Avodah Mailing List

Volume 30: Number 113

Tue, 14 Aug 2012

• 1. Re: rega = sha`a / 58888 (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Canceling Reservations (Zev Sero)
• 3. Re: Tzaar Baalei Chayim (T6...@aol.com)
• 4. A (Kosher) Can of Worms (Prof. Levine)
• 5. "Yodei'a Tzaddik Nefesh B'hemto..." (Mishlei) 12:10) (cantorwolberg@cox.net)
• 6. Follow-Up - Tzaar Baalei Chayim (cantorwolb...@cox.net)
• 7. Re: "Yodei'a Tzaddik Nefesh B'hemto..." (Mishlei) 12:10) (Liron Kopinsky)
• 8. Miriam Hanivi'ah (Henry Topas)
• 9. The Talmud?s Many Demons (Prof. Levine)

On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 11:44:36PM +0300, Simon Montagu wrote:
: In Berachot 7a the gemara says that a rega is 1/58888 of an hour.
: 
: Are there any perushim that say where this number comes from? I assume
: the Amoraim didn't pluck it out of thin air.
: 
: I gather from some internet research that there are variant readings:
...

From Kollel Iyun haDaf <http://dafyomi.co.il/berachos/backgrnd/br-in-007.htm>:
    "v'Chamah Rega? Echad me'*58,888* b'Sha'ah"

    There is a broad range of variant readings for the number mentioned in
    this Agadah (see also Avodah Zarah, end of 3a). However, according to
    the marginal notes of Rebbi Yeshayah Berlin, this number should read
    8,888, which is the number of verses in the Torah according to the
    Gemara in Kidushin 30a. It should be noted, though, that according to
    the Girsa in our editions of Kidushin, there are 5,888 verses in the
    Torah (which is close to the number of verses (5845) that we actually
    find in today's Sifrei Torah, as Rebbi Yeshayah Berlin points out
    there). Accordingly, the Girsa in our Gemara should also be 5,888. The
    Girsa in Agadas ha'Talmud (first print of the Ein Yakov), as cited by
    the Dikdukei Sofrim #60, is 5,880 (which perhaps should read 5,888),
    and the Girsa of Rabeinu Chananel to Avodah Zarah 4a is 56,888.

One answer in Tosafos relates the unit of time to the time it would
take Bil'am to say two syllables "Kaleim!" (And then, according to Tos'
AZ 4b "rega", Hashem literally reversed that into "Melekh!" -- note the
spelling of each word -- which is what Bil'am says at the rega of anger
in Bamidbar 23:21.

Maybe a person can get that out in 1/5888 or 1/5880 hours, around .6
sec. But not once you get to R' Chananel's in AZ or the Vilna girsa here.

: Then http://books.g
: oogle.co.il/books?id=Agw6AAAAIAAJ&;pg=PA36&lpg=PA36&dq=588
: 88+hour+moment&source=bl&ots=exVfiAaJr3&sig=OcfMDQb5mncNERyhH
: RjNSONrqiw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WR0kUJvmD6ri4QTZnYD4AQ&redir_esc
: =y#v=onepage&q=58888%20hour%20moment&f=false
: or http://bit.ly/Nqqfae has a footnote saying  "The correct number is
: 82,080; see Brodetsky in JR II p. 173". The reference seems to be to
: Selig Brodetsky: Astronomy in the Babylonian Talmud in the Jewish
: Review Vol. II No 8. July, 1911, but I wasn't able to find the article
: online.

This would make a rega 1/76 of a cheileq. Which is what Rambam says in
Hil' Qiddush haChodesh 10:1.

Why?

Because there are 235 months in a 19 yr me'uberes cycle. And that means
the average year length across that cycle is
    1 avg year = 235 molad / 19 years = 365 day, 5 hr, 55 min, 7-12/19 chalaqim
or
                                      = 365 day, 5 hr, 55 min, 48 rega

By making the rega four times as precise as needed to capture that 1/19
cheleq, Chazal had a unit of measure that allows a whole number for the
length of a tequfah
     1 tequfah = 91 days, 7 hr, 28 min, 15 cheleq, 31 rega

It is possible that this is a separate calendrical usage of the word
"rega". Because Rambam's 1/76 cheleq is .044 sec, and again we get a
sliver of time too thin for Bil'am to say two syllables.


I would also point out that all this speculation means little to most
of us. This aggadita is definitely metaphor -- we're talking about how
long HQBH gets angry. Neither anger nor time really apply. So, first
explain the basic idea, what Chazal are trying to convey by saying He
gets angry daily but for a very short time, and then we can discuss the
meaning of the size of the unit being used for "very short". But I'm
not past step 1 yet.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             We are what we repeatedly do.
mi...@aishdas.org        Thus excellence is not an event,
http://www.aishdas.org   but a habit.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Aristotle

The whole question ignores the fact that it's understood in the market
that reservations for accommodations may be cancelled until whatever
deadline the proprietor sets in advance.  When one gets a confirmation
email it specifies the cancellation policy.  If no policy is specified
then it's understood that one may cancel at any time.


-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

 


From: _cantorwolberg@cox.net_ (mailto:cantorwolb...@cox.net) 

>> I  don't know who "we" is, since I was never taught this.
So since YOU were  never taught this, therefore, it can't be so?
Is it not possible there are  m'forshim who taught that the purpose
of shechitah is to cause a painless  death to the animal? Are the
musmachim from whom I was taught, all  wrong??

Indeed I don't think it was even known that shechitah was  painless until
the modern era, when it became possible to attach scanners to  animals'
skulls and detect their brain activity.

So assuming it wasn't  even known that shechitah was painless, you don't
think HaShem knew? Do you  think that was the ONLY thing that wasn't
known by man? So therefore, what  does it prove?  <<

 
>>>>>
 
The Torah does not state the reason for shechita, and indeed seldom states  
the reason for any mitzva.  Sometimes a reason is given along the lines of, 
 "Do this to remember or to testify x, y, z."  (e.g., keep Shabbos  to 
testify that Hashem created the world; korban Pesach and matza to  remember 
yetzias Mitzraim).  Sometimes a reason is given along the lines of  "do it so 
you will benefit" -- like, honor your parents so you will have a long  life, 
or give ma'aser so that you will become rich.  In those cases it  isn't 
really a "reason" that's being given but rather a reward -- if you do x,  then 
Hashem will give you y.
 
But in the great majority of cases, the Torah does not state a reason for  
keeping the mitzva. It usually states neither the purpose nor the  reward.   
Often we discover that a mitzva has side benefits,  e.g., the wives of 
circumcised men rarely get cervical cancer, and people who  don't eat pork don't 
get trichinosis.  We can assume that Hashem knew of  these benefits when He 
commanded these mitzvos, but we /cannot/ assume that the  benefit is "the" 
reason for any given mitzva.  
 
Shechita is painless because the animal loses consciousness  immediately.  
This is a benefit but it is not "the" reason for the  mitzva.  One could 
easily think of other reasons -- for example, as someone  noted, shechita 
allows most of the animal's blood to drain out  rapidly.  Some have speculated 
that Hashem doesn't really care about the  suffering of animals (or that 
animals have no such concept as "suffering") and  that the purpose of shechita is 
merely to prevent human beings from acting in a  cruel way and becoming 
insensitive to the suffering of others.  Personally  I think that animals do 
feel pain and that Hashem /is/ concerned with their  suffering, and that He 
/also/ wants us human beings to refine our midos and  not become cruel and 
insensitive.  But even given all these factors, we do  not know "the" reason 
for shechita.
 
If anyone stated to you unequivocally, "THE reason for shechita is x, y or  
z" then that person was in error.  We know only benefits of shechita -- and 
 possibly not all the benefits.  We do not know "the" reason.
 
--Toby  Katz
=============



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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120814/e7e1560b/attachment-0001.htm>

 From http://tinyurl.com/bve3obb


Rabbis Go to Museum to Probe Kashrut, Tiny Worms and Fish


 From the hulking Willamette meteorite to the 
sparkling Star of India sapphire, visitors to the 
American Museum of Natural History in New York 
are used to seeing unusual sights. But 
museum-goers last year were likely unprepared for 
the sight ? and smell ? of Rabbi Chaim Loike, as 
he walked past the ticket booths carrying grocery 
bags full of thawing frozen sardines, fish oil 
dripping onto the lobby floor beneath the 
barosaurus skeleton in the front entrance off of Central Park West.

Loike, a rabbinic coordinator with the Orthodox 
Union, the largest certifier of kosher food in 
the world, went to the museum in March 2011 to 
solve a challenging kashrut problem. He and his 
colleagues, including OU fish expert Rabbi Chaim 
Goldberg, had noticed a recent uptick in the 
number of parasitic worms contaminating certain 
kosher-certified brands of tinned sardines and 
capelin eggs ? likely the result of newer deep 
ocean trawling methods ? and they wanted to know 
where these piscatorial parasites were coming from.

Worms, in general, are not kosher. But according 
to Talmudic rules, microscopic worms that grow in 
the muscles of fish are considered to come ?from? 
the flesh. And even though the idea of them may 
seem unpalatable, these parasites, which 
typically go unnoticed by consumers, are 
nonetheless acceptable by Jewish dietary laws. In 
contrast, worms that migrate into the fish meat 
from the guts, say, or elsewhere clearly come 
from outside the flesh, and the presence of such 
parasites would render any fish product unkosher.

Differentiating between these two kinds of 
parasites is no easy task. The rabbis knew the 
various worm species that normally develop inside 
their host?s muscles, yet they could not tell 
just by looking under the microscope which kinds 
of worms they were dealing with. Could the worms 
have migrated into the fish meat after the host 
had died? Or did they mature in the flesh in situ?

<Snip>

The museum researchers, led by worm curator Mark 
Siddall and his graduate student Sebastien Kvist, 
used a technique known as ?DNA barcoding? in 
which a small region of the genome is decoded to 
yield a uniquely identifying string of genetic 
?letters? to pinpoint the species. They ran 
samples from the tinned fish, the capelin roe and 
even Loike?s frozen specimens through a 
gene-sequencing machine and determined that all 
of the worms co-mingling with the food were of 
the type that develops in the muscle.

As a result, the kosher certification could 
stand. ?The Talmud basically says that most worms 
you find in a fish come from the flesh, and what 
the museum showed us is that that still happens 
today,? said Loike. The AMNH scientists published 
their findings earlier this year in the Journal of Parasitology.

Still, not all kashrut experts think this study 
does anything to resolve the longstanding 
controversy over whether these worms pass 
halachic muster. According to Rabbi Gershon Bess, 
a member of the Rabbinic Council of California 
who advises on issues relating to kosher foods, 
the genetics only confirms what rabbis and 
scientists already knew: Namely, that the worms 
found in the flesh and viscera are not a result 
of outside contamination but rather the natural 
life cycle of those known as Anisakis nematodes.

<Snip>

Given the totality of the worms? development, 
Bess and many of his contemporaries argue that 
fish products containing these worms should be 
off-limits. ?There?s no question that the worms 
are visible to the eye [before entering the 
fish],? he said. ?Therefore, according to the Talmud, it should be forbidden.?

Regarding the OU?s certification, he added: ?It?s 
an extremely weak position and doesn?t really 
work with the reasoning of any of the halachic 
authorities throughout the generations.?

Read more: 
<http://forward.com/articles/160736/a-kosher-can-of-worms/#ixzz23WYeqQwk
>http://forward.com/articles/160736/a-kosher-can-of-worms/#ixzz23WYeqQwk


YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120814/ddd9b322/attachment-0001.htm>

The following are further indications of tzaar baalei chayim:  (Some of which R' Micha fortunately has already articulated)

1) Lo tacharish b'shor uvachamor yachdav
Many interpret the Torah's prohibition against plowing with an ox and a
donkey as an attempt to prevent injury or pain to these animals, who
naturally work at different paces (D'vorim 22:10).

2) On the subject of veal, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein comments:
"[in regard to the situation in which] every calf is in its own pen, which
is so narrow that it does not have space even to take a few steps, and the
calves are not fed the appropriate food for them, and have never tasted
their mother's milk, but they are fattened with very fatty liquids...this
is certainly forbidden on the basis of tzaar baalei hayim. Even though it
is permissible in order to satisfy human needs, by slaughtering animals for
food, or by employing animals to plow, to carry burdens or other such
things, it is not permissible otherwise to cause them suffering, even when
one stands to profit from such practices (Igg'rot Moshe, Even haEzer
4:92)."

3) Building on the prohibition against causing unnecessary pain to work
animals,the Arukh ha-Shulhan forbids working one's animal night and day,
without a break, saying that such a practice violates the prohibition
against tzaar baalei hayim (Hoshen Mishpat 307:13). Similarly, the Rambam
comments, "If a thorn happened to be stuck in the animal's mouth and one
threshed with it while it was unable to eat, or if one caused a lion to lie
down nearby [thereby frightening the animal]...or if the animal was thirsty
and one failed to give it water...all this is forbidden (Mishneh Torah,
Hilkhot S'khirut 13:3)."

4) In addition to mandating a day of rest for human beings, the laws of
Shabbat also provide a day off for animals. The biblical command to keep
Shabbat specifies, "For six days, you shall do all of your work, but the
seventh day is God's Sabbath; you shall not do any work, neither you nor
your son or daughter or your servant or your animal, or the stranger who is
in your midst (Exodus 20:8)." Like humans, animals cannot be expected to
work seven days a week, but must be allowed one day a week to recuperate.

5) In the words of the Rambam, "If one encounters one's friend on the road
and sees that that person's animal is suffering from its burden, whether
the burden is appropriate for the animal or is excessive, it is a mitzvah
to remove this burden (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Rotzeah 13:1)." While some
interpretations understand this law as a mitzvah only to relieve one's
friend of a burden, others stress that the basis for the mitzvah is the
prohibition against tzaar baalei hayim and that one must relieve an animal
belonging even to an enemy (Kesef Mishneh, Hilkhot Rotzeah 13:9).

6) In some instances, it is even permissible to break Shabbat in order to
care for a wounded animal. The Talmud, for instance, allows a person to
break certain laws of Shabbat in order to prevent the death of an animal
that has fallen into a pool of water (Talmud Tractate Shabbat 128b). While
it is not permissible to help an animal to give birth on Shabbat, some
authorities allow assistance in the birth if an animal is suffering greatly
or is in danger of dying. (See, for example, Har Tzvi Tal Harim Shvut 3,
Rabbi Tzvi Pesach Frank [1874-1960]). While not as extensive as the laws
that require one to break Shabbat in order to save human life, tzaar baalei
hayim can overrule certain ritual laws when the life or comfort of an
animal is at stake.

7) It is also forbidden to eat before we feed our animals: Talmud, Berachot 40a; Mishneh Torah, Laws of Servitude 9:8
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120814/a143a043/attachment-0001.htm>

I have been distressed by a minority posting of what appears to be an insensitivity to tzaar baalei chayim.
Hence, this is my final posting on the topic.

The famous story of Yehuda HaNasi: A calf was being taken to the slaughter, when it broke away, 
hid his head under Rabbi's skirts, and lowed [in terror]. 'Go', said he, 'for this wast thou created.'  
Thereupon they said [in Heaven], 'Since he has no pity, let us bring suffering upon him.'  Rabbi 
was afflicted with a stone in the urinary tract and thrush for thirteen years. One day, his maidservant 
was sweeping the house. Seeing some weasel pups lying there, she was about to sweep them away. 
Rabbi said to her, ?Let them be, as it is written: ?God?s compassion is over all God?s creatures? (Psalms 145:9). 
At that moment, it was said in heaven, ?Since he is now compassionate, let us be compassionate to him.? 
And he was cured.  Bava Metzia 85a


When Moshe Rabbeinu was tending the flocks of Yisro in the wilderness, a lamb
scampered off, and Moshe ran after it, until it approached a shelter under a
rock. As the lamb reached the shelter, it came upon a pool of water and
stopped to drink. When Mosehe caught up with it, he said, ?I did not know
that you ran away because you were thirsty. Now you must be tired.? So,
he hoisted the lamb on his shoulder and started walking back with it. The
Holy One then said, ?Because you showed such compassion in tending the
flock of a mortal, as you live, you shall become shepherd of Israel, the flock
that is Mine.? (Shmos Rabbah 2:2)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120814/b137ba9a/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 4:21 PM, <cantorwolb...@cox.net> wrote:

> The following are further indications of tzaar baalei chayim:  (Some of
> which R' Micha fortunately has already articulated)
>
I don't think anyone is denying that there is a concept of Tzaar Baalei
Chayim. The question is what are its parameters and how far does it reach.

>
> 1) *Lo tacharish b'shor uvachamor yachdav*
> Many interpret the Torah's prohibition against plowing with an ox and a
> donkey as an attempt to prevent injury or pain to these animals, who
> naturally work at different paces (D'vorim 22:10).
>

Or as an attempt to make sure that they don't mate together. Among other
reasons.


> 2) On the subject of veal, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein comments:
>
> "[in regard to the situation in which] every calf is in its own pen, which
> is so narrow that it does not have space even to take a few steps, and the
> calves are not fed the appropriate food for them, and have never tasted
> their mother's milk, but they are fattened with very fatty liquids...this
> is certainly forbidden on the basis of tzaar baalei hayim. Even though it
> is permissible in order to satisfy human needs, by slaughtering animals for
> food, or by employing animals to plow, to carry burdens or other such
> things, it is not permissible otherwise to cause them suffering, even when
> one stands to profit from such practices (*Igg'rot Moshe, Even haEzer *
> 4:92)."
>
So my question would be: What are the consequences halachikally if someone
does pen up their animals in order to create veal? R' Moshe says it's
assur, so presumably one would receive malkot for doing so. Would an
activist be allowed to enter a veal farm and free all the animals against
the owners wishes? Could a BD force the owner to free the animals?

> 3) Building on the prohibition against causing unnecessary pain to work
> animals,the *Arukh ha-Shulhan* forbids working one's animal night and
> day, without a break, saying that such a practice violates the prohibition
> against tzaar baalei hayim (*Hoshen Mishpat *307:13). Similarly, the
> Rambam comments, "If a thorn happened to be stuck in the animal's mouth and
> one threshed with it while it was unable to eat, or if one caused a lion to
> lie down nearby [thereby frightening the animal]...or if the animal was
> thirsty and one failed to give it water...all this is forbidden (*Mishneh
> Torah, Hilkhot S'khirut *13:3)."
>
Same question as #2.

>
> 4) In addition to mandating a day of rest for human beings, the laws of
> Shabbat also provide a day off for animals. The biblical command to keep
> Shabbat specifies, "For six days, you shall do all of your work, but the
> seventh day is God's Sabbath; you shall not do any work, neither you nor
> your son or daughter or your servant *or your animal*, or the stranger
> who is in your midst (Exodus 20:8)." Like humans, animals cannot be
> expected to work seven days a week, but must be allowed one day a week to
> recuperate.
>
If it was purely about giving animals a day of rest, then an owner should
be allowed to own 2 animals, and work one of them from Sunday-Friday, and
the other one from Monday-Saturday, that way his farm could be operational
7 days a week. Why do the animals have to rest davka on Shabbat?

>
> 5) In the words of the Rambam, "If one encounters one's friend on the road
> and sees that that person's animal is suffering from its burden, whether
> the burden is appropriate for the animal or is excessive, it is a mitzvah
> to remove this burden (*Mishneh Torah*,* Hilkhot Rotzeah* 13:1)." While
> some interpretations understand this law as a mitzvah only to relieve one's
> friend of a burden, others stress that the basis for the mitzvah is the
> prohibition against tzaar baalei hayim and that one must relieve an animal
> belonging even to an enemy (*Kesef Mishneh*,* Hilkhot Rotzeah* 13:9).
>
Does anyone know how this Rambam deals with "imo"? From this quote it
implies that one removes the burden whether or not his friend is there.
This would imply that an activist should be allowed to free the animal
belonging to someone (at least their friend, maybe even their enemy) if
that animal is suffering.

>
> 7) It is also forbidden to eat before we feed our animals: Talmud, *Berachot
> 40a*; Mishneh Torah, Laws of Servitude 9:8
>
Presumably this has nothing to do with Tzaar Baalei Chayim, and is mostly
about our middot. If my animal is not starving, and I'm planning on feeding
him in 30 minutes, why shouldn't I be allowed to eat my lunch first?


Kol Tuv,
-- 
Liron Kopinsky
liron.kopin...@gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120814/4b5e3a2a/attachment-0001.htm>

I am preparing a d'var Torah concerning Miriam and her contributions to Am Yisroel.

What I have difficulty in finding are any discussions as to the lack of
organized mourning after her death in the same fashion as transpired
following the passing of Aharon Hakohen and Moshe Rabbeinu.

Any enlightenment from the chevrah would be appreciated.

Kol Tuv,

HT
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120814/e1115e26/attachment-0001.htm>

 From http://tinyurl.com/9vwk7t9


Sages in a superstitious age accepted the 
existence of invisible devils and the use of magic to render them visible

Here is a baraita attributed to Abba Benjamin: 
?If the eye would be granted permission to see, 
no creature would be able to stand in the face of 
the demons that surround it.? We are all, 
apparently, constantly beset by invisible devils, 
and the rabbis of the Gemara go on to expand on 
the proposition: ?Abaye said: They are more 
numerous than us, and they stand about us like a 
ditch around a mound.? ?Rav Huna said: Each one 
of us has a thousand to his left and ten thousand to his right.?

The idea that we see only a fragment of reality, 
that our senses are not designed to perceive 
everything that is, has a surprisingly modern 
ring to it. Abba Benjamin?s dictum <Snip> Taken 
as metaphor, the idea that we are surrounded by 
invisible powers is not hard to accept.

The problem is that the rabbis did not intend it 
as a metaphor. This becomes clear from the 
ensuing discussion of the effects of demons and 
the ways of making them visible. The evil these 
demons work is not metaphysical or catastrophic; 
it is trivial and bothersome, making them seem 
more like naughty sprites than devils. When your 
knees become tired, when your clothes wear out 
from rubbing, when you feel squeezed in the crowd 
at a public lecture?this is all, according to 
Rava, the work of demons. And there are magical 
ways of making demons show themselves. All you 
have to do is find a black female cat who is the 
firstborn daughter of a firstborn mother, burn 
her placenta to ashes, grind the ashes, and put 
some of them in your eye, and you will be able to 
see the demons. Be sure, however, to place the 
remainder of the ashes in a sealed iron tube, 
lest the demons steal it from you.

See the above URL for more.

----------
Rabbi A. Miller spent years giving shiurim that 
went through all of Shas.  He was not deterred by 
topics that some might feel should not be 
discussed in public due to their "delicate" 
nature.  However, there were times when he did 
skip some topics.  He would say, "I cannot teach 
what I do not understand, so now turn the page to 
......"   IIRC some of the topics that he skipped 
were the Gemara's discussion of Zugos and 
discussions like the one referred to about demons.

YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20120814/412a0953/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 113
***************************************

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..."