HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: MASH@WEIZMANN.WEIZMANN.AC.IL (Michael Shimshoni)
Subject: Re: Modest Dress in Judaism
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 12:35:01 GMT

 Subject: Re: Modest dress in Judaism (was Re: sexism in Judaism)
In: <1djae5INNmuq@pita.cs.huji.ac.il>
aplebaum@irs01.cs.huji.ac.il (Hillel Applebaum) explains "modesty":

>In article <1d9qr4INNjum@morrow.stanford.edu>, aliki@nova1.stanford.edu (Alexa
>|> In article <9211031350.AA22551@host0.COLBY.EDU> <jjsulliv@COLBY.EDU (Nice Y
>|> >Or should good Jewish women avoid public events where they have to look go
>|> >front of other men?
>|> Oh, come on, this is laying it on a bit thick. . .
>|> Covered knees, elbows, nothing tight, and no cleavage does not in any way
>|> preclude a dress being elegant and glamorous.  I don't know where the
>|> equation of 'modest' and 'drab' is coming from here, but it's not from any
>|> religious source I know of.
>|>
>|> Think how liberating the law is!  You can look as beautiful as you want, ju
>|> obey a few small dress codes and then if the guys start ogling you as you
>|> sashay around the dance floor (with your husband, of course) you can feel
>
>Soory, girls AND boys. Modesty isn't just covering your knees, etc. It's
>also not wearing anything that makes you look too different. Therefor
>one shouldn't wear somthing too expensive or too extravagnt (???). It
>should never happen that pepole would look back on you and say "look
>at that man/weman".

While I personally hate too much conformity in appearance, this may be
in general  good advice  from some  point of view.   I do  wonder from
where Hillel  got it? Is  it from general  principles or does  he have
"halakhic" backing  for it?.  If the  latter it seems that  he has not
been for a long time at  Orthodox weddings in the west, where covering
all that  "has to be  covered, is often  done with the  most expensive
dresses. (I am not claiming that this  not also the case in many non O
weddings).

I wonder  what Rabbi  Aqiva had in  mind when he  promised his  wife a
golden piece  of jewelry  ("Yerushalayim shel  zahav")? Did  he expect
that this ornament would not be noticed by other people?

>/ Hillel P. Applebaum  |> ISRAEL - where all
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: stephenp@cix.compulink.co.uk (Stephen Phillips)
Subject: Re: British Royal Family question.
Cc: stephenp@cix.compulink.co.uk
Reply-To: stephenp@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 14:51:00 +0000


> +From         : EXTDSM@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU (MADDISON,David)
> +Subject      : British Royal Family question.
> 
> I recently learned that the baby boys of the British Royal Family are
> circumcised by a mohel. Does anybody have any further information on this?

I had the "honour" of being circumcised by the late Dr. Snowman A'H
who was employed by Her Majesty the Queen to circumcise Princes
Charles, Andrew and Edward. Apparently it used to be the custom to
circumcise royal baby boys, no doubt for medical/hygienic reasons,
and a Mohel was used.

I believe that the "modern" royals (like Charles and Diana) have not
had their sons circumcised.

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

Stephen (Yisroel) Phillips      Tel: 44-895-442141
Burch Phillips & Co.            Fax: 44-895-421231
63a Station Road
West Drayton
Middlesex
UB7 7LR
United Kingdom                  stephenp@compulink.co.uk
From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Pierced Ears
Date: 9 Nov 92 16:02:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: netnews.96772
Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
In-reply-to: ben@vmsa.technion.ac.il

In article <1992Nov9.142818.27130@discus.technion.ac.il>, ben@vmsa writes:
>Could not a pierced ear be forbidden based on what is the sign that
>slave must do to indenture himself?

Considering that kippahs were taken from slave fashion, I don't think so.
-- 
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: gertler@cyclone.sbi.com (Don Gertler)
Subject: Re: Prayer shawls
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org
Reply-To: <gertler@cyclone.sbi.com (Don Gertler)>
Organization: Nysernet
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 15:23:23 GMT

dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
> <jjsulliv@COLBY.EDU (Nice Young Lady(tm))> writes:

> >I see a great variety of tallit (where is my hebrew textbook when i
> >need a plural form?) in our local temple, from the plain white with a
> >few blue stripes, to the rabbis gold-embroidered one, some with
> >colored embroidered hebrew letters, I've even seen on with BLACK
> >stripes and one covered totally with blue stripes (most of them only
> >have a few stripes on either end, this one looked like some sort of
> >kitsch horse blanket).  I want to make (handsew, embroider, etc.)  a
> >tallis for a friend of mine, as a gift, and I was wondering, among all
> >the variations, what are the absolute REQUIRED characteristics of
> >prayer shawls, and what variations are dictated mostly by fashion,
> >and, of them, what do you all find preferable?   
> 
> The only requirement is that it have four corners and be larger than a
      ^^^^
> certain size and have tzitzit on the corners.

... that the tzitzit be attached a certain distance from the edge of the
garment, that the garment not contain wool and linen interwoven, that
the tzitzit be properly tied (after the material becomes a four-cornered
garment), ...

> Aside from that it is nice if it's made from wool, with something
> fancy at the neckline area and perhaps a few vertical stripes (black
> or blue is traditional.)
> 
> Consult a Rabbi first, though.

-Don Gertler
From: warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Living in Israel - Voting in USA
Date: 9 Nov 92 08:38:00 GMT
Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs

In <HmowTB2w164w@csiatl.Gwinnett.COM> olga@csiatl.Gwinnett.COM (olga from the volga) writes:

>If they were giving away something that belonged to someone else, stolen 
>goods perhaps, would you take some.  In other words if it wasn't right 
>to take some, and they were giving it away, would you participate? 

Since it is the United States that is granting rights which it is
entitled to grant, this question (to which the answer is, of course,
no), is irrelevant.
-- 
/|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
 |__/__/_/    
 |warren@     
/ nysernet.org 			    Jerusalem
From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: McDonalds in Israel
Date: 9 Nov 92 14:06:55 GMT
Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
In-reply-to: CARIAN@auvm.american.edu

In article <92313.215906CARIAN@auvm.american.edu>, CARIAN@auvm writes:
>I am waiting for someone to invent totally artificial food which can
>be eaten on Yom Kippur without violating the fast. :-)

Snort spaghetti.
-- 
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:09:57 EDT
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Jewish Movies on Video?
 <1992Nov6.200715.11503@cbnewsm.cb.att.com>
 <1992Nov9.180827.8320@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>

One of my favourtie films is "The Angel Levine" with Harry Belafonte
as a Black, Jewish angel and legend Zero Mostel as a Jewish skeptic,
very funny and very moving film. One of Mostel's best although my favourite
Zero Mostel film is still "the Front" starring Zero and Woody Allen, a
condemnation of McCarthyism with some good Jewish content thrown in for
good measure.

Are there any other Zero Mostel gems out there?(Besides "Something funny
happened to me on the way to the Forum")
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: jgoldber@todah.chem.utoronto.ca (Joel Goldberg)
Subject: Re: Conversion Question
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 17:36:43 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.133503.805@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene) writes:
>In article <memo.733601@cix.compulink.co.uk>
>stephenp@cix.compulink.co.uk writes:
>
>> Are you saying that a conversion before a Conservative Beis Din would
>> be accepted by an Orthodox Beis Din? I really don't think it would;
>> certainly not in London and certainly it wasn't by Reb Moshe. I
>> therefore do not consider my belief to be unjustified. For that
>> reason, it was not meant as an insult, merely a statement of fact.
>It's pointless in SCJ to draw a distinction between insulting
>someone intentionally and stating facts which others find insulting.
  I'm going to anyway. The original statement was not "Orthodox
  batei din do not recognize Conservative batei din." Had it been
  so, no one would have been insulted. The original statement was
  that Conservative batei din are not kasher. As a blanket statement,
  this is clearly wrong, _by O halachic standards_. That some
  elements in the O community (and if I tread on the toes of a gadol
  here, so be it) have chosen to do so, does not constitute a halachic
  basis for it (it=blanket pasuling.)
From: silverm@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Jeff Silverman)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Z"L
Date: 8 Nov 92 01:15:45 GMT
Distribution: soc
Organization: Boeing Computer Services, Seattle

Laura,

	If memory serves me, Finland was the only nation in Europe which
paid back the loans America made as part of rebuilding after World War II.
Put the conduct of Finland in perspective compared with all the other nations
of the world in that terrible time, including my own.  You have little to
be ashamed of.

Jeff Silverman, Boeing

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: er@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Elie Rosenfeld)
Subject: Baby Ruth O-U - When?
Reply-To: er@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Elie Rosenfeld)
Organization: Bell Communications Research (Bellcore)
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 15:14:52 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.203039.5645@umbc3.umbc.edu>, shimoff@umbc4.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff) writes:
|> cholent.  Now I LOVE chocolate (wanted to say haTov v'ha'Metiv
|> when Baby Ruth's got the OU)

Eliott, you mentioned these candy bars getting the O-U a few weeks ago.  I
haven't been able to find them in stores with the O-U yet.  Two questions:

1) When are the O-U marked ones supposed to be coming out?
2) Can we eat them currently, before the ones marked with an O-U appear?  I.e.,
are they already considered O-U supervised even without the markings?

Please post reply - I'm sure many other candy-lovers want to know!
-- 
Elie Rosenfeld      | "I am what I am, Leila -- and if there are self-made
Bellcore            |  purgatories, then we all must live in them.
Piscataway, N.J.    |  Mine is no worse than someone else's."
(908) 699-8800      |                     - Spock, "This Side of Paradise"
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: lerner@cs.columbia.edu (Michah Lerner)
Subject: Re: Conversion Question
Organization: Columbia University Department of Computer Science
	<09Nov92.194522.19265@granite.ciw.edu>
	<1992Nov10.222459.5565@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 23:15:37 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.222459.5565@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> seth@inst-sun1.tmc.edu (Seth Chazanoff) writes:


>                I point out that "Orthodox" halacha no longer requires
> sacrifices, even though they still are listed as mitzvot by RAMBAM.  

  But it is a mitzvah that we are not able to do now because the Bais HaMikdash
  is, due to our faults,  no longer standing.

>                                                                      How many
> "Jews for Jesus" have you stoned for trying to corrupt your town?  The answer
> had better be all of them, otherwise you have thrown out "The Halacha".  

  If you stone them you will be arrested which will be a big chillul HaShem.
  Moreover, unless you happen to have a Sanhedrin there is no Halachic basis
  for this form of capital punishment.  
  
>                                While you might not approve of the Reform 
> movement, or indeed the Conservative movement, neither one is attempting to
> invalidate Orthodoxy.  

  Orthodoxy shows the greatest success in learning, in raising family, in
  coping with distress,  and in celebrating happy events.  

>                       The Reform phylosophy is that one should LEARN what
> the religion is about, then MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS about its practice.  

  If a decision is truly informed it will stick to standards.  Are we such
  geniuses that we can always decide what is "best" for us?    Does the Torah
  say you can pick which mitzvahs to observe?  But if you start to throw
  out mitzvahs (on the basis of an "informed decision") you have instantly
  violated the Torah.  

  For example, Shabbos.  It is forbidden to make a fire, and by extension it
  is forbidden to drive a car on Shabbos.  What allows anyone to drive a car
  on Shabbos?  It is forbidden.  And yet,  "fully Orthodox" people do it
  every Shabbos when the Halacha REQUIRES it (i.e. to save a life).  This is
  truly an INFORMED DECISION because tbe Halacha says it is a Mitzvah to
  drive in such a case.  Indeed, as the great sefer "Kitzur" states, one
  who is so pious as to abstain from a permitted labor in such a case is
  a fool.

  The key distinction is that the permisable form of driving is based on
  Halacha by the greatest sages  of the generation.  This is not the  
  same as an individual forming such a decision.  

> While the Reform movement does not REQUIRE that Halacha be observed, it 
> equally does not REQUIRE that it be discarded.

  Does this mean you are allowed to deceive someone if you are "right"?
  Does this mean you do not REQUIRE a witness to tell the truth, but
  he may if he wants to?





--
/M
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: chips@eskimo.celestial.com (:crp:)
Subject: Kosher Honey - Still no answer
Organization: >>> Eskimo North (206)-FOR-EVER <<<
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 05:05:29 GMT

An acceptable answer to why honey is kosher is still waiting to be found.
The main thread at this point is that since the honey, like cows milk, is
not used by the 'animal' itself internally, therefore the stomach is 
just acting as a holding vessel. To support this , it may be noted that
pigs are used to dig up certain mushrooms with their snouts and mouths and
that these mushrooms are still kosher.

However, the problem remains that their is no other substance that is 
digested by a non-kosher 'animal' and considered kosher. So to reiterate
the basic question:
			Why is bee honey kosher and tigers milk not?

And PLEASE!, the bible only talks about DATE honey !
From: warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Pierced Ears
Date: 10 Nov 92 07:17:53 GMT
Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs

In <9211091032.AA00809@relay1.UU.NET> MASH@WEIZMANN.WEIZMANN.AC.IL (Michael Shimshoni) writes:

>I  wonder if by the
>Halakha as the  Orthodox understand it, men (or women)  are allowed at
>all to have their ears pierced.   Is this not forbidden like any other
>form of self mutilation?

I've wondered about this, too.  Since I never considered piercing my
own ears, I never looked into it.  I don't recall in what context this
occurred (might it have been surgery that is not medically required?),
but I recall a prohibition against "hachovel et atzmo", which I
understood meant causing injury to one's self.

Might it be that since piercing an ear doesn't harm the body it's not
forbidden?

Then there's the story about how Bar Kochba only accepted soldiers who
demonstrated their bravery by cutting off a finger, and the Rabbis
objected that he was crippling them, not that he was forcing them to
violate the prohibition against self mutilation.  So is there such a
prohibition or not?
-- 
/|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
 |__/__/_/    
 |warren@     
/ nysernet.org 			    Jerusalem
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: chr04ha@vmsa.technion.ac.il (Amitai Halevi)
Subject: Re: Jewish Fundamentalism
Organization: Technion, Israel Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:22:26 GMT

In article <2781@israel.nysernet.org>, warren@nysernet.org 
(Warren Burstein) writes:
> In <1992Nov7.010111.1@vmsa.technion.ac.il> chr04ha@vmsa.technion.ac.il (Amitai Halevi) writes:
> 
>>teaching the theory of evolution in the (non-orthodox) schools.
> 
> Is it really the case that they *don't* teach evolution in secular
> Israeli schools?  Do Israeli students never learn it unless they take
> a college course in biology?
> 
> P.S.  I learned it in an Orthodox day school in the U.S.
> --
> /|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
>  |__/__/_/
>  |warren@
> / nysernet.org 			    Jerusalem
-- 

Of course they teach evolution, and have been teaching it since 
well before the establishment of the State.  
This makes the outcry, in which virtually all of Israel's Orthodox
establishments (yes, there are many!) joined against the new 
Minister of Education's  off-the-cuff statement, shouting that it 
constitutes rejection of a central  tenet of the Jewish faith, 
is all the more ridiculous. It merely illustrates the benightedness 
of some of them and the hypocricy of the rest.

To your P.S.: As I pointed out in my original post, Rabbi Kook did
not object to teaching evolution in schools.  Even Rambam would not 
have objected to teaching it privately to gifted students if the 
theory were extant at the time.
 
Amitai
 *---------------------------------------------------------------*
 | E.A. Halevi, Department of Chemistry, Technion - I.I.T.       |     
 | "Mipnei seiva takum, vehadarta pnei zaken" - Leviticus 19, 32 |
 *---------------------------------------------------------------*
From: jjsulliv@COLBY.EDU (Nice Young Lady(tm))
Subject: Re:  Modest dress in Judaism (was Re: sexism in Judaism)
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org
Reply-To: <jjsulliv@COLBY.EDU (Nice Young Lady(tm))>
Organization: Nysernet
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:52:55 GMT

I must confess that I am getting extremely confused.  First I am told that
women must dress modestly, to preserve themselves for their husbands and 
avoid attracting Other Men.  Then I am told, by several people who emailed
me privately and did not care to proclaim it on the net, that there is 
nothing wrong with a woman dressing quite stylishly and looking nice, as long
as she is modest, e.g. you cannot see her elbows or knees.  

I ask you:  does a woman's knees or elbows have to show for her to be 
ATTRACTIVE to men other than her husband?  Could not a woman, wearing a long-s
sleeved blouse and a long skirt, look attractive without losing her 
so-called modesty?  If so, what exactly IS the point of this custom?
I would really like to know what good it does for a woman to wear a nice, 
plain, (say black) long-sleeved long-skirted dress if every man in the room
is still going to think she looks good, ergo attractive?

The only way I know of to NOT appear attractive to other men is to dress in an
unbecoming way.  Which would not please my theoretical husband at all, either.

So:  The custom of modesty has been said, several times, to be for the sake
of preserving a woman's beauty and attractiveness for her husband.  

However, covering one's natural hair and wearing long-sleeved, long-skirted
dresses does NOT make a woman unattractive to men other than her husband,
unless she is pretty plain to start out.  So what's the point?  Should 
we penalize women who are naturally attractive by making them wear burlap sacks?


JJ

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,misc.headlines,talk.politics.misc,misc.legal
From: srm@world.std.com (Stevens R Miller)
Subject: Re: Say it ain't so
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 14:51:50 GMT

titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Eric Titmas) writes:

>In article <Bx74tn.E9r@world.std.com>, srm@world.std.com (Stevens R Miller) writes:
>|> 
>|> The murderer?  You're presuming the outcome; he was a suspect, presumed
>|> innocent. 

>The jury has a duty to regard the defendant innocent until proven guilty.
>But everybody else certainly presumes guilt.

Incorrect.

>If the police think he's innocent they shouldn't arrest him;

Unless they have probable cuase for arrest, in which case they have
reason to believe he committed a crime, but they must still presume
they are wrong and treat him as a suspect, not a murderer.

>If the D.A. thinks he's innocent they shouldn't bring charges;

Unless he believes a grand jury will find probable cause to indict, in
which case charges are brought, but the D.A. can't assume guilt; that's
why he mustn't speak to any absence of proof of innocence at trial, or
refer to the defendant as "the murderer" before the jury.

>If the judge thinks he's innocent he should dismiss the case.

Unless he thinks a reasonable jury could convict on the facts they have,
in which case he gives the decision to them.

The presumption of innocence is a protection of the rights of an accused
person, not a basis for disposition of the case.  It applies to all
participants in the criminal process, at least until a conviction, and perhaps
into the appellate process (not all judges agree on the latter, alas).
-- 
Stevens R. Miller J.D.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: ask@cbnews.cb.att.com (Arthur S. Kamlet)
Subject: Re: 500 years later
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories,  Columbus, Ohio
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:04:58 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.194216.25747@news.uiowa.edu> jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes:
>The U of Iowa and Agudas Achim, our local synagogue, with various sources
>of outside money, have just sponsored a conference on the Sephardic
>Diaspora.  This included exhibits in the synagogue, an academic
>conference, and much more, finishing up with a concert by "The Voice of
>the Turtle", a musical group that specializes in Ladino (Judeo Spanish)
>music.

They are good, and I second Doug's recommendation.

Just want to be clear that the "turtle" referred to here is a bird.
Their group's name is a quote from Song of Songs.
-- 
Art Kamlet  a_s_kamlet@att.com  AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus
From: khaikin@banana.cis.ohio-state.edu (dmitry khaikin)
Subject: Re: If I could read only one book on Judaism, what would it be?
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:20:29 GMT

In article <40857@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> ph600fcy@sdcc14.ucsd.edu (Matthew Harrington) writes:
>Let's say that I'm a Martian and am assigned to learn all about
>Judiasm in one week.  What book do you suggest I read?  It has been
>recpmmended to me that I read "Jewish Literacy" by Telushkin, I
>believe.  What do you all think?
>
>					Thanks,
>
>					Matt Harrington
>


Hi! I am sorry I don't remember the name of the athor, but his first
name is Chaim. I think his last name is Harris, but I am not sure.
Anyway he has a book called "To Be A Jew". That is a very good book for
those who are not familiar with Judaism and mitzvot (commandments). It
is not a very long book, so, you can read it in a week.

Thanks,
Dima
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  "A word is worth one coin; silence is worth two."_____ The Talmud.
  "Silence is good everywhere, except in connection with Torah."____ The Zohar.
   khaikin@cis.ohio-state.edu (Dmitry Khaikin, Columbus Ohio, USA)
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:05:41 EDT
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Interfaith marriages
 <1688E6F8D.VSANNIC1@weizmann.weizmann.ac.il>
 <1992Oct30.000621.663007@locus.com> <5832@tivoli.UUCP>
 <92312.0303512893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>

In article <92312.0303512893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>, andy
<2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> says:
>
>I would ask that anyone out there who gets ideas about sending this woman
>e-mail on the evil and wickedness of her ways, her betrayal of Judaism,
>or alleging any emotional or psychological problems because of her decision,
>to please refrain. I know there are some foolish, insensitive people out there
    ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^
>who think a modem gives them the licence to hurt people in comfort.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish