Avodah Mailing List

Volume 30: Number 110

Thu, 09 Aug 2012

• 1. Re: Brush teeth after seudat shlishit (Poppers, Michael)
• 2. WHAT IT IS PROPER TO LEARN (Prof. Levine)
• 3. Tzaar Baalei Chayim (cantorwolb...@cox.net)
• 4. Re: Tzaar Baalei Chayim (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: Tzaar Baalei Chayim (Liron Kopinsky)
• 6. Re: Brush teeth after seudat shlishit (Akiva Miller)
• 7. Menachem Cohen, Israeli Scholar, Completes Mission To 'Fix' Hebrew Bible (Prof. Levine)
• 8. Re: Brush teeth after seudat shlishit (Akiva Miller)
• 9. Re: Brush teeth after seudat shlishit (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Brush teeth after seudat shlishit (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: Menachem Cohen, Israeli Scholar, Completes Mission To 'Fix' Hebrew Bible (Lisa Liel)
• 12. Re: Menachem Cohen, Israeli Scholar, Completes Mission To 'Fix' Hebrew Bible (Simon Montagu)
• 13. Re: Rab Dessler's Givers and Takers (Maxi Yedid)
• 14. Re: Rab Dessler's Givers and Takers (Micha Berger)
• 15. Re: Rab Dessler's Givers and Takers (Micha Berger)
• 16. Shnayim Mikra (Rich, Joel)

In Avodah V30n109, R'Micha clarified:
> 1- I do believe that junk foods are olos al shulchan melakhim. For
> example, Ronald Reagan's famous love of Jelly Belly (brand jellybeans)
> <http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/reference/jellybellies.html>,
set out to be available for visiting heads of state. Kings do and always have enjoyed nosh. <
And the example demonstrates only that at RR's table, JB jellybeans were an
appropriate offering -- how does it demonstrate that junk food is
appropriate at a subsequent US President's table, much less your or my
table, much less forevermore and in all locations?

RAM again asked:
> Are there any poskim who use this criteria at all? It surely seems
> like a useful yardstick, but is "ruach chachamim nocheh heymenu"? Do
> any poskim advise us to eat only elegant desserts on Shabbos, and to
> avoid junk foods? <
I don't know, but Rav Hershel Schachter is quoted as equating "oleh al
shulchan m'lachim" with the Shabbos table -- see http://koltorah.o
rg/ravj/14-3%20Pat%20Akum%202.htm .

> Setting aside the question of preparing for after Shabbos, this person
> was surprised that someone would deign to eat such a non-special food
> on Shabbos at all. <
And, given RnLL's "...we wouldn't ordinarily chow down on half a can of
Pringles on Shabbat," RHS would seem to be saying (if quoted accurately)
that Pringles are not "oleh al shulchan m'lachim," but my Q (among a few Qs
mentioned in my earlier post in this thread) of whether that means one
sitting at RnLL's table on Shabbos should never be served Pringles seems to
still be open.

All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ, USA

At 01:07 PM 8/8/2012, R. Joel Rich wrote:

>--
> From an upcoming audioroundup:
>
>http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/78060
>2/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Why_Learn_Gemara_An_Appreciation_of_Talmud_Bavli
>_in_Anticipation_of_the_Siyum_Hashas
>Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz-Why Learn Gemara? An Appreciation of Talmud 
>Bavli in Anticipation of the Siyum Hashas
>
>Sounding very Litvish (my definition - anyone who says with a 
>straight face Nasata V'natata b'emunah is a question about your 
>learning and not your business ethics). R'Lebowitz explains the 
>primary importance of Talmud Torah [especially halacha; agadah is 
>only a supplement] as a description of HKB"H.
>Why learn Talmud Bavli and not Kitzur Shulchan Aruch?  1) 
>Deeper  understanding of halacha/applications; 2) connects us to 
>baalei mesorah (links in tradition)[me - but a real Litvak would say 
>connects us to how later baalei mesorah understood the earlier ones 
>since else it's academic talmud!]; 3) promotes engagement of student 
>with the material; 4) connects us to HKB"H; 5) contains Tanach and 
>Misnah and Mussar (i.e. everything); 6) more challenging.
>

In the introduction to his essay Our Prophets Speak to Us Rav Dr. 
Yosef Breuer, ZT"L.  wrote

The following essay on the role of the study of our
Nevi'im appears warranted in view of the incredible
neglect of this vital study area by most of our higher
Yeshiva institutions. This is a phenomenon that probably
has its roots in our recent history. At the time when the
so-called "Haskalah," spreading its vicious propaganda,
tried to expel Talmud study from the educational program
and replace it with the study of Tanach and Hebrew
language, a negative attitude of the Yeshivos towards
the role of Tanach study was understandable. In
our time there is no reason for this attitude. The present
trend towards almost exclusive occupation with the Talmud
leaves the study of Tanach to the individual talmid,
on whose private interest it depends whether he wishes
to broaden his knowledge and understanding of Tanach
beyond that which he acquired in grade school. The
study of Tanach, no less than the study of Talmud,
requires the mature guidance of those who are able to
provide it for our mature youth.

It is the purpose of this essay to demonstrate in brief
strokes the approach to the Books of our Prophets and
the vital significance of this research.

Our Prophets must be read in a spirit of sanctity, for they meet
us as Divinely-inspired leaders, commissioned by God to assist us
in comprehending the enigma of life.

Clearly Rav Breuer did not think that learning gemara was a 
substitute for studying Tenach.

Furthermore,  in my original post on this topic I wrote

Mishnah Berurah (155:3): Every day, one must learn Mikra, Mishnah, 
Gemara and Poskim. Ba'alei Batim who learn only three or four hours a 
day should not learn only Talmud, for then they are not Yotzei. 
Rather, they should learn also Poskim, everyone according to his ability.

Clearly the Chofetz Chaim did not think that it was sufficient to 
learn just Gemara.

YL

----------


http://www.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/our_prophets_speak.pdf




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120808/6e5f15bc/attachment-0001.htm>

So the primary reason to prohibit tzaar baalei chaim is because
boys who torture squirrels grow up to do worse things. It's an issue of
middos in the actor, not whether the animal's suffering is real.

Wow! So you mean all these years we've been learning that shechita is
to cause little or no pain to the animal, isn't really so?!

On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 02:06:21PM -0400, cantorwolb...@cox.net wrote:
:> So the primary reason to prohibit tzaar baalei chaim is because
:> boys who torture squirrels grow up to do worse things. It's an issue of
:> middos in the actor, not whether the animal's suffering is real.

: Wow! So you mean all these years we've been learning that shechita is
: to cause little or no pain to the animal, isn't really so?!

That's exactly what I wrote at
<http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol27/v27n142.shtml#11>, 2 years ago:
> Bottom line is that I'm extending the Ramban's explanation of shiluach
> haqen being about training people, rather than "al qan tzippor yagiu
> Rachamekha" to TBC as well. I'm happier doing that thinking there is
> no tzaar as we understand the word, but I think the lack of reason to
> distinguish between what the Ramban said there and TBC is sufficient
> to make my point.

After all, not only does the gemara say say shiluach haqen is a law for
people, rather than Divine Rachmanus on birds, Bereishis Rabba (4:1)
rhetoricaslly asks if it matters to HQBH whether we shecht from the
front or from the back (as in melikah); that too is for our sake.

Besides, if shechitah were really in order to cause little or no pain, to
the exclusion of other meanings in the mitzvah, there would be permission
to kill in other painless ways.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Education is not the filling of a bucket,
mi...@aishdas.org        but the lighting of a fire.
http://www.aishdas.org                - W.B. Yeats
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:35 AM, <cantorwolb...@cox.net> wrote:

> Is there a point at which someone can forfeit ownership of an animal of
> theirs because they cause it too much pain? Or do we say "azov taazov
> *imo*" shows that even if the animal is being afflicted, there is no
> responsibility on anyone else to remove that suffering unless the owner is
> involved as well?
>
> In common law, it is a criminal act when someone causes an animal
> unnecessary pain.
> People are arrested for this and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
> Why would Torah law be more lenient?


The Torah obviously prohibits Tzaar Baalei Chayim, and someone who violates
it should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. My question is "What
is "the full extent" of the law?" Would the person receive malkot, but
still maintain ownership of the animal? Or would the animal be confiscated
as well, as this owner has proven he is unfit to have it? Or would he even
forfeit the right to own any subsequent animals?

To me it seems, (from the fact that the pasuk says "imo" implying that the
animal that is being afflicted still belongs to its owner), that there is
no legislation that someone would have to give up their right to ownership.
The deterrent would be in the malkot, and presumably the person would learn
their lesson and refrain from harming animals again.

In common law, it seems that the people enforcing the law seem to take it
for granted that if someone abuses their property, that property can be
removed from them. But in Torah law, it seems that the rights of the owners
on the property are stronger, and can't necessarily be removed for harming
their property.

To take this even further, does "imo" imply that if Reuven sees the
struggling animal of his enemy, and that enemy is *not* helping that
animal, that Reuven is not allowed to help the animal, since that would be
violating the property of the owner? In this case, Reuven's only recourse
to help the animal, (and presumably this would be morally incumbent on him
to do so), would be to go to Beit Din and get them involved. (Which would
go back to my original question of what power BD have in this situation.) I
find this hard to believe, misvara, but then what does "imo" come to teach?

Kol Tuv,
Liron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120808/4a4288ad/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Michael Poppers wrote:

> ... Rav Hershel Schachter is quoted as equating "oleh al
> shulchan m'lachim" with the Shabbos table -- see
> http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-3%20Pat%20Akum%202.htm

I had to read it several times until I was sure I understood it. That article actually says:

> Rav Hershel Schachter is quoted as ruling that the Bishul
> Akum prohibition applies even if the food is worthy to be
> served at a Shabbat table.

The critical words are "even if". He seems to be saying that kings have an
even higher standard than Shabbos has: Bishul Akum applies to what goes on
the king's table, and EVEN to foods which are merely good enough for
Shabbos.

Thus, if a food is not good enough for the king's table, it is certainly not good enough for the Shabbos table.

Wow. I am very surprised, but this *is* what I asked for!

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Woman is 53 But Looks 25
Mom reveals 1 simple wrinkle trick that has angered doctors...
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/5022bc74341b83c736b90st02vuc

 From http://tinyurl.com/dygp9kt

RAMAT GAN, Israel -- For the past 30 years, Israeli Judaic scholar 
Menachem Cohen has been on a mission of biblical proportions: 
Correcting all known textual errors in Jewish scripture to produce a 
truly definitive edition of the Old Testament.

His edits, focusing primarily on grammatical blemishes and an 
intricate set of biblical symbols, mark the first major overhaul of 
the Hebrew Bible in nearly 500 years.

<Snip>

The errors have no bearing on the Bible's stories and alter nothing 
in its meaning. Instead, for example, in some places the markers used 
to denote vowels in Hebrew are incorrect; or a letter in a word may 
be wrong, often the result of a centuries old transcription error. 
Some of the fixes are in the notations used for cantillation, the 
text's ritual chants.

Most of the errors Cohen found were in the final two thirds of the 
Hebrew Bible and not in the sacred Torah scrolls, since they do not 
include vowel markings or cantillation notations.

See the above URL for more. YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120808/be03e7dd/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Micha Berger wrote:

> 1- I do believe that junk foods are olos al shulchan melakhim.
> For example, Ronald Reagan's famous love of Jelly Belly (brand
> jellybeans) ... set out to be available for visting heads of
> state. Kings do and always have enjoyed nosh.

This seems to be a great example of something mentioned in the article that
R' Michael Poppers linked to, by Rabbi Chaim Jachter, at http://koltorah.o
rg/ravj/14-3%20Pat%20Akum%202.htm --

> The Acharonim debate (see a summary of the debate in Mesorah
> 1:86-89) whether this term is defined as something worthy for
> a king to eat even at an ordinary occasion, such as his
> breakfast, or whether it refers to food that is worthy to be
> served at a state dinner. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik rules that
> the Bishul Akum prohibition applies only to food that is
> worthy to be served at a state dinner.

If someone has access to that issue of Mesorah, or any other relevant
source, I hope they can enlighten me: If Oleh Al Shulchan Melachim includes
even a king's breakfast and snack food, what is left? Perhaps it would
include name-brand Cheerios and Jelly Belly, but not the cheaper brands?

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Apply for the Visa&#174 Black Card&#8482
Members can redeem for cash back or airfare on any airline
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/5022fae3b60567ae35d8bst03vuc

On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 11:48:01PM +0000, Akiva Miller wrote:
: If someone has access to that issue of Mesorah, or any other relevant
: source, I hope they can enlighten me: If Oleh Al Shulchan Melachim
: includes even a king's breakfast and snack food, what is left? Perhaps
: it would include name-brand Cheerios and Jelly Belly, but not the
: cheaper brands?

I still didn't buy into the idea that we're talking about snack foods.
The whole concept of "olah al shulchan" implies otherwise. Which is
why I think you're running into problems when looking at how to apply
the idea to foods eaten outside the context of the se'udos.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 01:29:25PM -0400, Poppers, Michael wrote:
: I don't know, but Rav Hershel Schachter is quoted as equating "oleh
: al shulchan m'lachim" with the Shabbos table -- see
: http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-3%20Pat%20Akum%202.htm .

What scares me about R Jachter's article is the next paragraph, but I'll
quote the core paragraph about RHS as well:
: A fourth lenient approach regarding factory baked bread is the concept of
: "Oleh Al Shulchan Melachim." The rabbinic edict that forbids eating food
: cooked by a Nochri (Bishul Akum) applies only to food that is "fit for
: a king's table" (Oleh Al Shulchan Melachim; Avoda Zara 38a and Shulchan
: Aruch Y.D. 113:1). The Acharonim debate (see a summary of the debate
: in Mesorah 1:86-89) whether this term is defined as something worthy
: for a king to eat even at an ordinary occasion, such as his breakfast,
: or whether it refers to food that is worthy to be served at a state
: dinner. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik rules that the Bishul Akum prohibition
: applies only to food that is worthy to be served at a state dinner. Rav
: Hershel Schachter is quoted as ruling that the Bishul Akum prohibition
: applies even if the food is worthy to be served at a Shabbat table.

: It is possible that the Pat Akum edict does not apply to factory
: produced bread since it is not Oleh Al Shulchan Melachim (according to
: the lenient interpretation of this rule). ...
: Furthermore, many Poskim explicitly or implicitly state that the
: Eino Oleh Al Shulchan Melachim leniency does not apply to Pat Akum
: (see Chelkat Binyamin 112:12, Tziyunim 112:112:46, and Biurim 112 p. 5
: s.v. Vegam Eino). However, Teshuvot Avnei Neizer (Y.D. 1:92) is inclined
: to rule that the Eino Oleh Al Shulchan Melachim leniency does apply to
: Pat Akum as well. Thus, it is possible to use this argument as a lenient
: consideration regarding a food that is essentially permitted.

This might mean (there are 3 other possible sevaros, after all) that
someone who eats pas palter is declaring that machine made bread isn't
oleh al shulchan melakhim. Can he use machine made challos on Shabbos?
And if so, does that include personal bread machines, or only mass
production -- literal palter?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A cheerful disposition is an inestimable treasure.
mi...@aishdas.org        It preserves health, promotes convalescence,
http://www.aishdas.org   and helps us cope with adversity.
Fax: (270) 514-1507         - R' SR Hirsch, "From the Wisdom of Mishlei"

Really?  Neviim and Ketuvim don't have vowels or tropes?  That's a new 
one on me.

I'm going to assume that it's the author the article who is the am 
ha-aretz and not Cohen.

Lisa


On 8/8/2012 5:59 PM, Prof. Levine wrote:
> From http://tinyurl.com/dygp9kt
>
> Most of the errors Cohen found were in the final two thirds of the 
> Hebrew Bible and not in the sacred Torah scrolls, since they do not 
> include vowel markings or cantillation notations.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120808/59238825/attachment-0001.htm>

I think what happened here is that a sub-editor was cutting the
article and created the nonsense by combining two paragraphs, one of
which originally said that Cohen found fewer errors in N and K than in
the Torah; and the other that Sifrei Torah, as opposed to printed
editions, have no vowels and trope. It happens all the time in
journalism.

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:57 AM, Lisa Liel <l...@starways.net> wrote:
>
> Really?  Neviim and Ketuvim don't have vowels or tropes?  That's a new one on me.
>
> I'm going to assume that it's the author the article who is the am ha-aretz and not Cohen.
>
> Lisa
>
>
> On 8/8/2012 5:59 PM, Prof. Levine wrote:
>
> From http://tinyurl.com/dygp9kt
>
> Most of the errors Cohen found were in the final two thirds of the
> Hebrew Bible and not in the sacred Torah scrolls, since they do not
> include vowel markings or cantillation notations.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>

What I said that Rab Dessler took it from Rab Ashlag I red in a book that
is a biography and the main teachings of Sulam, and it said there "Rab
Dessler used this concept, as it is well known". The book was in hebrew. I
saw it in the sinagogue of Ramada Hotel Yerushalaim.

Micha: what you said that Baale mussar didn't use Kabalah is completely
incorrect. It just that they didn't EXPLICITLY quote from there, but they
did it IMPLICITLY. Those who understand, understand.

Examples: Rab Itzchak Hutner, Rab Dessler, Sama miKelm, The Bloch's Rabbi
from Telsh, Rab Zaichick, all of them ZT"L, and others that I don't have in
mind right now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120808/313b4e61/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 11:47:50PM -0500, Maxi Yedid wrote:
: What I said that Rab Dessler took it from Rab Ashlag I red in a book that
: is a biography and the main teachings of Sulam, and it said there "Rab
: Dessler used this concept, as it is well known"...

I still think it was simply zeitgeist, an attitude toward Torah that was
popular in that era.

: Micha: what you said that Baale mussar didn't use Kabalah is completely
: incorrect. It just that they didn't EXPLICITLY quote from there, but they
: did it IMPLICITLY...

I said that "Tenu'as haMussar really doesn't utilize Qabbalah much". By
which I meant, whatever Qabbala they might have used, or might be
consistent with because after all they are perspectives on the same
Torah, is not necessary to explore that to follow the derekh. If you
recall how rarely Litvaks turned to Qabbalah after R' Chaim Volozhiner's
generation, and in fact disuaded people from exploring it, this is
unsurprising. Qabbalah is framed as not essential for knowing man's job
in this world.

RSRH also writes many many things consistent with Qabbalah and that
reportedly appear in the margins of the Zohar he owned. But one can
fully follow his derekh without paying attention to any of that.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             You are where your thoughts are.
mi...@aishdas.org                - Ramban, Igeres Hakodesh, Ch. 5
http://www.aishdas.org
Fax: (270) 514-1507

I just posted:
: I said that "Tenu'as haMussar really doesn't utilize Qabbalah much". By
: which I meant, whatever Qabbala they might have used, or might be
: consistent with because after all they are perspectives on the same
: Torah, is not necessary to explore that to follow the derekh...
:               Qabbalah is framed as not essential for knowing man's job
: in this world.

I should add that this led to a dispute between Dr Immanuel Etkes and R
Dr Hillel Goldstein about whether R' Yisrael Salanter studied Qabbalah.
At the end of R/D HG's "Israel Salanter: Text, Structure, Idea", he has
an excursus titled "Did Israel Salanter Stufy Philosophy and Kabbalah?"
refuting Etkes's claim that he did not. Still, R/D Hillel Goldberg does
conclude that RYS didn't teach Qabbalah.

See the thread "Reb Yisrael and Kabbalah" in Avodah's archives at
http://j.mp/ON9uad
In particular, R' Meir Levin (author of "Novhardok", published by
Aronson) wrote then:
> Hillel Goldberg quotes these words of Ettkes and argues with them. The
> evidence for Ettkes is third line (R. Zaitchik and R. Levovits) and
> very late whereas R. Y. Blaser reports in Ohr Isroel that R. Salanter
> studied Kabbala. His other evidence is that a number of people around
> R. Slanater, including his teacher R. Zundel were masters of Kabbala as
> well his immediate disciples, such as R. Blaser.

> I agree that R. Salanter made a break with the conceptual
> world of both philosophy and Kabbala (see my article in
> Jewish Action, Volume 64, No. 2, Winter 2003/5764, fn.10,
> <http://www.aishdas.org/news/jewishAction.pdf>). That does not mean that
> he did not study or wasn't proficient in Kabala. While he seems to have
> avoided using Kabbalistic terms, philosophical terms are encountered
> abundantly in his writings.

And to quote the footnote:
    10. Reb Yisrael appeared to see both the "negative" and at least
    some of the "positive" middot as residing in the same "animal
    soul." He felt, therefore, that both positive and negative middot
    should be subject to the same methods of musar training (Etkes,
    126-127). This view contrasts with both the philosophical and
    kabbalistic traditions. In philosophy, good middot are an expression
    of "form," (spiritual within man) and bad ones come from "matter"
    (physical within man). Kabbalah attributed them to the "lower"
    and "higher" soul, respectively. (See Moreh Nevuchim, 3,8 and
    Rav Chaim Vital, Shaarei Kedushah, ch. 1-3). By breaking with this
    understanding, Reb Yisrael made good and bad middot correctable with
    the same techniques. The antecedents of Reb Yisrael's view may have
    been in the writings of the Gaon of Vilna; see Commentary to Yonah
    1,6.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             What we do for ourselves dies with us.
mi...@aishdas.org        What we do for others and the world,
http://www.aishdas.org   remains and is immortal.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Albert Pine

The gemara brachot (starting bottom 8a) says ?R. Huna b. Judah says in the name of R. Ammi: A man should always complete his Parashoth
together with the congregation, [reading] twice the Hebrew text and once
the [Aramaic] Targum,and even [such verses as] Ataroth and Dibon,for if one
completes his Parashoth together with the
congregation, his days and years are prolonged.?


The Rambam (similarly others) brings this down as a chiyuv in tfilaa 13:25 as : ?? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????? ????, ??? ???? ??????, ???? ????? ?????


The Aruch Hashulchan seems to understand this as a takana from Moshe: , not clear to me how he knew ???? ??? ???? ?
??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???, ??????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??, ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?????.


So if it is a rabbinic takana(granted an early one);
1. why was it stated as simply something that is a life extender?
2. was the life extension an intrinsic result (i.e. learning more extends
your life) or do the rabbis have the ?power? to determine reward for
listening (and why is this takana different from others)?

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/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20120809/bdb16f2f/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 30, Issue 110
***************************************

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..."