Introducing Encelia 'Gimbel's Gold'

To contact us Click HERE
Working in horticulture for years, I am always looking for new varieties either in nurseries or out in nature etc.  Wherever I am I keep an eye for variations in habit and foliage.  Two years ago, while in hiking Griffith Park I noticed a strange stem on an Encelia californica, our beautiful and abundant brittlebush.  I snapped a little yellowy stem off of the plant and crammed it into a plastic water bottle.

Fortunately the cutting struck,  and after several months I took many more cuttings from that new plant.  This spring I planted several in the ground to see how they would perform. Below are some photos that I took this morning.  I think 'Gimbel's Gold' is a winner, what do you think?  I can't wait for the plant to be covered in those yellow daisies!  The only drawback is that the variegation only shows on the new growth.

Cool plants: Melianthus 'Purple Haze'

To contact us Click HERE
As I've mentioned many times on this blog I do have a tendency to fixate on certain plants and certain plant types. One thing I look for more and more is any compact form of plants I already love.  This time the object of my affection is Melianthus 'Purple Haze'.  Normally Melianthus major is a whopping 6' + shrub, which really doesn't fit that many urban gardens, but this compact cultivar grows to 2'-3' max.  M. 'Purple Haze' has the nice ric rac edged foliage of the species with the added benefit of being uniquely blushed in lavender-purple, so its a great foliage plant.  The African honey bush also gets flower spikes in the spring which are attractive to pollinators, though I haven't had M. 'Purple Haze' flower in my garden yet. This year will be the first spring in which it is established in the garden so we'll see what happens.

Roger Raiche once told me the story of how he discovered this cultivar, He was at a nursery in the Bay Area, cruising through the 1 gallons when he spotted a purplish runt.  He grabbed it immediately knowing that he had something special. Since then it's been passed around but finally Monrovia picked it up with Dan Hinkley's recommendation.



Melianthus 'Purple Haze' 
Melianthus with concrete hedgehog-urchins

It's The Small Victories

To contact us Click HERE
Back in the 70s I had no fear of mechanical endeavors.  I had a Jeep that needed constant repair and  I was confident to open the hood and crawl in and mingle with the problems.  As time went on cars got more complicated and one needed uni-task tools and an array of diagnostic equipment.  Often one has to remove half of the under the hood content just to replace a plug.  I  had to remove all sorts of stuff just to replace the head lamp on my former Dodge pick-up.  I was shocked to see what one needs to remove just to replace a lamp in the floor shifter of a Subaru.  I fixed it and that will save me paying for an hour of labor.

I recently got a car that is not meant to be worked on by humans.  There is a plastic covering over the entire engine.  The only thing that is visible and accessible is the dip stick for the oil and the oil filler cap.  I discovered that the windshield spritzers were inoperable.  I had to remove a panel on the bottom side of the hood just to discover that the hose had become disconnected.  I was actually able to fix it.

The car doors constantly locked and the alarm went off every time I opened the door and there I found the rubber gasket on the key was stuck depressing the button for the lock mode.I was able to free it with a sharp tool that lifted the rubber gasket.  Another problem solved.

I love finding solutions to the small annoying problems especially since I am no longer equipped to handle the larger problems. It just makes my day, but fortunately these successes haven't spurred me into taking on any larger projects.  Perhaps my next car will come from a simpler time before the auto industry went craze with conveniences most people can't seem to live without.

Striking 1920's Spanish

To contact us Click HERE
This striking 1920's Spanish home is sited on a knoll with hillside views in Silver Lake. Mature trees provide privacy and a natural woodsy feel. Generous living room w/ barrel ceiling and gorgeous period sconces. Formal dining room. Chef's kitchen w/ 6-burner Viking range, wood floors. 2 bedrooms are upstairs and 3rd bedroom downstairs as a separate space, 2 baths. this house has such a nice warm feel to it, approx. 1610 sq ft, on a 5052 sq ft parcel. 2230 Meadow Valley Terrace, Los Angeles, CA 90039. Currently listed at $959,000.

New England Style Meets LA Views!

To contact us Click HERE















You really can find everything in LA! This warm and inviting 1937 New England style residence offers northeast charm surrounded west coast beauty. Located north of Los Feliz Blvd., the home is surrounded by greenery and set away from the street, offering homeowners a great sense of privacy. It's close to Griffith Park and plenty of walking trails, as well as a short walk to the restaurants and shops of Los Feliz village. 

Entering this very special residence you will know you've found a place to call home! The home starts with a beautiful step-down living room complete with fireplace, large picture window, hardwood floors, crown moldings and wonderful natural 
lighting. 

There's a spacious formal dining room with wainscoting, a charming kitchen with stainless appliances, butcher block top, great open shelving, and a built-in breakfast buffet. 
There's also a cozy den with a second fireplace that leads to the sun room and out to the yard, patio & a great dipping pool - perfect to cool down during the summer or heat up over the winter!  

The master bedroom offers city views, a walk-in closet and a full bath. The second upstairs bedroom also offers its own private bath and the third bedroom makes for great guest quarters with a full bath close by and French doors leading out to the yard. 

Additional features include a home office, laundry area and plenty of outdoor lighting. Also central air and a 2-car garage. 

This home is truly the best of both worlds. 3536 Amesbury Road, Los Angeles 90027. Listed at $1,295,000.00

Doctor's Appointment on Shabbat

To contact us Click HERE
A student told me that he wasn't feeling well to the point where he feels he might have fever. The only time he could make a doctor's appointment for was Shabbat, and the next opportunity would be only on Monday. Is it permissible to go to the doctor on Shabbat (assuming the doctor is a  non-Jew, as the majority of doctors are non-Jews)?

It is a common misconception that it is permissible for a non-Jew to preform any type of action on behalf of a Jew on Shabbat. But the Talmudic scholar Rav Ashi (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 150A) assumes that it is forbidden to ask a non-Jew to do a melacha (an action which is prohibited on Shabbat) from which a Jew will benefit. Some commentators (such as Rashi and Meiri) explain that this assumption is based upon the Mishna (Shabbat 16:6) which simply states that one may not ask a non-Jew to put out a candle on Shabbat.

O.K. on Shabbat?

The Rambam (Hilchot Shabbat 6:1) interprets this prohibition to be a rabbinic decree. According to him, the reason this prohibition was established is that the sages were concerned that a person might be influenced to himself perform forbidden actions. The way I understand this reasoning is that if there were no prohibition, one would be able to spend the whole Shabbat along with his servant constantly doing melacha on his behalf. The atmosphere which is created through this process may cause one to to himself perform melacha.

 Rav Ulah the son of Ilai and Rav Hamnunah (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 129 A) teach that it is permissible to ask a non-Jew to preform any type of melacha on Shabbat on behalf of one who is sick. The Ran (Shabbat, chapter 14) adds that only one who is so ill that he must stay in bed is defined as sick. But the Magid Mishneh (Maimonides, Shabbat 2:10) writes that the actual definition of sickness is when ones whole body is affected by the sickness, even if he is not forced to stay in bed.

Rav Moshe Iserlish, the Ramah (Shulchan Aruch OC 328:17), rules in accordance with the Magid Mishneh and therefore it is permissible to go to a doctor's appointment on Shabbat when one is not feeling well to the point where he thinks he might have fever (even without actually checking it, as I believe this case qualifies as a sickness that affects the whole body).

It turned out that this student had a sinus infection and was given antibiotics immediately. I believe that this really proves how important it was to get medical care ASAP and that assuming a more stringent approach would not have been correct.

May we all stay in good health, please God, but keep in mind the halachic options we can take advantage of if needed.

Using Another's Tefillin

To contact us Click HERE



Some Hopkins students keep their tefillin in our beit midrash which is great because it means that they feel at home. May one who finds himself one day stranded without tefillin use one of those pairs?


The Mishna[1]presents a difference of opinions between Rabbi Yehuda and the sages regarding the responsibility for the breaking of a flask during an oil purchase[2]. The Talmud[3] understands that their argument is stemming from a much broader issue: is one who uses an object without the owner's knowledge considered a robber[4] [5].
Maimonides[6], the Shulchan Aruch[7] and all major codifiers rule in accordance with the sages' opinion, i.e. one who borrows an object without the owner's knowledge is a robber. The Talmud[8] seems to suggests that if a person barrows an object in order to fulfill a mitzvah the borrower would not be considered a robber. The reason for this would be that we can argue that the owner would be pleased that his property be used for such purposes. The Talmud rejects this possibility in conclusion and rules against it. Thus it seems to be clear that it is forbidden to use someone else’s tefillin without permission.

When can you use it?

Surprisingly, this issue is a little more complex. Rabbeinu Yossef Chaviva, the 14^th century scholar, writes in his Nimukei Yossef[9], that one may use a talit[10] that is found in a place where people usually leave their talitot. His reasoning is that a talit is an object that is not harmed by a single use. The rationale of this ruling is that when the object won't be damaged we can accept the Talmud's above-mentioned suggested understanding, i.e. when speaking of a tool that is used for a mitzvah we may assume that the owner would not object to it being used[11].
13^th century Rabbeinu Peretz ben Rabbi Eliyahu[12] adds to this and says that if the talit is folded one may not use it as this indicates that the owner is extremely conscious of adequately maintaining his possessions. However, another 13^th century scholar, Rabbeinu Mordechai ben Rabbi Hillel[13], suggests an alternative ruling in a situation that the talit is folded: if the user will fold it back so that it is exactly as it was he is permitted to use the talit. It is important to mention that Rabbeinu Mordechai himself says that he is not certain that we can rule this way.
The fundamental rules that we can extract from these sources are as follows:
1. Generally speaking, one may not use someone else's objects without permission even with the intention of returning the object fully unharmed.2. When dealing with an object with which one performs mitzvot, if there is no harm whatsoever done to the object one may use it.3. If there is an indication that the owner is very strict about usage of his property, one may not use his possessions even for a mitzvah.
Rabbeinu Asher ben Yechiel[14] writes that the custom is to use another's talit and that if it was found folded it should be returned the same way, and the Shulchan Aruch[15] rules in accordance with this custom[16].The Rama (ibid.) adds that this is the case with tefillin as well, but not with books as they may be harmed by use.
On the other hand, both Rav Yechiel Michel Epstein[17] and Rav Yossef Chayim of Baghdad[18] write that in their time most people would not be pleased to know that someone used their talitot. Rav Yossef Chayim adds that the same is correct for tefillin and that he himself does not appreciate others using his tefillin.
Moreover, Rav Eliezer Waldenberg[19] says that even when borrowing tefillin directly from their owner one must be sure that the owner agreed to let him use the tefillin wholeheartedly, as sometimes people are disgusted by the thought of sweat being transferred from one person to the other via tefillin use[20]. This is to be done by listening intently to the owner's response and using intuition and common sense to assess whether or not the response was sincere. Now, how is one to do this if he is borrowing without the owner's knowledge?
Rav Waldenberg acknowledges that the Shulchan Aruch ruled that one may use another's tefillin, but he claims that this was relevant in the past when tefillin were much cheaper and therefore people weren't so strict about their use. Today when tefillin are so expensive people have greater reservations about other people using them.
I'd like to add two points that I believe have become an issue in today's world:
1. The method for creating tefillin in modern times involves innovative technologies, which enable a preciseness of shape that is truly remarkable and has never been reached in the past. Some people are more aware than others as far as caring for their tefillin and making sure the corners are unharmed. Thus we can possibly claim that it is forbidden to use someone else's tefillin as they may belong to someone who takes extra care for the shape of their tefillin.
2. Bathing is done much more frequently today than in the past. Many people in the western world shower first thing in the morning. If one puts tefillin on wet hair there is a chance that the shape will be ruined and even that water will erase the parshiyot. Some people are more aware than others of the importance of keeping one’s hair dry while using tefillin.
In my opinion, all the scholars that I have quoted agree that it has to be clear to the person who wants to use the tefillin that the owner would agree to it. To my understanding, their differences of opinions are rooted in their interpretation of different realities and situations. As I have shown, because there may be different reasons that someone would not agree to unattended use of his tefillin, it is very important that one who wants to use another's tefillin must take all of these issues into consideration.
I personally believe that each community should make its own rules regarding this issue so that members of the community know the full consequences of leaving their property in the public domain. I very much hope that we too will set these rules clearly and efficiently in our Hopkins community.

---

[1] Bava Batra 5:9[2] In ancient times, one who bought oil or perfume would bring his own utensils to the seller.[3] Bava Batra 88a[4] It is interesting to note that the Talmud uses the phrase ''gazlan" meaning robber as opposed to the phrase "ganav" meaning thief.[5] The Talmud explains the circumstances in the Mishnah to be such that a small child brought the flask to the seller and he, the seller, used the flask for his own personal benefit. In this case the owner of the flask is absent when the seller borrows it, and the child cannot be considered the owner's shaliach.[6] Hilchot Gzeila V'aveida 3:15[7] CM 359:5[8] Bava Metzia 29b[9] Halachot Ketanot [Menachot] Hilchot Tzitzit p. 12a[10] Prayer shawl[11] The object discussed in the Talmud is a sefer Torah which wears out with use as in those days it was used for studying which can be extremely extensive and intensive.[12] Sefer Mitzvot Katan 31 footnote 20[13] Halachot Ketanot [Menachot] Perek Ha’t’chelet 550[14] Chullin 8:26[15] OC 14:4[16] In regards to a talit[17] Aruch Hashulchan OC 14:11[18] Ben Ish Chai, Year a, Lech-Lecha 6[19] Tzitz Eliezer 12:7[20] But may still possibly allow it because they would be embarrassed to say no.