HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein)
Subject: Re: sexism in Judaism
Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 06:50:32 GMT

mz = zeleny@husc10.harvard.edu (Michael Zeleny)
dk = khaikin@pike.cis.ohio-state.edu (dmitry khaikin)

dk: Oh,G-d! What is it about cutting your hair? When did anybody say to you
dk: that you have to cut your hair??????

mz: Correct me if I am wrong, but it is my impression that this practice is
mz: still required of orthodox women.

There are different communities within Orthodoxy with different
practices.  It's hardly reasonable for either supporters or defenders
of O to speak of a monolithic O where everyone does the same thing.
Most women who cover their heads have hair between the covering and
their scalp, a minority (no figures available) remove it.  Somewhere
between these extreme are women who cut their hair short either
because it's difficult to keep long hair entirely covered (although
some do manage, and some don't entirely cover their hair) or because
it's uncomfortable to have long hair underneath a wig.
-- 
/|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
 |__/__/_/    
 |warren@     
/ nysernet.org 			    Jerusalem
From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: sexism
Date: 6 Nov 92 14:56:49 GMT
Article-I.D.: netnews.96455
Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
In-reply-to: mwertz1@cc.swarthmore.edu (Melanie Wertz)

In article <GJSSBPF6@cc.swarthmore.edu>, mwertz1@cc (Melanie Wertz) writes:
>No one has answered my questions yet.  Why is it that MEN are not barred
>from appearing provocative to women?  WOMEN EXPERIENCE ATTRACTION TOO!

So count yourself lucky, but meanwhile, what are you talking about?  Men
should wear at least knee-long pants, two layers of underwear under their
shirt which covers at least the middle of their biceps.  Orthodox men are
do not appear on Chippendale calenders.
-- 
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein)
Subject: Re: ORTHODOX
Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 08:56:49 GMT

In <1992Nov11.190212.708@vms.huji.ac.il> backon@vms.huji.ac.il writes:

>Look in a dictionary for the derivation of the word ORTHODOX. It
>comes from the Greek ORTH: straight, correct, true, right and DOXA:
>opinion.  It thus amuses me to no end when I see representatives of
>the Reform and Conservative movements denigrating the "orthodox".

It amuses me to no end when I see people act as if the etymology of
a word or its dictionary definition defines a group that uses that
word as its name.

I would imagine that one who criticizes Orthodoxy with a capital O,
might not feel that it is identical with orthodoxy with a small o, in
spite of its name.  Similarly, I would not say that one who criticizes
the Democratic or Republican Party is necessarily an opponent of
DEMOS: people + KRATEEN: rule or or RESPUBLICA: commonwealth (or of
the dictionary definitions of these words).

One should not take this message as expressing criticism of O, or of
supporting denigrating of any group.
-- 
/|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
 |__/__/_/    
 |warren@     
/ nysernet.org 			    Jerusalem
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: wouk@alumni.cs.colorado.edu (Arthur Wouk)
Subject: Re: book title:"Cholent"
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:45:28 GMT


Come for Cholent
by
Kay Kantor Pomerantz

Bloch Publishing  Company
New York

ISBN -0-8197-0598-5

-- 
arthur wouk 
internet: wouk@alumni.cs.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout)
Subject: Re: Passover in Va'yera
Organization: Dept. of Electronics, Carleton University
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:37:34 GMT

In <Af0vUG200WBNA1P4B8@andrew.cmu.edu> Etan Shalom Diamond <ed16+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>   I'm not sure if any of the divrei torah posted here talked about
>    Now, even if we say that Avraham and others kept the whole Torah,
>did that include such things as Pesach?  Isn't that holiday a
>time-dependent festival that would have had absolutely no meaning in the
>time of Abraham and Lot?  And was Lot included in this idea of keeping
>the whole torah?  The whole thing seems quite strange.  

That is the problem with projecting our later beliefs on earlier writings.
The words matzah had meanings apart from Passover.  So although many 
would like to refer to Abraham's Judaism, this term is inaccurate and
an anachronism.  Something like reading an 18th century novel talking about
riding in a car and assuming that it means automobile, when it only
means a car of a horse and carriage.

>Etan Diamond
>Department of History
>Carnegie Mellon University
>ed16@andrew.cmu.edu

--
Eli Chiprout                 
Dept. of Electronics, 
Carleton University, Canada
emc@doe.carleton.ca
From: goldberg@techunix.technion.ac.il (Jacques Goldberg)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Kippah
Date: 13 Nov 92 08:10:20 GMT
Organization: Technion, Israel Institute of Technology

jlove@ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu (Jack Love) writes:

>(....) Since current custom is derived from
>the Babylonian tradition,(......)
>so I would appreciate learning the source of your data. 

    Could you please quote the source of yours?
    For example, does it apply to the raising of the Torah (HAGBA'AH) before
    or after the reading?
    Thanks in advance - Yaaqov Goldberg
From: warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Jewish Fundamentalism
Date: 10 Nov 92 07:44:10 GMT
Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs

I did once come across two people who claimed (and seemed serious
about it) that every word of every midrash was true.  I tried to find
out if perhaps they meant something different by this statement than
what it seemed to mean on face value (e.g. "Was Moshe's height really
ten amot?"  "Yes.") and either we were speaking entirely different
languages, or they really accepted every word of midrash as factual
(as opposed to containing truth in a metaphorical way).

Now assuming that I understood them, and they weren't just pulling my
leg, perhaps this is Torah Shebaal Peh Fundamentalism?
-- 
/|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
 |__/__/_/    
 |warren@     
/ nysernet.org 			    Jerusalem
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Subject: Re: Autopsy - Kahane and Rosenbaum
Reply-To: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 20:31:31 GMT

In article <1N4PTB2w165w@valpso.hanse.de> tichauer@valpso.hanse.de (Manfredo Tichauer) writes:

# makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:

# > ... [deleted lines]
# > Do not repeat lies made up by the Jewish establishment who were politically
# > threatened by him.
 
#   It is interesting to read/hear from a Jew that there is a Jewish conspiracy
#   against other Jews.  Until now I always read/heared  of a Jewish conspiracy 
#   against the whole non-Jewish world.

# > ... [deleted lines] 
# > # Would you support an American Kahane who proposed expelling all non-Christ-
# > # ians from the USA?
 
# > Well, I will quote the late Rabbi from memory here just after he
# > was elected to the Knesset.  The Rabbi said something like "He would
# > pay them money to expell all Jews to Israel" when asked a similar
# > question.

#   If you are so fond of Kahane's theories and wishes, specially of this one:

# 1. What are YOU doing still in USA?

	Working.  Not that it is any of your business, but I intend on
making aliya.  However, should the need arise, I would leave
immediatly.

# 2. If Kahane said what you mentioned above, then he really was a Fascist of
#    the worst kind (even Mussolini wouldn't have thought of something so evil).

	You may disagree with it, but how is it "facism of the worst
kind"?

#    He would be at the same level as Adolf EICHMANN, who asked for money and
#    trucks in exchange for Jewish Hungarian lives to send them to Palestine
#    (he was ordered by his superiors to negociate with Jewish leaders for an
#    exchange of "goods for blood", although he did it only reluctantly, belie-
#    ving that this might jeopardize the execution of the "Final Solution").  

	If you really think the two are the same, you need some therapy.

#    It is sickening to hear such ideas from a non-Jew, but it is most horrible
#    to hear that a Jew accepts and propagates them too!

	It is more sickening to know that you actually believe the
scenarios are the same.
--
"For all I care, you can send your money to the Hitler memorial fund, too, if
that pleases you."

From  arens@vaxa.isi.edu (Yigal Arens) in article <9323@venera.isi.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: er@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Elie Rosenfeld)
Subject: Re: Is Hilary Clinton a MOTT
Reply-To: er@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Elie Rosenfeld)
Organization: Bell Communications Research (Bellcore)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 17:45:26 GMT

In article <4437@bimacs.BITNET>, rothberg@bimacs.BITNET (Danny Rothenberg) writes:
|> What is 'MOTT'?

Someone who drinks a lot of apple juice?
-- 
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"
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Conversion Question
Date: 6 Nov 92 13:35:03 GMT
Organization: Johns Hopkins University

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.

Rob


--
Robert A. Levene     Internet: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu
  "/  //  / /"         Bitnet:   RXL1@APLVM
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Subject: What Does it take to be a Prophet/Messanger?
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 03:00:57 GMT

I would be grateful for answers to the following:

1) Who is the last person which Judaism regards as a prophet
   and/or messanger from God?

2) Are there any criterions one has to fill to be considered a
   prhophet/messanger?

Toda raba,

-Danny.
From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Pierced Ears
Date: 6 Nov 92 14:46:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: netnews.96449
Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
In-reply-to: friedenb@topaz.egr.msu.edu (Gedaliah Friedenberg)

In article <1992Nov6.015337.5246@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>, friedenb@topaz (Gedaliah Friedenberg) writes:
>Men should not dress as women, and thus earrings are forbidden for men 
>is understood.  

But men can dress as men, so earrings are permitted.

What is men's clothing vs what is women's clothing depends on your culture.
-- 
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)
Subject: Re: Belief and science (Einstein)
Organization: Purdue University Statistics Department
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 17:21:10 GMT

In article <emc.721579695@tomalak> emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout) writes:
>In <BxJ4y8.5Bs@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>>Putting on my professional hat, when one examines the process of inference
>>carefully, what is being done is using data to update beliefs.  That we do
>>not carry this out explicitly, and in fact cannot, is due the the sheer
>>size of the problem--massively larger than the size of the universe.

>Agreed

>>God knows His laws of the operation of the universe, but we are commanded
>>to work at getting approximations to them.  It is only in this way that we
>>can have mastery over haaretz.

>But you have come to this conclusion using the process of inference that
>is incomplete, as you have mentioned.  So how do you stand above that 
>incompleteness to propose the above as a fact rather than as a theory?

It is not at all difficult to calculate how much would have to be known
to carry out the inference procedure explicitly in some very simple cases.
But the calculations show that this amount is far greater than the size
of the universe, at least as we know it.  Thus, we cannot explicitly 
carry out "optimal" methods of inference.  

This is not always that serious a problem.  One can make reasonable 
approximations to what should be done.

In mathematics, it is quite possible to construct a simple framework with
enormously complicated possibilities.  We can see something of the infinite
and use it without being more than finitely capable.  

>I submit as well, that any being that knows the universe in its totality
>would have to contain more information than the universe: MUCH, MUCH more.
>But then we have just expanded the universe by that statement.

No, we have expanded our opinion of God by that statement.  God created the
universe, according to Genesis; He is not part of the universe.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: solovay@netcom.com (Andrew M. Solovay)
Subject: Re: Prayer shawls
Organization: International Irony League -- Death before smileys!
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 20:38:36 GMT

In article <9211102318.AA05344@host0.COLBY.EDU> <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?  
>
>JJ

First, the plural: I believe the proper plural is "Talliot", but
the commonly-used plural is the Yiddishized "Talleisim".

The requirements: A Tallit must be rectangular, and above a
certain minimum size (which I forget... anyone want to followup?)

You must attach a special tassel, called a "tzitzit", to each
corner. If you go to a good Jewish gift shop, they'll sell you
tzitzit, complete with instructions on exactly how and where to
attach them. The fringes often put along the sides of talliot are
entirely optional; only the tzitzit are required.

The body of the tallit must not be "shaatnetz"; that is, it may
not be a mixture of wool and linen. (This would apply, eg.g, to a
wool tallit sewn with linen thread...) This rule actually applies
to any article of clothing. Strangely enough, as I understand it,
a linen Tallit may have wool tzitzit; this is an exception to the
Shaatnetz rule.

Beyond that, there are certain conventions, e.g. the Tallit is
generally made of wool, and is almost always white; it is often
embroidered or decorated with blue, to recall the thread of
techelet (a kind of blue die) that used to be put in the tzitzit;
various other customs & traditions. These are entirely optional,
as I understand it.

I think Rav Aryeh Kaplan (z'l) wrote an introductory book about
Talliot, the rules and customs surrounding them, and
philosophical asides regarding them. The book was called "A
Thread Of Light"; again, a good Jewish bookstore or gift shop
ought to carry it. This book should tell you everything you need
to know, and then some.

ObDisclaimer: I ain't a rabbi.

-- 
Andrew M. Solovay    "I've learned a secret about keeping house... after
                      four years, the dust doesn't get any thicker."
                                        --Quentin Crisp
From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Jewish Fundamentalism
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:40:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: netnews.97355
Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
In-reply-to: goldberg@techunix.technion.ac.il (Jacques Goldberg)

In article <goldberg.721583169@techunix.technion.ac.il>, goldberg@techunix (Jacques Goldberg) writes:
>>[on believing every Midrash]

>     The assumption is wrong, you understood what they said, not what they
>meant. They meant more than they said. Moshe's height was really ten amot,
>but they did not specify which amot, and you implicitly assumed current
>amot. That's all. Every Midrash is of course true. The point is that there
>is I think a Midrash which says that Adam and his descendants lost the
>knowledge of True / False when they acquired that of Good / Bad.

Similarly, there's a Midrash that the reason the Bible mentions putting
Adam to sleep but not his waking up is because it's all a dream from that
point on.
-- 
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: shimoff@umbc4.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff)
Subject: Whay OCR (was: Re: ORTHODOX)
Organization: Univ. of MD, Baltimore County
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:25:11 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.173747.28615@cbfsb.cb.att.com> hillel@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (hillel.e.markowitz) writes:

 re "Why OCR?"
>I would guess that it is a sign to show that even then (when full flames
>started with the creation of C) we were highly advanced in
>technology.  Obviously all 3 movements are descended from the
>original recipients of the Torah at Sinai who carefully checked the
>Sifrei Torah for accuracy using the computerized equipment brought
>by the space aliens and hinted at in the building of the ark.  We
>still remember the original Optical Character Recognition software
>of the lead programmer Moshe Rabbeinu.

Kol ha'olam gesher tsar me'od ...
AND WERE ARE JUST THE BETA-TESTERS???

>Note: the reference to the ark was that it was a giant capacitor
                            ^^^
You mean arc, don't you?
>
>BTW isn't Purim a little early this year?

The zman for Purim is halakhically specified.  But the mitzva of
Purim Torah can be fulfilled by men and women, in Eretz Yisrael and 
Chutz la'Aretz, even when the Bet ha Mikdash is not standing, and
at any time.  Telling Purim Torah to a single friend is a mitzvah;
posting it on scj is hidur mitzva!


-- 
Eliot Shimoff                  |    n   n   n
   shimoff@umbc3.umbc.edu      |   X + Y = Z .  Easy to prove no solutions
Ashamnu, bagadnu, gazalnu ...  |   for n greater than 2.  Darn.  Can't fit
Better luck next year!         |   it into this little .sig file.  Oh well.
From: gornish@sp1.csrd.uiuc.edu (Edward H. Gornish)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Who built the pyramids
Date: 12 Nov 92 23:18:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: sp1.GORNISH.92Nov12151859
Organization: Center for Supercomputing R&D

This is correct.  The 3 large pyramids in Giza were built around 2700
B.C.E.  I have the exact dates at home, not here.  They were for
Kings/Pharaohs Cheops, Chevron and M??? (can't remember the last
name).  I believe historians place the Jewish exodus from Egypt
somewhere between 1300-1100 B.C.E.  Also, I don't believe there is any
real theory behind the fact that the Jews were slaves during the reign
of Ramses II, it's more tradition.  The only evidence comes from the
fact that they built the cities of Pithom and Ramses (in Exodus).  Now
it's possible that the Jews built other pyramids along with whatever
else they did, but certainly not the famous pyramids.

Here's a slightly perplexing historical question.  The Jews lived in
the land of Goshen, which is supposed to be in the Nile Delta.  We know
that they were in proximity of wherever Pharaoh lived, based on the
logistics of the story.  But during the reign of Ramses II (and the
other Pharaohs of the time) the capital of Egypt was in Luxor - way in
the South.  This is hundreds of miles, many days travel from Goshen.
How can this be?
--
Eddie Gornish
University of Illinois - Center for Supercomputing Research & Development

ARPANET: gornish@csrd.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,misc.headlines,talk.politics.misc,soc.culture.african-american,misc.legal
From: srm@world.std.com (Stevens R Miller)
Subject: Re: ARF says is aint so
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:25:10 GMT

arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:

>there were two groups with prejudiced views involved in the case, Jews and
>Blacks.  In fact, you could say Chasidic Jews and Black to be more correct.
>It would seem to me that the most unbiased jury would contain neither of
>the above but if you insist on "mixing" the jury to somehow get justice,
>I insist on an equal number of Chasidic Jews and Blacks.  Nothing else
>makes any sense.

Why the assumption that blacks and Jews are all biased?  What was called
for (and is the only thing that makes sense) was an unbiased jury.  Bias
is not eliminated by including equal numbers of biased people, some for, some
against the defendant.  A biased black had no place on that jury.  Neither
did a biased Jew, nor a biased white nor any other biased person.

As it happens, persons with Jewish sounding surnames were called for the
Nelson jury, but all asked to be excused (this according to the Brooklyn
DA, in a report published by the National Jewish Post and Dispatch).

Now, I agree with Jack that a racial mix does not necessarily yield justice,
nor would I assert that an unmixed jury necessarily precludes justice.  My
point here is simply that if the jury's verdict in the Nelson case was the
product of pro-black, anti-Jewish bigotry, then blacks, whites and Hispanics
who all held that type of prejudice somehow got by the prosecutor during
voir dire.  Given the conflicting testimony of the police, I believe what
some of the jurors said was the reason for their verdict:  They didn't believe
the evidence.  What's so hard about accepting that reason?

BTW:  I got admitted to the bar of New York today.  Future historians will
have to debate which was the worse calamity for America in November of 1992:
The election of another southern democrat governor as president, or the
admission of Steve Miller to the practise of law 8-).
-- 
Stevens R. Miller J.D.