11:59 PM
Gil Student
11:50 PM
Gil Student
button in the top right corner of Hirhurim. See here for readership statistics.)
11:42 PM
Gil Student
Joe Schick has a front page article in The Jewish Press about Orthodox Jews and sports. He quotes me as follows (link):Rabbi Gil Student of Yashar Books and the Hirhurim blog once said that "movies are often halachically objectionable but at times they can have artistic value. Football is simply a bunch of men pummeling each other."He tends to disagree.
8:12 AM
Gil Student
The Akedah, the story of the binding of Yitzchak, lends itself to multiple interpretations. The following is what R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik wrote about this in the most recent book published in the posthumous Me-Otzar Ha-Rav series, Abraham's Journey: Reflections on the Life of the Founding Patriarch (ed. David Shatz, Joel Wolowelsky, Reuven Ziegler), pp. 10-12 (emphasis added):One of the many events in Abraham's life that are of central significance because of their paradigmatic role in our historical drama is the Akedah, the binding of Isaac. According to Nahmanidean historical semantics, the Akedah foreshadowed Jewish martyrdom down through the ages. The Akedah was the portent of the many sad and tragic situations in which Jews were summoned to bring the supreme sacrifice, their very existence. But the portent was subject to multiple interpretations, and Jews enjoyed the freedom to interpret the strange scene of the Akedah in a variety of ways.
Click here to read moreThe basic idea of the Akedah is nurtured by the service awareness. Man is a servant of God. He belongs completely to God--body and soul... Hence, God from time to time calls upon man to return to Him whatever is His. He demands that man give not a part but the whole of himself...
Of course, the idea of sacrifice is a cornerstone of Judaism and the Akedah has inevitably introduced sacrificial action as a part of our historical drama. Yet, as we have said, the drama of the Akedah is multi-semantic, lending itself to many interpretations. God demands that man bring the supreme sacrifice, but the fashion in which the challenge is met is for man to determine.
There are two ways in which the total sacrifice is implemented--the physical and the experiential. The choice of the method is up to man. The need for sacrifice was established as an iron law in Jewish history. However, whether man should sacrifice on a physical altar atop some mountain the way God summoned Abraham to do or in the recesses of his personality is man's privilege to determine. Whether the sacrifice consists in physical agony, pain, and extinction of life or in spiritual surrender, humility, and resignation is man's affair. God wills man to choose the altar and the sacrifice.
Abraham implemented the sacrifice of Isaac not on Mount Moriah but in the depths of his heart. He gave up Isaac the very instant God addresses Himself to him and asked him to return his most precious possession to its legitimate master and owner...
There was no need for physical sacrifice, since experientially Abraham had fulfilled the command before he reached Mount Moriah... Had Abraham engaged the Creator in a debate, had he not immediately surrendered Isaac, had he not experienced the Akedah in its full awesomeness and frightening helplessness, God would not have sent the angel to stop Abraham from implementing the command. Abraham would have lost Isaac physically.
10:12 PM
Gil Student
7:49 AM
Gil Student
There is a story going around the blogs about a wig store in Flatbush, across the street from Yeshiva Chaim Berlin (on Coney Island Ave.), that has pictures of models wearing wigs in its window. It seems that after people have unsuccessfully requested the store to remove the pictures, R. Aharon Schechter, the rosh yeshiva, wrote a letter advocating a boycott of the store. The letter in Hebrew and English can be found on Yeshiva World (link).
11:19 PM
Gil Student
R. David Horwitz writes about his trip to Japan with Yeshiva College students and how they handled the issue of whether Shabbos in Japan falls out on Saturday or Sunday, i.e. what side of the halakhic international dateline Japan is on ("Halakhah in the Land of the Rising Sun: Challenges and Strategies" in Chavrusa 42:2 December 2007, pp. 6, 12 - link [PDF]):At the end of the day, after all the theoretical issues were hashed and rehashed, we had to make a decision how to proceed. In spite of all the difficulties in the Hazon Ish’s position, how could one simply disregard his view? On the other hand, we couldn’t become paralyzed due to the situation! After much consultation with different Rabbanim (including one who was in the Far East with the Mir yeshiva in Japan during World War Two, and told me that many Yeshiva bahurim then and there were hoshesh for the Hazon Ish’s view, but only for dinim de-oraita), I concluded that “Shabbat in Japan will be our Shabbat. On Saturday night and on Sunday we will be mahmir like shitat Hazon Ish (that is, consider it Friday night and Shabbat morning) for dinei de-oraita (only). The determination whether something is de-oraita or derabanan will be according to the consensus of posekim.”
Click here to read moreImplementing these decisions into our actual schedule would serve to be quite an interesting challenge. Our first problem was to find someone who would act as a “Sunday goy.” (Since amira la-Akum on Shabbat is only assur mi-derabanan, he could perform any melakhot de-oraita, and allow us to have a fuller schedule on Sunday.) We were lucky to have Dr. William Lambert Lee, professor of English literature at Yeshiva College, who directed the Schottenstein Honors program at Yeshiva College, accompany us on the trip. He graciously agreed to serve as the “Sunday goy.” Thus, after Ma’ariv on Saturday night, he lit his Zeppo lighter and used it as the “esh” for our havdalah service...
On Sunday I ruled that the Ashkenazic students certainly could carry in any area not designated as Reshut ha-Rabim according to Rashi and the other authorities who follow his view. But our group contained the aforementioned three Sephardic students! They certainly could not disregard the more stringent position le-halakhah of the Bet Yosef. Moreover, the large and noisy shopping district we were now planning to go to on Sunday, although not as famous as the heavily populated Ginza district, by all accounts seemed to be a safeq shishim ribo! (Actually, the dispute between the late R. Moshe Feinstein, zatzal and others about whether one measures shishim ribo as a “point” through which 600,000 people pass through, our as a “box” of 12 mil times 12 mil was germane. I thought we should be mahmir as per R. Moshe’s position, especially as we had Dr. Lee’s kind services in any event.)
Once again, Dr. Lee rode to the rescue. He carried the students’ wallets for the entire duration of time that we were in an area that was safeq reshut ha-rabim. Only after we were safely inside the Japanese equivalent of Bloomingdale’s did we retrieve our wallets. Before we left the store, we gave him our wallets again. (Meqah u-memkar inside the store per se and tiltul muqtzeh, were not problems for us, as those issurim are only miderabanan. We could not sign our signatures for purchases via credit cards ke-derekh ketivah, however.) Dr. Lee even carried articles that we had bought in several large knapsacks that he had prepared for the situation. Returning by subway to the (relatively secluded) area where Azabu Court, our hotel/hostel was located, Dr. Lee announced, “Ashkenazim, you may now retrieve your wallets; Sephardim, I will hold on to them until we get to the actual courtyard of the hotel (a halakhic karmelit)”.
9:19 PM
Gil Student
by Steve Brizel
6:37 AM
Rabbi Ari Enkin
by Rabbi Ari Enkin
10:29 PM
Gil Student
10:11 AM
Gil Student
Sad as it may sound, the painful reality is that you cannot provide your children foolproof protection from what are, in my opinion, the greatest physical and spiritual dangers that they might face during their formative years; abuse and molestation. Why? Because it is simply impossible to follow them wherever they go, all the more so as they pass through their pre-teen and teenage years. Furthermore, it is impractical and harmful to their sense of security to raise them to be frightened or suspicious of every adult that they meet. Finally, it is important to understand that although most of the high-profile abuse cases are school based, they are only a tiny percentage of the instances of molestation. Abusers are far more likely to be extended or close family members, older kids in the neighborhood, family friends, neighbors and peers.Continued here
With that in mind, I suggest that you view things from a broader perspective and think of protecting your children from abuse/molestation in the following four domains:
1) Training your children about healthy and appropriate norms for behavior between adults and children;
2) Equipping your children with the knowledge of what abusive behaviors are;
3) Empowering your children with the self-confidence to assert themselves when their personal space is violated; and
4) Supporting your children if and when they report to you that they are feeling that things are out of order...
8:54 PM
Gil Student
Right before the giving of the Torah at Mt. Sinai, God tells Moshe (Ex. 19:9):הנה אנכי בא אליך בעב הענן בעבור ישמע העם בדברי עמך וגם בך יאמינו לעולם
Behold, I come to you in the thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with you, and believe you forever.The question that this verse raises is that not everyone has believed Moshe's words forever. Particularly in the modern era, there are many Jews who do not believe in the truth of the Torah. And if one includes in those who do not believe Moshe those Jews who decided to reject the commandments of the Torah and adopt either Christianity or Islam, then there have been many Jews throughout the past 2,000 years who have failed to believe in Moshe.
11:06 AM
Gil Student
A commandment that receives one of the highest priorities is that of pidyon shevuyim, redeeming captives. It is considered a great mitzvah to redeem a Jew who is imprisoned. In traditional literature this mitzvah was primarily framed in the talmudic era of Roman and Persian rule, and later in medieval Europe, where legal systems were often discriminatory, prisons life-threatening, and torture prevalent. Does this mitzvah apply to someone jailed in US prisons based on a generally fair judicial process?For extensive treatment of the topic of informing and when it applies, see the entire Chapter Eight of The Pursuit of Justice and Jewish Law.The question that is worthy of pondering is the relationship between the obligation to redeem captives (found in Shulhan Arukh, Yoreh Deah 253) and the prohibition to inform. In cases where there is no prohibition to inform (as informing is permitted, see Darkei Teshuvah 157:53) a logical case can be made that there is no mitzvah to redeem captives (as they are in prison properly) when there is nothing wrong with informing. This exact observation is made in the name of Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Ve’aleihu lo Yibol, volume 2:113–114, which recounts in the name of Rabbi Yehuda Goldreicht:
I asked Rabbi Auerbach about a particular Jew who stole a large sum of money and he was caught by the police in America. He was sentenced to a number of years in prison in America. Was it proper to assist in the collection of money for him [we were speaking about a large sum of $200,000] in order to fulfill the mitzvah of redeeming captives to have him released from prison?
When Rabbi Auerbach heard this he stated “Redeeming captives?! What is the mitzvah of redeeming captives here? The mitzvah of redeeming captives is only when the gentiles are grabbing Jews, irrationally, for no proper reason, and placing them in prison. According to what I [Rabbi Auerbach] know, in America they do not irrationally grab Jews in order to squeeze money from them. The Torah says ‘do not steal’ and he stole money — on the contrary, it is good that he serve a prison sentence, so that he learns not to steal!”
10:08 PM
Gil Student
This is the first in a series of posts in which I offer summaries and notes on classic texts of medieval Jewish philosophy. The following is from R. Sa'adia Ga'on's Emunos Ve-Dei'os (The Book of Beliefs and Opinions). I started from essay 3 rather than the beginning for no thoughtful reason.
12:39 PM
Gil Student
button in the top right corner of Hirhurim. See here for readership statistics.)
12:35 PM
Gil Student
אין זה משנה כלל אם הדופק הגשמי פועל או אם לאו, ואם ישנם כל מיני תופעות הקשורות בחיים גשמיים כפי שהם מוכרים לנו-- חייו הגשמיים של הרבי מעולם לא היו באופן ובמובן המקובל אצלנו, ואותם חיים גשמיים אמיתיים שלו ממשיכים באותו תוקף כפי שהיה מקודם.
יתרה מזו: כפי שמוסבר במקומות רבים, הרבי הוא 'בעל הבית' על כל מה שקורה עמו, ועל כל מה שקורה בעולם. בלי הסכמתו לא יכול להתרחש שום מאורע, ואם יעלה ברצונו, יכול הוא לפעול ולעשות כל דבר, 'ומי יאמר לו מה תעשה'. ואם-כן, הרי שברצונו יכול הוא בכל רגע לפעול שגם החושים הגשמיים יפעלו באופן המוכר לנו, ומה שאינו עושה כן זהו אך ורק מפני שאינו רוצה לעשות כן!... דווקא משום שהרבי הוא אדם גשמי כמו שאר העם, וביחד עם זה בו שורה הקדוש ברוך הוא בכל תוקפו כמות שהוא (מפני עצם ביטולו לה' לגמרי, עד שזה הופך להיות כל מציאותו ממש)--לפיכך דווקא על ידו יכולה החיות האלוקית להתלבש ולהאיר ולהחיות את העולם הזה הגשמי.
10:34 PM
Gil Student
The issue before us is not whether belief in a second coming, which shatters the parameters of the messianic faith of Judaism, is outright heresy. Not every non-heretic has a presumptive right to be welcomed into the Jewish people. To allow a non-Jew to cross the line into Judaism while affirming a belief that Jews through the ages have seen as a defining characteristic of a rival faith is to declare that that belief, while probably incorrect, is acceptable in Judaism. It is to declare that on a matter of fundamental principle, our martyred ancestors were wrong, and their Christian murderers were right.(See also this post)
10:19 PM
Gil Student
There was an article in The Jerusalem Post a few weeks ago announcing that the Hartman Institute has decided to start ordaining women as Orthodox rabbis (link). I did not comment on it initially because it seems like something was missing in that article. From what I read, the Hartman Institute is training men and women to be Jewish educators. That is nothing particularly controversial. However, at the end of the program they will be ordaining the participants as rabbis. Basically, according to the article, the institute seems to be just giving the title away without any training in the primary rabbinic role of ruling on halakhic issues. What I see is not that the women will also be rabbis but that not even the men will be.
9:45 AM
Gil Student
Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, To Heal a Fractured World: The Ethics of Responsibility, pp. 24-25:The use of a metaphor [of God as a parent], however, may at times change the meaning of the metaphor itself, and that is the case here. Alongside a revolutionary concept of God, Judaism gave rise to an equally revisionary understanding of what it is to be a parent. In the ancient world, children were the property of their parents without an independent dignity of their own. That gave rise to the form of idolatry most repugnant to the Bible, child sacrifice (against which the story of the binding of Isaac is directed: God wants Abraham not to sacrifice his child.) It also set in motion the tragic conflict between sons and fathers dramatized in the myth of Oedipus, which Freud, wrongly I believe, saw as endemic to human culture.
The Hebrew Bible tells the long and often tense story of the childhood humanity under the parenthood of God. But God does not want humankind to remain in childhood. He wants them to become adults, exercising responsibility in freedom. In Jewish law, the obligations of children to parents begin only when they cease to be children (at the age of 12 for girls, 13 for boys). Before then they have no obligations at all. Paradoxically, it is only when we become parents that we understand our parents -- which is why the first recorded command in the Bible is that of parenthood ("Be fruitful and multiply"). A weak parent seeks to control his children. A true parent seeks to relinquish control, which is why God never intervenes to protect us from ourselves. That means that we will stumble and fall, but only by so doing does a child learn to walk. God does not ask his children not to make mistakes. To the contrary, he accepts that, in the Bible's own words, "There is none on earth so righteous as to do only good and never to sin" (Eccl. 7:20). God asks us only to acknowledge our mistakes and learn from them. Forgiveness is written into the structure of the universe.
7:40 AM
Gil Student
7:38 AM
Gil Student
by Steve Brizel
6:10 AM
Rabbi Ari Enkin
By: Rabbi Ari Enkin
10:41 PM
Gil Student
10:13 PM
Gil Student
R. Avigdor Nebenzahl, in his Sichos on Shemos (I believe no. 13, sorry but everything that follows is paraphrased from [faulty] memory), quotes the Mekhilta that explains the change from "זכור - Remember" in the fifth commandment as said in Exodus (20:8) to "שמור - Guard" in Deuteronomy (5:11). Both words were said at the same time. In the words of the Lecha Dodi poem, "שמור וזכור בדבור אחד השמיענו א-ל המיוחד - "Observer" (Shamor) and "Remember" (Zakhor) in one act of speech, the One and Only God made us hear" (translation from R. Jonathan Sacks' prayerbook).Even though at first it seems odd for what obligation is there on a person to do something without a command of the Torah to do it, when one delves into this matter one can understand that even without a command to serve God and fulfill His will one is still obligated to do so from logic.Logic is the basis of our relationship with God and serves as the foundation of our religion. If we accept religious beliefs that are counter to logic, we are undermining the basis of the Jewish worldview.
9:32 PM
Gil Student
The question sometimes arises whether a Jew, in his honest search for truth, must examine every religion to see which one is true. Should a Jew simply pursue his own religion or must he also examine other religions? If the answer is no, should someone born into an idolatrous cult also not examine other religions?
6:10 AM
Gil Student
Perhaps some reader will prove me wrong, but why is it that neither I nor the friends I asked can remember similar scandals affecting Orthodox Jews of German extraction? Is it only that “yekkes” are straighter? Is it not also that their attitudes towards the rest of the world are not as contemptuous and not as benighted as in other quarters? Why does it take so long for some people to take note of the differences between corrupt, anti-Semitic governments of older vintage, and the arguably better record of the medinah she chesed we inhabit? Is it not related in part to having no frequent and sustained interaction with our neighbors, so that only fictionalized versions of them are encountered?(Note to commenters: Please do not turn this into an argument about whether or not insular communities have more scandals. If you disagree with the premise, please just say so without going into further depth.)
Insularity has its merits, but it seems to come at a price as well. Part of that price is living in a time warp, where little has changed from hundreds of years ago, and all non-Jews are assumed to be cut of the same cloth. Those who promote insularity as a hedge against dilution of spiritual energy had better come up with a way of injecting a bit of an update in attitudes towards non-Jews and non-Jewish governments, or scandals such as the present one will continue to plague the community.
10:53 PM
Gil Student
by Steve Brizel
9:47 PM
Gil Student
Chazal tell us that matters of sexuality ought not to be discussed in public as a general matter, and by all rights discussions of sexual abuse ought to be no exception. But yet, Dr. Klafter’s thoughts on this topic and his coherent analytical explanation of the works already published that discuss abuse in the Orthodox community need to be read by the general Orthodox community closely. One can neither be too strict nor too lenient in this matter. Problems of sexual abuse can neither be swept under the rug as even a single case is a tragedy and every case of abuse that can be avoided needs to be avoided at almost any cost.[1] On the other hand, over-stating the problem of abuse so that the Jewish community is subject to mockery and ridicule as sexual abusers is a desecration of the Almighty’s name of the first rank which needs to be responded to. Dr. Klafter has done our community a service with this article.Click here to read moreAn academic paper about sexual abuse among Orthodox Jews, "History of Past Sexual Abuse in Married Jewish Women," was published in the November, 2007 issue of the American Journal of Psychiatry (AJP) by Rachel Yehuda, PhD, et al. This paper has generated significant controversy in the Orthodox Jewish world. For the most part, the controversy is actually a reaction to an article in The New York Jewish Week (10/25/2007) by Debra Nussbaum Cohen, "No Religious Haven From Abuse," which characterizes the AJP study as follows: "New study finds Orthodox women are sexually victimized as much as other American women are."[2] Orthodox Jewish mental health professionals have been debating the significance of the data from the AJP paper. The following is my critique of the study.[3] My remarks will be organized in the following three sections:
Rabbi Michael J. Broyde
Dayan, Beth Din of America
Rabbi, Young Israel of Toco Hills
These estimates are consistent with data from several national surveys, in which 25%-27% of women, regardless of marital status or religious affiliation, reported sexual abuse A meta-analytic study by Gorey and Leslie concluded that approximately 22% of women report childhood sexual abuse, a figure slightly higher than was noted in the present study.The investigators made no attempt to measure the rate in the general population in this study. Therefore, a statistical comparison is impossible. Their mention of the prevalence of abuse in the general population is for the purpose of establishing a reference point for readers who are not familiar with the abuse literature. In fact, the authors repeatedly state that there are numerous indications that their sample is not representative of the larger population of married, Orthodox women, and they deny that they have drawn any conclusions about the rate of sexual abuse in the Orthodox community:
A major limitation of this study is that it was not feasible to obtain a representative sample of observant Jewish women, since no sampling frame was available…. We do not, therefore, claim that this study group is representative of all Jewish women. On the contrary, the high level of education, even among the ultra Orthodox, suggests a sampling bias…. For all of these reasons, the estimates of prevalence of sexual abuse reported here are not the actual prevalence of sexual abuse among Orthodox Jewish women. (p. 1704).[4]Three papers are cited in the AJP paper to establish a 25%-27% rate in the general population. A careful examination of these references further clarifies why no conclusions can be drawn from the AJP data regarding the rate in the Orthodox community, or comparisons with general population. The 25%-27% rate is based on data from surveys which used random sampling methods from groups which are representative of the general population, and measured the response rate (i.e., what percentage of potential subjects agreed to be interviewed).[5] By contrast, the AJP study made no efforts to measure the total number of women who saw the advertisement. Therefore, there is no way to estimate the response rate. For example, if 2,000 women saw this advertisement, her response rate would be 19%; if 10,000 women saw the advertisement, it would be only a 3.8% response rate. This is not a criticism of their study; it is simply a clarification of the kind of study this is. It is not an estimate of the rate of sexual abuse in the Orthodox community.
We do not, therefore, claim that this study is representative of all observant Jewish women. On the contrary, the high level of education, even among the ultra-Orthodox, suggests a sampling bias that may be associated with a willingness to participate in research. Furthermore, there was a high proportion of subjects receiving mental health treatment in this group, which also may reflect an openness to discussing sensitive topics with others.In summary, Schick unfairly portrays the AJP authors as though they have drawn conclusions about the rate of abuse in the Orthodox community and a comparison with the general population (which they have not), and inaccurately portrays himself (presumably inadevertently) as though he has discovered findings which indicate their data are not representative.
A child or infant who is brought to a hospital with symptoms of being a battered child... it is prohibited, after an investigation, to return him to his home as they will continue to beat him until he might die. Because of the real danger, it is obligatory for the doctor to inform the courts, and with an order from the court, place the child with a foster parent or agency. There is no problem of informing since we are dealing with danger to life and the parents are the pursuers. This is permitted even if they will place the child, due to no choice, with a family or agency that is secular. It is incumbent upon the Jewish court to do everything in its power to insure that the child is placed with an observant family or agency. Particularly in the diaspora it is important that the Jewish court work to insure that the child not be placed with a Gentile family or agency. Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach agreed with all of the above.For more on this, see http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/mesiralaw2.html
Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv recounted to me that it is permitted for the doctor to inform the authorities even if it is possible that the child will be placed with a family or agency that is not Jewish...
Rabbi Waldenberg wrote "if there is a real risk that the parents will continue to hit the child... it is obligatory for the doctor to report the matter to the police..." Sexual abuse (of either boys or girls) is no different than physical abuse. [Rabbis Waldenberg, Elyashiv and Auerbach agree that reporting is mandatory also.] Rabbi Elyashiv writes "there is no difference between boys and girls since one is dealing with a seriously life wounding event (pegiah nafshit) and a danger to the public... this is much more serious than theft and one certainly must report this matter to the school administration and if nothing is done, even to the police even in the Diaspora."
