HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (perlman eric)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Ralphie
Date: 13 Apr 92 19:19:57 GMT
Article-I.D.: colorado.1992Apr13.191957.21717
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <1992Apr13.173619.25273@midway.uchicago.edu> gross@befvax.uchicago.edu writes:
>
>And there have been at least 10 people, posting from different
>places, using different sources, talking about the Mufti.  It's not a
>question of just one person anymore.  And Benham, who I believe is Arab,
>(so it would be kind of silly to say that he was spreading anti-Arab
>propaganda) gave a reference from an anti-Zionist author,
>which confirmed the previous stuff that had been said about this topic. 
>And the sources themselves have not been disputed; no one has looked up the 
>books and said that the posters were lying about what was said in the books,
>or quoting out of context.  

Behnam is from Iran (I knew him in college), and so I doubt he is an
Arab.  He is, however, very vocal about being anti-Zionist.

-- 
"How sad to see/A model of decorum and tranquillity/become like any other sport
A battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee." -Tim Rice,"Chess"
     Eric S. Perlman  <perlman@qso.colorado.edu> or <eric@lyra.Colorado.EDU> 
  Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy, University of Colorado, Boulder
From: allender@ils.nwu.edu (Laura Allender)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Gefilte Fish Stories
Date: 13 Apr 92 22:58:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: ils.1992Apr13.225821.12017
Organization: The Institute for the Learning Sciences


There is wonderful movie out about making gefilte fish and the
traditions of a grandmother, mother and daughter.  I believe it is
called "Gefilte Fish".  My synagogue had it last year, maybe yours
will have it this year.  Anyway it is great family entertainment,
especially when the Seder chef's need a break from Passover
preparation.  It is an awesome thing to watch at say 3 or 4pm before
the seder, or maybe sometime during Passover.

Laura Allender
From: MASH@weizmann.weizmann.ac.il (Michael Shimshoni)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: What Defamation?
Date: 15 Apr 92 12:44:27 GMT
Organization: Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel

In: <204922@unix.cis.pitt.edu>
rdtst+@pitt.edu (Richard D Thorne) states:

>> Secondly, and more importantly, the whole point of encoding the message
>> is wrong.  Richard Thorne defends the pigeon practice of Tzahevet
>> through an anology to acupuncture.  Well, if the practice is defendable,
>> then defend it.  If it's not then drop it.  And if the cure works, keep
>> doing it - if its detractors won't adopt the cure you can go frolic in
>> the sun while they suffer from hepatitis.
>
>
>   You just don't get it.  I'll agree that posting a reply in transliteration
>   doesn't accomplish anything.

I seem to  agree here with the  well-bred Mr Thorne so where  did I go
wrong? :-)

>                                 And I think that the "cure" is most unusual
>   too.

Go on, I still agree.

>         Does this procedure work?  Does acupuncture work?  Does most of
>   what passes as "New Age" medicine work? Liver transplantation is already
>   a pretty big gamble.  It is hard to criticize someone for trying outlandish
>   things.

I could  not care less if  anyone privately does any  voodoo he likes,
and if he states  that he believes in it, I may  form an opinion about
him.  I will not call him a  coward if he publicly declares his belief
in these "outlandish  things", as after all he is  not afraid to stick
to his beliefs in public.  I might call him something else...

>           I also understand why some people are not comfortable with making
>   this cure and its source too public.

This I do not understand.

>                                         There are people who use informapion
>   like this to defame Jews.  Discretion is not cowardice.

I  am ready  to  "defame" anyone,  Jew, Gentile  or  whatever, who  is
ashamed about  his strongly held  beliefs.  This Ghetto  mentality, of
hiding in case  the "goy" will make  fun of one, is alien  to me.  You
believe in something,  so be proud of  it.  If you are  ashamed of it,
and hide your beliefs, this is not discretion this IS cowardice.

>                                                            As long as there
>   are boorish people, like Mr. Shimshoni, who desire to twist the facts to
>   fit their preconceived opinions discretion is proper.

Where did I  twist anything? I have not even  exposed what that person
was trying to hide by his trivial  "code".  All I did was stating that
there was  something in  the "encoded  message" which  proved to  me a
cowardly behaviour.

We have learnt from  experience that it is easier to  get the Jews out
of the Galut (exile) than get the Galut out of (some of) the Jews.

>      R. Thorne

       Michael Shimshoni
From: rdtst@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Richard D. Thorne)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Following Sedar tradition
Date: 7 Apr 92 01:00:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: unix.204502
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

>  And in the middle of our seder plate there will be our pascal beet
>  as always.  I have one of the very few parve seder plates in existance.
>  
>  Chaim


   If you want to be real careful use a beet made out of plastic.  No
where is it written by the way that you have to eat meat at the Seder.  The
pascal lamb is just a reminder of the real paschal sacrifice we can no
longer bring.  Of course, you'll have to explain why a beet is a better
substitute than something else.  I think I read somewhere (Me'am Loaz) of
certain foods like beets not being eaten since it was a common custom to
pack the vegetables in flour in order to keep them longer.  In any case,
have a Pesach kosher v'sameach.

Richard Thorne rdt@med.pitt.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Organization: Bar-Ilan University Computing Center, Israel
Date: Thursday, 16 Apr 1992 10:32:50 IST
From: Anthony Waller <P85014@BARILVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Address for Kasher publisher

======================================================================== 14
In article <10554@discus.technion.ac.il>, ben@ccvs1.technion.ac.il (Ben
Pashkoff) says:
>
>Now I need it...
>Can someone re-post or better yet send me the address and name of the
>institute
>that publishes work of R. Menahem Kasher???

  The address given at the front of my Hagadda Shlema is:

   Torah Shlema Institute
   19 Malachi St.,
   Jerusalem.

Pesah Kasher V'Sameah!

-------
Anthony Waller             BITNET:    P85014@BARILVM.BITNET
Bar-Ilan University        INTERNET:  P85014@vm.biu.ac.il
Israel.
From: janiceg@marvin.Eng.Sun.COM (Janice Gelb)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Vegetarianism & Halacha (was Re: Following Sedar tradition)
Date: 7 Apr 92 00:40:03 GMT
Reply-To: janiceg@marvin.Eng.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin

In article 23257@cs.yale.edu, engelson-sean@CS.YALE.EDU (Sean Philip Engelson) writes:
>Some Rishonim, including the Tur, seem to feel, however, that
>there is an idea of meat-eating even today; the only explanation I can
>see is a "zekher l'miqdash" [remembrance of the Temple].  The Beit
>Yoseph comments on this Tur that this makes no sense to him at all
>(his words), and concludes that only wine is applicable today.  Since
>he doesn't discuss the issue in the Shulchan Aruch, and the Darkei
>Moshe doesn't disagree, this would appear to be psak.  It should also
>be noted in this regard that the halacha of `oneg Shabbat [Sabbath
>enjoyment] does not, in any way, require meat; it is a subjective
>measure of enjoyment, "eat what you like".
>

Could you expand a little more on why "zecher lamikdash" makes no sense 
as a reason to eat meat?  A friend of mine in LA was always very puzzled 
by people that ate chicken as "meat" on Shabbat since it wasn't zecher 
lakorban and he was sure that was the reason you were supposed to eat 
meat on Shabbat.

********************************************************************************
Janice Gelb                  | (415) 336-7075     
janiceg@marvin.eng.sun.com   | "A silly message but mine own" (not Sun's!) 
********************************************************************************
From: gene@cs.bu.edu (Gene Itkis)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: On Surpassing Einstein
Date: 9 Apr 92 14:32:58 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

In article <1992Apr6.175610.8782@cs.uoregon.edu> pdm@sisters.cs.uoregon.edu (peter d. mark) writes:
-the above exchange [between Hayim Hendeles and Michael Shimshoni, I deleted
-the exchange for brevity -gene] illustrates perfectly the schism between 
-traditional religious jewish thinking (at least as put forth by hayim) and 
-modern secular thought based on rational, scientific thought:
-
-human history, according to the religious view, is the history of
-forgetting.  at the revelation at sinai, the sages knew everything
-that was/is ever possible to know, and since then we have forgotten
-more and more, until now, when we practically know nothing.  knowledge 
-and understanding are not acquired through experimentation and discovery 
-or discussion and debate, but rather obtained from the sages of old who 
-were closer to prophesy and revelation.
-
-the modern scientific/humanistic mind takes the opposite viewpoint: the 
-course of human affairs is marked by the expansion of collective knowledge 
-by a spirit of free enquiry and open debate, and the application of human
-creativity, resourcefulness, and intelligence.  according to the secular
-humanist mindset, one has an obligation to decide moral questions according 
-to the dictates of one's own conscience rather than relying on authoritative 
-pronouncements of religious leaders, past or present.

And is it not obvious (even with the above idealized, and even to some degree
tendentious descriptions) that both approaches are valid, and moreover, are
complementary and depend on each other? (the humanitsic morality does fall out
a bit in the above - what does it have to do with knowledge, in this context?
Besides, at least since Dostoyevsky, the perils of such an approach are hardly
unknown.) Moreover, in practice, religious as well as scientific mind
incorporates both approaches in its thinking. As a side comment, I'd like to
comment that it is fairly easy to show at least some examples (and even argue
that they are not at all a rarity) contradicting to each feature listed above.
--
	Gene Itkis		(gene@cs.bu.edu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: engelson-sean@CS.YALE.EDU (Sean Philip Engelson)
Subject: Re: Vegetarianism & Halacha (was Re: Following Sedar tradition)
Organization: Yale AI Mobile Robotics Project
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 18:46:25 GMT


In article <1992Apr6.154030.24559@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>, jgoldber@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Joel Goldberg) writes:
|> In article <1992Apr6.133909.23257@cs.yale.edu> I wrote:
|> >The third main halachic objection to vegetarianism is that it is
|> >associated with avodah zarah [idolatry], and hence should be avoided
|> >as a matter of mar'is `ayin [something which, while not itself
|> >forbidden, looks like a forbidden act].  I have even heard it
|> >suggested that vegetarians should specifically eat a piece of meat on
|> >Shabbat to avoid giving this impression.  However, it seems to me that
|> >this position is rather weak, especially in the US today.
|> >Vegetarianism, though it is a part of several Eastern Asian types of
|> >avodah zarah, as well as neo-paganism, is certainly not a primary
|> >indicator for membership in such a cult.  It is more associated here
|> >(although less and less as time goes on) with the "California" "health
|> >food" fad, and has no religious overtones at all.  Even did it have
|> >some such overtones, I would think that extrapolating from this
|> >halachically permitted behavior (which itself doesn't even look like a
|> >forbidden activity) to think someone an avodah zarah-nik, would be a
|> >case of choshed b'k'sherim [suspecting the innocent].
|>     
|>    Without consideration to the question of vegetarianism, is this an
|>    acceptable argument in general? My understanding about the
|>    prohibition of shaving the face with a blade is that scarring the
|>    face was a feature of some cults of avodah zara. The parallel
|>    with vegetarianism extends to there being some african cultures
|>    that purposely scar their bodies. Could one thus argue to
|>    allow shaving with a blade?

The arguments are not analogous, as shaving with a blade is explicitly
forbidden by the Torah.  We may rationalise the prohibition as having to do
with particular idolatrous practices, but at base we do not shave with a blade
because there is a specific halacha to that effect.  Vegetarianism clearly does
not fall into that category.  The objection to which I addressed myself above
was that vegetarianism, as a practice putatively associated with avodah zarah,
would be forbidden either because of "b.chuqoteihem lo teileikhu", which
forbids taking up even "innocuous" customs of idolators, or as a mar'it ayin in
that it looks like idolatrous practices.  These objections are dealt with by
noting that they presuppose that vegetarianism is exclusively, or at least
mainly, associated with idolatry (Buddhism and Hinduism, primarily).  This
assumption simply is not true today (if, in fact, it ever was).

I hope this clears up my reasoning.

Chag kasher vesameach!
			-Shlomo-
-- 
Sean Philip (Shlomo) Engelson		May He who makes peace on high
Yale Department of Computer Science	Mercifully make peace for us
Box 2158 Yale Station			And for all of the House of Israel
New Haven, CT 06520				And let us say: Amen.
From: rib@polaris.att.com (45266b-block)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: passover customs
Summary: walnuts are nuts, peanuts are peas
Date: 13 Apr 92 15:58:33 GMT
Organization: AT&T



While I consider the prohibition of kitniyot to be so much
foolishness (but observe them nevertheless), there is a real distinction
between peanuts and other nuts.

Walnuts are the seed of a fruit tree with an inedible flesh.
Some nuts, notably almonds, are very closely related to edible
species.

Peanuts, on the other hand are the seeds of a legumous vegitable.
The nuts grow in the ground and the plant is a nitrogen fixer like
alfalpha, beans, peas and grams. Moreover, the form of the peanut
is simular to the others: a seed or seeds in a thin sack.
From: israel@unixg.ubc.ca (Robert B. Israel)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Gemara question
Keywords: Talmud, prayer
Date: 7 Apr 92 07:10:25 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada

My son Hillel has a question from the Gemara:

In Brachos 27b, the Gemara looks at the wording of the Mishna, and asks
why it says, concerning the Ma'ariv prayer, "ein la keva" rather than "kol
halaylah".  It comes to the conclusions, that
        1)  Ma'ariv can be said all night, and that
        2)  The Ma'ariv prayer is "r'shus" (optional/voluntary).

Tosafos comments on this, and says (dibbur hamaschil "halacha k'divrei haomer
r'shus") that "r'shus" doesn't mean you don't have to do it, it means that 
if you have another mitsvah that is "overes" (passing/the time in which one 
can do it will end before the time in which one can do another mitsvah in), 
you can do the "mitsvah overes" first.

The problem is, that on daf 27a, the Gemara talks about when Mincha and 
Musaf fall in the same time period.  According to R' Yehuda, Musaf is 
"overes" (7 hours), and according to him, one therefore must do Musaf before 
Mincha.  Mincha is "chova" (obligatory), and yet, just like Tosafos' 
definition of "r'shus" above, when there is another mitsvah that is 
"overes", one must do the "mitsvah overes" first.  According to Tosafos, 
there is no difference between "r'shus" and "chova".

_____________________________________________________________________
|Hillel Chayim Israel           | "Hayom Kotseir V'Hamlocho M'rubo" |
|Maimonides Secondary School    |                                   |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Robert B. Israel
Department of Mathematics
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, BC, Canada
From: isaac@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Isaac Balbin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Equality again
Date: 6 Apr 92 22:50:03 GMT
Organization: RMIT Department of Computer Science

MASH@weizmann.weizmann.ac.il (Michael Shimshoni) writes:

>This brings  us back to the  inequality of the Halakha  as shown here.
>If  the patient  would have  been the  husband, no  Orthodox Rabbinate
>would have allowed  a second marriage.  Inequality is  inherent in any
>rigidly frozen religion.

Well, actually, it brings us back to Shimshoni's presumptions.
He starts with an ``equality before all'' axiom (without a definition
of equality) and assumes that this axiom is so fundamental that it
must transcend any G-d given religion. He then attempts to show that
Orthodox Judaism doesn't conform to his equality system and thereby
implies that Orthodoxy *can't* be right, or, it *must* be changed.

Now, from where I come from we don't start from "equality".
We start from Breishis Boro Elokim, and we work our way through the
to principles of Halacha. We speak about things conforming to 
Halacha or not. Halacha is the yardstick---not the "isms" of today.
If Shimshoni wants to speak from within Halacha and argue a particular
view, then I suggest that he do so formally with a responsa
which can be held up to the light of scrutiny.
--
From: kisa@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Kisa)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Frightening post on sci.research
Keywords: Sounds familiar
Date: 9 Apr 92 06:43:30 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center


When I was living back in USSR, we used to get a lot of *information* of
this kind. Now the only thing different is the language. Even style is the 
same. Feels like *home*.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Komandovat' paradom budu ya!          *  Kisa (The Giant of Thought)        *
*                   - Ostap Bender.     *  kisa@mentor.cc.purdue.edu          *
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: jgoldber@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Joel Goldberg)
Subject: Re: Vegetarianism & Halacha (was Re: Following Sedar tradition)
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 15:20:24 GMT

In article <4dsZoIK00UhWE_mEt4@andrew.cmu.edu> sb5i+@andrew.cmu.edu (Sandy Bodzin) writes:
>Mark Carroll writes:
>
>>My Rabbi, who is _not_ a vegetarian, answered that question this year
>>on Rosh Hashanah, in a discussion/study session between the afternoon
>>and evening services.
>> 
>>His answer was that God would prefer that we not kill animals to eat,
>>because the act of killing an animal is likely to lead to many
>>horrible practices (ie, the practice of drinking the blood of an
>>animal you've just killed, eating raw flesh, etc., which have been
>>common practices in many cultures.). But, it can be difficult or even
>>impossible to maintain your health without eating meat. So, God
>>limited the creatures we could eat, and limited the ways in which we
>>can eat them, so that if we had to eat meat, we would do so in ways
>>which would prevent us from adopting the barbaric practices of the
>>societies around us.
>
>This sounds pretty weak to me.  If God would prefer we didn't eat meat
>then why create people with a nutritional need that can't be fulfilled
>without meat?  Additionally, if I recall, Adam and Chava were
>vegetarians in Gan Eden.  How did they survive if health could not be
>maintained without meat?  

   Don't forget, they differed from everbody else. They didn't
   have navels.
From: shaks@cfa.harvard.edu (Jonathan Schachter)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: EUROPA EUROPA questions --- HELP!
Date: 17 Apr 92 16:24:18 GMT
Organization: CfA, Cambridge, Mass.


No one seems to have answered this, and although it's now too late
for the poster (it's past Good Friday in Australia), I'll try.
I saw the movie a few months back.

Incidentally, the film was called Hitlerjueng Solomon in German.
I think this is a big reason the German's didn't nominate it for an Oscar.
who translated the title that way anyway ("A Hitler Youth named Solomon")?

>- Nazi thugs attack the Perel home on the eve of what important family
celebration?

  Well, my memory says Shabbat, but I guess I have to guess Pesach.

>- To which Polish town does the Perel family flee when they leave
>Germany?
   
   Lodz, i.e. the Lodz ghetto.

>- With which European leader did Solomon Perel share his birthday?

   Easy.  Adolf.

>- Which two people did Solomon Perel reveal his true identity to?

   1.  A close friend in the Wehrmacht (army of the 3rd Reich), who sees him 
naked, hence circumsized.

   2.  Perel's own brother, who he meets at the end of the film.

I'd love a trip to Europe, eastern or otherwise.

   -- jon
From: ehrlich@bimacs.BITNET (Gideon Ehrlich)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Quotes
Date: 6 Apr 92 06:44:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: bimacs.3816

In article <1992Apr02.173759.15748@ncrcae.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM> nabil@ncrcol.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (Nabil Idriss) writes:
>>It is written in the Quran that the Jews will wander in the dark till the
>>Day of Judgment."  This is a negative statement about Jews, and I called
>>it that.
>
>There is a quote in the Quran that says " Oh  People of Israel, We have
>given you a preference over all other people". I am looking up quotes
>in the Quran about Jews and will keep you updated.
>
>Nabil Idriss

Nabil is right. According to the Koran every paganist is sended after
death to the 1st part of hell, christians are sended to the 5th part
of hell and Jews to the 6th part of that place, Assuming that
parts of hell are ordered according their comfort , one can conclude
that  "Jews got preference over  all other peopel"

 Shalom     Gideon Ehrlich       ERETZ YISRAEL
From: isaac@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Isaac Balbin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: On Superstitions
Date: 6 Apr 92 22:44:11 GMT
Organization: RMIT Department of Computer Science

MASH@weizmann.weizmann.ac.il (Michael Shimshoni) writes:

>To write something  in a way that  some readers of
>scj do  not understand is  meaningless and in this  case the act  of a
>coward.

Really? Only a coward? Is it only cowardice? Aren't your neurons sufficiently
matured to understand that cowardice isn't the only motive behind suppression
of information? Do you also assume that the IDF or security forces
or your bank manager or your wife withold certain information only because
they are cowards? If you don't *understand* why Rabbi Alter takes his
approach then by all means question him. Saying that he is a coward though
only puts *you* in a pretty poor light.
--