosafos Shantz in
Makos and the Aruch LaNer in Yevamos say that even eidim are not executed
because of the possibility of a super-fast camel. However, because it
is so remote we disqualify their testimony from the original case.

In other words, miracles are considered in halachah.

Gil Student

R' Chaim Shmuelevitz [Sichos Mussar II #42 page 117] in his discussion
of gratitude mentions Shemos Rabbah (1:32).

Moshe is introduced to his future father in law as "an Egyptian"

 [Soncino translation] "alternative explanation of AN EGYPTIAN: Moses
can be compared to one bitten by a lizard, who ran to place his feet in
the water. When he put them in the river, he observed that a small child
was drowning; so he stretched out his hand and saved him. Thereupon
the child said: =91Had it not been for you, I would already have
perished.=92 To which the man replied: =91Not I have saved you, but
the lizard who bit me and from which I escaped, he saved you.=92 Thus
the daughters of Jethro greeted Moses: ' Thanks for saving us from the
hand of the shepherds.=92 Moses replied: =91The Egyptian whom I slew,
he delivered you.=92 They therefore said to their father AN EGYPTIAN.
meaning that the Egyptian whom this man slew caused him to come to us. "


R' Chaim says that we learn from this that one has an obligation
of hakaras hatov based upon the consequence of the action not the
motivation. Therefore even though the snake and the Egyptian had not
intended good but rather the opposite - the recipient of benefit is
obligated to have gratitude towards that which caused the benefit.

The commentaries on this medrash have a simpler explanation. Moshe and
the rescuer of the child were merely noting that they should not be viewed
as the source of the good but rather HaShem through His various agents.


Does anybody else have R' Shmuelevitz's understanding of hakaras hatov?
While the Chovas HaLevavos does mention that hakaras hatov is not
dependent upon the motivation of the source - but here we are talking
about one's enemy. It would follow that we need to have hakaras hatov
to Amalek etc for causing us to do tshuva.

                                            Daniel Eidensohn

>Does anyone know if RYBS wrote a sefer Torah?  R' Moshe Feinstein?
>RAYH Kook?

I don't know - but RSZA zt"l did, so did Reb Meir Shapiro zt"l (a tiny one
he himself wrote), Rav Kunstadt zt"l(RY of Kol Torah) and many others.

I know that my greatgrandfather did too (it was subsequently used in the
old-age home in Jo'burg)- and he was not especially wealthy and lived
in a way-out dorp; even heard of Zeltingen?

I suspect it was rather common "back then". Even nowadays it's not that
uncommon. I'd venture there's a hachnosas ST at least once a month in my
(chareidi, not Rich-Ville) area.

I've also met plenty people who wrote one themsleves.

- Danny

kennethgmiller@juno.com wrote:
> ...confusing Ruach
> Hakodesh with Nevuah. Are there really people nowadays who feel that
> *today's* tzadikim are guided by HaShem so completely that they bear
> <<< no >>> personal responsibility for what they say?

I hope not. If they do feel that way they are either deluded or
charletons.

AIUI Ruach HaKodesh is in no way predictive. It is merely a heightened
sense of the presense of the Shechina... God's presence. Perhaps it
is even an altered state of conciousness but it is not nevuah in any
way. This sense will help one make a more "Godly" decision, meaning there
will be no ego involvement but a decision based purely on how one senses
that God would want him to decide. But there is no direct communication
between God and an individual with Ruach HaKodesh other than that the
awareness of His presence.

So an individual who makes decisions based on those feelings which
include a lifetime of absorbtion in learning Torah and Yiras Shomayim,
makes decisions solely based on his understanding of the God's Torah and
will LIKELY, but not necessarily make a better decision than those who
are not on that level. But certainly this is not predictive in nature
and one can still make mistakes even if one does have Ruach HaKodesh.

HM

On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 10:22:27PM +0300, Akiva Atwood wrote:
:> Can you please elaborate on the above, giving special consideration
:> to the fact that my training in biology stopped somewhere at the pre
:> college level.

: Obviously not meant to be take literally -- I suspect very deep and
: esoteric secrets are being conveyed here.

While this approach is usable for aggadita, how can we say that here?

Would chazal use a mashal that might lead people to eat treif?

Chazal themselves assume that no about the avos, Moshe Rabbeinu, etc... 
would portray them as being chot'im. Not only that the avos kept
kol haTorah kulah, but that even the ahistorical midrashim conform.

: or
: We're back to the question of just how much natural science did Chazal
: know -- and is the science of the gemara accurate.

Assuming this is a true dichotomy (and I can't think of an alternative),
I'm sticking wit this side of the "or".

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 Today is the 19th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org            2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org       Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote
Fax: (413) 403-9905                             withdrawal and submission?

On Sun, Apr 27, 2003 at 07:09:04AM -0400, Ari Z. Zivotofsky - FAM wrote:
: > I generally do not tear keriah either, using the makneh my shirt hetter.
: > I believe Rav Zevin, very soon after the Six Day War, suggested that
: > the simcha of possessing the Kosel outweighs the feeling of Churban and
: > that the loophole is not unreasonable...

: so you need to put yourself in the kriyah mode.
: tearing does that.

This is a very fundamental issue.

R follows those rituals that speak to them. IOW, they look at pe'ulah in
terms of its expression of that which they already feel. The Torah assumes
that a person is "nif'al lefi pe'ulosav", that actions should be chosen
in order to create a feeling.

If one is mechuyav in an act, and the feeling simply isn't there, isn't it
a statement that the feeling /ought/ to be?

Or would one question the halachic process's ability to keep up with
changes in how one ought to feel?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 Today is the 19th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org            2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org       Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote
Fax: (413) 403-9905                             withdrawal and submission?

On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 10:49:22AM -0400, Feldman, Mark wrote:
: The criterion that you mention relates to the issue of whether you fulfill
: (the *minhag* of) ma'aser kesafim by buying seforim...

Is it even a minhag?

My understanding is that ma'aser kesafim was simply the usual way
for an autonomous qehillah to raise funds.

It would be like our grandchildren speaking of the minhagim of paying
shul dues or buying a seat for Yamim Nora'im.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 Today is the 19th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org            2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org       Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote
Fax: (413) 403-9905                             withdrawal and submission?

On Sun, May 04, 2003 at 07:29:45PM +0200, Shalom wrote:
: With Hodesh Nisan behind us and the summer upon us, I wanted to ask
: about the well-known Halacha that when falling for Nefilas Apayim it is
: essential to put one's head on one's clothing, rather than on one's arm.

: According to the Mishna Berura (OH 131:3) this is because one must
: cover his face - "Yechaseh Panav" - which would not be accomplished with
: one's bare arm which is part of the same body as one's face..

Isn't the point of NA is because tachanunim ought to be accomponied
with bechiyah? Why is bechiyah any more real if the kisui is with a
shirt-sleeve rather than one's arm?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 Today is the 19th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org            2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org       Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote
Fax: (413) 403-9905                             withdrawal and submission?

On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 11:43:45AM +0300, Danny Schoemann wrote:
: IIRC correctly the Rosh seems to say that you can fulfill Mitzva 613 by
: writing seforim you learn from instead of a Sefer Torah.

Note that there is a fundamental difference.

A sefer you can learn from is a semantic requirement. Can we get the
ideas out of the book?

A ST has very strict syntactic requirements.

So, how can one be equally worried about Ashuris, about malei
chaseir, etc... if some learnable Torah is conveyed even without
prefect duplication of the sefer?

A ST that is missing a letter is still a sefer one can learn from. Would
the Rosh say that someone who wrote a pasul ST is still yotzei the chiyuv
on those grounds?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 Today is the 19th day, which is
micha@aishdas.org            2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org       Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote
Fax: (413) 403-9905                             withdrawal and submission?

What is the reason for not saying Tachanun at Mincha prior to a day that we 
don't say Tachanun?

KT
Joel RIch

RSBerger:
> "Yechaseh Panav" - which would not be accomplished with one's bare arm
> which is part of the same body as one's face. The source, according to
> the Mishna Berura, is the Magen Avraham.

> It appears to me that examination of the Magen Avraham leads to a
> different conclusion.

Not that it's any proof but I have noticed some older people who are
otherwise knowledgeable falling on their bare arms. I wonder whether
before the MB's influence took root people were makpid to fall on
clothed arms.

Kol tuv,
Moshe

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


[ 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         ]