Rabbi Jacob Joseph In The News

Dr. Yitzchak Levine, in the current issue of The Jewish Press, quotes extensively from the book Rabbi Israel Salanter: Religious-Ethical Thinker (link):

Rabbi Jacob Juspha, better known as Rabbi Jacob Joseph, was born into a very poor family in Kroz, Lithuania in 1840. His father, who worked in a beer brewery, sacrificed no end to provide his son a Torah education. Young Yaakov was an exceptional Torah student and studied for a number of years in the famous Volozhin Yeshiva, headed at that time by the Netziv, Rabbi Naftali Zvi Yehuda Berlin (1817-1893). Later he became one of the chief disciples of Reb Yisroel Salanter (1810-1883).

Click here to read moreWhile Rabbi Joseph did not perpetuate the Musar system of his Master, he considered himself his spiritual heir. At home, in Vilna, Rabbi Joseph, who more than anyone else tried to popularize Rabbi Israel Salanter’s ideas among the people, was considered an authority on rabbinic law, a great preacher, and he lived up to the name he was given, Charif, (sharp, keen minded). Rabbi Joseph was the first of the young Rabbis to put into effect Rabbi Israel’s theories. [Israel Salanter, Religious-Ethical Thinker by Menachem G. Glenn, Yashar Books, 2005]

Rav Joseph’s first rabbinic post was in the town of Vilon (Veliuona) in the Kaunas district of Lithuania. He established a yeshiva there for a few select young men. The yeshiva stressed bekius; each student was required to select one tractate of Talmud during each z’man and was expected to know it virtually by heart.

A dynamic man who, as was true with his teacher Rav Yisroel Salanter, found it difficult to remain in one place for a long time, Rav Joseph served in several rabbinical positions in Lithuania before accepting the post of "community preacher" of Vilna in 1883.

In a short time he became very popular, especially with the unlettered. His sermons, masterpieces of Musar were named Revues….The most wealthy and the most learned of Vilna, many of whom had their Ordination (Semichah), also flocked to hear these sermons. Since Vilna had no chief Rabbi [at this time], he became head of the Bais Din there. [Israel Salanter, Religious-Ethical Thinker]

His published book of sermons, L’Bais Yaakov (Vilna, 1888), shows him to have been a man with an orderly mind and liberal outlook. The sermons are clear, well constructed, and ethical in emphasis.

However, as learned as he was, through overconfidence in people, he became involved in some financial enterprise that failed and he went bankrupt. This made a painful impression upon him….He became melancholic and would spend hours on the old Jewish cemetery in Vilna weeping. [Israel Salanter, Religious-Ethical Thinker]

Read the rest of this entry »

Audio Roundup

The following is the first post in a new feature that highlights recent Torah audio lectures that are available online. Let me explain how I envision this feature so readers understand. This is generally for newly posted lectures because there are countless lectures that are already online. This is not for lectures on the weekly Torah portion or Gemara classes. And it is not intended to be comprehensive. It is just a taste of what is out there based on what I think will interest this blog's readers. Right now I am only listing lectures that are on YU Torah, KMTT and OU Radio because I think they are the most relevant and provide easy access to the newest lectures. It is important for me to note that I am not listening to all of the lectures. I simply don't have the time. I am basing my selections on my knowledge of the speaker and the topic.

Click here to read moreI am looking for a volunteer to continue this feature on a weekly basis. Please contact me via e-mail.

Another installment ("Saving the Animals") in R. Dovid Gottlieb's shiurim on "Bereishis: A Study of Text, Tradition, and Theology" (link), previous lectures: I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII

The latest class by Dr. Shai Secunda (a recent student of Dr. Yakov Elman and an expert on Iranian history during the Talmudic period) on interfaith disputation in the Talmudic period (link), prior lectures: I, II

R. Adam Mintz on providing medical treatment to Gentiles on Shabbos (link)

R. Yosie Levine on "Scribes and Scrolls: A Modern Orthodox Approach to Biblical Criticism" (link)

R. Dani Rapp's series of lectures on the Messianic Era: I, II, III, IV, V

R. Eliakim Koenigsberg on price fraud (link)

R. Ezra Schwartz on shemitah and medicine (link

R. Moshe Taragin on "Character and Ethics": I, II, III

R. Ezra Bick on the "Structure of Tefillah": I, II, III

R. Yosef Grossman on "Shmita and Cell Phones" (link)

R. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb teaches lessons from Rav Kook (link)

Read the rest of this entry »

Soft News Musings VI

Lambda Phi

Philologus summarizes Gershom Scholem's suggestion that the concept of there always being at least 36 righteous people in the world is based on Hellenistic beliefs (Forward). That's the kind of irreverent, wild speculation that gives Jewish history a bad name.

Hebrew School

A Jewish group is trying to start a Hebrew charter (public) school in Brooklyn that will teach Jewish subjects but be non-religious and open to students of all religions (Forward, Jewish Week). I have no doubt that this school will take some kids who would otherwise go to yeshiva, which I consider a bad result. But it will also take many other Jewish kids who would otherwise go to a regular public school and give them a stronger Jewish identity. Good for the Jews or bad? I don't know.

Click here to read moreLiving Wages Recommended

The Conservative movement has adopted an halakhic ruling requiring Jews to "strive" to pay a living wage to workers (JTA). Maybe now I'll be able to get a copy of the article and see what possible halakhic basis it has because I'm just not familiar with any viable basis. What really got me, though, is the following quote that states how current events in the media impacted the voting on this ruling: "She [the author of the ruling] said the recent raid on the nation's largest kosher slaughterhouse, and subsequent allegations that the plant had mistreated its largely immigrant work force, had weighed on the committee's decision."

Goodbye Confrontation

R. Shlomo Riskin opens the Center for Jewish-Christian Understanding and Cooperation, which organizers are calling "the first Orthodox Jewish institution of its kind dedicated to theological dialogue with Christians." According to The Christian Post, "The center will be hosting joint seminars for Jewish and Christian scholars and theologians on topics as diverse as salvation, messianism, and Jewish-Christian relations." (JTA, Christian Post, Press Release, Website) So much for Rav Soloveitchik.

Banning Shabbos Party?

A nutritionist points out yeshivas are facing a growing rate of obesity, although no data is shown to prove that contention (Jewish Press). Recommendations to help stem the tide include more gym time and banning sodas from vending machines. I'm not sure about the accuracy of the point that some schools have only a single 30-minute gym period a week. I'm willing to bet that those schools give multiple recesses a day during which the boys run around and play sports. But I think that the single most important thing that schools can do is to stop giving children candy as rewards for good behavior and grades.

Read the rest of this entry »

Reb Dovid's Test

R. Micha Berger tells the following story about R. David Lifschitz as part of a great post (link):

YU required written finals. I think Rav Dovid once told me that he wouldn’t have given them otherwise. In any case, the morning of the final, rebbe would ask us two questions that echo Rav Shimon’s “faher“:

First, he would want to know who had eight hours of sleep the previous night.

Second, he would ask who had breakfast that morning.

Click here to read moreRav Dovid’s primary concern was for the welfare of his talmidim who were often overextended during final week. How can he worry about how we would test when he wasn’t yet sure we were fully equipped to succeed at our learning?

Those who didn’t get a full night’s sleep were sent back to bed. Those who skipped breakfast were given $5 and sent to the cafeteria. (At least, those who addmitted to it. Few people would raise their hands the second time around, and I know for sure at least some of us were just avoiding taking rebbe’s money…)

Read the rest of this entry »

Parashah Roundup: Bemidbar/Yom Yerushalayim 5768

by Steve Brizel

The Themes of Sefer Bamidbar

R. Berel Wein reminds us that one of the key elements of Bamidar is how people, their attitudes and actions played a huge role in setting the future of Jewish history: link

The Netziv, as prepared by R. Eliezer Kwass, illustrates how the two countings of the Jewish People are two of the main themes of Bamidbar: link

R. Jonathan Sacks and R. Zev Leff explain the importance of the Jewish People receiving the Torah in the desert before they entered the Land of Israel: link 1, link 2

R. Shlomo Wolbe zt"l urges us to see Hashgacha Pratis as the key theme of Sefer Bamidbar: link (RTF)

R. Elchanan Samet presents different views on the censuses taken of the Jewish People: link

R. Shlomo Riskin reminds us that the Torah serves to sanctify the desert of our exiles throughout Jewish history: link

Click here to read moreThe Role of Shevet Levi

R. Ephraim Buchwald and R. Yissocher Frand explore the unique role of the Leviim: link 1, link 2

Yerushah and Rabbanus

R. Dovid Gottlieb explores whether rabbinical positions may be inherited: link (audio)

Yom Yerushalayim

R. Aharon Lichtenstein explains why Yerushalayim is the seat of sanctity and royalty: link

R. Yechezkel Yakovson urges us to remember the relationship between Yerushalayim and the Mikdash: link

R. Michael Rosensweig reminds us why Yerushalayim is the center of the Jewish People: link (audio)

R. Zvi Sobolofsky reviews many Halachos relating to the status of Arei Yehudah Bechurbanah uBinyanah: link (audio)

R. Asher Brander emphasizes that we must remember that the Shechinah never left the Kotel: link

R. Daniel Stein (Hatzlacha Rabbah upon your move to Passaic) discusses tearing Kriyah when visiting the Har HaBayis and walking on Har HaBayis: link 1, link 2 (audio)

Read the rest of this entry »

Announcements #040: Nishmat Summer Program and Conversion Crisis Lectures

Nishmat Summer Program for Women
THE ALISA FLATOW NISHMAT SUMMER PROGRAM 2008
The Jerusalem Center for Higher Torah Study for Women
DATES: July 1 – 22, 2008
THEME: Family and Community: The Ethics and Laws of Relationships

Join us for three weeks of intensive text-based learning for women of all ages and backgrounds. Full- and part-time learning available. Beginners investigate questions openly, and master the basics of Siddur and Chumash. Advanced participants confront challenging texts. Students leave the program with a deeper connection to Torah, the land of Israel, and their personal spirituality.

Click here to read moreIn classes and chavruta study, students examine models of relationships, through the prism of the Bible and Talmud. We will analyze halachik sources that guide us in creating and maintaining healthy relationships with family and community, and investigate through works of Jewish philosophy different approaches to building these relationships in the spirit of Torah.

SPECIAL FEATURES

• By Popular Demand: 5-unit course with Rabbanit Chana Henkin, Book of Daniel
• The Sandwich Generation: Parents aging, Children marrying: Halacha and Hashkafa
• Beginners: One-on-One Mentorship! Learn to read siddur, Chumash, Rashi, etc.
• Advanced: Learn Ktuvim with teacher of the highest caliber from the world of Tanach (in Hebrew).

Students will learn with * Rabbanit Chana Henkin * Rav Zvi Leshem * Rav Da’vid Sperling * Rav Chaim Tabasky * Linda Derovan * Rav Yehoshua Weisberg and more.

ISRAEL EXPERIENCE Special activities include shabbatot together at teachers' homes and in the Golan. During the week there are many special activities like weekly tiyulim, guest speakers and more.

Nishmat - The Jerusalem Center for Higher Torah Study for Women The Alisa Flatow Overseas Program at Nishmat offers a warm and stimulating torah community to women of all ages and backgrounds. Classes are offered at three levels and include Tanach, Gemara, Halacha, Jewish Thought and more. While engaging you in guided independent study, teachers help you develop your learning skills and push the limits of your abilities. Full year study, single semester and summer programs are available for full or part time.

Learn More

The Conversion Crisis
Tuesday June 3, 9:30pm Eastern

In light of the recent ruling invalidating thousands of converts Torah in Motion will be hosting an online discussion on the crisis with:
Click here to read more

• Rabbi Yitzchak Adlerstein, member of the beit din l'giyur of the Rabbinical Council of America
• Rabbi Seth Farber, Founder and Director, ITIM:The Jewish life information Center
• Rabbi Barry Freundel, Head of the Gerut Commission of the Rabbinic Council of America
• Rabbi Benny Lau, Director Beit Morasha

This program will be broadcast via the e-TiM network which provides the unique experience of seeing, hearing and participating in real time.

Register at www.torahinmotion.org




(Announce your simchah or Torah lectures by clicking on the button in the top right corner of Hirhurim. See here for readership statistics and here for instructions on buying an announcement.)

Read the rest of this entry »

Secondary Sources

In a post on the Seforim blog, R. Eliezer Brodt points out instances in which an author evidently utilizes the sources found in an earlier work without giving attribution (link). The question I raised in the comments is whether that practice is contrary to halakhah. I later remembered that R. Aaron Levine discusses almost this exact question in his Moral Issues of the Marketplace in Jewish Law (pp. 31-35). R. Levine's case is of a rabbi who bases a lecture on sources quoted in the book Beris Yehudah but fails to tell people that he received assistance from Beris Yehudah. R. Levine concludes that such a practice might be considered geneivas da'as (deception), depending on the common assumptions of readers. It definitely contravenes the obligation of gratitude to teachers, as defined in Nazir 56b to require naming the first and last in a chain of teachers. See the excerpt in this post (link).

Click here to read moreR. Simcha Rabinowitz (Piskei Teshuvos vol. 2 156:27) quotes R. Shlomo Kluger's Chokmas Shlomo glosses to Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 156) as reaching same conclusion as R. Levine. But in footnote 244, R. Rabinowitz quotes R. Yaakov Yisrael Kanievski as saying that you are not obligated to say where you saw a source quoted but it is a proper practice to do so (as quoted in Toledos Ya'akov, ch. 15).

On plagiarism in general, the She'arim Metzuyanim Ba-Halakhah (on Yevamos 91a sv. a"l Rav Nachman) cites Magen Avraham 156:2; Noda Bi-Yehudah (2:OC:20); Shakh (Yoreh De'ah 242:43); Responsa Machaneh Chaim (Choshen Mishpat no. 49); and Responsa Maharam Shick (Yoreh De'ah no. 156).

See also this post: link

Read the rest of this entry »

Yisachar or Yisaschar?

By: Rabbi Ari Enkin

Although the name of Yisaschar (son of Yaakov and founding father of one of the twelve tribes) is always written with a double "Sin" (referring to the letter of the Hebrew alphabet -- not to be confused with transgression), there are differing customs on how the name is to be pronounced. The conflicting customs on how to pronounce his name in the course of the Torah reading is noted by the Biblical commentator, Da'at Zekeinim.[1] The Da'at Zekeinim discusses what's behind the dispute regarding whether the name should be pronounced "Yisachar", articulating only one of the letter "Sin"s or rather, "Yisaschar", articulating both "Sin"s, just as it is written.[2]

Click here to read moreThe foundation of this dispute lies in the phenomenon that Yisaschar is noted as having a son who was originally named "Yov"[3] but is later, somewhat surprisingly, called "Yashuv"[4]. It is taught that Yov complained to his father regarding the name that he had been given because Yov was also the name of an idol. As such, Yov requested a name change. Yisaschar accepted his son's complaint as legitimate and then "took" a "Sin" from his own name, giving it to his son. With this added letter, "Yov" was then transformed to "Yashuv". From that time onwards, it can be said that Yisaschar's name is truly Yisachar and should be pronounced that way. As such, it is argued that Yisaschar should be pronounced "Yisaschar" until the point where the name of Yisaschar's son Yov is changed to Yashuv. It appears from here, therefore, that the dispute on how to pronounce Yisaschar is hinges on the name change of his son Yov.

There is, however, another unrelated explanation on why Yov's name was changed. It is suggested that Yov's name was changed to Yashuv was in order to reflect the fact that Yashuv and his descendants were scholars who "sat", ("Yashuv") and studied Torah.[5] Therefore, according to this approach, Yisaschar's son's name has nothing to do with the way Yisaschar's name is to be pronounced in the Torah.

Another approach to the dispute regarding how to pronounce Yisaschar is based on what the two "Sin"s of Yisaschar's name represent. It is taught that the two "Sin"s represent the word "sachar" which can mean both "payment" and "reward". The "payment" in this context refers to Leah having "hired" Yaakov to spend the night with her, paying him in mandrakes. The "reward" in this context represents Leah's reaction, calling the arrival of Yisaschar a reward. Since one "Sin" recalls "payment" for marital relations which is an uncomplimentary transaction, it is not pronounced.[6]

There is also a mystical teaching which encourages the name to be pronounced "Yisachar" at all times. This is based on the idea that Yisaschar represents the Torah.[7] As is well known, the Torah consists of two parts – the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. Each "Sin" in Yisaschar's name represents one of these facets of the Torah. Therefore, it is taught that the first "Sin", representing the Written Torah be read out loud, while the second "Sin", representing the Oral Torah, remain silent.

On the other hand, some authorities suggest that the name should always be pronounced "Yisaschar" just as it is written. This view is based on a verse in Tehillim which seems to frown on the prevalent custom of pronouncing only one "Sin", claiming that doing so is simply false and should never be done.[8] Yet others choose to always and only pronounce the name Yisaschar with one "Sin".[9] There is also a somewhat widespread custom to pronounce the name as it is written only the first time it is read,[10] and thereafter to pronounce it "Yisachar".

It is interesting to note that in the work Nefesh Harav[11] two customs are cited regarding the pronunciation of Yisaschar. It says there that in Volozhin the custom was to pronounce Yisaschar (with two "Sin"s) until Parshat Pinchas, at which time the name Yashuv is mentioned, and thereafter to read it with only one "Sin". Additionally, it says that Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik would instruct the one reading the Torah to read the name Yisaschar twice, once they way it is written, and a second time with only one "Sin". However, following Parshat Pinchas, Rabbi Soloveitchik would have it read with only one "Sin". Every congregation should follow its own custom.[12]


********************************************



[1] Parshat Vayeitzei
[2] See also: Siftei Chachamim to Bamidbar 26:24
[3] Bereishit 46:13
[4] Bamidbar 26:24
[5] Rashi;Divrei Hayamim I 7:1
[6] Rashbam,
[7] Bereishit Rabba;Vayeitzei
[8] Tehillim 63:12
[9] Minhag Yisrael Torah 428:1
[10] Bereishit 30:18
[11] Nafesh Harav p.308
[12] Minhag Yisrael Torah 428:1

Read the rest of this entry »

The Missing Afterlife

The commentators note that the blessings and curses in Lev. 26, part of last week's Torah reading, only promise reward and punishment in this world. There is no mention of an afterlife. In fact, there is no explicit mention of an afterlife anywhere in the Bible. Some historians have taken this to be proof that belief in an afterlife was a later addition to the Jewish religion, but Yechezkel Kaufmann ably rebutted that argument in his History of the Israelite Religion (vol. 5, cited by Nehama Leibowitz in her New Studies in Vayikra, vol. 2 p. 573). However, the question remains why the reward and punishment in the afterlife is not discussed outright in the Bible.

Click here to read moreProf. Leibowitz provides a survey of medieval answers to this question, although somewhat surprisingly she omits the discussions in the philosophical literature. What follows is a brief list of answers from Nehama Leibowitz's summary and my own additions from the philosophical literature:

1. Ibn Ezra (Deut. 32:39) writes that the Torah was written on a simple level, so that everyone can understand it. The afterlife is a complex philosophical idea that only sophisticated individuals can comprehend, and therefore had to be omitted. (However, R. Yosef Albo [Sefer Ha-Ikkarim 39:4] points out that the Torah uses anthropomorphisms, relying on the intelligent reader not to take them literally. So we see an assumption of some philosophical sophistication among readers.]
2. The Ramban (Commentary to Ex. 6:2, Lev. 18:29, 26:12) writes that reward and punishment in the afterlifes is a natural outcome from the spiritual state of our souls at the time of death. Reward and punishment in this world is entirely miraculous. The Torah only mentions the miraculous aspects of reward and punishment, which is in this world, and not the natural aspects.
3. R. Yitzchak Arama (Akedas Yitzchak, ch. 70) points out that the Torah describes the reward of God dwelling in our midst (cf. Lev 26:11-12). This, he argues, is the spiritual equivalent of the afterlife.

R. Bachya ibn Pakuda (Chovos Ha-Levavos, sha'ar ha-bitachon ch. 4) offers a number of responses to this question:
4. We do not truly know what the soul is, nor what brings it joy and pain. The Torah only tells us in detail about rewards and punishments that we can understand.
5. Reward and punishment in the afterlife is well known and accepted. The Torah did not need to mention in it because the Tradition was sufficient.
6. The people at the time of the giving of the Torah were unsophisticated and could not handle the complicated philosophical subject. God taught them--like children--concepts that they could handle and of which they would understand the more complex version at a later time.
7. Reward in the afterlife requires more than just good deeds. It also requires helping others to do good deeds and a special kindness from God. And while punishment in the afterlife should come automatically, God is merciful and sometimes intervenes to prevent it. Because they are not automatic rewards and punishments, they cannot be listed in the Torah as such.
8. Reward and punishment in this world are for outwardly visible deeds but the afterlife is for deeds that people cannot see and are not aware of. The afterlife is essentially a place of Divine recompense -- reward and punishment people cannot see for deeds that they cannot see, which is why it is not mentioned in the Torah.
9. Reward and punishment in the afterlife is really just the result of having a connection with God. Phrasing it in terms of reward and punishment minimizes it and defeats its purpose.

R. Saadia Gaon (Emunos Ve-Dei'os 9:2) offers two answers:
10. Reward and punishment in the afterlife is logical and does not need to be mentioned.
11. It is the nature of prophecy to speak at length about immediate needs and only briefly about distant needs. The afterlife is a distant need and therefore did not need to be explained.
12. R. Yehuda Ha-Levi (Kuzari 1:109) explains that the aim of Judaism is not next-worldly but to achieve communion with God in this world.

Read the rest of this entry »

Announcements #039: From Coca Cola to Postville

Current Issues in Kashrut... From Coca Cola to Postville

Rabbi Menachem Genack, National Rabbinic Administrator and CEO of the Orthodox Union's Dept. of Kashrut will describe what is involved in operating a kosher supervisory organization that certifies some 250 thousand products.

He will then address some current pressing issues in Kashrut supervision, including the Agriprocessors- Postville situation that has been in the news after an ICE raid of the Postville plant and the arrest of more than 300 allegedly illegal workers in what is reported to be the largest such raid of its kind for that agency, as well as suspicion of other plant irregularities.

A question and answer session will follow.

7:30 p.m., Tuesday, May 27
Weiss Auditorium - Jewish Center of Teaneck, 70 Sterling Place, Teaneck, NJ

For more information please call the Center office at: 201-833-0515




(Announce your simchah or Torah lectures by clicking on the button in the top right corner of Hirhurim. See here for readership statistics and here for instructions on buying an announcement.)

Read the rest of this entry »

A Different Tekufah

Guest Post by Prof. Yitzchak Levine

This past Shabbos my wife and I attended the 2008 Torah Umesorah Convention. One of the speakers at Seudah Shlishis was Rav Avraham Chaim Levin, Rosh Yeshiva, Telshe, Chicago. During his address he mentioned that "Forty years ago there were 8 boys in the eighth grade in Yeshiva Beth Yehuda in Detroit." Of these eight, he pointed out that five were not from Shomer Shabbos homes. He then went on to say, that all of these five boys eventually became outstanding Torah personalities.

There is no question that Torah Umesorah played a key role in the development of Yiddishkeit in Detroit, and Rav Levin had pointed to just one aspect of this.

Click here to read more"THE TRANSFORMATION OF DETROIT FROM A SMALL BACKWATER on the American Jewish map into a vibrant Orthodox community was largely fueled by Yeshivah Beth Yehudah, which became a full-day school in 1944. Thus Detroit demonstrates the impact that Torah Umesorah-sponsored day schools could have on communities throughout America. More, Beth Yehudah was built almost entirely by talmidim of Reb Shraga Feivel or those who had come under his sway. Nowhere was his inspiration more intensely felt than in the sense of mission his followers brought to Detroit." (From page 316 of Reb Shraga Feivel by Yonoson Rosenblum)

After Rav Levin had made his remarks about the 5 boys from non-religious homes who had become exceptional Torah personalities, I turned to the person sitting next to me and said, "You realize, I am sure, that today these 5 boys could not get into most of the yeshivas in Brooklyn." He replied, "It was a different tekufah [era] then. We are no longer concerned with parents who send their kids to public school. If someone wants to start a yeshiva for public school kids, then let him. It was a different tekufah."

To be honest, this reply did not sit well with me. However, I "saw" who I was talking to, and I let it go. Nonetheless, I have been thinking about this ever since I heard Rabbi Levin's remarks about these 5 boys.

My question is, "Forty years from now, what will a Rosh Yeshiva have to point to that occurred in places like Brooklyn that will serve as an example of the exceptional accomplishments of Torah Umesorah?"

Let me add the following, because I think that it is related. A friend of mine who has been going to Torah Umesorah Conventions for almost 30 years made the following remark. "When I started to go to these conventions, they were about 50% black hats and 50% knitted yarmulkas. Today you see almost no knitted yarmulkas."

Professor Yitzchok Levine
Department of Mathematical Sciences
Stevens Institute of Technology
Hoboken, NJ 07030
e-mail
web page

Read the rest of this entry »

Rav Amital Speaks

I've only once had the pleasure of meeting R. Yehuda Amital. It was when I was working in a Teaneck restaurant and waited on him. He did not know what to order and chose Hungarian Beef Goulash because he was born in Hungary. I'm not sure what the lesson is from that story, but the Talmud tells us that even the mundane discussions of Torah scholars require study.

Since he is the only rosh yeshiva on whom I waited during my brief career in the restaurant industry, I was happy to study his new book Commitment and Complexity: Jewish Wisdom in an Age of Upheaval. The book is a collection of quotations from R. Amital's books and articles, many of which appear in English translation here for the first time. The excerpts are arranged topically and address some of the biggest political and religious challenges of our times. What makes R. Amital's thoughts so interesting is that he is a fiercely independent thinker.

Click here to read moreA Holocaust survivor, R. Amital is a rosh yeshiva in the traditional sense and bases his views on his Hungarian upbringing, his studies in the Chevron Yeshiva, and his continued experience learning and teaching Torah. Nevertheless, his outlook is unique. When asked in his entrance examination to the Chevron Yeshiva how he remained a "Ben Torah" after his suffering during the Holocaust, he replied that he managed to keep with him a booklet written by Rav Kook that kept him inspired through the ordeal. R. Amital went on to excel in his studies and receive rabbinic ordination from R. Isser Zalman Meltzer (and marry his granddaughter).

In addition to his Torah studies, R. Amital was a volunteer in the Haganah and fought in the War of Independence. After the Six Day War, R. Amital founded a yeshiva in the newly conquered Kfar Etzion, site of a famous battle in the War of Independence. In 1988, R. Amital founded the left-leaning religious Meimad movement that eventually became a political party. It is for this "sin" of being different from the typical right-leaning Religious Zionist that I am sure I will have to edit out the insults right-leaning commenters will add to this post. However, it also means that his views are interesting. They represent a Da'as Torah -- a Torah-inspired viewpoint -- that is insightful and thought-provoking, yet not often heard.

This book, Commitment and Complexity, is an excellent introduction to R. Amital's thoughts. It gives readers an overview of his approach to many different topics. Not being a student of R. Amital's, I was not aware of his prior English books. A wonderful aspect of this book is that while the excerpts stand on their own they also let the reader know of other works by the author. Readers who find R. Amital's outlook on a particular topic interesting have the option of following the reference and reading a fuller exposition on the subject.

Here are some random excerpts from the book:

On Prayer (pp. 98-99):

Man, who was created in the image of God, enjoys an enormous privilege in that God has made it possible for him to pray. Humanity would look different -- more sad, more dejected -- were it not for this privilege which has been bestowed upon us... Let me share with you a conversation I had with the director of a large retirement home in Miami. The residents' children all lived far away -- New York, Washington, Chicago. There were three categories of children. Some sent a check every month to their parents. Sometimes the son or daughter would include a short note, sometimes not even that. In any event, the parents knew that the child remembered him or her every month. Others sent the monthly check straight to the retirement home office; it didn't go to the parent, but at least they remembered their parents every month. The third type, explained the director, were those who made use of a standing bank order, such that the money was sent each month by a teller at the bank without the child having any idea as to whether his parent was even still alive. Everything was conducted automatically. This was the difference between Ya'akov and Esav. God told Ya'akov, "You have to ask every time. You'll receive nothing without asking." Esav, on the other hand, enjoyed the benefits of a "standing bank order." [Jewish Values, 117, 121]

On Education (pp. 19-20):

Every educational institution, by its very nature, has a built-in problem: the student knows who is teaching him, and the teacher knows whom he is teaching. This situation -- direct education, of which both sides are fully conscious -- frequently generates resistance on the part of the student against accepting the teacher's world outlook and moral admonitions. This situation is liable to hurt the teacher as well: knowing that he is serving as a role model, he may conduct himself in an unnatural manner. The greatest educational impact is achieved when the teacher is unaware that he is teaching and the student is unaware that he is learning. This is the meaning of "the Name of Heaven shall become beloved through you" (Yoma 86a) -- a person through his ordinary conduct should bring about a sanctification of God's Name, without even being aware that he is influencing others through his behavior. [Jewish Values, 150-151]

On Halakhah (p. 48):

We live in an era in which educated religious circles like to emphasize the certainty of Halakha, and commitment to it, in Judaism. I can say that in my youth in pre-Holocaust Hungary, I didn't hear people talking all the time about "Halakha." People conducted themselves in the tradition of their forefathers, and where an halakhic problem arose, they consulted a rabbi. Reliance on Halakha and unconditional commitment to it mean, for many people, a stable anchor whose purpose is to maintain the purity of Judaism, even within the modern world. To my mind, this excessive emphasis of Halakha has exacted a high cost. The impression created is that there is nothing in Torah but that which exists in Halakha, and that in any confrontation with the new problems that arise in modern society, answers should be sought exclusively in books of Halakha. Many of the fundamental values of the Torah which are based on the general commandments of "You shall be holy" (Vayikra 19:2) and "You shall do what is upright and good in the eyes of God" (Devarim 6:18), which were not given formal, operative formulation, have not only lost some of their status, but they have also lost their validity in the eyes of a public that regards itself as committed to Halakha. ["Not Everything is Halakha," Alon Shevut Bogrim 13 (5759), 96)]

Read the rest of this entry »

Soft News Musings V

Top 36 Somethings

I can't figure out what this Jewish Week list of 36 people under the age of 36 is about, but I congratulate all of the winners, especially the two whom I know (Jewish Week). I was clearly disqualified because I will only be under 36 for a few more months.

The Kosher Business

The OU continues to certify as kosher meat produced at the Agriprocessors plant (link). This is a tough call. Revoking certification for reasons not directly related to the kosher status could cause serious damage to customers. The ensuing shortage will cause prices to rise and the people who will end up losing the most are the poor people who keep kosher and the marginally kosher who might opt for non-kosher rather than pay even higher prices. If the accusations impacted the kosher status of the meat then the OU would have no choice. But in this case, it's a tough call.

Click here to read moreReligious Books in Flames

The Deputy Mayor of the town Or Yehuda in Israel arranged for the burning of Christian Bibles that were given out by missionaries, and then afterwards apologized when he realized how bad it looked to the world (JPost). I think citizens should be allowed to burn holy books of another religion, even if I personally find it offensive. But public officials should not be involved. They represent the entire public and the government, and should not be offending any religion.

Politics and Morality

In an opinion piece in the Forward, Yehezkel Dror argues that the "the calculus of realpolitik gives primacy to existence, leaving limited room for ethical considerations" (Forward). The title of the essay is "When Survival of the Jewish People Is at Stake, There’s No Place for Morals". I hope that the newspaper chose the title because I think that Dror would be extremely irresponsible for choosing such a misleading and misguided title.

His point, if I understand it properly, is that Israel's existence has to come first and it overrides other considerations, such as protesting China's treatment of Tibet. However, while I think his argument is essentially correct, I believe that he overreaches. For example, when he states that "It is very likely that the collapse of Israel or the loss of its Jewish nature would undermine the existence of the Jewish people as a whole." I believe that the Jewish people will continue to exist regardless of the fate of the State of Israel. While its demise would be incredibly tragic and would eternally injure the Jewish people, it would not spell the end of the "Chosen People". However, that is irrelevant. Israel as a country must put its continued existence as its number one priority.

Yet I still disagree with his conclusion mainly because I agree with his statement that this primacy "leav[es] limited room for ethical considerations". "Limited room", not "no room". We can never set aside our ethics due to our need to survive. Instead, we have to include that need within our ethical calculations, much like military ethics include such considerations. Just like a soldier does not automatically kill everyone on the battlefield because of his need to survive but instead balances the different priorities, the State of Israel must do so as well. There are times when the country can fulfill more than one of its ethical priorities and, when possible, it must. Is there really no way to create a relationship with China while still protesting its treatment of Tibet? Cannot the State of Israel act in support while stating its hesitations? Or allow individual citizens to protest while the government remains quiet? There are more ways to maintain a relationship than full support and full opposition. Perhaps Israel would do well to stake out a middle position, even if slightly to the middle, in order to accomplish its multiple ethical priorities.

I think Dror accepts this in principle. He writes, "Responsible decisions in such difficult situations require clear recognition of the involved moral issues, careful pondering of all relevant values and acceptance of responsibility for one’s autonomous judgment. They also demand an effort to reduce to a minimum the violation of moral values." But then he proceeds to demand full compliance by Jewish leaders and organizations with Israel's full support of China and Turkey. Is there really no middle ground?

Read the rest of this entry »

Parashah Roundup: Bechukosai 5768

by Steve Brizel

Reward and Punishment

R. Aharon Lichtenstein suggests that we employ a sophisticated, as opposed to a simplistic approach to issues of Scar Vonesh and similar issues and avoid theodicy-tinged and based considerations: link

Maaser Sheni and Chinuch

R. Ephraim Buchwald explores the relationship between Maaser Sheni, Chinuch and Jewish continuity: link

Click here to read moreThe Tochachah

R. Mayer Twersky suggests that striving in Torah growth is part and parcel of man being mobile, as opposed to being stationary: link

R. Yissocher Frand, based on the Ohr HaChaim, suggests that one should try to learn Torah, even by listening to a tape, suggests why a Vav is missing from Yaakov and the connection between the Tochacha and the Mitzvah of Erachin: link

R. Berel Wein explains the multiple messages of the Tochacha: link

R. Jonathan Sacks underscores the importance of hope as a key factor in the survival of the Jewish People: link

Lag BaOmer

R. Dovid Miller discusses the importance of Lag BaOmer as Kabbalas HaTorah of Toras HaSod: link (audio)

R. Yitzchak Breitowitz explores the contemporary application of a well known Machlokes between R Yishmael and R Shimon Bar Yochai: link 1, link 2

R. Asher Meir and R. Shlomo Riskin investigates why R Shimon Bar Yochai went back into the cave: link 1, link 2

Yom Hashoah Followup

R. Tamir Granot discusses different Charedi Hashkafic reactions to the Holocaust: link

Read the rest of this entry »

New Periodical: Tradition 41:1 (Spring 2008)

There is a new issue of Tradition (link). I have not yet seen it but the table of contents makes it look like a must read. Note that subscribers can read the articles online.

• Editor's Note: "So Soon?" A Nahmanidean Meditation on Death by Shalom Carmy
• Music During Sefirah and the Three Weeks by Moshe Bleich
• May A Labor Coach Ride on Shabbat? by Alfred Cohen
• The Rav and the “Tale Told by the Heavens” by Shubert Spero
• Survey of Recent Halakhic Periodical Literature: Is the Milk We Drink Kosher? by J. David Bleich
• From The Pages of Tradition: Judith Ish-Kishor: This Too Shall Pass by Shnayer Z. Leiman
• Review Essay: Jewish Business Ethics and the Modern Marketplace by Aaron Levine
• Book Review: Democracy and Tradition by Jeffrey Stout by Michael Helfand
• Communications: Menachem Meier, J. David Bleich; Seth Farber, J. David Bleich; Bernard Septimus, David Horowitz; Daniel S. Berman, Alfred Cohen

Read the rest of this entry »

Catholic Zionism

In the current issue of First Things, there is an article by David Shushon arguing a case for Zionism based on Christian (i.e. Catholic) theology (link). I'm not sure who this author is. The byline states that he is a student of Jewish theology and his name sounds somewhat Sephardic. But the article is written from a Catholic perspective. Towards the end of his theological discussion, he addresses the Catholic Church's responses throughout the twentieth century to Zionism and the State of Israel:
Click here to read more

Until the Holy See exchanged ambassadors with the State of Israel in 1993, Jewish leaders viewed the diplomatic position of the Catholic Church through the lens of the prior ecclesiastical anti-Semitism. In fact, the Vatican throughout has reacted to, rather than guided, events in the Middle East. It delayed recognizing Israel mainly out of concern for the safety of ­Christians in Arab countries, and it changed its ­position only once the Oslo Process got underway, in order to secure a place at the table.

The historical record does not reveal a consistent theological stance toward the projected or actual ­Jewish state on the part of the Church. Many things influenced the Church’s view of the State of Israel, among which theology appears to have been the least important. Though in 1917 Benedict XV seemed sympathetic, he later turned sharply against Zionism. According to Sergio Minerbi’s account in The Vatican and Zionism, practical rather than religious concerns reversed the pope’s original sympathy.

One of these concerns was the disposition of the holy places. Christians had ruled Jerusalem for the three centuries between the conversion of Constantine and the Muslim conquest in 638, and for another century after the First Crusade took the city in 1099. The Zionists saw the Christian holy places as buildings rather than as territory. Under other circumstances, this matter might have been negotiated, but the 1919 British Mandate in Palestine put the Vatican on the defensive. The Church feared that the British authorities would favor Protestant organizations in Palestine over the established Catholic community. Moreover, the Vatican’s pastoral relation to Christian Arabs appeared at risk.

After 1948, the safety of Christian Arab minorities in the Middle East dominated the concern of the Holy See. The danger was not imagined: In 1965, during the Second Vatican Council, threats of reprisals against Middle Eastern Christians greeted the first drafts of Nostra Aetate, the Vatican II document that expressed the Church’s modern view of the Jews. With the ­delicate position of Arab Christians in mind, Augustin Cardinal Bea, charged with drafting the document, was at pains to separate Jewish religion from the State of Israel. As he told the council:

Since we are here treating a purely religious question, there is obviously no danger that the Council will get entangled in those difficult questions regarding the relations between the Arab nations and the State of Israel, or regarding so-called Zionism. . . . As regards the Jewish people, it must again and again be made clear that the question is in no sense political, but is purely religious. We are not talking about Zionism, or the political State of Israel, but about the followers of the Mosaic ­religion, wherever in the world they may dwell.

The issues that preoccupied Vatican diplomacy before 1993 have become moot. The Christian communities of the Middle East have almost disappeared in the face of growing hostility from the Muslim majority. Although the Latin Patriarchate in Jerusalem continues to voice Arab hostility toward the State of Israel, the winnowing of its flock has reduced its importance. A small but active presence of Hebrew-speaking Catholics in the State of Israel is growing in relative importance. The Vatican is building a Catholic community in Israel both to accommodate the growing number of Christian citizens of Israel as well as to strengthen the Christian presence in the Holy Land. Under the 1993 and subsequent agreements with the Vatican, Israel has given Catholic institutions in Israel full legal status. The Israeli conquest of East Jerusalem in 1967, meanwhile, has made Israeli protection of the territory surrounding the holy places of Jerusalem the only practical solution. Officially, the Catholic Church might prefer Jerusalem to be an international city, but in practice Israel offers the best guarantee of Christian interests.

The State of Israel no longer has to go to modern Rome to repair what ancient Rome destroyed, as ­Benedict XV suggested in 1917. Nonetheless, the living Rome and the restored Jerusalem remain what Franz Rosenzweig called “laborers at the same task.” The ­survival of fifteen million Jews in a dangerous world depends in good measure on the sympathy of two ­billion Christians.

Read the rest of this entry »

Charities and Transparency

Dr. Asher Meir discusses the ethics of charities' expenses (link). He states that people expect charities to have expenses but need to be informed when those expenses are out of the ordinary:

Where do we draw the line? Based on statistics I have seen, reputable organizations typically spend about 20% on fundraising, though a significant minority spend as much as 50%. It's hard to draw a hard and fast line, but in my opinion if fund raising takes up more than 30% of the budget donors should be informed.

Click here to read moreI can't think of any cogent objection to this rule. If the organization claims that there is no need to disclose because, say, 40% is a perfectly reasonable amount, then by the very same token they have nothing to fear by disclosing this. If by contrast they say it is not fair to make them disclose this because it will deter donors, then they are basically admitting that donors don't know where their money is going and are effectively being misled, actively or passively, as to the true use of their donations.

If your fundraising costs are unusually high for a good reason, then by all means explain the reason to donors. If donors are poorly informed about the costs, then educate them; for instance, you could show them that many reputable organizations have high fund-raising costs. The professional you hire can tell the donors very frankly: I'm getting 50% of funds collected, because I'm making initial contact with donors, or because my expenses are very high, etc.

See also this post.

Read the rest of this entry »

Lag Ba'omer

By: Rabbi Ari Enkin

There are a number of well-known and beloved customs relating to the celebrations of Lag Ba'omer.[1] Leading these is the celebration which is intended to mark the cessation of the plague which had killed 24,000 of Rabbi Akiva's students.[2] Additionally, the extensive festivities of Lag Ba'omer, complete with music and dancing, celebrates the Yartzeit of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai.[3] Among his many accomplishments, it is widely believed that Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai authored the Zohar, the primary work on kabbala.[4] Bonfires are also widespread on Lag Ba'omer representing a number of things, including the "fire" of Torah.

There are those who have suggested that the Lag Ba'omer celebrations are intended to be reserved primarily for the Land of Israel.[5] Nevertheless, they are common in the Diaspora as well. There were many Chassidic masters who would hold special gatherings in honor of Lag Ba'omer, complete with singing and dancing, as well as words of Torah in honor of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai. While one would think that a day of fasting and introspection would be in order for the Yartzeit of a Tzaddik, as is the case regarding the Yartzeit of Moshe Rabbeinu,[6] Lag Ba'omer is different because Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai himself requested that the day of his death be celebrated.[7]

Click here to read moreThose in Israel who are able to ascend to the Tomb of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai, located in Meron, are encouraged to do so. Once there, one should hold a meal in honor of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai and celebrate his life.[8] Rabbi Ovadia Bartenura writes: "“On the eighteenth day of Iyar, the day of the Yartzeit of R’ Shimon Bar Yochai (the Rashbi), people from surrounding areas gather and light huge bonfires aside from lighting candles. Many barren women have been helped and sick have been healed when they made a promise and donation for this holy site.”[9] Those who are unable to travel to Meron should at least study the teachings of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai throughout the day of Lag Ba'omer.[10]

Similarly, it is considered especially auspicious to visit the tombs of any Tzaddikim on Lag Ba'omer.[11] Lag Ba'omer is also the Yartzeit of the Rema and many visit his grave in Cracow on that day.[12] The three days prior as well as the three days following a Yartzeit are considered to be a component of the Yartzeit. As such, one who is unable to reach a grave on the actual Yartzeit of the deceased should at least attempt to do so during these days.[13]

It is interesting to note that there have been authorities in the past who have attempted to have the Lag Ba'omer celebrations eliminated entirely.[14] This is primarily due to what was once a widespread practice of burning items of value in the Lag Ba'omer bonfires. Such a practice is actually a Biblical prohibition known as "Bal Tashchit", needlessly destroying items of value.[15] Other authorities were disturbed at the idea of inventing "new" holidays and observances.[16]

Although some authorities have opposed Lag Ba'omer in the past, the observance of Lag Ba'omer has it's supporters as well.[17] Many consider creating a holiday out of Lag Ba'omer appropriate because Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai was miraculously saved from the Roman government, who pronounced death upon him for his spreading of Torah.[18] Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai (and his son) had fled to a cave in the city of Peki’in[19] and hid there for thirteen years, surviving on the fruit of a carob tree and a spring that miraculously appeared.[20] Hence, Lag Ba'omer can be seen as a celebration of escaping death.

A rather intriguing though highly questionable custom of Lag Ba'omer is that of the "Chai Rottel" segula. Chai Rottel is a liquid measurement of about 54 liters, referring to the amount of beverages, including wine and spirits, one should provide for the enjoyment of visitors to Meron on Lag Ba'omer. It is believed that one who donates the Chai Rottel will be blessed with all forms of miraculous salvations.[21]

There is also a custom on Lag Ba'omer for children to pay with bows and arrows. This is alluded to in the verse: "And the sons of Ulam were mighty men of valor, shooters of bows (archers), and had many sons, and sons' sons."[22] One of the explanations for this custom is to recall that during the lifetime of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai a rainbow was not seen in the sky. This is because the rainbow, which represents God's protection over the world, was superfluous, as the merit of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai served this purpose instead.[23]

Another reason offered for the bows and arrows custom is to recall the Roman decree forbidding any Torah study. As such, Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and his students would head to the forests equipped with their bows and arrows in order to study Torah there. When they would be found and questioned by the Roman policeman they would claim that they were hunting and not studying. Similarly, the military nature of bows and arrows are intended to recall the revolt against the Romans in 135 C.E. The revolt was led by Rabbi Akiva who was the primary teacher of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai.

********************************

[1] Kaf Hachaim 493:27
[2] Aruch Hashulchan 493:5
[3] Minchat Elazar 4:64, cited in Nitei Gavriel Minhagei Lag Ba'omer. There are eminent authorites such as the Chida, the Ben Ish Chai and Rabbi Chaim Vital who are of the opinion that Lag Ba'omer is not the Yartzeit of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai. They argue that this claim is based on scribal errors. See http://www.shofar.net/site/ARDetile.asp?id=8159 for more
[4] The authorship of the Zohar is the subject of much controversy. Some scholars attribute the Zohar entirely to Rashbi; others argue that it was Rabbi Moses de Leon who wrote it. Yet others suggest that it was started by Rashbi or contains thoughts and teachings of Rashbi, but was compiled and completed by de Leon.
[5] Minchat Elazar 4:64
[6] Sho’el U’meishiv #39
[7] Kaf Hachaim 493:27
[8] Kaf Hachaim 493:26
[9] Hilula D'rashbi p.89
[10] It is especially good to learn the story of Rashbi starting on Shabbat daf 33b (That is daf "lag"), or other Gemaras with Rashbi.
[11] Nitei Gavriel Minhagei Lag Ba'omer
[12] Nitei Gavriel Minhagei Lag Ba'omer
[13] Nitei Gavriel Minhagei Lag Ba'omer
[14] For an extensive discussion on this issue, see S'dei Chemed;Eretz Yisrael
[15] Bava Kama 91b, Shabbat 140b
[16] Chatam Sofer Y.D. 233
[17] See footnote #14
[18] Compare the nineteenth of Kislev being celebrated in memory of Rabbi Shneur Zalman.
[19] There is a minority opinion that the cave in which Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai hid when fleeing the Romans was located in Lod. Zohar Chadash;Ki Tavo
[20] Shabbat 33.
[21] This idea apparently originates with Rabbi Ben Zion Halberstam of Bobov who writes in 1912: " I heard from the holy sages of Eretz Yisrael that they have a kabbalah that barren women, G-d-forbid, should donate Chai Rotel on the yahrzeit of R’ Shimon bar Yochai.". See also the sefer "Tel Yerushalayim" where Rabbi Yehudah Leib Hornstein writes about two childless couples who were finally blessed with a child after they supplied "chai rotel" in Miron on Lag Ba'omer.
[22] Chronicles I 8:40
[23] Bnei Yissachar Iyar IV

Read the rest of this entry »

Shemitah: Food Without Effort

There is an unusual question asked in last week's Torah reading (Lev. 25:18-21):

ועשיתם את חקתי ואת משפטי תשמרו ועשיתם אתם וישבתם על הארץ לבטח. ונתנה הארץ פריה ואכלתם לשבע וישבתם לבטח עליה. וכי תאמרו מה נאכל בשנה השביעת הן לא נזרע ולא נאסף את תבואתנו. וצויתי את ברכתי לכם בשנה הששית ועשת את התבואה לשלש השנים.

So you shall observe My statutes and keep My judgments, and perform them; and you will dwell in the land in safety. Then the land will yield its fruit, and you will eat your fill, and dwell there in safety. And if you say, "What shall we eat in the seventh year, since we shall not sow nor gather in our produce?" Then I will command My blessing on you in the sixth year, and it will bring forth produce enough for three years.

After being promised that if we follow God's laws then we will have plenty of food, the Torah says that if we ask what will happen if we observe the shemitah (Sabbatical of the land) God will bless the land. Why would we ask that question? The Torah just told us that if we follow the commandments we will have plenty of food! Why the need for the further question and further blessing? It is redundant.

Click here to read moreR. Shlomo Wolbe, in vol. 2 of Alei Shiur, quotes R. Yisrael Salanter as saying that there is a debate between the Ramban and R. Bachya Ibn Pakuda (in his Chovos Ha-Levavos) regarding the need for effort (hishtadlus) in order to receive God's blessings. According to the Ramban one need only have faith in God while according to R. Bachya one needs to put in effort. R. Wolbe disagrees with R. Salanter's restatement of the Ramban's position and concludes, after a thorough analysis of the Ramban's writings on the subject, that the Ramban only says that one need not put in effort when one has a specific promise from God. Otherwise, even the Ramban would require you to extend effort in order to reap rewards.

According to the Ramban, those farmers who observe shemitah have a specific promise from God that they will have plenty of food. That could explain why there is the need for another promise. However, it does not explain why there is any additional need for people to ask how they will receive food.

According to R. Bachya, however, one can explain both the question and the answer. Receiving food as a reward for observing shemitah is unique in that shemitah is the only mitzvah that prevents people from doing hishtadlus in order to earn a living. Regarding all other commandments, a farmer who is to be rewarded for his fulfillment of them must still put in his effort to receive his reward. However, shemitah prevents a farmer from putting in effort. If that's the case, and he cannot do his hishtadlus, he might very well ask how he will eat in that year. There is no human action on which God's blessing can rest. That is why God has to give a special blessing that, in reward for observing shemitah, we will have plenty of food despite the lack of hishtadlus.

Read the rest of this entry »

Announcements #038: Computer Torah Research

The Rabbi Israel D. Rosenberg Educational Institute Of Congregation Etz Chaim of Kew Gardens Hills is proud to present

Computer Torah Research

A program for those already familiar with the rudiments of using Torah Databases who would like to take their skills to a higher level

Featuring:

• Professor Aviezri Fraenkel, Creator of the Bar Ilan Responsa Program, Awardee of the Israel Prize, 2007
• Chaim Rosenberg, Author of Hebrewbooks.org, Home of 15,000 free seforim

Tuesday, May 20 8:00-10:15pm
(with a break for Ma'riv and refreshments at 9:00pm)

The First 100 attendees will receive a free CD containing 500 seforim on Masechet Berakhot courtesy of Hebrewbooks.org

147-19 73rd Avenue $5.00 suggested donation
Info




(Announce your simchah or Torah lectures by clicking on the button in the top right corner of Hirhurim. See here for readership statistics and here for instructions on buying an announcement.)

Read the rest of this entry »

Soft News Musings IV

Slave Labor

Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (the most influential Jew in England) has a fantastic article on the ethics of slavery in Judaism in which he distinguishes between philosophy, which he claims deals with absolutes of right and wrong, and Judaism, which he says allows for a process of societal transformation (link).

Interesting Read About Interesting Reader

Zev Eleff interviewed non-Jewish blogger and avid online consumer of Modern Orthodox Torah--including this blog--Jeff Wild (Commentator). Congratulations on your newfound fame.

Click here to read moreMore on Rav Soloveitchik

Ethan Isenberg, the director of the documentary on Rav Soloveitchik, writes an extremely comprehensive book review of Mentor of Generations (Commentator). I found this review particularly insightful. Who would have thought that there is something interesting that has not already been written on this subject?

Undead Scroll

The Isaiah Scroll (from the Dead Sea Scrolls) is going on display for a few months for the first time in 40 years (AP).

All The News That's Fit To Not Print

A Jewish newspaper is accused of bowing to pressure from its local Federation (Forward). It's stories like these that make young people avoid Jewish communal organizations like the plague.

New Low?

I don't know if this is a new low for The Forward but in my limited reading experience I've never seen it mock religious practice so openly as it does the policy of Hamodia not to publish pictures of women (Forward). I also think that policy is a little extreme -- just make sure the women are dressed modestly! -- but I don't think mocking religious practices is the stuff of good journalism or a particularly valuable contribution to communal dialogue. I call shame on the Forward.

Read the rest of this entry »

Why Be Jewish? II

In the comments to this post, I indicated that I would be posting this week on why I think people become Orthodox. I have written the post but I've decided that instead of posting my barely informed opinions I will instead ask that question to a number of Reform, Conservative and Orthodox rabbis -- mainly pulpit rabbis who see the phenomenon up close but also one or two others who, I think, have interesting perspectives to offer. So far, two have confirmed (one Conservative and one Orthodox, both prominent) that they will write guest posts and others have indicated that they are considering it. Expect that series of guest posts to begin the week after Shavu'os.

Read the rest of this entry »

Latest Conversion Controversy III

Yediot Acharanot reports that Tzohar is publishing a statement in support of R. Haim Druckman signed by 80 leading Religious Zionist rabbis, including R. Aharon Lichtenstein, R. Yuval Cherlow, R. Yisrael Rosen, R. She'ar Yashuv Cohen, R. Zalman Melamed and many more (link - Hebrew). The article also reports on speeches at a recent Tozhar meeting and the strong statements made.

R. Lichtenstein reportedly said:
Click here to read more

How much hatred, animosity and demonization comes through in this awful and terrible ruling... The Conversion Authority has God-fearing and scholarly judges who have devoted their energy and their lives to the Torah. One cannot simply push them aside and throw them into the street. On this point we must be firm: We must not come to terms with this kind of approach... Where did we ever hear or see that someone who relies on a minority opinion against the commonly held one is considered a willing heretic? Woe to the ears that hear such a thing and woe to the biased court that has expressed itself in such a way!

(translation based on a comment on R. Daniel Eidensohn's blog, which is closely following this situation: link the translation has been redone)

If any reader has the time to translate the entire article into English and posts it as a comment, I will put the text into this post.

[On a parenthetical note, let me point out that EJF has publicly supported the ruling (link). No surprise, since EJF is run by one of the leading antagonists of R. Natan Slifkin (not the antagonist recently arrested but a different one). My impression is that the organization simply rejects Jews who don't follow their "Da'as Torah".]

Read the rest of this entry »

Parashah Roundup: Behar 5768

by Steve Brizel

Shemittah and Yovel

R. Yehuda Amital reminds us that Shemmitah is a model for how we should approach Torah study and observance-by keeping our minds on the details and underlying principles: link

R. Ephraim Buchwald and R. Berel Wein urge us to look at the spiritual benefits of the Shnas HaShemittah: link 1; link 2

R. Jonathan Sacks underscores the fact that Shemittah and Yovel should not be compared to any contemporary political or economic system: link

The Shem MiShmuel, as prepared by R. E. Kwass, emphasizes that Shemittah is a means of unifying Klal Yisrael: link

R. Yissocher Frand explores the common denominator between interest, Tzitzis and weight and measures: link

Click here to read moreSefiras HaOmer

R. Hershel Schachter explains why the Torah in Parshas Emor and Parshas Pinchas gives seemingly different definitions of the mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer: link (audio)

R. Yonasan Sacks explores why we do not say Shehecheyanu until we have completed the Sefiras HaOmer in its entirety: link

R. Joshua Flug reviews the halachic issues involved in Sefiras HaOmer, regardless of whether the mitzvah is viewed as a Torah or Rabbinic obligation: link

R. Daniel Z. Feldman discusses many halachic issues that arise from Sefiras HaOmer: Part I (audio) & Par II (audio)

R. Zvi Soboloflsy, based upon a Machlokes Rishonim, discusses the halachic consequences of missing a consecutive day in the Sefiras HaOmer: link (audio)

R. Shmuel Maybruch investigates the halachic issues involved with listening to music during Sefiras HaOmer: link (audio)

Sefiras Haomer and Shavuos

R. Avigdor Nevenzal suggests that we use the Sefiras HaOmer as a means of improving our interpersonal relationships link

R. Shlomo Riskin explores why we count Sefirah between Pesach and Shavuos and why the Baal HaHaggadah omitted the last verses of Mikrah Bikurim: link

R. Michael Rosenweig and R Shalom Rosner shows us how Sefiras HaOmer can serve as a path to Taharah: link 1, link 2 (audio)

Read the rest of this entry »

New Periodical: The Jewish Bible Quarterly 36:2 April-June 2008

There is a new issue of The Jewish Bible Quarterly:

• Were the Prophets Opposed to Sacrifice? by Jacob Chinitz -- a review of (later) prophetic attitudes to sacrifices
• When Does the Day Begin? by Yosef Green -- a review of the literature regarding whether the day follows the night or the night follows the day, with a particular emphasis on twentieth century academic scholars
• Eldad and Medad by Fred Blumenthal -- a theory as to why Eldad and Medad were excluded, based on Maimonidean thought
• Zedekiah: The Last King of Judah by Shimon Bakon -- weaves together the different and complementary accounts of the years prior to the destruction of the First Temple
• The Duality of Man: A Study in Talmudic Allegorical Interpretations by Pinchas Kahn -- interpretations from R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik about Adam being created with two faces ("du partzufim")
• Fraternal Strife in the Bible by Aiton Birnbaum -- a list of examples of intra-Jewish wars in the Bible
• Korah and his Fall: Observations on Holiness by Joel Litke -- why Korah was wrong that "the entire congregation is holy"
• Shalem: City or Safely? by Herbert Cohn -- different interpretations of Gen. 33:18
• Reflections of Readers -- short insights

Read the rest of this entry »

New Issue of The Commentator

Presenting the final issue of The Commentator for the year. Congratulations to the editors and writers for some really great work. Let me just point out that some past issues of Kol HaMevaser are available in PDF format here. Here are just some highlights from this issue:

• Rabbi Shmidman To Step Down as Dean
• Srolovitz Anticipates Reduction of General Requirements
• Reconstructing Student Government from the Bottom Up
• President Joel Addresses Israel, Budgets, Stern Dormitory Space
• CJF Hosts First Community Growth Initiative Conference
• Dear President Joel by Zev Eleff
• A Few Parting Shots by Immanuel Shalev
• Final Thoughts: A Culture of Accountability at YU by Ariel Schwartz
• Kol Hamevaser

Great interviews:

• A Man of Vision: Rabbi Charlop Reflects on His Career at Yeshiva
• An Interview with Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm
• An Interview With Rabbi Zevulun Charlop

Read the rest of this entry »

The Misunderstood Blessing On The Sun

This is the first in what will hopefully be a series of posts on this subject over the next year.


On Erev Pesach next year (April 8, 2009), we will have the opportunity to perform a very unique mitzvah. Looking back on the last time I was personally able to do this mitzvah, it is very moving and inspiring. I am speaking of the blessing on the sun, birkas ha-chamah. This is a blessing that is recited only once every 28 years, for reasons we will explore shortly. The common understanding of this uncommon blessing is that it marks the return of the sun to its place at the time of Creation and we take this opportunity to praise God for creating and sustaining the universe. This is, to me, a very powerful message and its infrequent occurrence emphasizes it. However, as we go through some of the details underlying this mitzvah, we will find that things are more complicated and the message is less obvious.

Click here to read moreI. The Source

The Gemara (Berakhos 59b) quotes a baraisa that states:

תנו רבנן הרואה חמה בתקופת... אומר ברוך עושה בראשית ואימת הוי אמר אביי כל כ"ח שנין והדר מחזור ונפלה תקופת ניסן בשבתאי באורתא דתלת נגהי ארבע

Our Rabbis taught: He who sees the sun at its turning point... should say: Blessed is He who performs the act of Creation. And when does this happen? Abayei said: Every twenty-eight years when the cycle begins again and the Nissan equinox falls in Saturn on the evening of Tuesday, going into Wednesday.

This passage requires a little explanation. Often, when someone starts talking about the Jewish calendar everyone within earshot automatically tunes out. Let me try to simplify this issue so even those with short attention spans can understand it.

The solar year is approximately 365 1/4 days. Let's say that the sun was created first thing on a Wednesday night. Every subsequent year, the sun would return to its same position on a different day of the week and at a different time because 365 1/4 is not a number that is divisible by the 7 days of the week. Since we are dealing with quarters of a day, it would take 4 years for the sun to return to its position at the same time of the day. But the day would also have to cycle through all 7 days of the week until it returns to Wednesday. Therefore, in order for the sun to return to its position at the same time and day of the week as in Creation, it would take 4 x 7 = 28 years until all the times and days are cycled through and it returns back to Wednesday morning.

That is why, according to Rashi and others, we recite birkas ha-chamah once every 28 years. It is a blessing to mark the occasion of the return of the sun to its original position. This is what I was taught when I was 8 years old in 1981, and my entire school gathered together outside to recite this blessing in a very memorable ceremony.

However, there are problems with this explanation that complicate this already complex matter.

II. The Time Of Creation

The implication of the above explanation of the blessing is that Creation occurred in the month of Nissan. However, this is the subject of a Tannaitic dispute (Rosh Hashanah 10b-11a). According to R. Eliezer, the world was created in Tishrei. According to R. Yehoshua, the world was created in Nissan. The conclusion (12a) is that we count years from Tishrei, like R. Eliezer, and we count tekufos (seasons) from Nissan, like R. Yehoshua. Rashi (12a sv. chakhmei) and Tosafos (12a sv. la-mabul) explain that we hold like R. Yehoshua, that the world was created in Nissan, but we count years from Tishrei because there are multiple times of the year that we call Rosh Hashanah for various purposes (cf. Rosh Hashanah 2a) and Tishrei is the beginning of the year for the counting of the sabbatical and jubilee.

The Gemara (Rosh Hashanah 27a) points out that the Rosh Hashanah prayer that calls the day the "beginning of Your acts" implies that the world was created in Tishrei, like R. Eliezer. Tosafos (sv. ke-man) quote Rabbenu Tam who says that the Gemara eventually rejects this position and explains that the prayer means that Rosh Hashanah is the beginning of God's annual judgment, which culminates on Yom Kippur. After pointing out that there is a prayer by R. Eliezer Ha-Kalir for Shemini Atzeres that implies that the world was created in Tishrei and a different prayer by the same author for Pesach that implies that the world was created in Nissan, Rabbenu Tam suggests that in Tishrei God thought about creating the world and in Nissan He brought His plan to fruition.

However, the Ramban in his commentary to the Torah (Gen. 8:5) writes:

ודע כי אחרי שהסכימו שבתשרי נברא העולם כאשר תקנו זה היום תחילת מעשיך זכרון ליום ראשון

And know, that [the Sages] agreed that the world was created in Tishrei, which is why they instituted the prayer "This is the day of the beginning of Your acts, a remembrance of the first day".

Similarly, the Ritva (Rosh Hashanah 27a sv. ke-man) disagrees with Rabbenu Tam and explains that the Gemara concludes like R. Eliezer, that the world was created in Tishrei.

The Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Shemitah 10:2), as understood by the Kessef Mishneh, seems to imply that the world was created in Tishrei (see also the unnamed commentary by R. Ovadiah ben Yosef to Hilkhos Kiddush Ha-Chodesh 9:3). The Ran (Commentary to Rosh Hashanah 16a sv. br"h) writes that the world was created on the 25th of Elul and Adam was created on the first day of Tishrei. This, the Ran suggests, is the basis of the custom in Barcelona (and Ashkenazic communities) to say selichos on the few days prior to Rosh Hashanah. That is when God was creating the universe. However, the Ran concludes that the world was really created in Nissan, which he suggests is the basis of the different custom in Gerona for selichos.

R. Yerucham Fishel Perlow (Sefer Ha-Mitzvos Le-Rasag, aseh 56, p. 237d) points out that the Rif and the Rosh, in their restatements of the Gemara (12a), omit the debate between R. Eliezer and R. Yehoshua. He believes that this implies that they follow R. Yehoshua, that the world was created in Nissan.

What we see is that the Tannaitic debate over when Creation took place continued among medieval commentators. However, doesn't the blessing over the sun conclusively indicate that the world was created in Nissan? Perhaps R. Yehoshua disagreed with the blessing or when it should take place, but how could the Ramban and others ignore the Gemara that describes this blessing? According to them, when we recite birkas ha-chamah we are months away from the time of the year during which Creation took place.

III. Calculating The Year

As described above, one way of calculating the length of a year is to assume that it is 365 1/4 days long (365 days, 6 hours). This is a fairly accurate approximation and is one that I frequently use in spreadsheets. In Talmudic times, it was championed by the Amora Shmuel and is therefore called Tekufas Shmuel.

R. Adda bar Ahavah advocated a more precise approximation of the length of the year: 365 days 5 hours 55 minutes and 25.44 seconds (365.2468 days). This is called Tekufas Rav Adda.

Ibn Ezra, in his Sefer Ha-Ibbur (link - PDF), claims that there was no disagreement between Shmuel and R. Adda. Rather, Shmuel gave a simple calculation of the year that is useful to the general population while R. Adda gave a more complex calculation that is only appropriate for scholars. However, the Rambam describes the two approaches to calculating the length of the year in Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Kiddush Ha-Chodesh, chapters 9 and 10. He writes ( 9:1):

שנת החמה יש מחכמי ישראל שהוא אומר שהיא שלוש מאות חמישה ושישים יום ורביע יום שהוא שש שעות ויש מהן שהוא אומר שהיא פחות מרביע היום. וכן חכמי יוון ופרס יש ביניהן מחלוקת בדבר זה.

The solar year -- some Jewish scholars say that it is 365 days and a quarter, which is six hours, and some say that it is [365 days plus] less than a quarter of a day. There is a similar debate among Greek and Persian scholars on this matter.

It seems to me that the way the Rambam describes it, there are two conflicting views and not just a simplification and a more precise calculation.

[Contemporary scientists set the length of the year -- the vernal equinox year -- at approximately 365 8/33 days (365.2424), although the length of the year fluctuates due to a number of largely but not completely offsetting phenomena.

R. Menachem Gerlitz (Birkas Ha-Chamah Ke-Hilkhasah p. 137) quotes the following suggestion from his father: The solar year at the time of Creation was exactly 365 1/4 days long but has been steadily decreasing at (if I recall correctly) the rate of 4.4 millionths of a second per year. However, based on my limited understanding of the astronomy involved this seems to be incorrect.]

If we accept Tekufas Shmuel as our guide to practice, then we can easily establish a 28-year calendar cycle. It is not hard to see the place for birkas ha-chamah in such a paradigm. If we use Tekufas Rav Adda, then the calendar has to be more complex to account for the fractions but a 19-year calendar cycle can be constructed.

For the past over millennium and a half, Jews have been using a 19-year calendar based on Tekufas Rav Adda. That is why your Hebrew and secular birthdays coincide every 19 years (assuming a secular leap year does not interfere). However, we still calculate the time for birkas ha-chamah based on the 28-year cycles of Tekufas Shmuel. This disconnect means that next Erev Pesach we will recite the blessing on a day that is two weeks after the proper day according to our calendar. R. Yehuda (Leo) Levi (Facing Current Challenges, ch. 46 n. 6) points out that after taking into account other astronomical phenomena, we are reciting the blessing 18 days too late. In fact, in the year 1841, the blessing on the sun was recited on the second day of Pesach even though halakhically Pesach must fall in the spring season, after the new cycle begins (R. Shlomo Kluger [Chokhmas Shlomo to Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chaim 229] reports that in his town, Brody, it was cloudy on that day in 1841 and they were only able to see the sun at 11am). This happened because according to the calculations of R. Adda spring had begun but according to the calculations of Shmuel spring only began on the second day of Pesach, when the blessing was recited.

IV. Resolutions

What all this tells us is that the connection between the blessing and the sun being in the same place it was at the time of Creation is tenuous. Actually, there are other explanations of this blessing.

The Arukh (sv. chamah) evidently has a different version of the Talmud from the text quoted above and has no mention of the blessing being recited every 28 years. Instead, the Arukh suggests that the blessing is meant to be recited after any period of at least three days during which the sun is not visible due to cloudiness. By reciting the blessing we are thanking God for the benefits of the sun that we have missed while it was hidden. This is also the position of Rabbenu Chananel (Otzar Ha-Ge'onim, Berakhos p. 65, cited in Yechaveh Da'as 4:18:1).

R. Yosef Kafach, in his edition of Mishneh Torah (Hilkhos Berakhos ch. 10 n. 35), suggests that according to R. Saadia Gaon, the blessing is supposed to be recited every year just like a blessing is recited over the new moon every month (cf. Rabbenu Bachya's commentary to Gen. 1:14; Encyclopedia Talmudis sv. birkas ha-chamah, vol. 4 col. 454 n. 14a). Both blessings are about the continuation of the natural cycles and the complex beauty of the universe.

However, neither of these approaches have been accepted as the normative practice, which leaves us with the two problems described above.

On the one hand, these problems are sufficiently significant that R. Akiva Eiger (Glosses to Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chaim 229:2) makes it seem that this is the reason for the Maharal's practice to recite the blessing without God's name. On the flip side, R. Tzvi Pesach Frank (Responsa Har Tzvi, Orach Chaim 1:119) writes that since there is a doubt whether we follow Shmuel or R. Adda, and since this blessing is one of praise and we recite blessings of praise even in cases of doubt, that is why we recite this blessing. However, I am not sure where he found a doubt in this matter. It seems that we unquestionably follow R. Adda.

The Chasam Sofer (Responsa, Orach Chaim 56) acknowledged this difficulty and leaves it unresolved. He quotes the Sheyarei Knesses Ha-Gedolah (229:2) who says that in previous generations this blessing was never recited. However, the Chasam Sofer writes that since the custom in his region is to recite the blessing every 28 years, then we must follow this custom and continue the practice.

Later authorities have generally adopted this approach of the Chasam Sofer, with the Minchas Yitzchak (8:34) going so far as to say that the blessing is not dependent on reality:

ועכ"ח דהברכה לא הוי משום המציאות אלא כך תקנו חכמים

We are forced to say that this blessing is not [a direct result] of the real phenomenon but because this is the way the Sages established it.

This blessing, like almost all, is a rabbinic enactment. If the Sages established that it should be recited every 28 years, then that is the nature of the mitzvah and what we have to do. Why don't we simply change the timing of the blessing and recite it every 19 years? The most basic reason is that it is not in our power to change an enactment.

Secondly, R. Yechiel Mikhel Tukaczinsky (Tekufas Ha-Chamah U-Virkasah, 1981 edition, p. 25) writes that the 19 year cycle is a mathematical convention and doesn't represent the completion of any real cycle. No heavenly body completes its orbit in 19 years. It is merely an effective cycle for avoiding rounding errors in R. Adda's calendar system. That is why reciting a blessing at that time is inappropriate.

The Birkei Yosef (Orach Chaim 229:1) writes that while according to the Rambam the world was created in Tishrei, we still recite the blessing in Nissan because it is the first day of the cycle of counting the seasons. In other words, there is evocative meaning in reciting the blessing in Nissan even though the sun is not in the same place as it was at Creation.

What we have seen is that according to certain assumptions, the time once every 28 years that we recite the blessing over the sun is meaningful. Even though those assumptions are not universal and do not apply to our situations, they inform the meaning we are intended to find in this ceremony. Yes, this is a somewhat artificial occasion. There is much less wonder than if we would actually be witnessing the sun returning to its position at Creation. Nevertheless, the blessing itself is supposed to "encourage us to look beyond the mechanical laws of nature, and to be inspired by the wonder inherent in them" (R. Yehudah Levi, p. 322).

[There are those who criticize the approach of R. Natan Slifkin to Creation because it renders the birkas ha-chamah meaningless. I think the preceding establishes that this is not the case. According to all contemporary authorities, we do not recite the blessing when/because the sun returns to the position it was in at the time of Creation.]

Read the rest of this entry »