Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 57

Sun, 29 Mar 2009

• 1. Re: [Areivim] Some Thoughts on the Dangers of Birchas HaChama (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 2. Re: Avodah] reasons for torah loopholes in dinei mamonos (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 3. Re: Fwd: Reshut Hyachid (David Riceman)
• 4. Re: Machlokes Leshem Shomayim (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: Machlokes Leshem Shomayim (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: [Areivim] Some Thoughts on the Dangers of Birchas HaChama (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Machlokes Leshem Shomayim (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: Some Interesting Remarks About Birchas HaChama (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: Some Interesting Remarks About Birchas HaChama (Zev Sero)
• 10. Hashgacha sources (Yehoshua Steinberg)
• 11. Birchat Hachama (Rich, Joel)
• 12. Birchat Hachama (Rich, Joel)
• 13. women at a funeral (Eli Turkel)
• 14. Re: Women at a funeral (Samuel Safran)
• 15. Re: women at a funeral (Zev Sero)
• 16. Re: women at a funeral (Zev Sero)
• 17. V'Shilam vs. V'Shileim (Nancy Martin)
• 18. More on Where did the wheat used to bake your matzos come from? (Yitzchok Levine)

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 08:13:25 -0400 Yitzchok Levine
<Larry.Lev...@stevens.edu> wrote [on Areivim, cited here with
permission]:

...

> The article says that those assembled in Thompson Square made the 
> Brocha at 8 AM. (This would be 9 AM if there had been DST, which 
> there was not). Thus, we see that they were not concerned about 
> making the bracha as close to sunrise as people seem to be today. 
> Furthermore, someone sent me the following:
> 
> "While of historical interest it is actually reappearing. In my town 
> in Israel the police have said that there can be no public meetings 
> before 7am and so disallowed a birchat hachama at sunrise.
> 
> As of now the rabbis are working on it."
> 
> I presume that the ordinance against assembling before 7 AM is to 
> prevent those making Birchas HaChama from waking those who are 
> sleeping.  I wonder what efforts will be made by those who want to 
> say Birchas HaChama as close to sunrise as possible  so that they 
> will not disturb those sleeping.  I mentioned this concern to a few 
> people this morning. The reply was, "It is Erev Pesach. Everyone 
> should be up anyway."
> 
> In my mind there is something wrong with this attitude. First of all, 
> everyone will not be up. There is no reason for the younger kids to 
> be up. They will not have yeshiva on Erev Pesach.  Also, the attitude 
> reflected in this approach, which I read as, "I am doing a mitzvah, 
> who cares about anybody else." does not sit well with me.  It 
> definitely goes against what was written in the article from last 
> week's Hamodia Magazine that I posted at
> 
> http://www.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/hamodia/setting_limits.pdf
> 
> Will this once in 28 year event turn out to be yet another "victory" 
> of bein adam l'makom over bein adam l'chaveiro?

It must be understood that this is, first and foremost, a *Halachic*
question, and so the discussion must begin, if not necessarily end,
with the Halachah governing these sorts of conflicts between Mizvos and
the rights of neighbors.  In fact, the Halachah explicitly maintains
that the performance of (at least some) Mizvos yields a dispensation to
engage in noisy and tumultuous conduct to which the neighbors would
ordinarily have the right to object:

"And so too is it permitted to teach Jewish children Torah in his
house, and the neighbors cannot protest and say to him 'we cannot sleep
due to the noise of the tinokos shel bais raban', and this is the case
for all Mizvah affairs, that he cannot protest"

SA HM 156:3

Taz points out this exemption is specifically for those Mizvos which
require social gathering:

"It seems that for this reason Rabbeinu [Tur] wrote 'mili de'mizvah
such as the distribution of charity or to pray with ten men, to teach
us that the dispensation is only for a Mizvah which depends on the
gathering of men, such as these ..."

So there is a very solid precedent for choosing "bein adam l'makom over
bein adam l'chaveiro".  I am well aware that there are numerous
potential arguments against the application of this principle to our
case:

I) The Mizvah of Birkas Ha'Hamah, and particularly the hiddur, even if
there is one, of performing it at sunrise, may be of less importance
than the other Mizvos discussed by the Poskim

II) Performance in public may be different from performance inside
one's house

III) A time of the day during which many people are asleep may be
different from a time when most people are awake (see Hasam Sofer,
cited in Pis'hei Teshuvah [begining of 156], for a discussion of a
related distinction)

IV) There is considerable discussion in the Poskim over the application
of Dina De'Malchusa and Minhag to Nizkei Shechainim

But the bottom line is that the question must be considered from the
perspective of the Halachah, and not decided simply by casual
references to the categories of Bein Adam La'Havero and Bein Adam
La'Makom.

[Another area of Halachah that may be relevant here is the question of
Kofin Ha'Rov es Ha'Miut (this consideration was pointed out to me by my
Havrusah).  A discussion of this point is beyond the scope of this
email; see SA HM 163 and the Poskim there for the discussion.]

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters

On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:38:36 -0000
"Chana Luntz" <ch...@kolsassoon.org.uk> wrote:

> RMC writes:
> 
> > The torah (via gezeras hakasuv) paturs a damager in various cases
> > (that sechel haAdom would say are not understandable)
> > For example: kelim b'bor, tamun b'aish, hezek shaino nikar, admit to
> > chazti nezek (modeh b'knas), etc etc
> 
> You would have to take these on a case by case basis, by why do you say that
> these are not understandable by sechel haAdom?

...

> Hezek sheano nikar is a really fascinating one - because it generally deals


RnCL and the other participants in this thread have said interesting
things about Hezek She'aino Nikar, but one point that has been
overlooked in the discussion is that HSN is actually not, AFAIK, a
Gezeiras Ha'Kasuv.  I am aware of no Derashah concerning it, nor any
indication that it is anything other than a Sevara of Hazal.

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters

Gals...@aol.com wrote:
> I wonder if the term "Reshut Hayachid" is a defentioion, describing an arae,
> or if the term just describe Din of an area, depends on the context.
> If "Reshut Hayachid" is a defention of an area, then I would assume that the 
> same area would be called "Reshut Hayachid", no matter if we are dealing about 
> Dinei Shabbat, Nezakim, or Tumeah.
>  
You have contradicted an explicit Mishna; see Tohoroth 6:7.

David Riceman

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 09:59:24PM -0400, Shmuel Weidberg wrote:
: However, if both sides of the machlokes entered in good faith. Neither
: side will ever admit that it was wrong because neither side made an
: error in insisting they were right. As such the machlokes will last
: forever because eilu vaeilu divrei Elokim chaim.

Is lesheim Shamayim the only way one can act in good faith? Having
legitimate grounds for claiming to be correct isn't the same as being
divrei E-lokim Chaim.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 09:59:24PM -0400, Shmuel Weidberg wrote:
: However, if both sides of the machlokes entered in good faith. Neither
: side will ever admit that it was wrong because neither side made an
: error in insisting they were right. As such the machlokes will last
: forever because eilu vaeilu divrei Elokim chaim.

Is lesheim Shamayim the only way one can act in good faith? Having
legitimate grounds for claiming to be correct isn't the same as being
divrei E-lokim Chaim.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 09:41:05AM -0400, Yitzhak Grossman wrote:
: "And so too is it permitted to teach Jewish children Torah in his
: house, and the neighbors cannot protest and say to him 'we cannot sleep
: due to the noise of the tinokos shel bais raban', and this is the case
: for all Mizvah affairs, that he cannot protest"
: SA HM 156:3
...
: So there is a very solid precedent for choosing "bein adam l'makom over
: bein adam l'chaveiro".  I am well aware that there are numerous
: potential arguments against the application of this principle to our
: case:
: 
: I) The Mizvah of Birkas Ha'Hamah, and particularly the hiddur, even if
: there is one, of performing it at sunrise, may be of less
: importance...
: II) Performance in public may be different from performance inside
: one's house
: III) A time of the day during which many people are asleep may be
: different...
: IV) There is considerable discussion in the Poskim over the application
: of Dina De'Malchusa and Minhag to Nizkei Shechainim

5) The case in the SA could well be assuming the melameid can't afford
to rent another location, and therefore one is actually forced to choose
between BALM and BALC. WRT birkhas hachamah, there are venues further
from residential neighborhoods that are equally available. One is really
choosing between the *travel time to* a BALM and doing a BALC.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "The most prevalent illness of our generation is
mi...@aishdas.org        excessive anxiety....  Emunah decreases anxiety:
http://www.aishdas.org   'The Almighty is my source of salvation;  I will
Fax: (270) 514-1507      trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 09:59:24PM -0400, Shmuel Weidberg wrote:
: However, if both sides of the machlokes entered in good faith. Neither
: side will ever admit that it was wrong because neither side made an
: error in insisting they were right. As such the machlokes will last
: forever because eilu vaeilu divrei Elokim chaim.

Is lesheim Shamayim the only way one can act in good faith? Having
legitimate grounds for claiming to be correct isn't the same as being
divrei E-lokim Chaim.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 04:35:21PM -0400, Yitzchok Levine wrote:
: One of the people on my list sent me the comments at the end of this 
: message to me. He is someone with an avid interest in and a good 
: knowledge of astronomy.

How is astronomy relevent?

The even being commemorated, is the first sunrise after the tequfah
occuring during the begining of the rule of Shabetai (Saturn) on or
layom revi'i. That hour has no astronomical meaning, it's when the planet
happens to be in force with no regard to where it or anything else is.

So why are we assuming the tequfah is an astronomical season? Perhaps in
addition to the tropical year and the sidereal year, there is a totally
distinct astrological year.

This would explain the minhag of not drinking water during the 1st hour
of each of the 4 tequfos, unless someone placed iron in it. It's in the
BY OC, after 455 besheim the Mordechai, and in the Rama YD 116:5. It
fits the notion that we are clocking a metaphysical cycle.

In fact, this would give us an explanation to the masqanah of the gemara
on Berakhos 12a. It would only work according to the Ramban (Bereishis
5:8) which says we assume creation was in Tishrei. Not Rabbeinu Tam.
We count physical phenomena from the start of the physical year. And
we therefore switched for it to the closer estimate of tequfas R'
Adda. Although it doesn't explain why we start with a molad 1 yr early.
We count metaphysical phenomena from Nissan, which is the more spiritual
new year. And this cycle of astrological tequfos doesn't get more exact.

So (in addition to my earlier post about my belief that a Nissan
creation implies the sun started its trip at noon), it is consistent to
say that the whole thing is being treated as a pedagogic opportunity,
a commemoration of a hypothetical.

And therefore the driving issue was making an event rare enough to
become a big deal (unlike thunder or seeing the ocean or a desert) and
yet frequent enough for most people to do it more than once, and that
it be transmittable mimetically.

After all, the berakhah is acknowleding Hashem's constant creation of
the universe, and doesn't even mention the sun.

LAD, this whole description everyone is gfiving to the occasion for
making the berakhah isn't the right mindset. Being moderns, in this
technologically oriented age, they're trying to brag about scientific
precisision when in reality it's about using a mythical approach to
history (in the sense of caring about message, rather than caring whether
or not it really happened) to come up with an excuse to remember that
G-d created the sun.

And all the circumlocutions (never mind the ones that go overboard and
use the words "exactly the same place" ukhedomeh) just make more problems
for the nevuchim than they resolve. As RYL's correspondent noted.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It's never too late
mi...@aishdas.org        to become the person
http://www.aishdas.org   you might have been.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                     - George Elliot

Micha Berger wrote:

> We count physical phenomena from the start of the physical year. And
> we therefore switched for it to the closer estimate of tequfas R'
> Adda. Although it doesn't explain why we start with a molad 1 yr early.

The reason for that is simple: the world was created on 25 Elul.  If we
are to date our years from the creation, rather than tracking Adam's age
as the Seder Olam does, we must account for that stub of a year.  Since
when this system was invented we were unaware of the concept of treating
zero as a number, it was natural to number that stub year 1.  And thus
we need to start our molad calculations at the beginning of that year,
with the Molad Tohu (BaHaRaD), which is when the molad *would* have been
had the world existed at that "time".  The alternative, starting from
molad VYD, which is the first molad that actually happened, would mean
that we'd constantly be having to deduct a year from our number, which
is just awkward.  IOW to calculate the molad of Tishri 5769 we now say
to ourselves, "Well, 5768 years have passed. How many months is that?
Add them up, add BaHaRaD, normalise it all, and we have our answer";
if we were to start from VYD we'd have to always remember that in fact
only 5767 years have passed, and only add up that many months.  That
just makes things messier, for no reason, so we start from BaHaRaD.

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

 
Someone referred me to this list after I asked about hashgacha pratis vs.
klalis on another list. I've looked through the thread, but at first glance
still haven't found an answer to my questions, so here goes:
 
 1. Does anyone know of any pre-Geonic sources for the terms "hashgacha
 pratis"/"hashgacha klalis"?
 2. Which source would you consider to be the definitive definition for the
 expressions?

Yehoshua Steinberg 
ysteinb...@hotmail.com 
Complacency is tantamount to complicity



_________________________________________________________________
Quick access to Windows Live and your favorite MSN content with Internet Explorer 8.
http://ie8.msn.com/microsoft/internet-explorer-8/en-us/ie8
.aspx?ocid=B037MSN55C0701A
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090327/7c02d61a/attachment-0001.htm>

Has anyone seen anything on a preference for a tzibbur to be yotzeh with
shomeiah koneh/amen versus each individual saying the bracha on their
own?
KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090327/c46137dd/attachment-0001.htm>

 
Regarding my earlier question, I just came across this - will look it up
later
It is for this reason that many are accustomed to daven kevasikin and
following the davening, everyone goes outside and recites the bracha
together (Shu"t Chasam Sofer, Orach Chaim #56, quoting Shu"t Masas
Binyomin #101; Elya Rabbah 229:2).

KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090327/3522d370/attachment-0001.htm>

see

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3693161,00.html

is there any halacha (not minhag) against women speaking at a funeral?
In other places I have seen it

-- 
Eli Turkel

Thanks.

I am aware of many of these sources but sources alone do not make
halacha -- lomudt does.  
It might be useful for the Israeli religious community to understand
what behavior is mandated
by halacha (e.g., separation) and what is aggadic.  For example, I
don't think the Rambam
paskens that women cannot participate in a funeral.  I realize that
some religious trends
do not want to differentiate between halacha and aggada-kabbala, but it
is worth reminding
the community that there are trends that do differentiate.  The
particular incident that I read
about (referenced in my email below) was particularly bothersome and in
my opinion lead to
a chilul hashem.

S? 

>>> Esther and Aryeh Frimer <frim...@zahav.net.il> 3/29/2009 12:49 AM
>>>
    The prohibition of Women at the Beit haKevarot during a funeral is
based on the Zohar VaYakhel sec. 196 (haSatan merakeid...).  Shulkhan
Arukh Y.D. sec. 359, seif 1 indicates that there are different mihagim
about women coming to a funeral; and in seif 2 (based on the above
Zohar) writes that one should be careful that women should not come
particpate in the fumeral; Shach ad loc. subsec. 2. 
    The many communities throughout the world who are Meikel, Rely on
the Resp. Beit Lehem Yehuda, sec. 359 - particularly if men and women
remain separated.      
    The issue is Discussed in Pnei Barukh Chap. 5, Parag. 10, note 32.
See also Resp. Mareh haBazak II:94 and III:73. For a discussion of the
Resp. material, see at length the excellent review (in Hebrew) of R.
Mordechai Avadiel: 
http://upload.kipa.co.il/media-upload/kulech/kulech6581.DOC
    The issue of a woman giving a hesped, is related to the above as
well as to tsniut considerations/sensitivities. I remind everyone of the
furor when Rav Mordechai Eliyahu objected to a woman giving a shiur in
front of men.  The above Zohar seems to maintain that there is a
particular problem of Hirhur at a funeral.  
    Many stringent Hevra Kadishot will permit women to eulogise after
they have left [ - what you do when they are not around is not their
responsibility]. 

--------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Aryeh A. Frimer
Chemistry Dept., Bar-Ilan University
Ramat Gan 52900, ISRAEL
E-mail: Fri...@mail.biu.ac.il
 



----- Original Message ----- 
From: Eli Turkel ( mailto:elitur...@gmail.com ) 
To: avodah ( mailto:avo...@aishdas.org ) ; Aryeh Frimer (
mailto:frim...@zahav.net.il ) 
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2009 8:33 PM
Subject: women at a funeral

see

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3693161,00.html 

is there any halacha (not minhag) against women speaking at a funeral?
In other places I have seen it

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090329/88d587f0/attachment-0001.htm>

Eli Turkel wrote:
> see
> 
> http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3693161,00.html
> 
> is there any halacha (not minhag) against women speaking at a funeral?
> In other places I have seen it

I'm not familiar with this.  What he mentioned about Satan dancing sounds
like it's based on the gemara which says that he dances in front of the
women when they return from a funeral.  But note that Chazal didn't say
that therefore women shouldn't go to funerals; on the contrary, it seems
completely accepted that they do go, and return with Satan leading them,
and the only significance of that is that one should take care not to meet
them on the way.

It also seems that Chazal completely accepted the practise of women
wailing and chanting at funerals ("ezehu inuy? shekulan onot ke'achat.
kinah? sheachat medaberet, vechulan onot achareha").   How is a speech
less appropriate than that?

Nevertheless, *assuming* that he had valid grounds for paskening as he
did, it seems to me that he was right to stand his ground, and the
article's mocking tone is an attack on the Torah; i.e. it would take the
same tone even if this were an explicit halacha brought in every source
from the gemara down.


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

PS: I'm surprised that she was allowed to follow the coffin at all.
Many communities are careful not to allow a man's offspring to follow him,
and many make an explicit announcement to that effect.  (I've heard that
in Yerushalayim they're so careful about this that they don't allow them
to go to the grave at all, even by a different route, and that they even
extend it to women's funerals.)  I would have thought that Sefardim such as
this rabbi would be among those who are careful about this, so I'm surprised
that he forbade her from talking, but allowed her to walk after the coffin,
albeit among the women rather than the men.


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

At the end of Parashat Vayikra (5:24) which was read yesterday, the baal
keriyah leined "v'shilam" with a patach under the lamed.  Someone
corrected him that it should be read "v'shileim" with a tzeire under the
lamed.  He pointed to the text in the Torah Temimah edition, which is
vowelized with a tzeire.  After some research, I found that the vast
majorirty of chumashim say "v'shilam" (patach), but there are a few
minority chumashim that say "v'shileim" (tzeire). Questions:1. 
Is "v'shileim" (with a tzeire) just a printer's error that has
propagated, or is it a legitimate text?2.  What is the correct
vowelization based on the rules of Hebrew grammar?3.  If the baal
keriyah leined it with a tzeire, should he be corrected?4.  Since it is
the last aliya, would it be advisable/acceptable to read it with a patach
in the regular reading, and with a tzeire in the maftir?

-- 
Be Yourself @ mail.com!
Choose From 200+ Email Addresses
Get a Free Account at www.mail.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090329/8402c20c/attachment-0001.htm>

I sent out the following a few days ago.

From 
http://www.vosizneias.com/29446/2009/03/26/kiryas-joel-ny-
arizona-wheat-controversy/ 


Kiryas Joel, NY - Rabbi Aaron Teitelbaum, Satmar Rebbe, has been 
using Arizona wheat exclusively for all Pesach needs. In recent 
months, a new sefer was introduced describing the deficiencies of 
Arizona wheat for Pesach use. Written by Rabbi Avrohom Laufer, 
Doroger Rav, sefer Ho'aishel Beramah, in three volumes, describes the 
traditions of which wheat to use, by our parents and grandparents. 
Arizona wheat, because of the lack of rain in wheat-growing areas may 
be thought of as ideal for matzah baking, since the likelihood of it 
becoming leaven seems unlikely. However, Rabbi Laufer focuses on 
irrigation systems that feed water to the wheat, and finds it unacceptable.

This "controversy" got me to thinking about rainfall in Egypt. RSRH 
writes that the Egyptians thought that they controlled their 
environment, because they depended upon the Nile River overflow and 
irrigation for water rather than rainfall. Hence they felt they were 
not subject to the elements.

With this in mind, I checked the amount of rainfall in Egypt and found

"Average rainfall is about 200 mm (nearly 7.9 inches) at northern 
coasts (near Alexandria), decreasing as you go south to about 50-100 
mm in the Nile Delta region. Around Cairo it ranges between 10-30 mm, 
varying from year to year. Rainfall decreases sharply farther south. 
Rainfall season is mainly in winter between the months of November 
and January, and to a lesser extent February and March."

Therefore, the wheat that was used to make the matzos that the B'nei 
Yisroel ate at their seder in Mitzraim definitely was watered by irrigation!

Furthermore, it turns out that many places in Arizona receive more 
rainfall than in Egypt. See http://alliance.la.asu.edu/maps/AZ_rain_web.pdf

Thus, if anything, the contention should be that one should not use 
wheat that was watered via rainfall, and all of our anscestors who 
did were not following the original tradition!!!! >:-}

Yitzchok Levine 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20090329/a9c3efde/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 57
**************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."