HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: allen@golem.ssc.gov (Michael Allen)
Subject: Re: Orthodox Monopoly
Reply-To: allen@ssc.gov
Organization: SSC Laboratory, Dallas, TX
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 14:47:44 GMT

>>>>> On Thu, 10 Sep 92 14:54:19 +0200, MASH@WEIZMANN.WEIZMANN.AC.IL (Michael Shimshoni) said:
[...]
Michael> the fact  that the  O claim  that their "distortion"  of the  Torah is
Michael> "what was really meant" or "what was  told to Moshe at Sinai" does not
Michael> change the simple fact  that no person does or can  live by the letter
Michael> of the Torah as written.  And now that we have established that...
[...]

Ah!  The clear and ever popular proof by blatant assertion.  Thank you.
--
===================================================
But those who toiled knew nothing of the dreams of 
        Those Who Planned;                         
And the minds who planned the Tower of Babel       
        Cared nothing for the workers who built it.

	-Metropolis
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: lms@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com (Max Stern 310-524-6152)
Subject: Re: Kashruth of wine
Keywords: Yein Nesech, Stam Yeinam
Organization: NCR (Torrey Pines Development Center)
Disclaimer: This posting does not neccessarily reflect the opinions of NCR.
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 20:31:10 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.211759.16585@cs.ubc.ca> davef@cs.ubc.ca (David Finkelstein) writes:
>In article <1992Sep10.170002.18503@cc.gatech.edu> amir@leopard.gatech.edu (amir) writes:
>>There are two concepts relating to wine:
>>	1. Yein Nesech.
>>	2. Stam Yeinam.
>>
>>Yein Nesech is wine that was used for Avodah Zara. An example today
>>would be (according to the Rambam) wine used in church rites. This is
>>forbidden from the Torah (see last week's Parasha). 
>>
>
>Uh-oh, a lot of churches like to use "fortified concord grape wine"
>for communion.  You know, like the wine found in those bottles with
>the guy wearing the talit on the label.
>
>I guess taste isn't the only reason to buy wines from the Gan Eden or
>Hagafen wineries... :-)

Hmmm...

When I was on Ulpan Avodah at Kibbutz S'de Eliyahu (a Dati Kibbutz),
there were non-Jews also studying there (they were on Ulpan Giur,
preparing for Halachic conversion).  At Shabbat Dinner, when we made
Kiddush at our table, our strictest Jews insisted on not letting the
non-Jews even _TOUCH_ the wine bottle.  We had to pour for them.

Halachic basis???
-- 

 |\/|  /_\  \/
 |  | /   \ /\                      Max.Stern@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com
From: lnieplo3@ua1ix.ua.edu (Jaroslaw Nieplocha)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: (Re: Polish complicity - Jewish complicity) AND Glemp's tolerance
Date: 12 Sep 92 19:29:29 GMT
Organization: The University of Alabama


(Re: Polish complicity - Jewish complicity) AND Glemp's tolerance

>aleks@cray.com (Aleksander Mazur) writes:
>#dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:
>#RWhat about violently intolerant ? Of course Weiss cannot be compared
>#with Glemp - there is no even shred of evidence that Glemp is
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>#intolerant. 
  ^^^^^^^^^^
>I believe your opinion is not shared by other Polish readers of
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>this newsgroup.
>
>-Danny Keren.
>
>
Of course, this opinion cannot be shared by anybody who has read/heard
speaches of cardinal Glemp concerning other than Polish/Jewish issues.

His attitude toward people infected with AIDS, homosexuals, abortion,
or even contraception demonstrates that Glemp is far from being tolerant.

Sometimes he realizes this and tries to explain afterwards  what
he did or  didn't mean to say but this is not convincing at all.

It is very unfortunate that he is the head of Polish Church
and his behavior/handling of many delicate issues including
Polish/Jewish relations is far from being wise or tolerant. 
 
JN
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: hayim@locus.com (Hayim Hendeles)
Subject: Re: The Location of Eden (Re: Torah In A Torah Context)
Organization: Locus Computing Corporation, Los Angeles, California
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:34:40 GMT

In article <BuHr3A.97A@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Rubin Herman) writes:
>In article <BuDDFA.E8v@sun3.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca> ward@sun17.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Ward) writes:
>>[H Rubin wondering why Eden has not been found]
>>
>>Perhaps the answer lies in 2 Kings 6:8-23.  (Specifically vs. 15-17).
>
>God can keep us from seeing Eden.  But then why tell us so much about it,
>and why have it guarded by winged creatures instead of just putting up
>a force field?  Or even just remove it from earth?
>-- 
>Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399

Who says G-d didn't put up a force field? These angels are "spiritual
beings", not visible to us. So if you were to translate these angels
as a type of force field, I would certainly not argue with you.

Hayim Hendeles
From: gertler@ptms_dev.sbi.com (User - Don Gertler)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re:  A Can of Worms
Date: 4 Sep 92 17:36:40 GMT
Reply-To: <gertler@ptms_dev.sbi.com (User - Don Gertler)>
Organization: Nysernet
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org

MASH@WEIZMANN.WEIZMANN.AC.IL (Michael Shimshoni) writes:
>Here we have  another excellent example to show the  arrogance of this
>one sect of the  Jewish religion, or at least of  some of its members.
>Stan had asked how they, a small minority, could claim the monopoly to
>determine who  is Jewish, not for  themselves but for all  other Jews.
>The answer of Sheldon is very simple.  Essentially he says, we deserve
>that monopoly  because we claim  it, because  *we* are right.   And in
>order to show the inferiority of  all other views but his own, Sheldon
>compares those to "drugs".  What a can of worms!

For fear of opening up the wrath of the anti-trust laws, I must mention
that Jewish law had, for a long time, resided with this one sect of the
Jewish religion.  Then came along a rebellion within the Jewish world,
and the new sect arrogated the name "Jewish," albeit with a modifier.
The new sect's Jewish character was strictly in its membership list.
Everything else was new.  Perhaps the sect's membership list even
comprised the majority of Jews, but the change of the rules was not
performed within the framework long before defined.  The law became,
within this new sect, non-binding.  (How can it be called "law"?)  Then
it was completely overhauled, by a sect claiming not to be bound by it.

Now the original, depleted sect is criticized for not deferring to the
new sect's rebuilt version of the non-binding law, insofar as determination
of Jewsihness is concerned.  (I guess we're bound by their law, even though
they're not.)  If the new sect's name were "Reformjudaism," I would have
no problem.  The roster of Reformjudaists would include many who are Jews.
In fact, most of the world's Jews may even be Reformjudaists.  But their
membership criteria are not in accord with Jewish law.

I realize my tenor here is somewhat more confrontational than usual,
but I'm trying to step up [sic] to the level of the discussion I've
joined.

-Don Gertler
From: hayim@locus.com (Hayim Hendeles)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Violent antisemitism?
Date: 4 Sep 92 17:23:27 GMT
Organization: Locus Computing Corporation, Los Angeles, California

In article <goldberg.715599867@techunix.technion.ac.il> goldberg@techunix.technion.ac.il (Jacques Goldberg) writes:
>
> ...
>To summarize I do not see much contradiction between Hayim who writes about tha
>suffering imposed on Jews in Poland 
>by non Jewish inhabitants of that land, and Irek who claims that the Governement
>of Poland was not always very antisemitic.
>
>Agreed , or deliberately interested in maintaining confusion?
>Yaaqov Goldberg
>


You have brought up an excellent point. You are correct in your assertion
that most of my Father's stories about Polish anti-semitism were
directed against the Polish citizens, and not from the government.
So, perhaps there may be some truth to your theory.

There is a story about the Chofetz Chayim meeting with one of the
top government officials, to plead for some specific Jewish interest.
As the story goes, he was greeted quite warmly. (As the story goes,
he spoke in Yiddish without the aid of a translator. The Polish
official said something to the effect "words from the heart
don't need to be translated". Does anyone know the details of this story?)

(But I don't know if you can prove anything from this story, one way
or the other.)

My Father did tell me, however, though, that when a Jew was killed (G-d
forbid), and the Police were called to  investigate, they would
usually look the other way. But again, as you say, this was not
official government policy, but rather the behaviour of certain
individuals.

One question though: Contrary to public opinion, a government is
not a mindless entity (although it often acts as such), but rather
consists of individuals. Most probably, it consisted of Polish
individuals. So how was it, that the individual Poles were
anti-semetic, but the collective government not (according to your
theory) ?

Hayim Hendeles
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.polish
From: aleks@cray.com (Aleksander Mazur)
Subject: Re: Nazi camps
Date: 8 Sep 92 09:01:55 CDT


In article <Aef9xnW00WB6IqTUUK@andrew.cmu.edu> re0x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Radu Eugen Edelstein) writes:
>I was surprised to see that my fellow Jews following this thread,
>after being told to go to the history books, did not do so.  The
>Polish posters are perfectly right in stating that the Polish
>government (up to the Saxon accession to the throne, in 1697),
>has practically had *NO ANTISEMITIC RECORD*.  That at a time when
>both in Western Europe and in Russia, official antisemitism was
>almost constantly the case.
>The Sigismunds and Bathori have been Polish Kings who granted
>equal rights to the Jews, and who - because of their simpathy to
>the Jews, as a result of the benefits they had from Jewish
>professionals (especially personal doctors) - have always spoken in
>favor of the Jews.  Often they had to intervene to rescue Jews from
>the hands of the Church.
>It is the Catholic Church of Poland that succesfully transformed
>the Polish population into one of the most antisemitic peoples
>that Europe has ever known.  The blood liebel was most used by
>this Church; this Church has continuously supported the view of
>Jews as killers of Christ (despite the Papal Buls and the Polish
>Kings' continuously reminding the Church leaders about the falsity
>of the accusation).
>Their success in practically creating a nation of antisemites is easy
>to understand: the uneducated Pole who believed in the Church and its
>authority even more than in that of the Polish rulers was the perfect
>material.  Over generations, the myths they were told by their Catholic
>priest have transformed themselves into "facts".  To this day the
>Poles keep with them that legacy.
>There is only one way to change this, and that is that the maker be
>the breaker.  The Chatolic Church is still the most influential
>institution in Poland.  Unfortunately, it is also still contributing
>to the perpetuation of antisemitism.
>I made friends here with Poles that tell me that in their churches in
>Poland, to this day, Jews are continuously presented as the source of
>evil, the killers of Christ, and... as the cause of communism.
>
>Rad

Thanks for one of those posts that does not seem to intend flaming
the issue. However I think such a position as above contains
oversimplifications. I would say it is quite close to the sources
representing Rabbi Weiss and his followers. As an example entire
action od so-called convent Auschwitz affair can be brought. It did not
happen in middle ages, it took place couple years ago and there are 
many witnesses for what happened - one of the most intolerant and
weird happenings that ever took place between followers of Jewish
and Catholic religions in their several ages long history of relations.
I could see it clearly being then in Poland and returning to the US,
seeing how it was presented in mass media. So when there is an issue
od tolerance it is necessary to look how tolerant are followers
of both religions, not just one. Otherwise one gets to
oversimplification of that type as quoted above.

A. Mazur
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: lms@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com (Max Stern 310-524-6152)
Subject: Re: Another Wedding (was Re: weddings on Saturday???)
Organization: NCR (Torrey Pines Development Center)
Disclaimer: This posting does not neccessarily reflect the opinions of NCR.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 02:41:50 GMT

In article <2530@israel.nysernet.org> warren@nysernet.org writes:
>
>The confetti was made before it was PoliticallyIncorrectToDoAnythingWhich-
>CouldPossiblyHaveAdverseEffectsOnAnything.
>
>I got a mouthful of it once (can't trust anyone).  Spit it out.  No
>injuries in many weddings, Purims, and assorted festivities.
>

Well, I am as much on guard against mindless PC thinking as anyone, but
this represents simple thoughtfulness for the next person.  And it was
_LONG_ before PC-ness, back in 1970, that I learned this.  I ran my
hand through a full chad box and it was clear to me that this stuff was
potentially harmful as I had been told by my fellow workers (NOT by a
boss or by the OSHA).

I'm glad your mouthful didn't hurt you, Baruch HaShem.
-- 

 |\/|  /_\  \/
 |  | /   \ /\                      Max.Stern@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: ask@cbnews.cb.att.com (Arthur S. Kamlet)
Subject: Re: Bar Mitzvah Problem
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories,  Columbus, Ohio
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 23:45:56 GMT
Keywords: non-frum relatives

In article <1992Sep9.125454.482@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> segs@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (susan.e.slusky) writes:
>me. As I am composing an insert for out-of-towners on how
>to get to the shul and hotel anyway, I am considering adding a line 
>like this:
>     Please observe Shabbat ettiquette by not giving gifts to Ben on
>Shabbat.

I don't know if this is appropriate, but might be worth checking
with your local rabbi.

It assumes that no one just hands cash or checks to the Bar Mitzvah
boy.   Instead, they will try to hand him an envelope containing
a card and who knows what???   The point is, you really do not know
if there is cash or a check or just good wishes contained in that
envelope.

Is there a problem carrying such an envelope within the synagogue
itself?  If not, then make arrangements to place the envelopes in
the rabbi's office or other relatively secure place, and retrieve
them afterwards.

I have seen this technique used at our conservative synagogue.
-- 
Art Kamlet  a_s_kamlet@att.com  AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: rig@eng.umd.edu (Ronald Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Rain Relief Fund
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 22:24:38 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park, College of Engineering

>Please mail your contributions to:
>
>Pakistan Rain Relief Fund
>4105 Providence drive
>St. Charles, MO 63304
>USA

This may be a great cause, but I wouldn't mail any money to an
organization you haven't heard of and don't know to have a good record
of getting money to the right place.  I would even be careful about
where I address a check made out to a reputable organization.  (I once
received a solicitation for a donation to the Heart Association, I
think it was.  But it came from somebody down the block who had
enclosed a stamped, hand-addressed return envelope with her address.
I wasn't sure if this was a scam or just a very stupid logistical
scheme on the part of the organization; the mailing did include what
looked like an official, professionally printed little piece of paper
about the organization.  Any thoughts?)

Please note that I do not wish to impugn anybody's reputation.
Everybody may be completely above-board, but I feel that it does no
harm and possibly some good to direct your donations in a very
skeptical fashion.

Also please note that exercising caution about where to send your
donations should in no way discourage you from sending donations
generally.

I may as well take this opportunity to repost addresses for a couple
Jewish charities.  I believe that the first one even includes a
component of allocations to non-Jews in situations of dire need, such
as when natural disasters strike.  If you want to find something else
specifically directed to Pakistan Rain Relief, I suggest you do some
research to find an organization in which you have confidence, or call
the first phone number below to see if you can direct your donation in
that fashion.

The first address is:
     American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee
     711 3rd Avenue, 10th floor
     New York, NY  10017
     (212)687-6200

I believe they concentrate particularly on Jews in poverty and
refugees.  Some money goes to Israel, but this is very much a
worldwide program.  I believe you can recommend targets for your
money, e.g. to help Ethiopian immigrants to Israel.

The second address is:
     P. E. F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc.
     41 East 42nd Street, Suite 607
     New York, NY  10017
     (212)599-1260

PEF donates to a ton of causes in Israel (e.g., schools, hospitals,
refugee relief), and you can recommend a target.

L'shana tova tikateivu v'tichatemu.

Ron
-- 

Ronald I. Greenberg	(Ron)		rig@eng.umd.edu
Xref: sparky soc.culture.jewish:15554 soc.culture.polish:2455
From: kahn@troi.cc.rochester.edu (James Kahn)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.polish
Subject: Re: Nazi camps
Date: 8 Sep 92 17:53:10 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)

In article <1992Sep8.153738.20284@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> kahn@troi.cc.rochester.edu (James Kahn) writes:
>
>Didn't the notorious Chelmecki massacre occur in Poland in 1648?  This was
>perhaps the bloodiest attack on Jews in the 1800 years between
>the Bar-Kochba rebellion and the Nazis.  Tens of thousands were killed.

Several people have pointed out that although some of the bloodshed took place
in Poland, the Ukrainians were responsible, not the Poles.  My mistake.  That's
what I get for relying on my increasingly faulty memory.

J. Kahn  
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: amir@leopard.gatech.edu (amir)
Subject: Re: On Orthodox Monopoly
Keywords: Rambam, sacrifices
Organization: College of Computing
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 17:08:18 GMT

The much quoted passage of the Rambam in More Nevuchim about the need
for sacrifices in the past (and future) puzzled me for many years.

While I have not studied More Nevuchim, I did study a lot of Yad
Hachazaka. Three important observations are relevant:
	1. The Rambam does not write the details of the laws of
           building the Mishkan (tabernacle).
	2. The Rambam writes the laws of sacrifices.
	3. The Rambam is one of the very few sources we will be able
	   to use when Beit Hamikdash will be rebuilt, we will want to
	   offer sacrifices, and we will need to know how.

It would have been easy for the Rambam to avoid the laws of sacrifices
without a need to apologise (as did the Tur and Shulchan Aruch). He
chose to write them down. The Rambam did not write down laws that are
clearly relevant only to the past and not to the future. It does not
make sense, then, to assume that the Rambam indeed did not believe
that sacrifices will be reinstituted.

You may still ask why he wrote what he wrote in More Nevuchim. The
short answer is that More Nevuchim (and Perush Hamishnayot) are NOT
Halacha books. Their agendas are different.

-- Ami



					
					-Amihood Amir (amir@cc.gatech.edu)
From: weiner@theory.lcs.mit.edu (Merril Weiner)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Surrogate Mothers
Date: 8 Sep 92 20:27:27 GMT
Reply-To: weiner@medg.lcs.mit.edu (The Frog)
Organization: Laboratory for Computer Science, MIT

In article <Bu9nGr.L9y@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>In article <1992Sep8.002710.14925@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> weiner@medg.lcs.mit.edu (The Frog) writes:
>>2)  Is artificial insemination of a woman's ovum by another man's sperm 
>>    allowed in Judaism or is this adultry?
>
>>3)  Is artificial insemination of another, unmarried woman's ovum by the
>>    husband, placed in the wife, allowed?
>
>>4)  Is artificial insemination of another, married woman's ovum by the
>>    husband, placed in the wife, allowed?
>
>do you mean this or in vitro fertiliztion in
>(2), (3) and (4)?  These are quite distinct problems.

I'm sorry for being ambiguous.  I thought, but didn't type, in vitro.



--

   Merril Weiner                weiner@medg.lcs.mit.edu
   11 Ashford Terrace           weiner@medg.uucp
   Allston, MA  02134           Boston University School of Law
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.polish
From: avr@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (adam.v.reed)
Subject: WWII Poland: more on murder of Jews in Polish underground
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 16:48:45 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.jewish
Keywords: AK NSZ Makowiecki Widerszal Sudeczko Jamontt

W. Dobosiewicz writes:

> However, Makowiecki and Widerszal were both Jews and were running BIP (in
> command of), a propaganda/intelligence arm of the Home Army. Certainly,
> they did not "join in or after 1942", as you seem to maintain.
> It is incorrect to say that the Home Army did nothing about it, as they
> sentenced to death and executed the murderer, a certain Sudeczko (albeit
> in shady circumstances). Better informed netters, please step forward with
> more details, please.

Interesting you should ask - I had just become better informed
thanks to e-mail from another reader:

> It may be of interest to you that the AK *did* something about it,
> namely killed the person who murdered Widerszal and Makowiecki.
> 
> There are more sources to the history of AK and WWII period than
> you mentioned, as you well realize, and it is always good to
> include a disclaimer 'to my best knowledge' and the end of a
> paragraph like above.
> 
> Some information pertaining to the murder of the two AK officers 
> mentioned above may be found in the article:
> 
> "Kiedy i czego dowiedzialem sie o zamordowaniu polskich 
> demokratow" by Tadeusz Kochanowicz, in "Miesiecznik Literacki" 
> 8/1985, p. 103.
> 
> A copy on demand.
> 
> According to the author who had been a personal friend and
> collaborator of the two officers, the murder was committed by a
> certain Andrzej Sudeczko, who had been commanding a sort of
> execution commando for the AK, i.e. implementing death sentences
> for the High Command of AK. In the case of Widerszal and Makowiecki
> he acted without necessary authorization. It turned out the order was
> given orally by an AK officer Wladyslaw Jamontt who had joined the
> AK from a nationalistic group "Pobudka". Hence the accusations
> towards the NSZ.
> 
> Sudeczko was shot but it never became clear who inspired Jamontt to
> order the murders. Jamontt survived the war and lived to the
> early sixties but never spoke out. Strangely, the communist 
> authorities after the war apparently never bothered him, while at the 
> same time sentencing many other AK and NSZ officers to deaths or 
> long-time prisons. Thus even the participation of the NSZ has never 
> been proved in this particular case, the conviction of Korbonski and 
> others notwithstanding.
> 
> Note that this in no case represents any defence of the NSZ in other
> cases. It just shows how complicated and obscure many details of
> the WWII are and will always be.

Amen.
				Adam_V_Reed@ATT.com
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: hillelm@ecs.comm.mot.com (Hillel Meyers)
Subject: Ham radio to Jerusalem
Organization: control_centers
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 22:06:06 GMT

A friend of mine's daughter will be studying in Jerusalem this next year, 5753.  He
and she are both registered HAM radio operators.  Therefore that would like to
take advantage of this means of communication.  Has anyone out there used a HAM
radio for this purpose?  Could you send me your name and phone number and they
will contact you directly at your convenience.

Toda and Thank you in advance,

Hillel


+-------------------------------------------+
| Hillel Meyers    hillelm@ecs.comm.mot.com |
| Motorola Inc.    Schaumburg, IL USA       |
+-------------------------------------------+

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish