Avodah Mailing List

Volume 30: Number 118

Tue, 21 Aug 2012

• 1. Rich rabbis (hankman)
• 2. Re: is this ok? (Akiva Miller)
• 3. Rabbi: Electric razors not kosher (Prof. Levine)
• 4. Birchat Hagomeil (Rich, Joel)
• 5. Re: Birkat eirusiin (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: is this ok? (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Sleeves that Cover the Elbows (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: Birkat eirusiin (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: Birkat eirusiin (Zev Sero)
• 10. Mezuza Not an Amulet (Prof. Levine)
• 11. Re: Mezuza Not an Amulet (Rich, Joel)
• 12. kosher lobster? (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 13. History? (Rich, Joel)

(moved from Areivim)

On 19/08/2012 12:10 PM, hankman [CM] wrote:
> I looked around a bit on Otzar Hachochma and most of the seforim I saw
> were not in agreement with your assumtion (deduction) "from Elisha that
> it was normal for anyone consulting a navi to bring him a present."

RZS responded:
> The Kesef Mishneh explicitly says, from this pasuk, that it was normal
> for every navi to charge a consulting fee. And the gemara learns from
> it that bringing presents to any talmid chacham is a mitzvah like
> bringing bikurim

I presume you are referring to the very long Kesef Mishneh on the Rambam
in Hil. T"T, 3:10.

The K"M is going on the Rambam who has very strong words for those who
are misparneis min haTorah. The K"M uses this as sort of a kashe to the
Rambam from Elisha. He starts with the words "vegam shematsinu bedivrei
chazal..." as he brings the gemara about Elisha and bikurim, but at the
end of his lengthy words he remains with a maskana (if I understood
him correctly) that where the "halacha rofefes beyadcha halach achar
haminhag" and this was the practice in the times of the Rambam to take
sechar from the tzibur so the K"M concludes that this was only because
the "chachmei hadoros" were maskim that this was an eis la'asos laH'
heifeiru Torosechah, so Torah should not be forgotten, which would imply
that the previous "proof" from Elisha was not something he remained with,
though how he explains it away is not clear. (Clearly he differentiates
it in some fashion).

Also the Gr"a in the sefer Sdei eliyahu on Brachos 10b notes on the gm'
kol hamaivi doron l't"ch k'ilu makriv bikurim" he notes immediately,
"veheinu bedoronos ketanim..." That is to say that he is not misparneis
from them -- they are not significant income.

Kol tuv
Chaim Manaster

R' Saul Newman asked:

> why does an ex-meshumad toivel?
> is there not an inyan of removing tum'ah?

We tend to associate tevilah with removal of tumah, but that is a gross over-generalization. Tevilah is also often done to add kedusha.

I think the simplest example of this is the many tevilos done by the Kohen
Gadol on Yom Kippur - surely no one thinks that there's any tumah he needs
to get rid of. I would think that tevilas keilim is another example - the
pots aren't really tameh, are they?

I think there are also times when tevilah is for *both* tumah and kedushah
reasons: When men tovel for Shabbos or Yom Tov, for example, I understand
it to be for both purposes - getting rid of those forms of tumah that we
are able to get rid of, and also for added kedusha. Similarly, the tevilah
of a ger - While one could argue that it is to get rid of the rabbinically
imposed tumah of non-Jews, the d'Oraisa requirement must be for something
above and beyond that.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Woman is 53 But Looks 25
Mom reveals 1 simple wrinkle trick that has angered doctors...
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/50325bf338a765bf25503st01vuc

 From http://tinyurl.com/8u2rpsh

Religious leaders in haredi town rule that use of electric razors 
constitutes violation of Jewish law, send out lists of prohibited 
haircuts to barbers


Rabbis in the haredi town of Kiryat Sefer have ruled recently that 
the use of electric razors is prohibited by Torah

The rabbis, whose convention marked the beginning of the yeshiva 
students' summer break, have prohibited the use of electric shaving 
machines because the gadgets pull out hair by its roots, which is 
considered a violation of Jewish Law

The religious leaders decided that any store that chooses to sells 
the 
non-<http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4228689,00.html>kosher 
electric razors would be required to refund the buyers' money.

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/20120820/16abeb86/attachment-0001.htm>

Berachot 54b is the source gemara for this bracha.  In the give and take
concerning how many must be present to recite the bracha, the gemara
debates whether 2 of the 10 must be talmidei chachamim based on competing
interpretations of a pasuk in tehilim. Let's assume for now that this
debate took place when because Chazal instituted this bracha after the
churban (don't ask me which bayit) since before then one would bring a
karban toda.  Which would you assume came first - that some of chazal had
an idea that there was a reason to have talmidei chachamim in there and the
pasuk was an asmachta, or that they had no predisposition and looked at the
pasuk (albeit in tehillim) and determined that HKB"H had influenced the
writer to word it in such a way so that chazal would know this was the
proper approach?
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/20120820/393e21f4/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 10:32:52AM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
>                Given that we say that someone who isn't obligated in a  
> mitzvah can't be motzi someone who is, how is it that the mesader  
> kedushin can say the birkat eirusin instead of the chatan?  Does anyone  
> know how that works?

A shaliach has to be connected to the mitzvah in order to be a valid
shaliach. Not even fulfilling or even subject to the chiyuv at the moment
he is doing the shelichus.

Someone who already heard Qiddush could make Qiddush for another. And
a husband, who already fulfilled Qiddush deOraisa when saying the
Amidah for Maariv can be motzi his wife in her chiyuv deOraisa for
Qiddush. (Although it is a popular topic in lomdus to discuss why,
then, she shouldn't take priority and preferably be the one to make
Qiddush.)

The textbook example (Gittin 62b): A man can be a shaliach leqabalah on a
gett because a father accepts the gett for a qetanah. The shaliach himself
might not have a daughter, and be unable to ever produce one. Still,
men fall under the rubric of meqabelei gittin because of this case,
so he can be a valid shaliach.

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

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 03:45:39PM +0000, Akiva Miller wrote:
: R' Saul Newman asked:
:> why does an ex-meshumad toivel?
:> is there not an inyan of removing tum'ah?

: We tend to associate tevilah with removal of tumah, but that is a
: gross over-generalization. Tevilah is also often done to add kedusha.

I'm not sure I agree.

: I think the simplest example of this is the many tevilos done by the
: Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur - surely no one thinks that there's any tumah
: he needs to get rid of. I would think that tevilas keilim is another
: example - the pots aren't really tameh, are they?

I'm not as sure. Perhaps it is just in case he touched something?
But really, I think the tevilos of the KG are commitment ceremonies;
ways of focusing kavanah for the task ahead. This is similar to "adding
qedushah", but not necessarily the same thing.

:                         I would think that tevilas keilim is another
: example - the pots aren't really tameh, are they?

Tevilas keilim or actual geirus are also commitment ceremonies.

And I think the tevilah of the ex-meshumad is a way to concretize his
breaking ties with the old faith community. Which is why we named this
practice as though it were a form of geirus, even though it isn't.

: I think there are also times when tevilah is for *both* tumah and
: kedushah reasons: When men tovel for Shabbos or Yom Tov, for example,
: I understand it to be for both purposes - getting rid of those
: forms of tumah that we are able to get rid of, and also for added
: kedusha. Similarly, the tevilah of a ger - While one could argue that
: it is to get rid of the rabbinically imposed tumah of non-Jews, the
: d'Oraisa requirement must be for something above and beyond that.

There is an overlap between taharah and qedushah: Taharah is
separation from gashmius. RSRH, kedarko beqodesh, phrases the idea in
lesson-teaching, psychological, terms (commenting on Vayiqra 11:47):

    A dead human body tends to bring home to one's mind a fact which
    is able to give support to that pernicious misconception which is
    called tum'ah. For, in fact, there lies before us actual evidence
    that Man must -- willy-nilly -- submit to the power of physical
    forces. That in this corpse that lies before us, it is not the
    real human being, that the real human being, the actual Man, which
    the powers of physical force can not touch, had departed from here
    before the body -- merely its earthly envelope -- could fall under
    the withering law of earthly Nature; more, that as long as the real
    Man, with his free-willed self-determining G-dly nature was present
    in the body, the body itself was freed from forced obedience to the
    purely physical demands, and was elevated into the sphere of moral
    freedom in all its powers of action and also of enjoyment, when the
    free-willed ruling of the higher part of Man decided to achieve the
    moral mission of his life;

R. SR Hirsch portrays the tamei object as one that causes the illusion
that man is nothing more than a physical object, an animal, a helpless
subject to physical forces and physical desires. In reality,

    death only begins with death, but that in life, thinking striving and
    accomplishing Man can master, rule, and use even his own sensuous body
    with all its all its innate forces, urges, and powers, with G-d-like
    free self-decision, within the limits of, and for accomplishment of,
    the duties set by the laws of morality;...

Qedushah is a commitment to avodas Hashem which can only come through
a separation from competing life-goals. As R' Shimon Shkop writes
(translation mine):

    In my opinion, this whole concept is included in Hashem's mitzvah "Be
    holy, [for I am Holy]." (Vayiqra 19:2) The Midrash (Vayiqra, Emor,
    ch. 24) says about this verse: "Can it [truly] be 'Like Me?' This
    is why it continues, 'for I am Holy' to teach that My Sanctity is
    above yours." And about the foundation of this mitzvah of sanctity
    the Toras Kohanim has "'be holy' -- be separate". Nachmanides,
    in his commentary on the Torah, explains at length this notion of
    separation as it is stated in this mitzvah, that it is separation
    from excessive comfort and pleasure -- even if they are actions that
    are not prohibited to us. In one illustrative statement, he writes
    that it is possible for a person to be disgusting with [what would
    otherwise be] the permission of the Torah, see his holy words there.

    According to this, it would seem the Midrash is incomprehensible. What
    relevance does the concept of separation have to being similar to the
    Holy One? The verse tells us with regard to this that His Will is not
    like this. As it says, "Can it [truly] be 'Like Me?' This is why it
    continues, 'For I am holy' to teach that My sanctity is higher than
    yours." It is more difficult to understand "My sanctity is higher
    than yours." This explanation is incumbent upon us to understand --
    in truth there is some similarity in the holiness He expects of us
    to His [Holiness], except that His Holiness is more general and
    inclusive. If we say that the essential idea of the holiness He
    demands of us (in this mitzvah of "be holy") is distance from the
    permissible, that kind of holiness has nothing to do with Him.

    And so, it appears to my limited thought that this mitzvah includes
    the entire foundation and root of the purpose of our lives. All
    of our work and effort should constantly be sanctified to doing
    ...

I'm eliding RSSkop's definition of what avodas Hashem focuses upon,
as history shows it can prove distracting.

    .... And as understood, all holiness is being set apart for
    an honorable purpose -- which is that a person straightens his
    path ... Then, anything he does even for himself, for the health of
    his body and soul he also associates to the mitzvah of being holy,
    for through this he can also do [avodas Hashem -mb]...

    In this way, the concept of separation is a consequence of the
    underlying basis of the mitzvah of holiness, which is recognizable in
    practice in the ways a person acts. But with insight and the calling
    of spirituality this mitzvah broadens to include everything a person
    causes or does even between him and the Omnipresent. In relation to
    this, this holiness is comparable to the Holiness of the Creator
    in whatever little similarity. Just as the Act of the Holy One in
    all of creation, and in each and every moment that He continues to
    cause the universe to exist; all His actions are sanctified...

The question of whether Qedushah means following the letter of halakhah
or going beyond it appears to be a machloqes Rashi and the Rambam on
one side (halakhah), and the Ramban (beyond halakhah) on the other. See
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2010/11/qedushah.shtml where I posted on
the latter two points ("tahor mei-" vs. "qadosh le-", and din vs lifnim
mishuras hadin).

This distinction between qedushah and taharah leads me to my next post,
on a different thread...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             If a person does not recognize one's own worth,
mi...@aishdas.org        how can he appreciate the worth of another?
http://www.aishdas.org             - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye,
Fax: (270) 514-1507                  author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef

This builds on my previous post (on the thread) "is this ok?". I wrote:
> There is an overlap between taharah and qedushah: Taharah is
> separation from gashmius.
...
> R. SR Hirsch portrays the tamei object as one that causes the illusion
> that man is nothing more than a physical object, an animal, a helpless
> subject to physical forces and physical desires. In reality,
...
> Qedushah is a commitment to avodas Hashem which can only come through
> a separation from competing life-goals. As R' Shimon Shkop writes...

On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:30:21PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
> Perhaps one should classify wearing sleeves that cover the elbow as a  
> Hidur rather than a chumra.
>
> The following is from http://tinyurl.com/btzc4vw
>
>
> Kedusha = Restriction
> by Kedusha
> <http://www.guardyoureyes.com/inspiration/members-chizuk/item/ked
> usha>

Obviously, from what I just wrote, I do not think this equality holds.
As RSShkop argued, if the Toras Kohanim meant "perushim tihyu" /defined/
qedushah, then what does it do with "ki Qadosh Ani"? What negative things
does HQBH have to be poreish Himself from?

...
> Source: Chiku Mamtakim, volume II p. 121 (translated from the original 
> Hebrew) (emphasis added).
...
> Rav Shlomo Zalman responded: "Why look for stringencies?  There is no  
> need for that.  The main thing is to accept upon yourself to fulfill the 
> Halacha on a Lechatchila level."

Rashi (on "qedoshim tihyu") and Rambam (in his discussions of
"lashon haqodesh" and "sheqel qodesh"), not the Ramban. (As
I mentioned last post, I am referring to something I wrote at
<http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2010/11/qedushah.shtml>.) The Ramban says
the main thing is "qadeish es atzmekha bema shemutar lakh". Apparently
he holds that following the halakhah on the lekhat-chilah level is simply
"lekakh notzarta", and not qedushah.

...
> Since it meant so much to them, Rav Shlomo Zalman acceded to their  
> request and gave them the following advice: "All the Chumros and Hidurim 
> are not worth a single minor Hidur in matters of Kedusha and Tzeniyus.  
> In matters of Kedusha and Tzeniyus, every small Hidur is immeasurable, it 
> raises up, sanctifies, and brings a person close to his Creator, as 
> Chazal say: 'Wherever you find safeguards against ervah, you find 
> Kedusha.'  For someone whose Neshama is thirsty for Ruchniyus, the place 
> to begin and the area that is most important is Kedusha and Tzeniyus."

Notice that unlike the anonymous "Kedhusha"'s understanding, this maaseh
does not say that qedushah *is* restriction any more than qedushah will
perforce (at least for people) require restriction. There is no indication
RSZA disagrees with RSShkop's defimition.

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

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:41:55PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote:
: Someone who already heard Qiddush could make Qiddush for another. And
: a husband, who already fulfilled Qiddush deOraisa when saying the
: Amidah for Maariv can be motzi his wife in her chiyuv deOraisa for
: Qiddush. (Although it is a popular topic in lomdus to discuss why,
: then, she shouldn't take priority and preferably be the one to make
: Qiddush.)

Looking over the AhS (OC 271:5-6) it looks like I erred. Se'if 6
explicitly states that there *is* a problem when one who davened wants
to be motzi(ah) one who hadn't.

The AhS explains how a man can come home and make qiddush for his wife
by making a chiluq between birkhos hamitzvah and birkhos hanehenin. By
birkhos hamitzvah we say kol Yisrael areivim gives me permission to make
a berakhah for someone when I'm not chayav. For birkhos hanehenin I have
to equally need the berakhah.

So now I'm wondering when do we only require the shaliach be a bikhal
chiyuv (like a man being shaliach leqabalah for a get) and when do
we require them to actually at that moment have at least equal chiyuv
(like a birkhas hanehenin)?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and
mi...@aishdas.org        this was a great wonder. But it is much more
http://www.aishdas.org   wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a
Fax: (270) 514-1507      "mensch"!     -Rav Yisrael Salanter

On 20/08/2012 3:55 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> Looking over the AhS (OC 271:5-6) it looks like I erred. Se'if 6
> explicitly states that there*is*  a problem when one who davened wants
> to be motzi(ah) one who hadn't.
>
> The AhS explains how a man can come home and make qiddush for his wife
> by making a chiluq between birkhos hamitzvah and birkhos hanehenin. By
> birkhos hamitzvah we say kol Yisrael areivim gives me permission to make
> a berakhah for someone when I'm not chayav. For birkhos hanehenin I have
> to equally need the berakhah.
>
> So now I'm wondering when do we only require the shaliach be a bikhal
> chiyuv (like a man being shaliach leqabalah for a get) and when do
> we require them to actually at that moment have at least equal chiyuv
> (like a birkhas hanehenin)?

AIUI, shomea` ke`oneh is not a matter of shlichus, it's a separate concept.
If it were a matter of shlichus then you wouldn't have to hear it; you'd
be able to tell him "make kiddush for me" and leave, confident that he will
fulfil your shlichus.  You can't make a shliach to say a bracha for you,
but you can become a participant in his saying of it.  If he has no chiyuv,
then the question is how you can fulfil an obligation by attaching yourself
to the act of someone who is not, or who is fulfilling a different and
lesser one.


-- 
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 Questions & Insights by Rabbi Zev 
Leff 
<http://www.matityahu.org/RavLeffQA/viewquestions.asp?viewcat=17>Women 
in Judaism (Laws/Customs)

I heard a shiur about the hashkafa behind mitzvas 
challah, and the significance of each ingredient 
that goes into the dough. The presenter did not, 
however, bring any sources. What is the source 
that says that kneading challah is an eis ratzon? 
Are there any other sources which discuss the 
hashkafic aspects of this mitzva? ?Anonymous, Baltimore, MD

The Answer <http://www.rabbileff.net/shiurim/answers/1750-1999/1962.mp3>
[]
<http://www.rabbileff.net/shiurim/answers/1750-1999/1962.mp3>Click 
here to listen to Rabbi Leff's answer.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120821/c988448e/attachment-0001.htm>

A very rationalist approach (which suits me just fine) BUT (and perhaps
very much to the point of the Aishdas society) there is obviously something
rotten in Rationalistland if we have large groups of people who are seeking
the eit ratzons of R' Nachman assumedly because they are not finding 
fulfillment in tfila and doing mitzvot because we are so commanded and
doing them is what pleases HKB"H.  Unfortunately I don't think there are
quick fixes to this issue and I'm not sure we won't be yotzeh scharo
bhefsedo if we try to discourage these practices without something more
than just people should understand better what HKB"H wants of them.

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/20120821/45ad0d9a/attachment-0001.htm>

http://havolim.blogspot.com/2012/08/reay-devarim-143-loathsome-fo
ods-and.html
theoretical possiblility  ?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120821/0341d73c/attachment-0001.htm>

I was struck by these 2 views of history. It would be interesting to consider where on the spectrum we as individuals and communities fall out.
KT
Joel Rich





====================================================
http://www.jewishideasdaily.com/4815/features/until-a-hundred-twenty/

Why these particular texts?  How should one study them?  Lewis gives
specific answers, some of them in a chapter of his book titled, "Why Study
History?"  More generally, Lewis observes that those who will not confront
the past "will be unable to understand the present and unfit to face the
future.  A great responsibility, therefore, falls on historians," he says,
"whose moral and professional duty it is to seek out the truth concerning
the past, and to present and explain it as they see it.  I have endeavored
to fulfill this responsibility."
<SNIP>
 And how does fulfilling the historian's duty help us "face" the present
 and future?  It is, of course, too soon to tell in any simple sense; but,
 although historians cannot predict the future, "there are certain things
 that the historian can and should do.	He can look at what has been
 happening and what is happening and see change developing."  By doing so,
 Lewis says, "he can formulate, I will not say predictions, but
 possibilities, alternative possibilities, things that may happen."
=============================================================

Rabbi Shimon Schwab & Historic Truth

What ethical purpose is served by preserving a realistic historic picture?
Nothing but the satisfaction of curiosity. We should tell ourselves and our
children the good memories of the good people, their unshakable faith,
their staunch defense of tradition, their life of truth, their impeccable
honesty, their boundless charity and their great reverence for Torah and
Torah sages. What is gained by pointing out their inadequacies and their
contradictions? We want to be inspired by their example and learn from
their experience... Rather than write the history of our forebears, every
generation has to put a veil over the human failings of its elders and
glorify all the rest which is great and beautiful. That means we have to do
without a real history book. We can do without. We do not need realism, we
need inspiration from our forefathers in order to pass it onto posterity.

Selected Writings (Lakewood, 1988)

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/20120821/7b406d28/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 118
***************************************

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..."