Hirhurim - Musings

This Blog Has Moved

2010-07-08T09:18:00.000-04:00

After a great get-together last night, we are ready to move the blog to a new format that has more functionality and is more esthetically pleasing. Please change your browser bookmarks to this website: www.TorahMusings.com. All new posts will be there only. All old posts will remain here and there.

Note that, in the past, there have been complaints about changes. That is why I gathered a focus group to test out the new blog. I received a lot of good feedback and made changes to the format based on it. However, the response was overwhelmingly favorable. If you have suggestions, please leave them in the comments to the Welcome post on the new blog.

Comments

Comments on old posts will stay here. The Disqus comments will slowly be copied to the new blog while the Haloscan/JS-Kit comments will remain here. That way everyone will be able to access all old comments. Just please give me some time to migrate all the comments. I will begin with the most recent posts so the conversation can continue on the new blog.

Weekly Links

2010-07-08T08:48:00.001-04:00

Rules: link

Thursday

Drug bust at Israel airport, Hasidic Jews arrested (time for another Tehillim gathering?): link

The cost of being Jewish: link

Rabbinic group’s resolution expands women’s role: link

Rabbis: 'Don't rent to foreign workers': link

Times Square rabbi seeks America's runaway kids: link

Union for Traditional Judaism in financial trouble: link

SALT Thursday: link

Wednesday

Halachically Speaking on worm-infested fish (an essay of mine is quoted in footnotes 46 and 52): link (PDF)
Jewish (including Orthodox) LGBT leaders meet: link
Disaffected synagogue leaders push for change in Young Israel: link
'America Is Better Served By A Religiously Vibrant Christianity' An Interview with Rabbi Daniel Lapin: link
Satmar protests in front of White House over Israeli digging of graves: link
New Young Israel advocacy: link
Orthodox Rabbinical Group Outlines Women’s Roles as “Clergy” and More: link
R. Jeffrey Saks' review in Tradition of biography of R. Ovadiah Yosef: link (PDF)
Jewish organizations protest UC president's handling of reports of anti-Semitism: link
A hard hitting examination of Jews and baseball: link
Tradition and Its Discontents (new book by Shaul Stampfer): link
SALT Wednesday: link

Tuesday

The Mossad: link
R. Malkiel Kotler denounces Hamodia eulogy of Dr. Bernard Lander (beginning of eulogy here: link): link
Agreement reached in Chinuch Atzmai leadership battle: link
More secular Israelis take up Torah, Jewish studies: link
SALT Tuesday: link

Monday

Passion Play called more balanced: link
Red, White and Kosher: link
New conversion institute aims to spark halachic debate: link
R. Shlomo Aviner on Facebook's problems: link
The Atheist vs. the Rabbi: link
SALT Monday: link

Parashah Roundup: Matos-Masei 5770

2010-07-07T21:32:00.005-04:00

by Steve Brizel

The Book of Memories

R Berel Wein suggests why the Torah records the names of the stops and encampments of the Jewish People: link

R Shlomoh Riskin explains why the Torah uses Shevatim and Matos: link

The Nesivos Shalom, as explicated by R Yitzchak Adlestein, explains why Parshas Maasei is a mission statement for every Jew: link

R Avraham Gordimer explains why the Maasos are mentioned at the end of Sefer Bamidbar: link

The War Against the Midyanites

R Ephraim Buchwald explains why the Midyanites were eradicated: link

The Laws of Vows

R Yissocher Frand explains why Hilcos Nedarim were transmitted to the Roshei HaMatos: link

R Michael Rosensweig explains the role and significance of Nedarim: link 1, link 2

Tevilas Kelim

R Asher Weiss analyzes the Halachos of Tevilas Kelim: link (audio)

Maintaining Proper Priorities

R Herschel Schachter and R Avigdor Nevenzal reminds us that we should ensure that the proper Torah education of the next generation is an individual and communal priority that should never be dispensed with as a cost saving measure: link 1, link 2

R David Horwitz discusses the choice of the tribe of Reuven: link

Living in the Land of Israel

R Sir Jonathan Sacks explores the centrality of living in the Land of Israel in the thought of Ramban and R Yehudah HaLevi: link

R Dovid Miller discusses Kedushas HaMikdash and Kedushas Eretz Yisrael: link (audio)

Tribal Integrity and Family Integrity

R Yitztchak Etshalom explains why the dialogue between Mosheh and the chieftains of Menasheh regarding the land which will soon be inherited by the five daughters of Tz'lofchad occurs at the end of Parshas Maasei: link

Shoalim Udorshim Department

Rav Soloveitchik ZL explains the Halachos and Hashkafa or Tisha B”Av and Kinos: link 1 (audio)*, link 2

R Yona Reiss discusses Aveilus Yeshanah Aveilus Drabim: link (audio)

R Michael Rosensweig analyzes the unique nature of Tishah B”Av: link

R Yonasan Sacks examines the dual aspect of Taanis Tzibur and Aveilus that is characteristic of Tishah B’Av and the silver lining of the fires of Tishah B’Av: link 1, link 2

R Asher Brander, based on the teachings of the Bnei Yissoscher, explains why Tishah B’Av is birthday of the Moshiach: link

R David Brofsky explains the Halachos of the Nine Days and Tisha B’Av: link 1, link 2

R Baruch Simon discusses Galus and Torah She Baal Peh, how to prepare for Tishah B’Av and explains why our Geulah is in the merit of Torah She Baal Peh: link 1 (audio), link 2 (audio), link 3 (audio)

* For the interested listener, additional explanations of all of the Kinos can be found by various Roshei Yeshiva and Rabbonim on YuTorah.org.

Welcome to the Hirhurim Dinner

2010-07-07T19:15:00.000-04:00

This slide show is going on in the background right now.

Get-Together: Today

2010-07-07T08:26:00.001-04:00

Today is the day. Information here: link

Even if you have not RSVP'ed, you can just walk in.

Note that we are in the midst of a heat wave. There will be plenty of water but please dress business casual. There is no need for jackets or suits, although I will be wearing a tuxedo.

Please try to daven Mincha beforehand but if you cannot, the shul will have an 8:20 minyan.

Is Creativity Possible in the Information Age?

2010-07-06T21:25:00.001-04:00

We live in an age where more information is available with greater ease than ever before. This applies to Torah just as much as any other subject, perhaps even more. The ingathering of exiles that broke down (to some degree) communal barriers, the relatively low cost of publication thanks to printing technology, the electronic revolution that opens entire libraries through your computer, and the widespread wealth that allows people to take advantage of these technologies offer unprecedented amounts. But is all this information stifling?

Barriers to Creativity

Most people lack the training in both Torah and technology to excel in their use of this additional information. This has led to the growth of the genre of collection literature -- essays and books that collect opinions on various subjects. In itself, this requires highly developed skills of comprehension, summarization and explanation. While the genre can entail a certain amount of creativity in the presentation, it generally includes minimal original thinking. There is very little if any creative Torah in collection literature.

Even those who do not write such literature can find their creativity stifled. The sheer volume of available analyses on any subject is overwhelming. A thorough student will find multiple views on any subject and will have to carefully sort through the different variations of each view. This is usually a non-trivial intellectual effort that diverts attention from original thinking. It also points one's mind in a specific direction, biasing a thinker about the proper way to approach a subject.

Finally, there is a humility factor. A modest student, aware of his limitations, will hesitate before taking a different path than the many authorities of the past and present. If you truly venerate the different commentators, and someone has always said something on any subject, you will find it difficult to disagree and offer a conflicting suggestion.

The Value of Creativity

These are no small problems. Even when overcome on occasion, even when a student has a flash of insight and follows it, these issues can still remain as general impediments to creativity.

While some may accept this situation as a welcome development, it seems to me to be a limitation on our ability to properly learn. The blessing of "Ahavah Rabbah" prior to the morning Shema, which focuses on the study of Torah, contains a request that we be able to hear, to learn, to teach, to keep, to do and to fulfill. The simple understanding of "to keep" and "to do" is that it refers to observing negative and positive commandments. But then what is "to fulfill"?

The Netziv (Ha'amek Davar, Lev. 18:5 in Harcheiv Davar), however, has an original interpretation of these phrases. He sees them as continuations of the types of learning. "To keep" means to remember one's Torah learning and "to do" means to innovate new Torah interpretations. According to the Netziv, creative interpretation is integral to Torah study. It is part of what we ask for in the blessings of Shema.

Regaining Creativity

There are a few strategies to overcoming these barriers. One is to simply refrain from utilizing all of the available resources. This is how I was taught to learn: Choose a few classics to which you always refer and if you come across a big problem that you can't solve, then look beyond that small library.

Another is to overcome your humility and offer suggestions of new approaches. Caution is required here. Some (most?) original thinkers do not have to overcome their humility because they were not blessed with a large portion of it. This eventually becomes clear to readers, some sooner than others. When I realize that an original thinker is arrogant toward his predecessors, I usually just tune him out. I have no interest in what he has to say. The difference between being reluctantly original and arrogantly original is, I believe, eventually the difference between tradition and heresy.

Finally, we have to realize that not everyone was meant to be an original thinker. Such a status requires both extensive and broad training as well as unusual intellect. Those of us who are merely above average (isn't everyone?) but not exceptional should not be offering anything other than the occasional harmless original thought. Therefore, we have time to collect opinions while the geniuses create new sources for us to utilize.

Shabbat Mevarchim

2010-07-06T02:24:00.003-04:00

By: Rabbi Ari Enkin

There is an ancient custom to bless the upcoming Jewish month on the Shabbat which precedes Rosh Chodesh. These Shabbatot when the new month is blessed are referred to as “Shabbat Mevarchim”. A central feature of this prayer is the public announcement of the exact time the new moon, known as the “molad”, is set to appear.[1] The molad is the exact moment of the moon’s renewal. Recall that at the concluding moments of every lunar cycle the moon is positioned directly between the earth and the sun and is completely invisible. A few hours following this occurrence the moon is once again visible, albeit only the most minute portion of it. At such time the "molad" the "birth" is recognized as having taken place and a new Jewish month has begun.

The prayer for the new month is conducted in a somewhat distinguished manner. It is led by the Chazzan while holding the Torah. The prayer announces the name of the upcoming month along with the exact moment the new moon is set to appear. It also serves to alerts the congregation as to which day(s) of the coming week will be observed as Rosh Chodesh. Finally, it asks that God renew the upcoming month with all forms of blessing. It is often carried out in an elaborate and impressive manner.

It is actually quite important that the exact time of the molad be announced.[2] Doing so allows people to determine when the latest opportunity is for them to recite the Kiddush Levana. It also represents our efforts to familiarize ourselves with the workings of the calendar. Indeed, we are strongly encouraged to somehow participate in the calculating of celestial matters.[3] Yes, learning the basics of astrology is a mitzva! [4]

Announcing the molad also recalls the ancient practice of “Kiddush Hachodesh”. In Temple times the new month was declared by the Beit Din based on manual calculations along with the testimony of witnesses who would have claimed to have seen the moon’s renewal. It is rather essential to be standing when reciting this prayer as the ancient Kiddush Hachodesh was only acceptable if performed while standing.[5] Although it is technically to recite the "Mevarchim" prayer on any day of the week preceding Rosh Chodesh, universal custom is to recite it on Shabbat when more people are to be found in the synagogue.[6] Indeed, it is always commendable to make an effort to perform mitzvot in the presence of as many people as possible.[7]

There is one month, however, that is excluded from the cycle of Shabbat Mevarchim prayers and that is the month of Tishrei. Among the many explanations as to why this so, it is said that the month of Tishrei with all its holidays and their accompanying mitzvot is inherently blessed. It is as if God Himself is the one who blesses the month of Tishrei. The other months of the year which don't contain nearly as much mitzvot as Tishrei are therefore dependant upon the Jewish people to bless them.[8]

While in our day Tishrei is the only month for which Shabbat Mevarchim prayers are not recited, there was once a custom to omit them for the month of Av, as well.[9] While no longer practiced, the idea for omitting the prayer on behalf of the month of Av was related to that month’s eternal association with bad fortune and tragedy.[10] It is actually the opposite reasoning that has prevailed however – being that the month is so associated with tragedy, how much more so does it require our prayers![11]

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

[1] Mishna Berura 417:1
[2] Kaf Hachaim 417:1
[3] Shabbat 75a
[4] Rashi, Maharsha, Rambam ad loc.
[5] Magen Avraham 417:1, Kaf Hachaim 417:7, Igrot Moshe 1:142
[6] Likutei Maharich;Rosh Chodesh
[7] Rosh Hashanah 32b, Pesachim 64b, Menachot 64a
[8] Likutei Sichot;Nitzavim-Vayelech 5744
[9] Magen Avraham 417:1
[10] Machatzit Hashekel O.C. 417
[11] Ateret Zekeinim 549

Get-Together: This Wednesday

2010-07-05T15:35:00.000-04:00

This Wednesday July 7th is the Hirhurim get-together/dinner (link 1, link 2, link 3, link 4, link 5). All readers, commenters and friends of the blog are invited to this free event. Free mugs and trinkets will be available, while supplies last.

Please RSVP to the event using this online form: link.

When: July 7, 2010 from 7-9pm.
Where: The Jewish Center, 131 W. 86 St., New York, NY 10024
What: A get-together and dinner for readers and friends of the Hirhurim-Musings blog. In particular, a celebration of the 100th Audio Roundup.

Greetings and food at 7:00pm. The program will begin at 7:45pm, which will include a few brief speeches and an interactive, multi-media presentation. Speakers will include Gil Student, R. Kenneth Brander, Dr. Charlie Hall, Steve Brizel and Joel Rich.

Name tags will be available but you can choose what name or alias to use. There will also be Hirhurim-branded trinkets, while supplies last so come early. There will be a special commemorative Torah journal for the event with articles by different rabbis, including a special section on communications technology (authors include R. Norman Lamm, R. Jonathan Sacks, R. Shlomo Aviner, R. Yitzchok Adlerstein, R. Michael Broyde, R. Yaakov Klass and others).

Everything is free. Dairy food will be served. Mugs and trinkets will be given out.

As mentioned, I will be paying for the evening but I am asking for help subsidizing the event by those who can. As encouragement for large donations, I am publishing a special Torah journal for the occasion. The journal is split into three sections:
1) Perspectives - hashkafic reflections on communal and personal directions
2) Technology - questions related to technology and Torah
3) Studies - discussions of general Torah topics

Here is the table of contents. The order is alphabetic by author's last name within each section. Note that some of these articles have been published elsewhere, but if you haven't seen them yet then they are new to you:

Introduction

Perspectives
Scientific Advance and the Jewish Moral Conscience — R. Yitzchok Adlerstein
The Makings of a Ben Torah — R. Norman Lamm
Modern Orthodoxy for Everyone? — R. Adam Mintz
Adaptability: The Key to Facing Our Future — R. Gidon Rothstein
Two Dimensions of Community — R. Reuven Ziegler

Technology
Teshuvot Regarding Technology — R. Shlomo Aviner
Connections — R. Micha Berger
Favorable Judgment in the Internet Age — R. Daniel Z. Feldman
“Infosnacking” and Halachah — R. Yair Hoffman
The Evolution of Halacha and the Internet — R. Ari Kahn
Technology and Moral Growth — R. Jay Kelman
Torah in English — R. Yaakov Klass
Reading another Person’s Letter — R. Moishe Dovid Lebovits
Downloading Music from “Sharing” Websites — R. Aryeh Lebowitz
Challenges of the Information Age — R. Jonathan Sacks
Technology and Personal Relationships — R. Meir Soloveichik
iPods and Hirhurei Torah — R. Gil Student

Studies
Godtalk: Should Religion Inform Public Debate? — R. J. David Bleich
Science, Halakha, and the Truth: The Case of Paternity Tests — R. Shlomo Brody
A Mathematical Analysis of the Structure of the Jewish Calendar — R. Michael J. Broyde
On First Names and Titles — R. Ari Enkin
Medical Enhancement: Promises and Perils — R. Joshua Flug
The “Kedoshim” Status of the Holocaust Victims — R. Aaron Rakeffet

You can obtain a copy of the journal on the RSVP form: link.

Drinking Wine During the Nine Days and the Authority of the Shulchan Aruch

2010-07-04T21:33:00.002-04:00

Guest post by Rabbi Aryeh Leibowitz

The Shulchan Aruch records a tradition to refrain from drinking wine during the period of the nine days leading up to Tishah be-Av. In a recent lecture delivered in Teaneck, Prof. Daniel Sperber argued that the entire passage in the Shulchan Aruch is based on a faulty interpretation of a passage in the Talmud Yerushalmi (Sperber’s full analysis of this issue appears in his monumental work, Minhagei Yisrael).In light of this supposed error, Sperber concluded publicly that the Shulchan Aruch’s ruling can be considered a מנהג טעות, although Sperber added that it is advisable to observe this specific מנהג טעות as a mean of identifying with the mournful nature of the time period.

What was the supposed erroneous basis for the ruling in the Shulchan Aruch? A passage in the Yerushalmi in tractates Pesachim and Ta’anit reports the custom of certain women to refrain from certain activity (למשתייא) from Rosh Chodesh Av until the fast of the 9th. Sperber demonstrated that the Shulchan Aruch understood the Yerushalmi to be reporting that these women refrained from drinking wine during this time period, and based on this understanding the Shulchan Aruch codified his ruling. However, Sperber pointed out that the word למשתייא in Palestinian Aramaic means “to weave,” not “to drink,” which would be למשתי. Moreover, he noted that if the custom was to refrain from drinking, it is not clear why this custom would be specifically attributed to women, and not men.

Therefore, Sperber quoted the view of an early North African Talmudist, R. Nisim Gaon, quoted in Or Zarua, who maintained that the custom reported in the Talmud was to refrain from weaving. This understanding explains both the language למשתייא as well as the attribution of this custom to women specifically. The above discussion led Sperber to conclude, quite matter-of-factly, that the Shulchan Aruch’s recording of a tradition not to eat meat or drink wine was faulty and based on a string of errors.

This conclusion is startling for a number of reasons. First and foremost, Sperber failed to articulate clearly that the different explanations of the original custom was due to two separate versions, girsaot, of the Yerushalmi passage. The alternate girsa actually reads, “to drink wine” (למשתי חמרא). In fact, this alternate girsa even predated R. Nisim, and was quoted by no less of an authority than R. Hai Gaon, an older contemporary of R. Nisim.

That an alternate girsa existed is apparent in many Rishonim. Take for example, Machzor Vitri (#263), which states explicitly that the girsa of the Yerushalmi reads, “to drink wine.” The same is true with Ravyah’s recording of this custom (#882). In fact, R. Nisim’s reading was in the minority (Although it is the text in printed editions and in the Leiden manuscript), as most of the major Rishonim had the girsa that reads, “to drink.” This includes significant Rishonim from a wide spectrum of halakhic cultures. From the Baylonian Gaon, R. Hai, to the Spanish codifier, Rambam, to the Ashkenazic codifier, Tur, who records both girsaot, to the Catalonian Talmudist, Ramban, all of the major medieval Talmudists ruled in accordance with the girsa that states “to drink wine.”

Additionally, R. Yosef Karo, author of the Shulchan Aruch, was himself aware of the variant girsaot of the Yerushalmi passage. In the Shulchan Aruch, both the custom to refrain from drinking wine, and to refrain from weaving are codified. The commentators on the Shulchan Aruch note that both customs appear in the Shulchan Aruch due to the fact that the Rishonim quote two different versions of the Yerushalmi text. See, most notably the Be’er ha-Golah, who refers to the version that reads “למשתייא” as a variant text of “some” of the Rishonim (see also Biur ha-Gra). Apparently, R. Karo who was aware of both girsaot, didn’t feel confident enough to conclude that the girsa of the majority of Rishonim was in error. Why then was Prof. Sperber so confident?

Conclusion: The opening question of Sperber’s lecture—what is to be done when the Shulchan Aruch contains a ruling that is based on a mistake?— is not relevant to the issue at hand. The Shulchan Aruch’s quoting of the custom to not drink wine was not based on a mistake. Rather, it was due to two different girsaot in the Yerushalmi. Whereas most Rishonim ruled in accordance with the view that the recorded custom was to refrain from drinking wine, there was a minority view that the recorded custom was to refrain from weaving.

Instead of arguing that the Shulchan Aruch was in error for quoting the view of the overwhelming majority of Rishonim, the opposite could have been argued: Even though the girsa of R. Nisim was only represented in a very small amount of sources, the Shulchan Aruch still included it because of the strengths mentioned by Sperber (such as the fact that the woman were specifically singled out).

In the end, it is appropriate to note that the custom to not drink wine during this period was observed by the Rishonim, and was accepted by the Jewish nation for centuries before the Shulchan Aruch. The very Or Zarua, who quoted the girsa of R. Nisim, rules (2:414 and 415) that one must not violate this important custom. Also the Rashba, in his responsa (1:306, qtd. in Beit Yosef 551:11), has very sharp words to say about one who violates this custom. It is appropriate to end with a quotation from the Aruch Ha-Shulchan (O”C 551:23) who writes that a Biblical prohibition is violated by one who drinks wine during this period:

Hundreds of years ago, our forefathers accepted upon themselves not to eat meat or drink wine from Rosh Chodesh Av until after Tishah be-Av…Nowadays, in our many sins, many people are mezalzel this prohibition. Besides the fact that they are in violation of a Biblical prohibition of neder, for our forefathers accepted this custom upon themselves and it is therefore a neder of klal Yisrael… Their punishment is very great.

As a final note, I would add that the tone of Sperber’s entire presentation was troubling to this listener. What type of message is appropriate for a Shabbat afternoon shiur in a community shul? The material was fascinating and the potential for a positive educational learning experience was ripe. Sperber could have engaged the sources, and used this example to demonstrate the nature of transmission, as seen through the different traditions of the Yerushalmi text. Instead the event contained a tone that likely undermined the authority of the Shulchan Aruch in the eyes of some of the listeners. Indeed, the smirks, and occasional laughs from the audience that accompanied Sperber’s declarations that the Shulchan Aruch erred, and that the “passage in the Shulchan Aruch is based on a faulty interpretation,” were reflective of this lost opportunity.*

* A note regarding censorship. My words here should not be misunderstood as a militant call to “hide the truth from the masses.” When the truth is apparent, we need to reverently address it. However, because in this case it is far from apparent where the truth lies, it appears to me that a bit more prudence and respect could have been exercised.

Weekly Links

2010-07-02T08:31:00.006-04:00

Rules: link

Friday

'The End of Men' ... in Judaism?: link

New issue of Jewish Review of Books: link

We can make a difference in our children’s lives: link

Learning Curve: Community confronts day-school tuition crisis: link

Teaneck elects first Muslim mayor: link

Long time archaeological riddle (Sisera) solved: link

Ask The Rabbi: On being fruitful, part II: link

Can Kutsher’s, the Catskills’ last kosher resort, be saved?: link

SALT Friday: link

Thursday

R. Yitzchak Herzog was the Chief Rabbi of what country? Not Israel: link
Response and rejoinder to R. Chaim Rapoport re new biography of Lubavitcher Rebbe: link
Rabbi of historic Orthodox synagogue overturns decision to let women lead: link
Backlash to visit by Sara Hurwitz: link
No luck for Young Israel at delegates meeting: link
SALT Thursday: link

Wednesday

Young Israel movement in turmoil over upstate shul: link
Restoring our collective faith: link
Rabbi Yosef allows woman pregnant through artificial insemination to marry: link
Do interfaith marriages threaten Jewish identity?: link
French Nazi collaborators to be exposed: link
Jewish-music figure gets prison in $36K theft: link
Rabbi Binyamin Marwick elected to position at Shomrei Emunah: link
SALT today: link

Tuesday

Newsweek's hit-or-miss list of the 50 most influential rabbis in America: link
VHQ's 50th anniversary: link
Communing while commuting: link
SALT Tuesday: link

Monday

Flotilla for Gilad Shalit (IMHO childish and unproductive): link
Rav Soloveitchik: The Status Of The Night Of 17 Tammuz: link
Of Kabbalists and Kings: Rav Moshe Feinstein and Halakhic Pluralism by Moshe Simon-Shoshan: link
Resurgence of Jewish anti-Zionism: link
YU Museum exhibit of rare manuscripts: link
Intermarried women, Shabbos and their religious identities: link
Rabbinical Alliance of America says Kagan not kosher for Supreme Court: link
SALT Monday: link

Audio Roundup C

2010-07-01T21:55:00.002-04:00

by Joel Rich

Rabbi Shmuel Marcus -Birthdays and Yahrtzeits: link

With the 100th audioroundup I thought it appropriate to lead with this shiur which contains some positive and negative opinions concerning "celebrating" birthdays and yahrtzeits – bottom line use/view as a positive opportunity for introspection and future positive impact. (Kach Mkublani mbeit avi abba zll"hh)

Questions:
1. True or False: A finite individual could never plumb the full breadth and depth of torah even if they learned 24/7 for their entire lives (alternative construct: Each and every individual’s torah knowledge could benefit from additional learning)
2. True or False: Yiftach b’doro K’shmuel b’doro (every generation’s leadership has the same status regardless of level of knowledge/accomplishment)
3. If 1) and 2) are true, why was there a horaat shah (emergency measure) [or whatever it was] to turn being paid for learning into a l’chatchila (or for that matter, to allow writing down of the oral law).

Rabbi Daniel Z. Feldman -Laws of Lashon Hara (5770): link

Is the issue with Lashon Hara one of developing a negative trait or of the negative result (Does R’DF see everything in halacha as binary? J).
Detailed discussion of a number of issues (saying something in front of 3 people , saying the truth, saying in front of the person, having a good reason for saying it).
The chofetz chaim is not universally accepted on each point.
One might get the impression that in going l’chumrah in many of the alternative understandings of some of the basics, we have developed a system which many (most?) seem not to be able to maintain adherence. Does this yield a cognitive dissonance and some strange results? (e.g. one does not see a non-violent hour where people agree to take on not hitting anyone for that time period, but we do see this for lashon hara.)

Rav Assaf Bednarsh -Theology - Olam HaBa Part 2: link

Where have all the souls gone, long time a passing? Olam haba or purgatory/gan eden or reincarnation.
What happens to bad boys? Physically burn, be forced to watch an eternal video of how stupid you were, karet (cease to exist).
What is tchiyat hameitim? Physical or spiritual?

Rav Moshe Taragin -Talmud Torah Metaphors of Torah - the Human Body 2: link

“You gotta have heart” (any Mets fans out there?) There can be a dialectic between regularity of learning and the “joy/creativity” of learning. Enjoying can also aid in retention and learning should impact your personality (classic Brisker retort to mussar movement).
Becoming creative – Rambam – 1) have yishuv hadaat (self serenity?) 2) harchavat halev (broad view); me – e.g. knowledge base of analogies to draw on – IIRC the inventor of the M-16 drew on his aerospace background).

Charlie Rose-The Brain Series-mental illness: link

Mental illness (schizophrenia, bipolar…). 5th century Hippocrates recognized these as medical but this was “lost” and these were ascribed to demons and the like (cue here to discussion of shoteh et al).
Now categorize as mood altering vs. thinking altering diseases. Some very compelling descriptions (me – having seen this up close and personal, I wonder if there is an element on anusim (exculpatory compulsionary forces) in halacha here.)
Interesting – schizophrenia in identical twins is 50% correlation (so partially genetic but something else as well). Grief is part of the human condition, depression isn’t (and should be treated) [me – if you could drug grief, why wouldn’t you?]
More interesting – psychotherapy has biological impact (me – explains why drugs and psychotherapy both work). Targeting specific therapies!
A little trashing of society and insurance as reflecting social stigmas.

R-Reisman (not available on-line)
Y-208 Importance of training oneself to control their thoughts – based on Lo tishneh – blvavecha (don’t hate your brother in your heart). (Remember R'YBS on the God given ability for the intellect to control the emotion)
Y-209 Examples of danger of mispronounciations and mispunctuations. Don’t rely on mpi hashmuah (stories or reports) of halacha - they are often misleading because you don't know all the circumstances or someone just makes it up . Be sure your listener understands your communications (me-e.g. Who do you mean when you say "The Rav")
Y-210 The mida of pushing yourself can have value.
Y-211 Koach hariah – (the power of what you see) – is tremendous, so look at role models not newspapers (except kosher ones)!

Rabbi Ally Ehrman -Supporting Adult Children: link

Should a son pressure parents for money if he knows it causes them pain? (Was the response to someone who wanted to be supported in learning?) No.

Rabbi Moshe D. Tendler -Horayos Shiur 5 - Daf 2b-3b - When You Pasken A Shaylah, It's Your Head On the Block: link

Who brings par he’elem davar (sacrifice brought when a majority of the nation sins based on following a faulty decision of the Sanhedrin) and when? When you paskin your head is on the block. More discussion of parameters of “relying” on beit din. Does a head nod count as a vote (or as a head fake)?

Rabbi Azarya Berzon -Splitting Your Time for Learning: link

Is the mitzvah in the experience of torah or the knowledge accrued (Rambam vs. Tosafot)? Some application differences (part of a series).

Rav Binyamin Tabory -She'elot uTeshuvot - Rav Shaul Yisraeli - Amud HaYemini: link

R’Yisraeli – some history (me – the eretz chemdah sh”ut make fascinating reading from a sociological perspective – questions from around the world). Sh”ut covered –
1) Should Zionist youth groups in diaspora encourage aliyah (yes, but…)
2) Do women have a chiyuv (requirement) of being misameach (“joying”?) the newlyweds (no).
3) Microphone on Shabbat (yes)
4) Terrorists confrontation like Entebbe (yes)

Rabbi Zev Reichman -Peace vs. Disputes: link

Beit Shammai vs. Hillel, chassidut vs. GR”A – all the same debate – be strong and pull away from evil vs. spread the good and find HKB”H everywhere. We need to bring peace between these approaches.

Rabbi Daniel Stein -Hilchos Geirus Review 5770: link

Detailed summary with focus on what is the mitzvah (if any), acceptance of heavenly yoke (kabbalat ol) and the problematic language of the Rambam (R’HS – it’s a 30-day probation period to determine if the ger was serious!!!)

Rabbi Moshe D. Tendler -Horayos Shiur 6 - Daf 3b-4a - You Can't Claim To Be An Observant Jew If You Don't Observe Anything: link

How often do you have to “check’in” to reaffirm no changes in Kashrut states or GAHP (Generally Accepted Halachic Practices)?

Rabbi A Enkin-Dina Demalchusa Dina: link

A basic review of the Talmudic sources and rishonim’s understanding of sources. Specific analysis of situation in Israel (can’t ignore government!). See here for a long recent discussion of the issue,We report, you decide! : link

Quick Takes

2010-07-01T21:37:00.006-04:00

Does the internet make you dumber?
A few weeks ago, much was made of a new book which claims that technology makes people less able to think critically and concentrate. The hype did not impress me. What we're dealing with is an onslaught of information and people have to develop internal filters. You have to know when to turn everything off and, when it's on, how to find the good information while avoiding the bad. Even before the internet, many people procrastinated, had trouble focusing, and ignored their spouses and children. It's hard to blame that on the internet. I'm on computers most of my waking hours but I still regularly read long books. I found this NY Times Op-Ed particularly informative: link.

Is it right to criticize the Young Israel of Hewlett?
A rabbi published an Op-Ed in the Five Towns Jewish Times in which he thoughtfully explained why he felt it necessary to berate the Young Israel of Hewlett for hosting Rabba Sara Hurwitz as a scholar-in-residence. He was then criticized himself for being impolite in his words and over-stepping his bounds (link). Was he impolite? Somewhat, but not that bad considering the hysterical rhetoric we often read. He seemed to me to be trying hard to hold back, mostly successfully. Was he over-stepping his bounds? I don't think so. The shul needs to know if it crosses a line so important that it risks being shunned by the rest of the community. Should it have been done in an Op-Ed? I don't think so. It seems to me the kind of situation where one rabbi (or a few) calls up the rabbi of that shul, lets him explain the circumstances, and then explains to him the reaction of the rest of the community. From there, let the pressure go downhill to the shul's board and congregants.

Common language?
One of the benefits of being in a community is having a common language and common basic assumptions. I'm no longer sure what assumptions I share with those on the left wing of Orthodoxy. When I have conversations, I sometimes make assumptions about practice and belief that turn out to be wrong and I sometimes hear them making assumptions that I don't share. Consider the following summary by R. Dr. Israel Drazin of Dr. Marc Shapiro's contribution to a recent book on theology edited by (Conservative) Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove (link):

Shapiro, an Orthodox Jew, states that he feels comfortable in "removing God from almost everything that takes place in the world." The world functions according to the laws of nature; God is not "pulling the strings of the world." He sees nothing wrong with a person having their own understanding of what revelation is. This approach of an uninvolved God, he stresses, focuses on what people should do to improve themselves and society, and not on what God does for us.

Even if that is inaccurate (I haven't seen the book), I've already met self-described Orthodox Jews who believe those things. Are we really part of the same religious community if we don't have a shared language about revelation?

Where's the outrage over Rubashkin
I've seen a lot of outrage over Rubashkin's prosecution (or persecution), conviction and sentencing. Where's the outrage over his white collar crime? Remember the post-Spinka era, when we as a community were going to send a message that white collar crime isn't acceptable? Now we're turning a convicted criminal into a hero, with little kids walking around collecting money for him and community-wide gatherings that lionize him. Have they read about what he's admitted to doing?

Parashah Roundup: Pinchas 5770

2010-06-30T22:33:00.002-04:00

by Steve Brizel

The Covenant of Peace

R Berel Wein explains why peace is very fragile, almost always difficult to maintain and it requires great effort to keep it together:
link

The Nesivos Shalom, as explicated by R Yitzchak Adlerstein, discussed why Pinchas is viewed as the source of the fire of Teshuvah that combats transgressions committed with zeal and alacrity: link

R Ephraim Buchwald examines the legacy of leadership transmitted by Pinchas: link

R Shomoh Riskin explains why Pinchas received the covenant of peace: link

R Mayer Twersky discusses how to cultivate Ahavas Yisrael: link (audio)

R Baruch Simon discusses why one should not be critical of other Jews: link (audio)

R Avraham Gordimer examines how the message of Pinchas relates to the rest of theParsha and underscores the importance of a person’s own spiritual achievements, as opposed to one’s lineage: link 1, link 2

R Asher Brander examines the lineage of Pinchas before he was awarded the covenant of peace: link

The Division of the Land of Israel and the Transition in Leadership

R Yissocher Frand, based on an answer given by the Imrei Emes to his mother Zicronah Livrachah, explains why the daughters of Tzlofchad loved the Land of Israel: link

R Asher Brander discusses why the daughters of Tzlofchad are considered Nashim Tzidkaniyos: link

Rebbitzen Smadar Rosensweig discusses the interface of Pshat, Chazal, and Parshanut: The Model of Bnot Zelaphchad: link (audio)

R David Horwitz, based on the explanation of the Kli Yakar, explains why the women loved the Land of Israel, as opposed to the men: link

R Sir Jonathan Sacks examines the transition from Moshe to Joshua and Judaism’s attitude towards power: link

R Asher Weiss analyzes inheritance in Rabbanus: link (audio)

R Mordechai Willig reminds us that All enduring, successful movements in religious Torah society have been led by Torah scholars and that such leaders must realize that many decisions are beyond their purview, and must have love and respect for the laity and its proper leaders and why every Bris Milah begins the first three Psukim of this week’s Parsha: link 1, link 2

Parshas Timidim Umusafim

R Yitzchak Etshalom examines the structure of the Parsha of Timidim and Musafim: link

R Avigdor Nevenzal explains why the Parshas HaTamid is a source of our yearning for the Redemption: link

R Dovid Gottlieb examines the Halacha of Tadir Vsheino Tadir: link (audio)

Shoalim Udorshim Department

Rav Soloveitchik ZL explains the Halachos and Hashkafa or Tisha B”Av and Kinos:* link (audio)

R Larry Rothwachs explores the sugya of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza and asks whether we have lost the ability to mourn for the Churban: link 1 (audio), link 2 (audio)

R Avishai David and R David Gottlieb explain Megilas Eicha: link 1 (audio), link 2 (audio)

R Elyakim Koenigsberg discusses the onset of the Three Weeks: link (audio)

R Zvi Sobolofsky and R David Brofsky explain the Halachos of the Three Weeks: link 1 (audio), link 2

R Daniel A. Feldman examines the dual emphasis of Aveilus and Moed on Tisha B’Av: link (audio)

R Avishai David and R Chaim Eisenstein compares and contrasts the Aveilus Yeshanah and AveilusChadashah: link 1 (audio), link 2 (audio)

* For the interested listener, additional explanations of all of the Kinos can be found by various Roshei Yeshiva and Rabbonim on YuTorah.org.

Avrekh

2010-06-30T21:47:00.001-04:00

Translations and commentaries have difficulty explaining exactly what Pharaoh did when he raised Yosef from imprisonment to prominence (Gen. 41:43):

He had him ride in the chariot of his second-in-command, and they cried before him, "Avrekh!" (NJPS)

What is this "avrekh" that they called before him? Or does it not even mean the term they used but rather something else? There are three general ways to render this phrase:

I. Great One

Onkelos splits the word in two, av meaning father and rakh meaning king. They therefore called Yosef a father or mentor to the king. This is also the interpretation given in Bava Basra (4a). Does rakh mean king? Rashi says that it does in Roman (presumably Latin), although some versions have it as Aramaic. Jastrow, in his Aramaic-English dictionary, translates reikha as nobleman and, among other sources, refers to Onkelos on this verse. Rashi (Shabbos 53a) also understand it this way.

Similarly, the ancient book of Jubilees (40:7) interprets avrekh as meaning "great one," although it seems to be based on the first three letters of the word (abir). One scholar connects it to an Eblaite word meaning superintendent and another connects it to an Akkadian word meaning steward (quoted in Victor Hamilton, International Commentary on the Old Testament, Genesis pp. 506-507). Rather than meaning the person in control, they interpret it as meaning the king's servant.

II. Bow Down

Aquilas and Jerome (quoted by Victor Hamilton) translate avrekh as meaning to bow, the herald was proclaiming that everyone should bow to Yosef. This presumably is basing the word on the root b-r-kh, meaning knee -- the herald was telling people to bow on their knees. This same interpretation can be found in a fascinating midrash (Sifrei, end of ch. 1, quoted in Rashi on this verse):

R. Yehuda expounded: Avrekh is Yosef who was old (av=father) in wisdom but young (rakh) in years. R. Yossi of Damascus said to him: Until when will you distort the Bible? Avrekh is from the language of birkayim (knees), that everyone came and went under his control.

R. Yossi, too, connects avrekh to knees. R. Menachem Ibn Saruk (Machberes Menachem sv. avrekh - link - PDF) also translates avrekh as meaning to bow, as do other grammarians such as R. Yonah Ibn Janach (Sefer Ha-Shorashim sv. b-r-kh), Ibn Ezra (ad loc.) and Radak (ad loc.). The King James Version translates the passagee as "And he made him to ride in the second chariot which he had; and they cried before him, Bow the knee."

One scholar (quoted by Hamilton) believes that avrekh is an Egyptian word that means to bow. Shadal (ad loc.) also says that this is the Egyptian translation. Another scholar (also in Hamilton) suggests that it derives from an Egyptian word meaning to make way. The New International Version translates the passage as "He had him ride in a chariot as his second-in-command, and men shouted before him, 'Make way!'"

III. The Herald

Another possibility is that the word does not refer to the text of the proclamation before Yosef. Rather, it refers to the person doing the proclaiming. In other words, the verse says that a herald went before Yosef shouting out a proclamation. Josephus (Antiquities, quoted by R. Menachem Kasher, Torah Shelemah, Gen. ch. 41 n. 99) said that avrekh means in Coptic (late ancient Egyptian) a herald. The Samaritan Targum (also in R. Kasher) translates similarly.

Books Received XXVII

2010-06-30T12:30:00.002-04:00

I don't always have the chance to review each book, so I'll list the books that I receive. Some of them will be quoted or reviewed in future posts. Here are the books I've received recently:

To Remain a Jew: The Life of Rav Yitzchak Zilber

Back to Disqus

2010-06-30T08:45:00.000-04:00

Based on user feedback, the comments switch seems to have been premature and I've switched back to Disqus for another week. Next week, at the get-together (RSVP here: link), I will officially unveil the new Wordpress blog at which time we will move there and switch the comments here to JS-Kit. Maybe by then we will have figured out a way to keep both JS-Kit and Disqus comments.

The Old Comments Are Back

2010-06-29T22:44:00.001-04:00

I've reinstalled JS-Kit/Echo (the successor to Haloscan, which no longer exists) so all the old comments are back. Just go to an old post (e.g. link) and you'll see all the old comments--the good, the bad and the ugly.

I tested it in Internet Explorer and Google Chrome without problem.

On the Meaning of a Mysterious Line in a First-Crusade Kinah

2010-06-29T21:28:00.000-04:00

On the Meaning of a Mysterious Line in a First-Crusade Kinah

Guest post by Dr. David Berger

In 2000, I published an observation about a difficult line in a kinah. The observation was buried in the footnote of a scholarly article dealing with a different theme, and I was berated by a friend for making sure that hardly anyone who recites kinot would ever come across it. So I wrote a letter to Artscroll explaining the point and suggesting that they modify the translation in any revised edition of their Tishah be-Av liturgy. The letter was graciously acknowledged—even to the point of agreeing that if the change would be made the new understanding would be cited in my name—but to the best of my knowledge there has not been a second edition.

Three developments have provided the stimulus to write this note. First—the publication of the new volume of Kinot Mesorat ha-Rav. Second—the appearance of a volume of my collected essays containing an English translation of the article in which I made the observation. Third—the imminence of Tishah be-Av.

The kinah in question (#22 in the Artscroll and Mesorat ha-Rav editions; #24 in the Rosenfeld edition) begins “Hacharishu mi-menni va-adabberah.” The Artscroll edition notes that “the particular tragedy about which this kinah was written is unknown. It very aptly describes any one of many massacres and pogroms that have formed a large part of Jewish history.” In fact, it is evident from the description of suicides and mutual slaughter that the strongest candidate for the tragedy underlying this text is the first crusade, and the Mesorat ha-Rav edition gets the context right. Artscroll greatly compounds its error by asserting a few pages later that kinah #25 (Mi yitten roshi mayim), whose crusade context is emphasized in the commentary, is “the first kinah recited on the Ninth of Av that is apparently unrelated to the destruction of the two Temples,” an assertion incompatible with the book’s own comment on Hacharishu mi-menni va-adabberah. The relevance of Hacharishu to the first crusade is further sharpened by what I believe to be the meaning of the difficult line to which I finally turn.

Here is the text of my note (“On the Image and Destiny of Gentiles in Medieval Ashkenazic Polemic,” in Persecution, Polemic, and Dialogue: Essays in Jewish-Christian Relations [Boston: Academic Studies Press, 2010], p. 110, note 3; original Hebrew in Yehudim mul ha-Tzelav, ed. by Yom Tov Assis et al. [Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2000], p. 75):

The general lack of acquaintance with the standard Ashkenazic derogatory terms for Christian concepts has led scholars to misunderstand a line in a qinah (elegy) for the Ninth of Av about the 1096 massacres. The poet writes: nit’orer goy az doresh shuhah – a fierce nation arose, seeking a pit; or, according to a variant text, koreh shuhah – digging a pit. See Seder ha-Qinot le-Tish’ah be-Av, ed. by D. Goldschmidt (Jerusalem 1968), p. 84. Goldschmidt and others prefer the smoother reading, “digging a pit,” an expression which is also found in other liturgical poems. Apparently, these scholars found the reading doresh shuhah (“seeking a pit”) so difficult that even the principle of lectio difficilior [that in certain circumstances a more difficult reading should be preferred because a scribe may revise a text that he does not understand to make it more “comprehensible”] was unable to rescue it. Nevertheless, it is clear that this is the correct reading, and in fact it is not difficult at all. The term shuhah (pit) was the standard Ashkenazic expression for the holy sepulcher. (See, for example, [David Berger], The Jewish–Christian Debate in the High Middle Ages, Hebrew section, pp. 61 and 63: the Arabs came to Jerusalem and “defiled the shuhah.”) The crusading armies were precisely “a fierce nation, seeking the shuhah.”

Eating in Public

2010-06-29T02:15:00.003-04:00

By: Rabbi Ari Enkin

The Talmud teaches that eating in public is inappropriate conduct and that one who does so is comparable to a dog.[1] Furthermore, eating in public is one of the activities which disqualify a person from serving as a witness in ritual matters.[2]While the Talmud seems to imply that any form of eating in public is to be shunned, it appears from other sources, however, that it is only eating *while walking* in public which is truly forbidden.[3] As such, it is permitted to eat in a restaurant or any other circumstance where eating in public is appropriate.[4] One should also avoid drinking a beverage in public whenever possible.[5]

The Talmud's comparison between one who eats in public and a dog is actually, well, somewhat accurate. Indeed, animals often continue to walk while eating any food they happen to find in the street rather than establish themselves in one spot in order to eat it in a dignified manner. It is also taught that eating in the street is a sign of personal disregard and indignity.[6] Some authorities teach that eating in public is a sign of poverty, as if one has no food to eat at home.[7] It is permitted, however, to chew gum or suck candies in public.[8]

While normative practice certainly permits one to eat in a restaurant and similar venues, one should, however, make an effort to avoiding eating on public busses and trains. These places are not designated for eating and therefore eating in them may be unacceptable from both a halachic and social perspective. So too, it is likely that there are passengers who may be offended by the sight and smells of certain foods.[9] Eating on airplanes, however, is completely acceptable and anticipated.[10]

Some authorities suggest that it is only eating a meal in public which is to be avoided, but eating a quick snack in public is permissible, though it too should be avoided if possible.[11] Similarly, there is also an opinion that only eating bread in public is that which the sages have forbidden, but other foods are less problematic.[12] It is also permissible to eat in a public place where very few people are expected to appear.[13]

There are a number of authorities who maintain that it is only Torah scholars who are truly forbidden to eat in public or to eat while walking. According to this approach, even eating in a restaurant might just be forbidden for such individuals.[14]. Regardless of one's social status, eating while walking is certainly unbecoming and should be avoided by everyone whether or not it might be technically permissible.

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

[1] Kiddushin 41b
[2] Rambam, Hilchot Edut 11:4; C.M. 34:18
[3] Rambam, Hilchot Edut 11:4; Yaavetz, Kiddushin 40b
[4] Devarecha Yair 34
[5] Siach Yitzchak 479
[6] Rashi, Kiddushin 40b
[7] Maharsha, Kiddushin 40b
[8] Divrei Banayahu, C.M. 26
[9] Beit Yechezkel, Kedushat Hapeh V'haachila p.171
[10]Yosef Daat, O.C. 42:5
[11]Kesef Mishna, Edut 11:5
[12]Tosfot, Kiddushin 40b
[13]Devarecha Yair 34
[14]C.M. 8:4; Yaavetz, Kiddushin 40b; Aggadot Talmud Yerushalmi, Massrot 3:2

Get-Together: More Information

2010-06-28T21:28:00.002-04:00

This is your weekly reminder about the July 7th Hirhurim get-together/dinner (link 1, link 2, link 3, link). All readers, commenters and friends of the blog are invited to this free event. Free mugs and trinkets will be available, while supplies last.

Please RSVP to the event using this online form: link.

As mentioned, I will be paying for the evening but I am asking for help subsidizing the event by those who can. As encouragement for large donations, I am publishing a special Torah journal for the occasion. The journal is split into three sections:
1) Perspectives - hashkafic reflections on communal and personal directions
2) Technology - questions related to technology and Torah
3) Studies - discussions of general Torah topics

Here is the table of contents. The order is alphabetic by author's last name within each section. Note that some of these articles have been published elsewhere, but if you haven't seen them yet then they are new to you:

Introduction

Perspectives
Scientific Advance and the Jewish Moral Conscience — R. Yitzchok Adlerstein
The Makings of a Ben Torah — R. Norman Lamm
Modern Orthodoxy for Everyone? — R. Adam Mintz
Adaptability: The Key to Facing Our Future — R. Gidon Rothstein
Two Dimensions of Community — R. Reuven Ziegler

Technology
Teshuvot Regarding Technology — R. Shlomo Aviner
Connections — R. Micha Berger
Favorable Judgment in the Internet Age — R. Daniel Z. Feldman
“Infosnacking” and Halachah — R. Yair Hoffman
The Evolution of Halacha and the Internet — R. Ari Kahn
Technology and Moral Growth — R. Jay Kelman
Torah in English — R. Yaakov Klass
Reading another Person’s Letter — R. Moishe Dovid Lebovits
Downloading Music from “Sharing” Websites — R. Aryeh Lebowitz
Challenges of the Information Age — R. Jonathan Sacks
Technology and Personal Relationships — R. Meir Soloveichik
iPods and Hirhurei Torah — R. Gil Student

Studies
Godtalk: Should Religion Inform Public Debate? — R. J. David Bleich
Science, Halakha, and the Truth: The Case of Paternity Tests — R. Shlomo Brody
A Mathematical Analysis of the Structure of the Jewish Calendar — R. Michael J. Broyde
On First Names and Titles — R. Ari Enkin
Medical Enhancement: Promises and Perils — R. Joshua Flug
The “Kedoshim” Status of the Holocaust Victims — R. Aaron Rakeffet

You can order a copy of the journal on the RSVP form: link.

Comments Update

2010-06-27T22:32:00.000-04:00

As many of you know, the comments on old posts have disappeared since the switch to Disqus commenting. After a great deal of effort, it is now clear that they cannot be transferred. That leaves us with few options. Here are my plans, although I am open to suggestions.

I want to move this entire blog onto a Wordpress platform that uses Wordpress comments going forward. Old comments, however, cannot be transferred there. The old posts will remain here with all of the old comments. I want each post to have Disqus comments inside the post and a link to a pop-up window with JS-Kit (=Haloscan) comments. That way, all the comments, both from the days of Haloscan and JS-Kit and from the days of Disqus, will be preserved.

Right now, I don't know how to do that. I have a programmer trying to figure it out. If it turns out to be impossible, my inclination is to revert to JS-Kit to preserve 5-1/2 years of comments even if it means losing the last few months of Disqus comments. In fact, I'd like to switch back immediately so all comments over the next few weeks -- until we move to Wordpress -- are in JS-Kit.

What do you all think? These are your comments as well, so please let share your opinions.

Rav Soloveitchik on Women Rabbis

2010-06-27T21:32:00.001-04:00

R. Aryeh Frimer has published an essay on the position of R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik regarding the ordination of women as rabbis (link). It is partially based on an essay in Shi'urei HaRav on Yoreh De'ah (available for purchase here: link), which is translated in this post (link). One reader e-mailed me that this essay is a vindication of my position:

I have been avidly following the recent discussion at the RCA Convention and on the various blogs regarding granting women semikha. I was rather surprised, however, that in all the active give and take, there is one opinion that has not been placed center stage. I am referring to the view of Moreinu veRabbeinu haRav Yosef Dov haLevi Soloveitchik zt”l, known by his students as “the Rav”. The reason for this may well be the fact that the Rav never discussed this issue head on. However, there are several solid pieces of evidence which indicate, to my mind, that the Rav would clearly have opposed having women serve as Shul Rabbis and their receiving semikha.

The first piece of evidence is found in the recently published shi’urim of the Rav on Yoreh De’ah.[1] In contradistinction to Rav Soloveitchik’s Talmud shi’urim – which were very lomdish and had a large element of creativity and hiddush – the tone of the Yoreh De’ah shi’urim were halakha le-ma’aseh. The Rav’s primary goal in the latter was to clarify the various views of the Mehaber, Rema and nosei kelim in preparation for semikha exams.[2] In one the first shi’urim, the Rav dealt with the ruling of Rema to the effect that our custom is not to allow female ritual slaughterer (shohatot). The Rav suggests that the reason for this is that nowadays being a ritual slaughterer requires kabala – the authorization/certification of a recognized scholar testifying to the candidate’s knowledge of both the theory and practice of shehita. It should be emphasized that receiving kabala has community wide repercussions since it generally allows the bearer the right to apply for a position of shohet anywhere.

Read the full essay here: link.

Emmanuel Compromise Approved; Parents Released

2010-06-27T13:44:00.002-04:00

"A compromise proposal enabling the release of the parents of the Emmanuel students was approved Sunday by the High Court of Justice, after being presented by the parents and petitioners with the approval of the State Prosecutor’s Office. The judges ruled that the incarcerated parents would be released on Sunday.

"The decision followed a compromise deal struck on Sunday morning between Shas spiritual leader Rabbi Ovadia Yosef and the Slonim Rabbi, religious leader of the Ashkenazi families who had refused to send their daughters to the mixed-ethnicity school."

More here: link.

Weekly Links

2010-06-25T08:38:00.003-04:00

Rules: link
Friday

They spilled our blood, you kept quiet: link

Interview with R. Yaakov Yosef about Emanuel situation (Hebrew): link

London Charedim hard hit by budget cuts: link

Success and Scrutiny at Hebrew Charter School: link

Best pizza in DC is kosher: link

SALT today: link

Thursday

Rubashkin prosecution not anti-semitic: link
Chief Rabbi slams Methodist report: link
New bios of Lubavitcher rebbe dig for the man behind the myth: link
Pickle Shop, a Lower East Side Icon Now Makes Its Home in Boro Park: link
SALT today: link

Wednesday

Syracuse Shul: NCYI ‘Bullying’ Us: link
Shas’s dismal silence: link
Prosecutor: Rubashkin deserves his 27-year sentence: link
The Rubashkin Saga: Old Questions Answered, New Questions Raised: link
All heck breaks loose at World Zionist Congress: link
New York flotilla for freeing Gilad Shalit: link
SALT today: link

Tuesday

Agudath Israel leader asks Israeli ambassador to intervene on Emmanuel situation (kudos for trying diplomacy!): link
13 Emmanuel moms exempted from prison: link
Israel’s chief rabbi: I will ban cruel slaughter: link
Ask The Rabbi: On being fruitful, part II: link
SALT today: link

Monday

Rubashkin sentencing document: link (PDF)
Rubashkin to get 27 years, pay $31 million of restitution and no fine: link
Responsum by R. Moshe Chaim Efraim Padwa, Av Beis Din of Hisachdus Kehillos Charedim of London, permitting worm-infested fish: link
Expected compromise in Emanuel is not happening: link
Beit din sides with High Court: link
Declaration of the American Moetzes of Agudath Israel regarding Emmanuel: link
Some old articles about the Emanuel case: I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII
Furor at budget's $18M for 'rabbis': link
SALT today: link

Audio Roundup IC

2010-06-24T23:48:00.000-04:00

by Joel Rich

Question: Should a shul's educational program (e.g. Rabbi's shiur, guest magidei shiur…) be primarily focused on a few areas needing reinforcement or be a smorgasbord so as to attract more people (but perhaps with diluted impact)?

Question:Why did the gemara come up with klalei horaah (rules for psak) rather than deciding each disagreement on its own merits?(e.g. was Rav always right in cases of issurin?)

Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz -Ten Minute Halacha - Celebrating Rosh Chodesh: link

Defining reasons and type of work women don’t do on Rosh Chodesh. One should have at least extra treat if not a special meal on Rosh Chodesh.

Rav Assaf Bednarsh -Theology -- Prayer: link

If everything HKB”H does is for the best, why would we pray to change anything? A. Prayer: 1) Reminds us of our own responsibilities in the cosmic order; 2) Works on our relationship with HKB”H which increases our likelihood of a good outcome; 3) Helps us bring HKB”H into our lives. This yields more direct intervention; 4) Improves us (we do a mitzvah), so we get better result; 5) Brings HKB”H’s presence into the world (Kabbalistic).

Rabbi Jeffrey Saks - Angels, Ladders and Caves: link

Rambam’s thought in the Moreh Nevuchim compared to that in Plato’s cave – see here link for cave information) – Rambam expands on Plato - knowledge must impact on our personalities as well. Also discussion of responsibilities of teachers of torah.

Rabbi Moshe D. Tendler -Horayos Shiur 3 - Daf 2a-2b - Psak vs Pilpul: link

Discussion of who has the right to disagree with a psak, difference between psak and pilpul and differing understandings of eilu v’eilu (is it one is right and one is wrong – but understand how got there, or did HKB”H provide a box within which any of the bounded answers are “right”?)

Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz -Nezikin Case Studies: link

1st case study – insurance where Reuvain borrowed Shimon’s car and it is damaged. My take away – posek really needs an understanding of insurance law and how insurance works in practice. R’Aryeh – how about reimbursement of past premiums (if borrower of car wants to use owners insurance rather than pay for damage themselves?).
2nd case study – If someone called a service man and then fixed the problem themselves, do you owe for a service call? [me – remember halacha is a floor, not a ceiling]

Rabbi Michael Taubes -Guarding The Makom HaMikdash Is it A Mitzvah: link

Unusual topic – identifying mitzvah of guarding mikdash and possible purposes (prevent robbery, not allowing a zar in, kavod – being sure someone is always thinking about mikdash)

Rav Binyamin Tabory -She'elot uTeshuvot -- Rav Zalman Sorotzkin - Moznayim leMishpat: link

1) Do you do chazarat hashatz if you just got a minyan after the silent amidah? (yes – interesting historical background). 2) How much do you have to spend for a time bound mitzvah (e.g. etrog). 3) Does the mesader kiddushin have to drink any of the wine (probably not). 4) Educating women (yes). 5) Restart Sanhedrin now (no).

Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz -Avoda Zara Shiur 8 - Intro. to Pas Akum: link

Detailed analysis of the Talmudic sources of pat akum (non bnai brit bread). Interesting Tosfot as defender of current practices (i.e. not sure why everybody does x based on “normal” halachic rules – so need to find explanation (even if strained) rather than say practice is wrong).
R’Aryeh starts down the path of gzeirot rules (e.g. was reason given, was it “accepted” by all). IMVHO – this topic calls out for a more extensive treatment. Problem is IMVEHO the data don’t fully support any particular theoretical constructs.

Note: Rabbi Yisrael Reisman Yirmiyahu shiurim are not online but can be purchased. My thanks to Councilor K for loaning me his copies.

Y-201) Geographical imponderables – where tanach and chazal’s geography seems “challenging” (wrong?).
Y-2022) Grandparent – grandchild – special mesorah relationship teaching avodat hashem (not our job to be cool – (me – just some of us are naturally so?)
Y-203) Do you have to mention specific names/items when praying for health or other requests? Contradictory sources in the Talmud. R’YR differentiates based on a general rule where intent controls (if it’s main element). It may depend on whether your prayer is of the heart or of the lips! [ouch]
Y-204)Can individuals convert from one nation to another (e.g. moavi become an amoni). Differentiate between genetics (yichus) and mahut (characteristics). [I’ve always wondered about Emunah and bitachon begin when there’s no hope in natural order of things (not sure all see it this way)].
Y-205)Why did sfarim start to be named after author’s (direct or just a hint) name? Isn’t it hubris? No – it allows connection to your rebbi (nice mussar – not sure factual). No need for concern on writing words/names which include HKB”H name. Hashkafah of sefer as rebbi (didn’t sound negative!)
Y-206)Shidduchim – be complimentary not similar (modern psychologists just realizing this).
Y-207)Most things (physical and psychological) get better with time. Learn not to pick at a scab and to “let it go” (words of wisdom – let it be?)

Rabbi Yehoshua Grunstein -The Rabbinic Shabbat desecrator - a true story: link

Main issue – Is one who violates a rabbinic prohibition on Shabbat considered a shabbat prohibition or a rabbinic prohibition violator? (and the consequences).

Rabbi Moshe D. Tendler -Horayos Shiur 4 - Daf 2b - Rambam Al HaSugyah: link

Horiyot 2b – continuation of series. R’Sadia – in bavel (9-10 century). They didn’t use ring for kiddushin (hmmm – who started the ring thing – us or them?).

Rabbi Shlomo Einhorn -The Last Lecture: link

MTA is a great place (it certainly was 40+ years ago). Learn to make the most of every moment. Ask advice from gedolim and feel gratitude.

Rav Moshe Taragin -Talmud Torah - The Metaphors of Torah - The Human Body Part 1: link

Gemara discusses importance of verbalization of learning. Was goal to increase retention, increase your effort and/or make it more part of you? Answer may have implications when considering changing technologies.

Rav Assaf Bednarsh - Theology -Olam HaBa: link

Reward in world to come – physical or spiritual. Differing opinions reverse engineered to show coherence with the individuals’ opinion on other philosophical points (me – I’ll take whatever it is).

Listening to Your Parents

2010-06-24T21:27:00.004-04:00

As a parent, I believe that all children must listen to their parents. As a child, though, I believe that children must follow their own paths even if it bothers their parents. What does halakhah have to say about this?

In 1984, R. Basil Herring published a fabulous book, Jewish Ethics and Halakhah For Our Time: Sources and Commentary, recently republished. R. Herring proposes a number of complex ethical dilemmas and then proceeds to analyze them. It would be wrong to say that he addresses them from an halakhic point of view because that implies a limited discussion of halakhic rulings.

Rather, he begins each chapter with a translation of relevant sources from Bible, Midrash, Talmud and Rishonim. He then shows how the interpretation of the various passages, the resolution of conflicting texts and the emphasis of one over the other, yields different approaches to the subject. These are intentionally complex case studies, so each discussion covers debates among the commentators. With an eye to textual interpretation, including the interpretation of enigmatic commentators, R. Herring also keeps another eye on history. He keeps one foot grounded on historical progression -- who preceded whom and on what sources did he rely -- without engaging in historical interpretation. The conclusion is invariably inconclusive, because that is the point. R. Herring shows the areas of universal agreement but also how the conceptual differences lead to different conclusions.

When it comes to listening to your parents, the issue boils down to a general debate over whether the obligation to respect and fear them also includes obeying them at all cost. Everyone agrees that you do not listen to them if they tell you to violate a prohibition. But do you have to otherwise obey them? Rabbenu Tam (quoted in Ritva, Yevamos 6a) and Ri (Tosafos, Kiddushin 32a) hold that you only have to obey them if they somehow benefit from your obedience. If the issue is entirely neutral to them, you may disobey them without worry. The Rashba (Yevamos 6a), as understood by the Gra (Bi'ur Ha-Gra, Yoreh De'ah 240:36) and the Chazon Ish (Kiddushin 32a), and the Meiri (Yevamos 6a) hold that you must obey your parents unless they ask you to violate a prohibition.

This debate is reflected in the responsa and codes regarding the common question of marrying someone against your parents' wishes. The Maharik (Responsa 164:3) and Rema (Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh De'ah 240:25) follow Tosafos, that since this is not an issue thay may or may not benefit a parent, a child need not obey his parents. The Netziv (Meishiv Davar vol. 2 no. 50), however, adds a qualification to this lenient approach. He holds that while obedience is only required when a parent benefits, a child may still not cause the opposite of benefit -- embarrassment or pain. If marrying a particular person does so, then a child may not marry that person. The Chazon Ish (ibid.), though, follows the Rashba and does not allow you to marry someone if your parents are totally opposed to the union.

R. Shneur Zalman of Liadi, the Ba'al Ha-Tanya, wrote a responsum about whether a man can become a chassid against his parents' wishes (Iggeros Ba'al Ha-Tanya U-Vnei Doro, pp. 48-49). He is generally lenient and upholds a man's right to disobey his parents in such a circumstance.

R. Herring's case is more complex than ours, in that he deals with a mentally unstable parent and the obligations of both the child and the parent. For our general case, it seems clear from our summary that the general trend is towards greater latitude for a child, with some noteworthy strict authorities. But all agree that a child must obey a parent when there is some direct benefit to the parent. R. Herring concludes: "It would be a truism to say that in such family situations each case is sui generis, requiring its own special treatment and resolution.")

What is particularly interesting is the uniqueness of this book despite the intervening 26 years since its original publication. In that time there has been a storm of halakhah books. These types of issues are addressed by many other excellent writers, both online and in print, with many more sources from an expanding database of available literature. Yet R. Herring's analysis remains fresh because he engages the sources and shows how their interpretation affects the bottom line (an approach that is not seen in the summary presented in this post). He doesn't only tell the reader what the different authorities say, he explains how and why they got there.

Parashah Roundup: Balak 5770

2010-06-23T21:47:00.006-04:00

by Steve Brizel

The Mission and Message of Bilaam

R Yitzchak Etshalom explores how Bilaam became Bilaam HaRasha: link

R Zvi Sobolofsky explains why Bilaam, who listened to HaShem, is described as Bilaam HaRasha: link

R Avraham Gordimer discusses the fear of Balak: link

R Berel Wein and R Shlomoh Riskin compares and contrasts Moshe Rabbeinu , Avraham Avinu, and Bilaam HaRasha: link 1, link 2

R Yissocher Frand explains why Bilaam was not shocked when his donkey spoke to him: link

The Nesivos Shalom, as explicated by R Yitzchak Adlerstein, explains why Dveikus is the antidote to the message of Bilaam: link

R Avigdor Nevenzal explains why HaShem silenced Bilaam: link

R Sir Jonathan Sacks discusses why “no” was the most important word that Bilaam learned during his mission: link

R Aharon Lichtenstein and R Ephraim Buchwald remind us that the uniqueness and separateness described by Bilaam are of contemporary value: link 1, link 2

R Asher Weiss , R Hershel Schachter, and R Yonsasan Sacks, discuss Kedushas Beis HaKnesses and Kedushas Beis HaMedrash: link 1 (audio), link 2, link 3 (audio), link 4 (audio)

R Michoel Zylberman discusses the prohibition of Lo Sisgodedu in the context of divergent halachic practices in the same synagogue: link 1 (audio), link 2 (audio)

R Joshua Flug discusses the treatment and disposal of religious items: link

R Baruch Simon illustrates the elements of Kedusha in a Jewish home: link (audio)

R Chaim Eisenstein discusses Bilaam’s one-eyed perspective: link (audio)

R Daniel Z. Feldman illustrates how Kavod HaBriyos was demonstrated even with regards to the punishment meted out to Bilaam: link (audio)

R Asher Brander illustrates why we must live and transmit Judaism via our inner fires and passion and discusses another praise of Bilaam that is part of the Mussaf for Rosh HaShanah: link 1, link 2

R Dovid Gottlieb discusses the Halachos of Kanaim Pogim Bo and Krias Shema AlHaMitah: link 1 (audio), link 2 (audio)

Kiruv Rchokim and Chizuk Krovim Department

R Aaron Soloveitchik ZL discusses the implications, amplifications and pitfalls of engaging in outreach: link (audio)

A Case Study in Contemporary Halakhic Rhetoric

2010-06-23T21:30:00.002-04:00

A Case Study in Contemporary Halakhic Rhetoric—Rav Asher Weiss on Dina DeMalkhuta

Guest post by Prof. Chaim Saiman

Last week’s dispatch from Rav Asher Weiss (Parshat Chukat, 5770: June 18, 2010 - link), disagrees with nearly all the rishonim, most achronim, and significantly challenges the haredi consensus concerning the relationship between halakha and the State of Israel.
Yet, rather than incur the wrath of the community he is addressing, this shiur will likely burnish Rav Asher’s (RA) reputation as a significant halakhic authority and a true Gadol B’Yisrael. For these and several reasons pursued below, this brief shiur is worthy of a close reading.

I. RA’s Overview of DMD

The shiur opens with a presentation of the six leading account of Dina Demalkhuta Dina (DMD) found in the halakhic literature.

Rashbam to Bava Batra 54 who bases the government’s taxing authority on the assumed consent of the populace.
Rashba and Ran to Nedarim 28 who argue that since the king owns the land, he can demand fidelity to his laws in exchange for allowing the Jews to live within his borders.
R. Yonah to Bava Batra 54 who understands DMD in terms of a court’s authority to declare property ownerless and transfer it to another party, הפקר בי"ד הפקר. (RA rejects this view since הפקר בי"ד הפקר only applies to a Jewish court).
The Dvar Avraham’s [R. Avraham DovBear Shapira, Poland, 1871-1943] claim in the name of Rashba and Ritva that a king acquires rights via “din kibbush”— rights by conquest. (This is rejected since conquest by force is an untenable political rationale and governance must be predicated on consent).
Rashi to Gittin 9b who writes that DMD is based on the fact that both Jews and Gentiles are subject to the Noahide law of “dinnim” which includes fidelity to secular law. (This is rejected since post- Sinai Jews are bound to Torah rather than Noahide law).
Hatam Sofer who understands the Gemara Shevuot 35 to grant a king the inherent right to tax. (This is rejected since the Gemara only deals with king’s right to tax for his own purposes but not to erect a government for the betterment of society).

Of the six rationales presented RA sees only two as viable. Yet, using little more than an Enlightenment conception of individual autonomy RA finds fault even with views 1 & 2. (ובמה יתחייב היחיד בדין המלכות מכח הסכמת חבריו, או מכח הסכמת עצמו ולמה לא יוכל לחזור בו בכל עת שירצה.)

In other words, the rishonim’s accounts are based on fictional rather than actual consent. And while this may have been sufficient in the fourteenth century, RA reasons that in the twenty-first century, actual consent is required.

Instead, RA claims that the true basis of DMD is the fact that the Torah implies and the reality of political life demands assuming a foundational concept of political authority for both Jews and Gentiles. Citing Mishna Avot 3:2 אלמלא מוראה איש את רעהו חיים בלעו, RA suggests a social-contractarian grounding of politics. Moreover, RA argues that this is what Chazal mean by DMD—simply the power of the government to rule. As for what the rishonim were talking about—and why they failed to mention this point ולא נחלקו הראשונים אלא במהות הדין שרשו וטעמו האם סמכות המלך משום קבלת העם היא או שמא אין זה משום הסכמת העם כלל אלא משום שהארץ שלו, ואכמ"ל , which to the best of my understanding means: “The rishonim argued only as to the essence of the rule [of DMD] and its source and reasoning: whether the king’s authority is predicated on the consent of the governed or on account of the king’s ownership of the land. But here is not the place to delve into this matter further.” I suspect however, that this statement was never intended to convey much substantive content. Its goal is to assure the reader that due respect has been paid to the rishonim— and then proceed to the next point.

It is important to consider how this opening section operates. First, RA demonstrates his obvious mastery and respect for the arguments and personalities presented in the classical sources. Second, it rejects four of the accounts through a combination of lomdushe (analytical-legal) and substantive arguments. Finally even the two views that are “accepted” are reworked such that the real basis of political authority are the raw facts of social life recognized by Tanakh and the Mishna, but apparently ignored by the leading rishonim.

Why is this significant? Because each rishon’s view presents a significant limitation as to the domain of secular authority. By offering a reworked theory of DMD however, RA legitimates nearly every method of governance employed by the modern administrative state. Thus, RA rejects most limitations suggested by the achronim, including: (i) DMD applies only when the financial interest of the government are at stake but does not apply to social, economic and public safety regulation; (ii) since DMD is predicated on the “lease agreement” between the king and the community for the land the Jews will occupy, DMD applies only outside Israel. In Israel however, where Jews reside as a matter of Hashem’s gift, DMD cannot legitimate secular law or government; (iii) DMD applies only to relationships between Jews and Gentiles, however intra-Jewish relationships are governed exclusively by din torah; and finally (iv), DMD applies only to the executive/legislative branches (malchut) but not to secular courts (arkaot). Through a combination of bold arguments and soft phrasing, RA presents a maximalist vision of DMD, where state law controls in most areas where secular law and din torah conflict.

II. RA’s Specific Applications

In Parts II and III of the shiur, RA applies his understanding of DMD to a number of concrete cases, all while deftly navigating the contrary views of leading achronim.

For example, RA points to a tension between Rema’s holding that DMD applies to all forms of civil law (HM § 369:8) and his statement limiting DMD to laws promulgated “for the benefit of the king or the social welfare.” (369:11). S”ma understands Rema as distinguishing between actions of the executive/legislator on the one hand and the judiciary on the other. (S”ma HM 369:28). While S”ma claims this position is universally accepted, RA dismisses this reading since אך פירוש זה אינו מתיישב בלשון הרמ"א כלל.

Following other achronim, RA understands Rema to distinguish between laws regulating public conduct (which concern the government and are subject to DMD), and laws regulating private conduct which lies outside the government’s interest. However, even this limitation is subtly undermined as RA demonstrates the pliability of the public/private distinction. For example, in HM 154:18, Rema suggests that DMD applies to neighborly disputes regarding a property owner’s rights to maintain a consistent level of access to sunlight. Similarly, in HM 356:7 Rema rules that, despite the Gemara’s holding to the contrary, one must return lost items even after the initial owner has given up hope of recovery. Finally, in HM 73:14 Rema argues that while din torah permits lenders to sell pawns (mashkon) 30 days after the debtor’s default, lenders must comply with secular law and wait an entire year.

Pulling these cases together, RA finds that in an interconnected economy, virtually any law can be described as regulating a matter of public concern. And while RA never rejects the public/private distinction ascribed to Rema, his conclusion דבענינים אלו יש מיסוד וסידור ענפי המסחר ויש בהם תקנת המדינה, וצריך בזה עיון makes it pretty clear where his commitments lie.

Second, the Shach (HM 73:39) explains that DMD applies only to cases where secular law does not contradict din torah. Thus DMD can supplement Torah law, but never supplant it. Citing the Hazon Ish, RA explains that this position is difficult, since by definition, DMD is relevant only in cases of direct conflict between secular and Torah law. While RA closes this section deferentially,וא"כ באמת צ"ע בהבנת דברי אדונינו הש"ך רבן של כל ישראל , there is little doubt that his understanding runs contrary to the Shach.

While RA relied on the Hazon Ish as against the Shach, in the very next paragraph, the Hazon Ish’s views on a related matter are summarily rejected. The Hazon Ish understands that DMD recognizes secular law only to as between Gentiles and Jews. In an intra-Jewish context however, the covenantal commitment to din Torah means that secular law never trumps. Citing several of Rema’s applications of DMD, RA dismisses the Hazon Ish, leaving off with a simple “tzareich iyun gadol”.

The most radical claims are left for last. In a paragraph that frankly recognizes that virtually all achronim exclude decisions of secular courts (arkaot) from DMD, והנה על אף שהסכימו האחרונים דרק חוקי המלכות הוי דין ולא משפטי הערכאות, RA argues to the contrary. Because contemporary democracies conceptualize the judiciary as one of three co-equal branches of government, RA understands that the traditional distinction between “kings” (malchut) and “courts” (arkaot) is no longer relevant. Despite this bold claim, the paragraph concludes with a tentative, ולכאורה מסתבר לפי"ז דגם באלה נוהגת זו דדמ"ד, וצ"ע בזה.

A similar approach is taken towards an even more explosive issue— the status of DMD in contemporary Israel. Though the position of Ran/Rashba (predicated on monarchical ownership of the land) has long been used to argue against applying DMD in Israel, RA reasons that since contemporary political theory grounds legitimacy in representative democracy rather than the king’s ownership of land, the laws enacted by the popularly elected government in Israel are entitled to DMD recognition. This highly contested claim is then followed, וצע"ג בכל זה, ולא נתחוורו לי הדברים, and with this RA concludes the shiur.

III. Contemporary Halakhic Rhetoric

In this brief shiur, RA argued with virtually all the rishonim, most of the achronim, and built a theory of DMD that shares more with Enlightenment and democratic values rather than ideas culled from the standard halakhic texts. Nevertheless, I doubt RA will be placed in cherem or lose influence as a result of this shiur. While much has to do with matters that lie outside the text of any specific given shiur (RA’s manner of dress, speech, bearing, peer group etc.), it is worth focusing on what this tells us about the practices of contemporary halakhic discourse.

Form and Substance

The first point, while obvious, bears repeating. RA is a first rate talmid chacham and who displays a level of mastery in substantive literature of the rishonim, achronim, poskim and ba’alei machshava that has few equals in today’s olam hatorah. Of equal importance is his mastery of the achronic form. The tone, texture and structure of the shiur (up to and including the typeface and graphical presentation) display deep affiliation with yeshivish traditions. Despite the “radical” content, the presentation is more comforting than confrontational, demonstrating not only that RA “knows how to learn” but that he conceptualizes Torah in a way that his audience recognizes and identifies with.

Yet, RA is working to expand the boundary lines of the discourse itself. He displays a keen sense for the contours of contemporary political and legal theory and hints at the ideas of social contract, separation of powers and democratic governance. However, because these concepts are enveloped in a thoroughly conventional halakhic frame, the presentation feels organic to the classical materials. Few halakhic writers have demonstrated this level of literary and conceptual dexterity while adhering to the broad conventions of achronic writing.

Discretion and Patience:

Given the political turmoil surrounding the issues covered, the shiur is remarkably discreet. While my own presentation highlights the radical departures both from specific piskei halakha and overall conventions of halakhic argument, RA works to minimize this gap, constantly emphasizing the tentative and hesitant nature of his conclusive non-conclusions. This comes across not only in the self-effacing comments interspersed throughout the text, but in the presentation of this material as “thoughts on the parsha” rather than a programmatic essay setting forth the halakhic and political basis of secular law.

RA also understands that his readers approach these questions halakhically rather than theoretically. While the shiur is obviously predicated on a conception of both halakha and the modern state, these ideas are implied rather than expressed, and are never subjected to systematic exposition. While from a Western/academic perspective this is an undeniable flaw (the constitutional boundaries of the state assumed in the shiur are not well-developed), RA’s audience is far more concerned with his knowledge of achronim than his ability to talk legal or political theory. Moreover, RA uses these predilections to his advantage. While each paragraph and p’sak gently nudges the reader towards accepting RA’s views, he is able to defer the overarching philosophical questions to another day—a day one assumes will be long in coming.

RA is also patient. He has no illusions that this shiur will be the final word, not even his own final word on the topic. He is happy to work interstitially, bit by bit, and return to and reinforce similar themes down the road. RA thus proceeds sugya- by-sugya, confident that increased and non-confrontational exposure to his views will solidify his status as a halakhist and posek.

Method and Message

This shiur was published for Parshat Chukat. If the connection between DMD and Chukat is tenuous, the relationship between DMD and current events is anything but. The Israeli public is currently aflame over questions of halakha and the legitimacy of the State’s legislative and judicial decisions. There is no doubt that DMD was the parsha of this past week, even if it had little to do with this past week’s parsha. Though I have no special insights into RA’s thinking, I find it hard to believe that a shiur concluding with a discussion of the halakhic validity of the courts and government of Israel, is in any way coincidental.

There are many approaches to Torah leadership. Some involve cherems, riots and bromides. Others sense that a shiur on parshat hashavua can serve as a lesson in civic education. RA shows that an approach that is not afraid of a reverentially stating that, באמת צ"ע בהבנת דברי אדונינו can be far more effective than a wall full of pashkevilim. והמבין יבין, ואכמ"ל.

Chaim Saiman teaches Jewish law at Villanova University Law School.

Praying on the Subway

2010-06-22T21:27:00.001-04:00

I often see women praying from a siddur on the subway, during the commute to work in the morning. There are many reasons why I think this is a bad practice but we also have to keep in mind that some women are juggling so many responsibilities that this is the only opportunity they have to pray. Let's just address one halakhic aspect of this issue.

The Torah says "ולא יראה בך ערות דבר - He may see no naked thing among you" (Deut. 23:15). The Gemara (Shabbos 150a) learns from the word davar that no dibur (word) of holiness can be recited in front of nakedness. That means no prayer, Shema or words of Torah can be recited in front of someone improperly dressed.

This should effectively prohibit praying on the NYC subway during the summer, when the trains are full of immodestly dressed women. Sleeveless and low-cut shirts, short skirts and shorts, etc. Even closing your eyes is insufficient. The Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 75:6) allows you to close your eyes and then pray but the commentaries (e.g. Magen Avraham 9; Taz 2) require you to turn your back.

There is, however, room for leniency. The Rema (Orach Chaim 75:1) follows the Rosh, who holds that this rule applies to women in front of immodestly dressed women just like it applies to men in front of women. The Rashba, though, is lenient and only prohibits women from praying in front of uncovered genitalia. Many later authorities rule according to the Rashba (e.g. Mishnah Berurah 75:8; Kitzur Shulchan Arukh 5:16).

It would seem, therefore, that this issue is not a matter of concern regarding a woman praying on the subway.

Kiddush Levana & Toothaches

2010-06-22T02:51:00.001-04:00

By: Rabbi Ari Enkin

One who suffers from a toothache and other oral woes might find their remedy in the recitation of Kiddush Levana. The increasingly mystical Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky teaches[1] that for a toothache, it is a “segula m'kadmonim", a segula from early generations, to add several words to the Kiddush Levana at a specific point in the prayer for relief from toothaches. After one has recited the passage of “kach lo yuchlu kol oyvai lingoa bi lera'a", so too, may my enemies not be able to harm me, one should immediately add “velo yehiye li ke’ev shinayim", and I should no longer have a toothache.

It seems that the Lubavitcher Rebbe concurred with the efficacy of this segula, as well.[2] This segula is also cited in the siddur "Beit Yaakov" of Rabbi Yaakov Emden. Rabbi Kanievsky adds that his father would recite these additional words not only for himself when needed, but also on behalf of others who were suffering from toothaches. The reason why teeth are associated with the moon and Kiddush Levana is because these words are all closely related to the word, lavan.

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

[1] Derech Sicha Vol. 1 p. 144
[2] Igrot Kodesh, Vol. 10 p. 150

Get-Together: More Stuff

2010-06-21T22:33:00.000-04:00

This is your weekly reminder about the July 7th Hirhurim get-together/dinner (link 1, link 2, link 3). All readers, commenters and friends of the blog are invited to this free event.

That picture you see on the right is of two more trinkets that we will be giving out for free at the get-together: keychains and refrigerator magnets. Limited quantities of each so get there early -- while supplies last.

Please RSVP to the event using this online form: link. Thank you.

The Emanuel Beis Yaakov Controversy

2010-06-21T21:28:00.010-04:00

Not far from Atlanta is a theme park called Stone Mountain, at the base of a large mountain that has a massive carving the three Confederate leaders: Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson. When, on visiting, I mentioned to a friend my amazement that there would still be a celebratory tribute to people who fought for slavery, he responded that the Civil War was really about states' rights. I responded, "Yes, states' rights to allow slavery." This came to my mind when thinking about the drama surrounding a court case over a girls' school in Emanuel.

I won't go through the whole story because it has been in the news (see the links here: link). It seems to me that there are three separate issues that need to be distinguished:

1. The allegations of discrimination in the school

Is there discrimination or not? The matter is more complex than might appear. While there are Sephardic girls in the Chasidic school and admission is based entirely without consideration of ethnicity, rules can be devised that implicitly and intentionally exclude students from a specific group. Is that the case? Here is a link to an English translation of the Supreme Court ruling: link (PDF). At the end of this post is a relevant quote.

I don't claim to know with certainty whether or not there was discrimination. However, the student body makeup and the initial entry requirements imply that there was a conscious attempt to exclude Sephardim. We also have to keep in mind that there is widely acknowledged discrimination against Sephardim in yeshiva admissions. A friend of mine from YU recently changed all of his Sephardic practices to Ashkenazic to increase his son's chances of admission into a choice high school (his last name is ambiguous and his upbringing makes it easy to pretend to be Ashkenazic).

There is discrimination against Sephardim, including the assumption that they are less intense in their religiosity. While many readers might agree with this assumption, the mere fact that you judge someone's religiosity based on his ethnicity is, by definition, racist. By what justification do you make assumptions about an individual based on the color of his skin or the place his grandparents once lived? Judge people on their own merits, not generalizations based on their ethnicity.

2. The Israel Supreme Court's imprisonment of Ashkenazi parents who refused to enroll their daughters in a broader school

This seems outrageous to me. The parents were not part of the lawsuit and, regardless, why did they lose the right to choose schools for their children? Even though the court acted in frustration, after multiple attempts to enforce their ruling, how does this justify violating the parents' rights? This is extremely heavy-handed.

3. The massive Charedi rally opposing this ruling

Here's the big question: What did this rally accomplish? Was it supposed to convince the Supreme Court to change its ruling? This sort of persuasion won't make them budge. To the opposite, it will cause them to become more entrenched.

To encourage the legislature to change the law? There are other, more effective ways to introduce legislation. To show the general Israeli population that this is an important issue for Charedim? Maybe. To gather the troops and inform them that this is the issue of the day? Probably.

What is the issue? If you ask a Charedi, he will tell you that it is parents' rights. Parents have the right to choose where to send their children to school and with whom their children will associate. In other words, like my friend at Stone Mountain, this is all a matter of rights. And likewise I respond that this is about the parents' right to discriminate. Parents want the right to say that most Sephardim are bad but the few good ones can go to school with my children. The claim that this is really an issue of parents' rights and not discrimination would be more convincing if R. Ovadia Yosef had attended the protest. He did not, nor did he encourage his followers to attend.

Even if I am entirely wrong about this, let's take a look at what the public saw, both in Israel and around the world. The international perception is that the one issue that energizes Charedim above all, that leads to the largest protest rally in Israel's history, is the right to discriminate against people with darker skin. Was the damage, the lessened perception of Torah and its keepers, worth the benefit? Did the little that came out of the rally justify the terrible denigration of Torah that it caused?

At this point we need to declare to the world that the Torah leaves no room for this type of bigotry. If anything, this sort of discrimination violates fundamental concepts of the Torah, as explained at length in R. Joshua Berman's book Created Equal. We are all servants of God, equal in His eyes regardless of ethnic background. We must love each other as we love ourselves, and look past superficial differences to see the beauty in our common goals.

Right now the world thinks that Orthodox Jews support ethnic discrimination.

Excerpt from court ruling:

It is easy to determine that in the case before us the purpose of the rules — some of which found their place in the wording of the separate regulations for the Hassidic track, and some of which were applied de facto without official regulations — as the examination report of Advocate Bas showed, was simply this: the separation of girls of the Hassidic denomination from their Sephardic counterparts. This determination is based mainly on the outcome test, which shows that de facto two wings were operated within the school. These wings — which were initially intended to be two separate schools and were subsequently run as two wings — were characterized by a division of the population that was not coincidental, and it clearly shows the discriminatory intentions of the initiators of the separation, to such an extent that it can be said to speak for itself…

This discrimination is also clearly reflected in the regulations that were submitted for the approval of the director-general of the Ministry of Education, some of which were cited above. A study of the various regulations shows that we are not dealing with a track whose purpose is the study of the Hassidic way of life, but with an attempt to separate different sectors of the population on an ethnic basis, under the cloak of a cultural difference. The preference of students from a certain ethnic group in admissions to the Hassidic track, while placing bureaucratic difficulties in the path of parents of students from another ethnic group who want to register their daughters for the track, seriously undermines the right to equality. The same is true with regard to the school’s requirement that parents of the students should act in accordance with the lifestyle practised in the school, and the request — which was rightly excluded from the regulations — that the prayers should be recited solely in accordance with the Ashkenazi pronunciation. All of these merely serve an improper purpose, which is to exclude from the Hassidic track students from the Sephardic community, solely because of their origin.

The characteristics of the discrimination in this case can also be seen in the atmosphere that has enveloped this case from the outset and that is discernible in the respondents’ conduct. In other words, the main discrimination in this case was discussed above, but it is also reflected in the fact that the Independent Education Centre and the school did everything that they could in order to satisfy the requirements of the Ministry of Education on an institutional level, but they did not really implement their solutions. In practice, their undertakings had little effect on the lifestyle in the school, and in this regard it has been said that: It should be remembered that discrimination always — and maybe today more than in the past — conceals itself and goes underground, but achieves its goals by using valid arguments.

Sephardim Switch to 'Ashkenazi' Surnames to Ensure Their Children's Admission to Charedi Schools

2010-06-20T22:26:00.000-04:00

An article from nine months ago (link):

(Septamber 9, 2009) Jerusalem - As the public and legal struggle to curb discrimination within haredi educational institutions continues, many still face difficulties in enrolling their children to desirable ultra-Orthodox schools, and some parents of Sephardic descent have resorted to changing their last names just to fit in.

Haredi weekly “Mishpacha” (“Family”) reported in its most recent edition a growing trend of ultra-Orthodox families of eastern descent Hebraizing or “Ashkenizing” their surnames in order to increase their children’s chances of being accepted to Ashkenazi seminaries and yeshivas.

The clerks at the Interior Ministry’s population registry are already used to the practice: The family name Turjeman is changed to Truzman, Mussayev to Moskovitch, Shavo to Shavan, and so on.

“It’s no secret that Sephardic quotas in Ashkenazi educational institutions are limited,” said David Rot (pseudonym), formerly Shitreet. “Every Sephardic parent that registers their son to an educational institution is met with a stack of difficulties, unless they have a well known reputation or are well connected, or if they place a hefty donation on the table and the money makes up for the name.”

Yair Lev (pseudonym) who also changed his last name said, “I would rather not have taken this step, but in this world, everyone just looks at the outer wrapping of the name. If you don’t have to right name, things are harder for you.”

Both Rot and Lev said they had encountered much criticism from neighbors and members of their communities, with comments such as, “What’s so bad about being Moroccan?”, “The world isn’t stupid, who are you fooling? You were born Moroccan and you will stay that way,” but they said they had received some positive reinforcement as well.

Yoav Lalom, of the “Halacha Youth” organization for the struggle against discrimination in the haredi sector, told Ynet he is familiar with the phenomenon, saying, “It exists, but is not widespread.”

Lalom said he opposes the practice, which he calls “the easy solution”, adding that in many cases it ends up being counterproductive, as principals have been known to discover the truth about certain students’ origin during the school year and begun to pick on the “Ashkenized” children.

Headmasters of Ashkenazi institutions seem to regret the situation: “It is a shame that such prominent Sephardic families find themselves in this kind of situation,” an Ashkenazi rabbi from a well-known Jerusalem yeshiva told Ynet. “They are God-fearing Jews, even more so than us, and I guarantee that.”

His own institution, he stressed, does not discriminate: “For some Sephardic families changing the name will not do any good, since their mentality is completely different and unsuitable for our establishment.

“It has nothing to do with descent – past experience has proven that they just don’t assimilate well. It’s a shame to have everyone frustrated over it.

“We have in our school pupils with the most obvious Sephardic names. The only admission criterion is coming from a true God-fearing home,” he continued. “You can’t generalize the Sephardic community – some are adequate and some are not and it doesn’t matter whether they’ve changed their name. We have many Sephardic pupils on our honor roll. We love them.”

A Mature Freedom

2010-06-20T21:25:00.001-04:00

The modern era, with its attendant rise of personal freedom and decline of communal authority, is often seen as the enemy of religious tradition. In pre-modern religious communities, the vast majority of people observed religious practices because they had no choice. They could be fined, imprisoned or exiled from town with no place to go. They had no options and no ability to choose their own lives. While it was not as idyllic as some like to think, it was still a much more religious environment than the modern world.

In the modern era, religious freedom means people can no longer be legally coerced to observe religion. They have choices. They can decide their own course of life. Sometimes socially they feel like they have no choice, but that is usually due to artificial barriers that can be pierced with enough courage.

The result of this has been a large secular wave, with the majority of Jews in the world believing and observing little of Judaism. Some judge the modern era to be a failure because of this. While the many anti-semitic discriminations of the pre-modern era were clearly bad, at least then just about all Jews were religious.

R. Nachum Rabinovich (Darkah Shel Torah, pp. 3-9, 100-102) sees the increased freedom of the modern era very differently. To him, it is an important step in the evolution of religion. Based on a Maimonidean perspective (as the whole book is), R. Rabinovich emphasizes that the true Divine aspect in humans is the freedom of choice. When we choose to obey God, that is when we are fulfilling our personal abilities and becoming the true people that should be.

At first, the Jews accepted the Torah out of fear of God's punishments. A thousand years later, during the Babylonian exile, Jews moved forward and accepted the Torah out of desire for Divine reward (Shabbos 88a). This was an important step forward. Later, during the Second Temple, there was further development among the elite to observe Judaism out of a desire to do what is right. However, while Antigonus Ish Sokho (Avos 1:3) taught this approach, the people were not yet ready and his students terribly misunderstood his intent. Nevertheless, throughout the generations, there have been those who have been able to follow this advanced religious worldview.

In the modern era, we have reached a new stage in the development of humanity and Judaism. While we encounter growing pains, we are quickly reaching the final stage of maturity for the nation when people will independently, without any coercion, choose to observe Judaism.

People who lack confidence in the Torah, who do not truly believe that it is the answer to the inner needs and desires of all people, will look back nostalgically to the pre-modern era. But those who recognize that a time will come soon when the darkness will be dispelled by the light of the Torah, when God will be universally accepted and all Jews will freely choose to observe Judaism, embrace the increased personal freedom of the modern era.

Acronyms

2010-06-20T21:18:00.002-04:00

Here is a link containing most of Steve Brizel's commenting acronyms: link

Weekly Links

2010-06-18T08:26:00.002-04:00

Rules: link
Friday

The Jewish Agency’s new strategic vision: link

The Patriarchal Age: Myth or History?: link

YU aims to help singles connect: link

Call the cops: Ohel recommends alerting the authorities: link

A painful cry for kavod hatorah: link

SALT today: link

Thursday

Israel’s sex-segregated buses riding high: link
Reform chief outlines big challenges as he announces his retirement: link
Rationalizing Torah: link
Shining a light on ancient Israel: link
The case for Emmanuel: link
Tens of thousands of Haredim rally in Jerusalem: link
Rabbi Zalman Melamed: Join the Hareidi Rally: link
Aish Machal recruits non-Israelis for IDF: link
Coalition to Discuss IDF Radio Sabbath Broadcast: link
SALT today: link

Wednesday

Gary Rosenblatt: A decade after Lanner: link
Great exchange of letters about R. Aharon Lichtenstein's review (see this post: link): link
Moses Montefiore: The most important Jew of the 19th century: link
Suddenly, the Israel lobby discovers a genocide (convenient? yes but still right): link
Paul Shaffer on the tunes of prayers: link
SALT today: link

Tuesday

Hebrew University researchers unveil a sarcasm detector: link
Latest issue of Jewish Action is now online (including my articles on OU Press books): link
In honor of the Lubavitcher Rebbe's yahrtzeit, here is a link to my website and book on Lubavitch messianism: link
More on the World Zionist Congress: link
Formation of Jewish LGBT movement: link
Lubavitcher Rebbe’s biography disturbs followers: link
R. Chaim Rapoport reviews the biography: link
Animated Talmud: Bringing Gemara to life: link
WZO is indeed relevant: link
SALT today: link

Monday

UC Irvine Muslim Student Union suspended: link
Kosher vendor suing Mets: link
A history of Commentary: link
Interfaith marriages are rising fast, but they're failing fast too: link
High Court abolishes state grants for yeshiva students: link
What Israel Ta-Shma saw: link
SALT today: link

Announcements #158: Ask OU 10 Summer Programs

2010-06-17T22:03:00.000-04:00

Ask OU 10 Summer Programs (1 Week & 3 Weeks)

ASK OU - KASHRUS TRAINING PROGRAM «1 WEEK
If you are a congregational rabbi, semicha student, chaver hakollel or a member of a Vaad Hakashrus
MONDAY, AUGUST 2 to FRIDAY, AUGUST 6

BE...on the cutting edge of modern-day Kosher Food Technology...behind the scenes at the world’s largest Kosher certification agency.
LEARN...how to set up a local Vaad Hakashruth...basic “Treibering”...the Kosher issues related to bakeries, butcher stores, fish stores, pizza stores, restaurants and other food service establishments...factory supervision...the basics of ingredients and biotechnology...practical Kashrus Halachah which includes “Bedikas Toloim”...how to perform industrial and retail kashering
VISIT...the kitchen of an OU restaurant ...a meat processing facility under OU supervision... an OU certified factory

ASK OU - KASHRUS INTERNSHIP PROGRAM «3 WEEKS
If you are a serious semicha student or chaver hakollel, you may be eligible to join a special three-week Kashrus Internship Program
JULY 21 to AUGUST 10

FIELD WORK... visiting plants with an expert Rabbinic Field Representative.
ASSIST... Rabbinic Coordinators at OU headquarters.
INCLUDES... the one-week ASK OU Kashrus Training Program and two additional intensive weeks.

To register, call today 914-391-9470.

(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. Please note that announcements now cost $36 each.)

Koren Mesorat HaRav Kinot

2010-06-17T21:30:00.004-04:00

OU Press (where I work) and Koren Publishers Jerusalem just published a new edition of Tisha B'Av kinos (link), really a full Tisha B'Av guide, that has many incredible attributes (press release). This is the kind of tool that will transform your Tisha B'Av. Kinos will never be the same:

A commentary distilled from Rav Soloveitchik's own words. Rav Soloveitchik used to sit for hours on Tisha B'Av and explain the kinos. Recordings are available from a number of years. R. Jacob J. Schacter adapted the transcripts into essays on Tisha B'Av in The Lord is Righteous in All His Ways. R. Simon Posner adapted those transcripts into a running commentary on the text of the kinos that is usable in the synagogue. There are differences between the two books in presentation and some of the details. (I'm explaining this only because I've been asked many times what the difference is between the two books.)
A new English translation of the kinos by R. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb. R. Weinreb has been leading popular kinos sessions for years, many of them webcast around the world. He used his experience and formidable talent to translate the kinos from scratch.
Koren used its popular new siddur for the prayer services, accompanied by R. Jonathan Sacks' famous translation.
Koren's scholars researched the precise text of the kinos, using manuscripts, old versions and the Goldschmidt edition. They typeset it using Koren's siddur font rather than Tanakh font (I think they have technical names but I don't remember them right now), because it isn't Tanakh (I've been asked which font they used for kinos).
There are essays of notes from Rav Soloveitchik's shi'urim and a halakhah section (I wrote the first draft of the latter).
I should add that there are a number of great introductions. I just want to highlight R. Haskel Lookstein's introduction (the edition is dedicated in his honor), in which he summarizes a lecture by Rav Soloveitchik in 1968 about why we still need to observe Tisha B'Av after the Six Day War. It is available for download on the OU Press website: link.

Below is a video with some information about the kinos. No, it isn't exciting. But this is a text for Tisha B'Av so exciting isn't the right tone.

You can buy the kinos here: link.

Audio Roundup XCVIII

2010-06-17T21:28:00.000-04:00

by Joel Rich

Yes- I do appreciate posters who can identify song references!

Last week R’Gil wrote a post on halacha anthology books – Discuss:

1) Resolved: Authors of halachic anthology books will write in such a away as to favor type I errors (reader won’t understand and do something permitted) vs. type II errors (reader won’t understand and do something forbidden). Result – convergence to stricter positions.
2) Resolved: Without accessing Rabbis with clarifying questions, readers will tend to assume ceteris paribus (all other things equal) when using such books in more complex situations – and they never are equal?
3) Resolved: Anthological halachic works for laymen without mediation by a counselor may encourage focus on less important points of law at the expense of higher priorities (e.g. imho – hat tip phineas – worry about looking at fingernails and palms in proper order during havdalah versus actually benefitting from the light).
4) Question: What underlying need is being met by these books and how might the need be better addressed?

Rabbi Elchanan Adler -Inyanei Tochacha VeArevos: link

Beginning of a series of giving tochacha (rebuke?). Starts with sources throughout Tanach. General approach here – it’s not judging the person but what to do with your feelings about his sin – get over it/get it out. So once you do it and the person doesn’t listen – can you hate? Can you just go to forgiveness (get over it) without the middle step of rebuke?

Rabbi Eli Ozarowski -Hilchot Hashavat Aveidah - Finding Lost Objects, Part II: link

Rules of simanim (identifying marks) within object and location for purposes of needing to announce you found something and/or for returning a lost object.
Who is a talmid chochom for purposes of claiming lost object without identifying mark.
When can you assume owner gave up hope? When can you assume he gave up hope immediately? (Something heavy, maybe money?, baby bottle and other things you check for.)
Must you pick something up and keep it if you can’t assume owner gave up hope rather than just leave it? Do you have to leave it on the shelf or can you use it? Lots of opinions on these issues.

Rav Moshe Taragin - Talmud Torah - Can a Person Choose what Field of Torah to Study?: link

Interesting insight – why comparatively so little study of Nach? Because non bnai brit started studying in detail?
Chazal’s formulation of 1/3 Torah, 1/3 Mishnoh, 1/3 Talmud seems ignored as a formula for study time allocation. Why?
1) It was really a formula for equivalent results and thus need to spend more time studying Talmud, which is harder.
2) Rambam – that’s for beginning, but once have solid basis, more time to Talmud.
3) Rabbeinu Tam – “Talmud” Bavli is a good mixture of all (or perhaps allows you to focus where you want).

Rabbi Zev Smith - Grape Juice in Halacha: link

Very good summary of the issue of grape juice – is it considered wine for purposes of brachot, Kiddush, 4 cups, simchat yom tov….
Question: What percentage of grape juice whose fermentation was stopped by heating (vs. sorbates) would eventually ferment if left uncovered (and thus subject to airborne yeasts)?

Rav Assaf Bednarsh - Theology - Bitachon - Trust in God: link

Continuing the discussion on what a good Jew believes (answer – it’s complex!).
Chazon Ish thought (except according to revisionists today) that bitachon doesn’t mean HKB”H will come through for me and give me what I want/pray for, etc., but rather HKB”H will do what he thinks best (or how he set the world to operate).
Rabbeinu Yonah says it’s the “good” result if you take world to come into account as well.
Novardak [(R’AB states this is Desslerian – I’m not convinced that this is compelled)] hold if you believe enough you’ll get what you asked for. [me – I’m with the CI on this one – you can’t always get what you want…you might just get what you need]

Rabbi A Weiss - Ner Shabbos: link

(Hebrew) Neirot Shabbat for oneg or kavod or shalom bayit. Based on this, is it related to the meal or not?
Comparison to Chanukah candles.
R’AW tears into those who are concerned about lighting Shabbat candles when electric lights are on.

Rabbi Hershel Schachter -Parsha Shiur - Shelach 5770: link

Everything you wanted to know about tzitzit.
Interesting combination of shitot that require us to wear now (it’s not universal!). Another (in addition to the one about not reinstituting daily birchat Kohanim, due to fire in his shul when he wanted to do it) GRA story where maaseh shehayah (actual fact) changed practice [he had asked tzitzit not be pasuled at burial].
Very interesting tcheilet history 1) R’Herzog kept Radzhiner method alive; 2) Tcheilet disappeared at time of gaonim – why? Knots issues.
Written (by a student) vs. oral (family story) tradition as to the Beis Haleivis position on tcheilet (written – it would be ok if could explain why lost [e.g. royal decree against use]; oral – can’t restart mesorah). Leads into great discussion of “need” for mesorah (e.g. birds and beef kashrut)

Rabbi Reuven Taragin -Iyov Part 1: link

Introduction to a series on Iyov. Why doesn’t Tanach give timeline – perhaps because story is timeless?
Continues with line by line analysis.

Rabbi Daniel Stein - Hilchot Milah Review 5770: link

Another excellent halacha l’maaseh summary shiur.
Whose mitzvah is it? (father, child, bet din….) Lots of implications of basic question – is the mitzvah to do the act of mila or to be mahul (circumcised)?
Use of anesthesia (local vs. general), best time (brov am [large gathering] vs. zrizin [soon]) who can do? When doesn’t it push Shabbat aside?

Rav Moshe Taragin -Talmud Torah - Creativity in the Study of Torah: link

What was given at Sinai – multiple truths (eilu v’eilu) or are these later divergences.

Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff - Women Rabbis and Relations with the chareidi world Part 1: link

Lots of interesting 20th century American Jewish history. Bottom line – R’H Schachter’s using yehareg v’al gavor when discussing women “Rabbis” (Rabbah’s?) was much like R’YBS on mechitza – it means it’s worth going to the baracades for.
R’ARR feels women can do just about everything but can’t be called Rabbi because that implies all rabbinic functions and there are some women can’t do.

Rabbi Michael Taubes -Making Tzitzis by Machine: link

Tzitzit – what is needed (spinning, untangling) in making tzitzit and can machine be used (similar to machine matzah issue?) Talmudic source – water wheel triggered by a person’s actions – when do we ascribe result to that person as well.

Rabbi M Tendler-Horayot 2: link

2nd in Horiyot series. Covers a number of issues including defining shogeg and ones; differentiating between Horaah and Laasot (judgment to act upon) and toleh al daat beit din (relying on psak of beit din).

Rabbi Jeffrey Saks - The Rise of Orthodoxy and Neo-Orthodoxy: link

History series – here focused RSR Hirsch and TIDE. Notes Chasam Sofer was true innovator due to changing times.

Rabbi Eli Gersten -To Hive and Have Not?: link

Talmud gives two reasons why honey is kosher: 1) it’s not a bee’s bodily excretion or 2) gzeirat hakatuv. Discussion of Royal honey (me – look for the OU label).
The 4 Tops pasken like reason 2.

Solving Some of the Agunah Problems

2010-06-16T21:28:00.008-04:00

The Beth Din of America has launched a new website to encourage and enable use of their prenuptial agreement: www.thePrenup.org. What follows below is a proposal by R. Michael J. Broyde for a more complex prenuptial agreement. It is just a proposal and he "remain[s] a deep supporter of the standard prenuptial agreement drafted by Rabbi Mordechai Willig, endorsed by countless poskim, and distributed under the letterhead of the Beth Din of America."

This article is reprinted with permission from Jewish Law Association Studies XX: The Manchester Conference Volume. Download PDF here: link. Scribd format after the jump.

Parsha Roundup: Chukas 5770

2010-06-16T21:27:00.001-04:00

by Steve Brizel

Chukim and the Parah Adamah

Rav Soloveitchik ZL, discusses the Halachic and Hashkafic aspects of Parah Adumah and assesses the future of American Jewry: link

R Michael Rosensweig illustrates the role of Chukim in Torah study and commitment, and Kiddush HaShem as a component of national leadership: link 1, link 2

R Hershel Schachter explores the roles of ego and humility in the study of Torah: link

R Avigdor Nevenzal illustrates why the study and teaching of Torah require one to put aside one’s own biases if one wishes us to understand Torah: link

R Berel Wein and R Zvi Sobolofky remind us that the system of values and behavior of the Torah is ultimately beyond human comprehension: link 1, link 2

R Avraham Gordimer suggests why the Parsha begins with the Parah Adumah: link

R Azarya Berzon discusses logical and illogical mitzvos: link (audio)

R Shlomoh Riskin, based on the teachings of Rav Soloveitchik ZL explores the differences between Parah Adumah and Korban Pesach: link

R Ephraim Buchwald explores various interpretations and the contemporary significance of Bamidbar 21:17: link

The Passing of Miriam and The Waters of Strife

R Yissocher Frand investigates the contrast between the reaction to the deaths of Miriam HaNeviah, Aharon HaKohen and Moshe Rabbeinu: link

R Yitzchak Etshalom and R Sir Jonathan Sacks explore why Moshe Rabbeinu was punished for his hitting the rock at Mei Mrivah and not allowed to enter the Land of Israel: link 1, link 2

R David Horwitz, based on the Rambam in the fourth chapter of Shemoneh Prakim, and R Asher Brander, in a survey of the Mfarshim., discusse the sin of Moshe Rabbeinu: link 1 (audio), link 2

R Baruch Simon, based on the explanation of the Shem MiShmuel, explores the concept of latent Kdusha: link (audio)

The Copper Servant

The Nesivos Shalom., as explicated by R Yitzchak Adlerstein, discusses the role of the copper serpent: link

The Song at Arnon

R Avraham Gordimer explores the Song at Arnon: link

R Asher Weiss surveys the extent of Taamei Mitzvos and, discusses whether Kivrei Tzadikim Im Tahmim: link (audio)

The Great Transition

R Mosheh Lichenstein investigates the transition of generations at Mei Merivah: link

R Yissocher Frand investigates the contrast between the reaction to the deaths of Miriam HaNeviah, Aharon HaKohen and Moshe Rabbeinu: link

Halacha Lmaaseh Department

R Baruch Simon discusses the Halachos of Shabbos in the summer: link (audio)

R Elyakim Koenigsberg: link (audio)

R Larry Rothwachs: link (audio)

R Daniel Z. Feldman, R Aryeh Leibowitz, and R Dovid Gottlieb explore numerous halachic issues relating to Tumaas Kohanim: link 1 (audio), link 2 (audio)

Torah Im Derech and Torah Umada Department

R Jeffrey Saks discusses the approach of R Shamshon Rafael Hirsch ZL to Reform Judaism: link (audio)

David Sacks discusses being a Shomer Torah Umitzvos in Hollywood: link (audio)

Footnoting Tradition

2010-06-15T21:32:00.006-04:00

The decision of where in the flow of an essay to place detailed citations and tangential comments entails a number of considerations. Footnotes allow for easy reference by the reader, easily going back and forth between text and note. However, lengthy footnotes clutter the page and make reading cumbersome. Even brief footnotes can be a little distracting.

Endnotes free the text from clutter and allow for quick review of sources cited. They also remove the brief distraction of citations on the page but add the significant distraction of flipping to the back of the book. It is difficult to read an essay straight through because of all the flipping. This can be made a little easier if the endnotes are labeled in a header as referring to specific pages in the book. But it doesn't remove the temptation to leave the page.

My personal preference is for footnotes because there is a significant benefit in terms of readability. However, my recommendation in general is that if the notes are long, put them in endnotes. If they are short, put them in footnotes. It is very confusing and inelegant to mix footnotes and endnotes within an essay (or book). Therefore, even a few long notes necessitate using endnotes.

It is noteworthy that the journal Tradition recently changed from endnotes to footnotes. It seems the switchover happened in the Summer 2009 issue (link). I greatly applaud this change. In my opinion, the reading experience is enhanced and the journal benefits from this refocus. While this is entirely a matter of taste, I find that even R. J. David Bleich's articles -- which often have lengthy notes -- benefit from the new format.

It seems to me that a journal of Tradition's nature requires notes because articles frequently addressed complex topics that cover over a millennium of literature. However, its large non-academic audience does not need or want long notes.

Charity Today

2010-06-15T21:27:00.007-04:00

The latest Orthodox Forum book was published: Toward a Renewed Ethic of Jewish Philanthropy (YU Press, 2010), Yossi Prager ed.: link. I was at this Orthodox Forum and remember some good arguments. Here is the table of contents:

Part 1: Sociology and History

Philanthropic Behavior of Orthodox Households by Jacob B. Ukeles
For the Poor and the Stranger: Fundraisers' Perspectives on Orthodox Philanthropy by Margy-Ruth Davis and Perry Davis
American Jewish Philanthropy, Direct Giving, and the Unity of the Jewish Community by Chaim I. Waxman

Public Charity in Medieval Germany: A Preliminary Investigation by Judah Galinsky
Jewish Philanthropy in Early Modern and Modern Europe: Theory and Practice in Historical Perspective by Jay Berkovitz

Part 2: Orthodoxy and Federations

Bound with Unseverable Bonds: The Orthodox Jew and the Jewish Community by Barry Shrage
Orthodox Involvement in Jewish Communal Philanthropy by Marvin Schick
Orthodoxy and Jewish Federations: Reflections from "Out-of-Town" by Michael Berger

Part 3: Halachic Perspectives

Jewish Philanthropy--Whither? by Aharon Lichtenstein
Our Poor and Their Poor: Philosophical Reflections by Baruch Brody
The Giving of Charity in Jewish Law: For What Purpose and Toward What Goal? by Michael J. Broyde
Think Local, Act Global: Tzedaka in a Global Society by Ozer Glickman
Ethics in Philanthropy: Should Synagogues and Mosdot Chinuch Accept Tainted Funds? by Kenneth Brander

Part 4: Contemporary Philanthropy

New Thinking for a Changing Philanthropic Climate by Mark Charendoffand Yossi Prager

Part 5: The Role of Rabbi As Fundraiser

The Role of the Rabbi in the Fiscal Health of His Congregation by Haskel Lookstein

On the topic of contemporary philanthropy, see this interesting essay about Jewish giving today by the president of the Steinhardt Foundation: link.

Air Pollution

2010-06-15T02:40:00.005-04:00

By: Rabbi Ari Enkin

The issue of air pollution, as we struggle with it today, is not directly discussed in the Talmud. There are, however, a number of Talmudic precedents and parallels which teach us that we are to show consideration for property, environment, and quality of life. These principles are especially applicable with regards to unjustifiable air pollution, especially if it affects others. Below are some examples.

In a discussion regarding the operation of furnaces, the Talmud rules that anyone who wants to set up a large furnace must do so at least 50 amot away from the city.[1] Indeed, there was an ancient enactment specifically prohibiting the use of furnaces in Jerusalem due to the effects of the smoke and other pollution it created.[2]

One is also not permitted to put one's garbage on public property and one who does so deserves to be fined.[3] So too, one is obligated to ensure that any activity or project which causes pollution or even leaves an offensive odor is distant enough from all others so that they are not affected by it.[4] It is interesting to note that in the event that there is a factory or other industry causing pollution but large numbers of city residents are dependant on the factory for their livelihood, the factory cannot be forced to close. An alternative solution or compromise, however, must be found.[5]

There is no statute of limitations with regards to air pollution, and neighbors can protest a person's polluting activities even years after they have been in operation.[6] An example of such an instance is the documented case of an individual who came to Rabbi Avraham, the son of the Rambam, and complained about a neighbor who was causing him great distress due to the clothes-dying business he was running. The fire from the dying furnace was producing excessive amounts of smoke which constantly found its was into the plaintiff's property. He claimed that the smoke was "ruining his life" and that he was also unable to hang his clothes outside as the smoke would ruin them. The defendant argued that he had been running the dying business for over fifteen years before the plaintiff had moved in, and therefore by virtue of seniority he should be permitted to continue his work unhindered. Rabbi Avraham decided in favor of the plaintiff and ruled that the defendant must cease his dying practice due to the rule that there is no statute of limitations with regards to damages.[7]

The issue of air pollution as well as all other forms of damage can be best summarized in the words of the Sefer Hachinuch who writes: "It is the way of the pious and those of good deeds that they have peace and rejoice in that which benefits people…and they never destroy even one grain of mustard in the world and they are upset by any destruction that they see. If they can save something, they will save anything from destruction in any way they can."[8]

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

[1] Tosefta, Bava Batra 1:10; Bava Kama 82b; C.M. 155:23
[2] Bava Kama 82b; cf. Bava Batra 23a
[3] CM 414:1
[4] CM 155:34
[5] Maharshach 2:98. Of related interest: The sefer Shem Hagedolim (Chida) quotes Rabbi Yaakov Alfandari as saying: "Mahari ibn Lev, Maharashdam, and Maharshach are to be considered like Rif, Rambam and Rosh.
[6] Bava Batra 23a
[7] Teshuvot Rabbeinu Avraham ben Harambam 101
[8] Sefer Hachinuch 529

Get-Together: They've Arrived

2010-06-14T22:07:00.000-04:00

This is your weekly reminder about the July 7th Hirhurim get-together/dinner (link 1, link 2). All readers, commenters and friends of the blog are invited to this free event.

That picture you see on the above right is the graphic I submitted to be put on the mugs. The mugs have arrived and below is a picture of one. It's a little blurry but that happens when you use a Blackberry to take pictures. These mugs will be a collector's item. You don't want to miss your opportunity to pick one up for free (along with another trinket).

Recall that I will be publishing a special Torah journal for the occasion, which is available to donors wishing to help sponsor the event. The articles are coming in. Recent scholars to submit essays include R. J. David Bleich, R. Aharon Rakeffet, R. Gidon Rothstein and R. Adam Mintz. More to come as the deadline approaches later this week.

Please RSVP to the event using this online form: link. Thank you.

Announcements #157: YCT 2010 Yemei Iyun on Bible and Jewish Thought

2010-06-14T14:25:00.001-04:00

Only Three Days Left for Early Bird Registration Discount for the 8th Annual YCT rabbinical School Yemei Iyun on Bible and Jewish Thought to be held Sunday, June 27-June 28, 2010 at the Maayanot Yeshiva High School in Teaneck, NJ

Register today and don't miss out on hearing leading educators and scholars of Bible and Jewish Thought such as R. Hayyim Angel and Rabbi Shalom Carmy on Sefer Yeshayahu, Rabbi Menachem Leibtag on The Structure and Themes of Sefer Devarim and Sefer Shoftim, Rabbi David Silber on Sefer Shmuel, Rabbi Dr. Gil Perl and Rabbi Francis Nataf on the Thought of the Netziv, Mrs. Rachel Friedman on the Sin of the Golden Calf, R. Moshe Kahn, Dr. Michelle Friedman and Rabbi Dov Linzer on Issues of Sexuality and Intimacy in the Jewish Tradition, and many many more.

For more informatiion please go to www.yctorah.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. Please note that announcements now cost $36 each.)

Books Received XXVI

2010-06-14T14:23:00.000-04:00

I don't always have the chance to review each book, so I'll list the books that I receive. Some of them will be quoted or reviewed in future posts. Here are the books I've received recently:

Jewish Ethics and Halachah For Our Time (new edition) by R. Basil Herring
Halachically Speaking volume 2 by R. Moshe Dovid Lebovits

Working Women

2010-06-13T21:38:00.003-04:00

Contrary to common belief, things are not so different from how they used to be. The ideal world of the past was not as perfect or different as many think.

Prof. Shaul Stampfer, "How Jewish Society Adapted to Change in Male/Female Relationships in 19th/early 20th Century Eastern Europe" in Rivka Blau ed., Gender Relationships In Marriage and Out, pp. 67, 69-70:

The most important fact is that a very significant percentage of Jewish women, perhaps a majority, worked in order to make ends meet.[4]They did not do this out of an ideology but out of lack of alternative. Most Jews were poor, and the income of women was often crucial to the financial well-being of a Jewish family. However, the ideal of a woman who supports her scholar-husband certainly strengthened the pattern of the working married woman and made it look legitimate and acceptable. There was no talk about working leading to the disintegration of the Jewish family. If anything, work contributed to its survival...

[T]here is no shortage of evidence that traditional Jewish society in Eastern Europe was characterized by a high level of divorce. Even a cursory reading of responsa literature quickly shows that divorce was one of the most common halakhic issues discussed. Reading through biographies of rabbis and of laymen also shows that divorce was a common experience. Rabbis married early in traditional society, and often divorced just as early. I found scattered statistical evidence for this, and ChaeRan Freeze in a recent monograph presented massive amounts of evidence that make it absolutely clear that divorce was widespread among Jews.[7] This is not evidence that Jews did not take marriage seriously or that women’s work outside the home dissolved the family fabric. There is no evidence that a Gan Eden of family life ever existed. What it does support is the claim that in traditional East European Jewish society women had relatively independent lives, though not equal rights. Under these conditions, when a woman was in an unhappy marriage, she could say to herself that if she were alone she could support herself almost as well and that her life would not be much worse for it. This, to repeat, was due to the economic role of Jewish women and to the acceptance of divorce by halakhah.[8]
[4] Charlotte Baum, “What Made Yetta Work” Response xviii (Summer 1973) pp.
32–38.
[7] ChaeRan Freeze, Jewish Marriage and Divorce in Imperial Russia (Hanover nh
2002).
[8] Compare Gary Becker, Treatise on the Family (Cambridge ma 1981).

New Periodical: Tradition 43:1

2010-06-13T21:36:00.009-04:00

There is a new issue of Tradition 43:1 (Spring 2010). This is a blockbuster issue in which every article is fascinating and important.

Editor's Note: A Peshat in the Dark: Reflections on the Age of Cary Grant by R. Shalom Carmy - Very important critique of undisciplined peshat and dismissal of tradition.
Self-Dealing in the Not-For-Profit Board Room: An Inquiry into a Trustee's Multi-Faceted Halakhic Identity by R. A. Yehudah Warburg - An analysis of the obligations of board members in the wake of Madoff. In which halakhic category is a board member -- an apotropus or a shali'ach? And the halakhic ramifications.
On Rationalizing Biblical Tum'a by R. Shlomo Spiro - A creative interpetation: impurity reflects a deviation from the Edenic ideal. I question how well it works on all cases but this is a worthy and original approach.
On the Methodology of Jewish Medical Ethics by Dr. Alan Jotkowitz - A study of the general approaches to Jewish medical ethics, informed from general trends in medical ethics. Recognition of these differing approaches can help maintaining consistency and recognizing new directions.
Short Selling and Jewish Law by R. Dr. Aaron Levine - Advocates the value of short selling in maintaining market equilibrium but prohibits naked shorts. Prohibits short selling your competitor's stock (I wonder if you can sell short an offshore competitor's stock because it does not pay tax). Also points out the rabbinic violation in inter-Jewish shorts but shows how to avoid the problem.
Sacrificing the Few to Save the Many by R. J. David Bleich - Can you shoot down a plane with innocent passengers to prevent terrorists from using the plane as a weapon? Proof after complex proof that the answer is no.
Communications - Dr. Joel Wolowelsky has to point out again that he was defending and not denying the Flood story (see this post: link). Dr. Russel Jay Hendel wonders why Dr. Nathan Aviezer doesn't mention his allegorical interpretation of the 6 days of Creation as a way of reconciling Torah and science.

Full issue here: link

Announcements #156: Pepsi Challenge

2010-06-11T10:17:00.000-04:00

Put down your check book. Raise your ability to lend your support by sending
off an e-mail.

The Lancaster Yeshiva Center has submitted a grant proposal accepted by THE
PEPSI REFRESH PROGRAM. We are now seeking online votes to satisfy
requirements to be awarded the $50,000 grant. The grant will help our
Vocational Training Program renovate uninhabitable city homes while training
vocational students.

Use the following link and cast your vote!
www.refresheverything.com/LancasterYeshivaCenter

Really want to help: TELL A FRIEND!

For more information about the Lancaster Yeshiva Center visit our web site
at www.lancasteryeshiva.com

(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. Please note that announcements now cost $36 each.)

Weekly Links

2010-06-11T08:36:00.003-04:00

Rules: link
Friday

Once we were young (by Joseph Kaplan): link

Free online edition of the YIVO encyclopedia: link

Conservative movement struggles over intermarrieds in cemetery: link

An illuminating journey through seven centuries: link

Orthodox teacher marks 75 years in classroom: link

Shaaray Tefilla celebrates a century: link

Missionaries in Flatbush: link

SALT today: link

Thursday

US’s ‘Great Recession’ is boon for aliya: link
The oldest synagogue in Greece: link
In the shadow of Nazi classic, director’s kin speak their minds: link
Conversion bill still troubles U.S. Jewish leaders: link
SALT today: link

Wednesday

Obama, Israel & American Jews: The Challenge—A Symposium: link
Jamaican hip-hopper turned Orthodox Jew: A candid talk with Yoseph Robinson: link
Israel's ultra-Orthodox turn to consumer clout: link
Ask the Rabbi: On being fruitful (I'm hashkafically against contraception during early marriage): link
Rav Belsky’s stance on the kashrus of worms in flesh of fish: link
Glatt kosher, pasture-raised meat: link
SALT today: link

Tuesday

The value of the humanities: David Brooks, Stanley Fish
Chief Rabbi Metzger: 'No mourning Gaza exit': link
State to blame for lack of haredim in workforce: link
Quoting biblical verses, man wins a million shekels: link
Rabbis without borders: link
R. Yisroel Belsky's teshuvah about worms in fish (and see this post: link): link
SALT today: link

Monday

Rubashkin found not guilty in child labor law case: link
New issue of Torah U-Mada Journal: link
Hooked on gadgets, and paying a mental price: link
Boxer with OU tattoo defeats rabbinical student: link
At Maimonides 38% of women giving birth are obese: link
Genetics & the Jews: link
Chosen, but not genius (reminiscent of this post, without the politics: link): link
SALT today: link

Audio Roundup XCVII

2010-06-10T21:34:00.001-04:00

by Joel Rich
Question: The general rules of “inheritance” of positions (e.g. Rabbi’s son has first rights to father’s position) – AIUI community can “hire” for positions with condition that this preference not apply. Is including such a condition (to paraphrase R’Asher Weiss) against the torah’s will or is the torah indifferent?

Question: According to many, the mitzvah of appointing a king for the first time was linked to “when you want one”. Did HKB”H have a preference for when we should have wanted one? [Note: The immediate stimulus in history seems to have been Shmuel’s son’s lack of popular support for communal leadership due to their actions].

Rav Asher Weiss-Aveilus in Sefira & Lo Tisgodedu: link

(Hebrew) Discussion of prohibition of making sects (agudot = differing practices by differeing subgroups) – is it duraita or drabanan?
Lag Baomer as a day of chesed – the usual reasons why we celebrate Lag Baomer plus perhaps it was the day that R’Akiva gave smicha to his later students (after the plague), thus day of great joy.
In today’s world the concerns of “sects” (agudot) do not arise for separate kehilot (e.g. shuls) in the same town but concerns do arise for differing practices in the same shul – one should not deviate from the shul’s practices in a public manner (me – so please don’t do nfilat apayim in my shul or Yom Yerushalayim).

Rabbi Shmuel Klammer -Foundations of Midot: Real Change: How?: link

We need both vhalachta bdrachav (imitato dei) and v’davakta (following role models) to develop middot. Part of a series.

Charlie Rose Brain Series- fear and anxiety: link

Speaking of midot – here’s the next in the Charlie Rose brain series, which indicates that prefrontal cortex manipulation is the focus of baalei mussar.
Analysis of our immediate reactions to outside stimuli as well as the somewhat delayed associated processed reactions. Also explores the relationship between genetics and cultural influences. Why does psychotherapy (especially behavioral vs. “deep couch”) work better for specific fears while drugs (medicine) work for general fears?
Why are flies grown in isolation more aggressive than their counter parts?
Dehumanization takes the brakes off the frontal cortex! Parents really matter (more than rabbeim?)

Rabbi Moshe D. Tendler -Horayos Shiur 1 - Introduction to Maseches Horayos: link

Beginning of June Zman shiur by R’Moshe Tendler.
Interesting insights on the issue of the “new psak” (egg donor is halachic mother) [vehement disagreement] and R’O Yosef psak methodology [step 1 – find every posek who ever opined].
Psak has its own methodology very much different from giving a shiur. Bet din pronounced psak in a formal ritualistic way.

Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz -Eating Before Davening: link

Eating (drinking) before shacharit?! Three reasons given, R’Aryeh thinks gaava (hubris) is the main one – discusses practical halachic implications.

Rabbi Yehuda Balsam -The Story of Bas Nakdimon ben Gurion part 1: link

Beginning analysis of Nakdimon Ben Gurion story (from wealth to poverty) given other stories of his righteousness. Good question (because I agree with it?) on our misheberachs and Maharsha’s good insight on people who became wealthy in an inappropriate manner (it’s not a positive – even if they name things after you)

Rabbi Yehuda Balsam -tovaa bashuk_ kolanis: link

Sounds like part of an ongoing series here focusing on “attention grabbing” clothing and actions in the context of the laws of tzniut.

Rabbi Gershon Segal-Of Faith and Factories: Kosher Supervision in the 21st Century: link

Explanation of why all fish oils require supervision.

Rabbi David Bistricer-Product Labels: Kashrus Lifeline?: link

Discussion of halachic status of food package seals and the need thereof.

Rav Assaf Bednarsh -Theology #07- Divine Providence and the Natural Order Part 3: link

A middle of the road – you need (and have) both hasgacha (HKB”H’s intervention) and hishtadlut (your effort). HKB”H channels his intervention through the natural order.

Rabbi Jesse Horn =Entering into the secular world: link

Mussar for M.O. students leaving the womb (hey – if it were easy, we wouldn’t get the schar – kfum tzara agra).

Rav Binyamin Tabory-She'elot uTeshuvot - Rav Menachem Kasher - Divrei Menachem: link

Prodigious author including the Torah Shlaimah, Haggada Shlaimah, Divrei Mnachem… - a Gerrer Chosid who was a Zionist as well.
Sh”ut on the Manhattan Island Eiruv (OK), Mezuzot on courtyards in Israel (Yes), trumot chiyuv in Jerusalem, Yom Tov sheini in new cities in Eretz Yisrael (didn’t know it was a question?)

Rabbi Kenneth Brander-Is All Fair in Love and War? Just & Unjust Wars through the prism of Jewish and Secular Thought: link

“Just” war in secular (me – if you think Aquinas is secular?) and Jewish thought. Focus on the Rambam requirement of always giving warning and how halacha emcompasses all elements of life/war.

Rav Moshe Taragin -Talmud Torah - Can a Person Choose what Field of Torah to Study?: link

Chumrah as a double edged sword – positive tool and dangerous distraction. You gotta know when to hold ‘em and when to fold ‘em (BTW, I always thought the eitzah – “There’ll be time enough for countin’ when the dealin’s done” is very worthwhile when applied to life/mitzvot as well).

Rabbi Shimon Isaacson -Practical Applications of Amira l'akum: link

Part of a series – some very practical halacha regarding amira l’akum (but why is it seemingly universally assumed that newspapers come from outside the tchum?)

Rabbi Assaf Bednarsh -halachot of childbirth: link

Excellent practical Q&A sessions including (since it’s very l’maaseh I won’t summarize answers) 1) return from false alarm or Shabbat; 2) call if unsure in labor?; 3) who can accompany; 4) how to get to hospital; 5) can you pay driver; 6) ancillary concerns if you drive; 7) turn off car once there?; 8) showering? 9) carrying? 10) type or phone to use; 11) other non Shabbat issues (can you babysit while wife learns?)

Speaking Halakhah

2010-06-10T21:25:00.005-04:00

We live in a time of plentiful books on practical halakhah and it is worthwhile noting when one such book stands out as unique. A few years ago, I pointed out the rarity of inclusive halakhah, of authors quoting authorities from the full spectrum of Orthodox authorities (link). Authors usually quote authorities from within their own orbit and maybe a little to the left and far to the right. I identified three authors, all from Yeshiva University, who have much wider grasps.

A recently published book disproves my theory that this is a uniquely YU trait. R. Moishe Dovid Lebovits, a Torah Voda'as alumnus, reaches beyond his comfort zone in his Halachically Speaking volume 2. The book is a collection of essays on extremely relevant halakhos, going into significant detail with multiple views and extensive footnotes. However, unlike many books in this genre, Halachically Speaking does not merely present different views and leave the reader uncertain how to act. He decides (or presents a decision) without negating the other positions.

I am often frustrated by books on halakhah that begin with a disclaimer stating that the rulings in the book cannot be followed. While I understand that the author is merely trying to teach Torah, readers want to put into practice what they learn. It is, therefore, refreshing that Halachically Speaking begins with a preface that states:

All halachos in this sefer may be relied upon for halachah l'maaseh. However, one who has a question regarding a specific case should follow the age-old practice regarding a specific case should follow the age-old practice of consulting with his halachic authority.

R. Lebovits tells the reader that the rulings in the book are reliable but advises people to still ask questions to their rabbis.

Without question, the most prominent authority featured in the book is the author's mentor, R. Yisroel Belsky. However, the author searches for relevant rulings in a wide variety of sources, including authorities from the Chasidic, Modern Orthodox and Religious Zionist worlds. Not only are R. Hershel Schachter and R. Yehudah Henkin cited, but my book is quoted as well (p. 111 n. 1).

In general, the book is not intended to be innovative. It is, instead, meant to inform readers of little-known laws that they shoud be observing and discuss the varying opinions. The book is meant as a guide to the topics covered, and in that it succeeds. It is well-informed about the reality it discusses and well-aware of the latest halakhic publications.

Unlike some compendia, this book does not tend to be strict in order to fulfill all of the views cited. Nor is it overly lenient. The author and the authorities he consults call them like they see them. Sometimes that means being strict and sometimes lenient.

Parashah Roundup: Korach 5770

2010-06-09T22:05:00.002-04:00

by Steve Brizel

The Rebellion of Korach

Rav Soloveitchik ZL explores the unique nature of the rebellion of Korach and its contemporary ramifications: link (audio)

R Mosheh Lichtenstein, based on the commentary of the Netziv, examines the motives of Korach., Dasan , Aviram and their followers: link

R Herschel Schachter reminds us that the complaints of Korach can be traced back to the reluctance of Klal Yisrael at Maamad Har Sinai to accept Torah SheBaal Peh , which was ultimately rejected when the first Mitzos of a Rabbinic nature were instituted in the aftermath of Purim, unfortunately remain alive and well in many sectors of our communities and that Halacha can only be analyzed as a self contained discipline: link 1, link 2

R Berel Wein and R Yitzchak Etshalom discusses the reaction of Moshe Rabbeinu to the arguments of Korach and his supporters: link 1, link 2

R Yissocher Frand suggests why Korach accused Moshe Rabbeinu of seeking honor for himself: link

The Nesivos Shalom, as explicated by R Yitzchak Etshalom, based on the interpretation of the Zohar , R Ephraim Buchwald and R Asher Brander explore the roots of Sinas Chinam and Machlokes Shelo L”Shem Shmayaim: link 1, link 2, link 3

R Asher Weiss discusses the Halachic principal of Mitzvah HaBaah Baverah: link (audio)

R Yonasan Sacks, based on the teachings of R Asher Weiss, illustrates why the attributes of fire and water, which are viewed in the Medrash as the means by which Torah is acquired, were not used in a proper manner in the episode of the spies and the rebellion of Korach: link and explores the idea of Ratzon HaTorah: link

R Avraham Gordimer explores why Aharon HaKohen was a prime target of Korach’s arguments: link

R Baruch Simon illustrates the differences between true and false unity: link (audio)

R Avigdor Nevenzal explores Moshe Rabbeinu’s response to Korach and Chazal’s critique of the response ( Sotah 13b) , especially with respect to a person’s spiritual growth and the danger of being a Nogea BaDavar: link 1, link 2 (audio)

R Shlomoh Riskin reminds us of the critical error and presumption of Korach that merely being present at Maamad Har Sinai rendered anyone on the same spiritual level as Moshe Rabbeinu: link

R Dovid Horwitz, based on a drasha of R Fabian Schonfeld, demonstrates why the staff of Aharon HaKohen was “among the staffs.”: link (audio)

R Dovid Gottlieb analyzes the Halacha of Ain Shliach L’Dvar Averah: link (audio)

R Sir Jonathan Sacks explores why Moshe Rabbeinu’s victory over Korach was incomplete: link

R Aharon Soloveitchik ZL and Yivadleinu Lchaim Tovim R Daniel Z. Feldman analyze the prohibition of engaging in Machlokes: link 1 (audio), link 2 (audio)

R Hershel Schachter examines the 24 Matnos Kehunah: link (audio)

Jewish History Department

R D Shnayer Leiman analyzes the roles of several Gdolei HaAcharonim in the Emden-Eibshutz Controversy: link 1 (PDF), link 2 (PDF), link 3 (PDF)

Contemporary Halacha Special

R Shmuel Marcus examines the worms and fish controversy: link (audio)

R Baruch Simon and R Aryeh Leibowitz discuss Hilcos P’as HaRosh: link 1 (audio), link 2 (audio), link 3 (audio)

Ball Playing on Shabbos

2010-06-09T21:34:00.000-04:00

The Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 308:45) forbids playing ball on Shabbos or Yom Tov (even in a place where there is an eruv). The Rema (ad loc.) writes that the custom is to be lenient. However, later authorities overwhelmingly disagree with, or limit, the Rema's leniency.

The Magen Avraham (518:4) and Taz (518:2) rule that the leniency only applies to children under the age of bar mitzvah. The Mishnah Berurah (518:9) is similarly strict. Shemiras Shabbos Ke-Hilkhasah (16:1,6) also forbids it to anyone above bar mitzvah.

R. Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld (Salmas Chaim 1:71) rules like the Shulchan Arukh, and therefore forbids even children to play ball. R. Chaim Na'eh (Badei Ha-Shulchan 110:16) rules that the Rema's leniency only applies to an ad hoc game and not anything scheduled in advance.

However, the Shulchan Arukh Ha-Rav (308:83) writes that the practice has been to be lenient and no one protested because those who are lenient have on what to rely. The Arukh Ha-Shulchan (308:70, 518:8) is entirely lenient, permiting playing ball on Shabbos and Yom Tov.

R. Pinchas Bodner (The Halachos of Muktzeh, p. 22 n. 16, p. 25) rules like the Shulchan Arukh Ha-Rav but adds that it is "not proper" but "cannot be prohibited (since technically no Shabbos prohibitions are violated)."

In concluding his discussion of this subject, R. J. Simcha Cohen writes (Shabbat The Right Way: Resolving Halachic Dilemmas, p. 124) writes:

Organized ball games (or other athletic activities) that involve anyone over the age of bar/bat mitzvah appear to be in violation of uvda de-chol. They contravene the mitzvot of mikra'ei kodesh and ba-yom ha-shevi'i tishbot. Thus, they should be strongly discouraged...

Between the ages of five (commonly assumed to be the lowest age for chinuch) and bar/bat mitzvah, the propriety of ball-playing may be a matter of dispute due to a difference of opinion regarding the age of chinuch. Therefore its appropriateness will depend upon the evaluation of the rabbi of the individual children involved and the community's requirements.

Of course, everyone should ask their own rabbi.

Barukh Dayan Ha-Emes

2010-06-09T06:25:00.000-04:00

The funeral for the father of frequent commenter Thanbo (his name is on his blog: link) is today at 1:30 pm at Plaza Jewish Community Chapel. Shiva information in the comments section.

Rabbi Halevy on New Women's Religious Roles

2010-06-08T21:23:00.000-04:00

Rabbi Haim David Halevy was the Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv from 1972 until his death in 1998. He was a prominent halakhist, prolific author and a creative thinker. This courageous and innovative decisor, who was very cognizant of the modern condition, had a definite view of expanding public roles for women in Jewish ritual.

Rabbis Marc and Hayyim Angel, Rabbi Haim David Halevy: Gentle Scholar and Courageous Thinker, p. 100:

Rabbi Halevy was asked about the permissibility of women's prayer groups. He was not favorably disposed, arguing that "our religiously proper mothers would never have considered such a thing." He viewed women's prayer groups as being unfaithful to the holy traditions of Israel. When asked whether women may participate in the recitation of the seven wedding blessings, Rabbi Halevy responded that this constituted a breach of modesty and should not be condoned. In these cases, then, he felt that traditional halakhic norms should not be set aside due to changes in the sociological factors relating to the status of women in society.

Kissing Children in Shul

2010-06-08T02:28:00.003-04:00

By: Rabbi Ari Enkin

Among the many halachic regulations concerning one's conduct in the synagogue sanctuary is the prohibition against kissing another person. This is especially true regarding one's children. The ban on kissing one's children in the synagogue was instituted in order to remind ourselves that the love we must feel for God should exceed even that which we feel towards our children.[1] It is argued that if one was permitted to freely kiss one's children in the synagogue, it would blur the role of the synagogue as a place where one is to focus exclusively on God.[2] It does not matter whether one's children are young or if they are adults.[3]

It is permitted, however, to kiss the hand of one's parent or rabbi should that be the local custom, as doing so is a sign of honor and respect rather than affection.[4] In fact, the practice of kissing the hand of an elder in the synagogue is one which dates back to Talmudic times.[5] As such, we see that giving a kiss in a religious context is often more of a ceremonial gesture than an affectionate one. Indeed, although physical contact between men and women is generally forbidden, there have been rabbis in the past who have permitted a woman to kiss a man's hand, such as the hand of a great sage, as doing so is considered to be a sign of honor rather than affection.[6]

According to a number of authorities, the prohibition against kissing in the synagogue applies exclusively to kissing one's children and not to others. This is because the feelings that one has for one's children are unlike those for any other person.[7] Consequently, the widespread practice of a father kissing his son following the latter's Bar Mitzva aliya is halachically problematic according to all opinions. Conversely, kissing any other person following an aliya or other synagogue honor, as is the custom in many Sefardic congregations, would be permissible according to this approach.[8] Among the reasons for the custom to kiss one who has received an aliya is because such a person is said to be imbued with an added measure of holiness. It is taught that kissing such a person immediately following their aliya can impart some of this holiness onto oneself.[9] Others, including many Sefardic authorities, discourage kissing even in such circumstances.[10]

Nevertheless, it is permitted to kiss one's child in the synagogue if necessary in order to calm him down after getting hurt, or the like.[11] One is also permitted to kiss one's child in order to make the child feel important, encouraged, or as praise for something positive the child has done, such as asking or answering a sharp Torah question.[12] This is similar to the custom of the Talmudic sages who would kiss one who has delivered an impressive Torah discourse. This was practiced both in the synagogue and even in the Beit Hamikdash.[13]

Finally, there is a view among some halachic authorities that the prohibition against kissing one's children in the synagogue applies only while services are being conducted, but is permissible at all other times.[14] This innovative ruling is based on the observation that the halacha which forbids kissing in the synagogue is codified in the Shulchan Aruch under "The Laws of Prayer" and not under "The Laws of the Synagogue".

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

[1] Rema, OC 98:1
[2] Sefer Chassidim 255, Binyamin Ze'ev 163
[3] Binyamin Zev 163, Sefer Chassidim 255
[4] Yechave Daat 4:12, Kaf Hachaim 151:6, Or L'tzyion 2:45:35, Ishei Yisrael 11:footnote 64
[5] Avoda Zara 17a;Rashi
[6] Od Yosef Chai, Shoftim
[7] Kaf Hachaim, OC 98:10
[8] Ben Ish Chai;Vayikra 11
[9] L'david Emmet 5:34
[10] Yechave Daat 4:12, Ben Ish Chai;Vayikra 11
[11] Rivevot Ephraim 2:61, Veharev Na;Shemot, Aleinu Leshabeiach p.579
[12] Veharev Na;Shemot
[13] Avot D'rabbi Natan 6, Nedarim 96, Kalla 1:21. See Piskei Teshuvot 98 note 70
[14] Piskei Teshuvot 98:7

Get-Together Reminder

2010-06-07T19:31:00.008-04:00

As mentioned earlier (link), we are having a Hirhurim get-together/dinner on July 7th. All readers, commenters and friends of the blog are invited to this free event.

You must RSVP so we have a headcount and can make appropriate accommodations. Please do so here: link. Leave questions in the comments to this post or e-mail me.

Note that we will be giving away Hirhurim trinkets (including coffee mugs) for free.

As mentioned, I will be paying for the evening but I am asking for help subsidizing the event by those who can. As encouragement for large donations, I am publishing a special Torah journal for the occasion with articles from prominent rabbis. The journal will have a section on Judaism and communications technology. Allow me to reveal the titles of some of the articles that have already been submitted (although many more have been promised):

Challenges of the Information Age
Teshuvot Regarding Technology
Torah in English
Info-Snacking
Scientific Advance and the Jewish Moral Conscience
The Evolution of Halacha and the Internet

Order the journal on the RSVP page: link.

Me-Am Lo'ez: The Lost Translation

2010-06-06T21:30:00.009-04:00

I. Standard Translation

Psalm 114 is very familiar because it is part of Hallel, the group of Psalms recited liturgically on holidays, Rosh Chodesh (beginning of the new month) and at the Passover seder. The first verse has an unusual word that is surprisingly translated universally the same despite the availability of an alternate, and arguably preferable, translation.

בצאת ישראל ממצרים בית יעקב מעם לעז

The traditional translation (Old JPS and KJV) is:

When Israel came forth out of Egypt, the house of Jacob from a people of strange language

Me-am lo'ez (מעם לעז) is rendered as "from a people of strange language" (hence the title of the famous Ladino anthology of commentaries on the weekly Torah portion: link). The word lo'ez is unique in the Bible. One possibly related word is in Isaiah 33:19 - "es am n'oaz". Rashi (ad loc.) says that "no'az" is another form of "lo'ez" and renders the phrase, "a nation speaking a foreign language". Ibn Ezra, however, believes it comes from the word "az" and the phrase means "a strong nation". That is also how Targum understands it, translating no'az as takif.

II. Talmudic Translations

Absent any biblical hint of the meaning of lo'ez, commentators went to the Talmud. The Mishnah (Megillah 2:1) uses it to mean someone who speaks a foreign language, in the context of whether one can read the scroll of Esther on Purim in a different (non-Hebrew) language for the benefit of people who understand that language. Therefore, Rashi and other commentators translate me-am lo'ez in the verse as meaning "from a nation that speaks a different language". Some see this as meaning that the nation was entirely foreign, either that the Jews heroically failed to assimilate or that it was simply inhospitable. However, there is an alternative to this translation which, arguably, allows for an even better interpretation.

R. Donash Ibn Librat, in his critiques of his mentor R. Sa'adia Gaon's Arabic translation of the Bible (see this post: link), offers a different translation of the phrase. R. Sa'adia Gaon evidently translated as above. R. Donash (par. 45) points out that the term lo'ez is predominantly used in the Talmud in a different fashion.

The Arukh (not quoted by R. Donash) has two entries for la'az. The first refers to the Mishnah above, which uses the word to mean someone who speaks a foreign language. In a parenthetic comment, the Arukh (or a later gloss) states that this is the meaning of the phrase in our verse. The second entry translates la'az as slander or denigrating language. This is, indeed, the predominant usage of the term in the Talmud (e.g. Pesachim 51a; Gittin 5b; Kiddushin 81a; Nidah 13a).

III. Alternate Translation

R. Donash suggests that this latter meaning is the correct translation of me-am lo'ez. The phrase refers to an oppressive nation; the Jews were taken from Egypt, whose people were denigrating and oppressing their slaves. R. Donash points out that lo'ez in Arabic means a destroyer and an adulterer, similar to this translation of "oppressor".

Interestingly, R. Donash is most famous for his critiques of R. Menachem Ibn Saruk's Machberes Menachem. However, in this case, R. Menachem and R. Donash seem to agree. R. Menachem (sv. laz - link - PDF), explains me-am lo'ez as "inyan zadon hu", which probably here means "malicious nation". This seems closer to R. Donash's translation than Rashi's and R. Sa'adia Gaon's.

Targum on the verse translates lo'ez as "barberai". My initial inclination was to align this with R. Donash, referring to a barbaric and oppressive people. But that is probably just a modern connotation of the word. Jastrow translates "barberaya" as meaning simply "foreign people," which corresponds with Rashi's traditional translation.

The only other commentator I could find who even mentions R. Donash's translation is Ibn Ezra, who notes the two talmudic usages of the word. I could not find any other commentator or grammarian. For example, R. Yonah Ibn Janach (Sefer Ha-Shorashim sv. laz), Radak (commentary, ad loc.; Sefer Ha-Shorashim sv. laz) and R. Menachem Meiri (commentary, ad loc.) all translate me-am lo'ez as "from a nation that speaks a foreign language". I found this highly surprising

R. Donash's translation seems to me to be preferable. Is it really such a big deal that the Jews were enslaved by a foreign nation that spoke a different language? Granted, this allowed for greater misunderstanding and less assimilation. But, really, that only applies to the first generation of immigrants. Later generations were certainly able to communicate in Egyptian, even if it wasn't their primary language. Note that the Midrash consistently lists four reasons that Jews were redeemed from Egypt (which, in various versions, sometimes include that they didn't change their language, clothes and names). Clearly, language alone was not a sufficient barrier to assimilation and other factors contributed. Why would the verse only mention language? It seems more significant to me to describe the Egyptian people as denigrating and oppressive.

IV. Modern Translations

I could not find a single English translation that significantly differed from the standard approach. Even Robert Alter (The Book of Psalms: A Translation with Commentary, p. 433) translates the phrase as "barbarous-tongued folk" and R. Aaron Lichtenstein (not the son-in-law of R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik), in his recent The Book of Psalms in Plain English, translates it as "foreign land". My admittedly brief internet search of Christian and academic translations and commentaries yielded a similar result -- translations referring to foreign language, foreign nation or foreign land.

R. Amos Chakham, in the Da'as Mikra commentaries to Isaiah (33:19) and Psalms (114:1), similarly adopts the standard interpretation. In the latter place, he explains (in a somewhat forced fashion, in my opinion) that because they spoke a foreign language, they were oppressive.

Interestingly, the only approaches similar to that of R. Donash I have found in modern writings are in homiletical commentaries to the Passover haggadah. For example, R. Chaim Yosef David Azulai (the Chida), interprets the phrase in his Simchas Ha-Regel commentary to the haggadah as referring to denigration. Interestingly, he says nothing about the phrase in his commentary to Psalms. I have found some other haggadah commentaries that similarly translate the phrase according to the second talmudic usage, like R. Donash, but proceed in a more homiletic direction.

Weekly Links

2010-06-04T08:52:00.002-04:00

Rules: link
Friday

Recession fuels rise in Russian aliyah: link

RCBC: Give more charity dollars to local causes: link

Sperber to explore the role of women in worship during Teaneck talk: link

Jews around the world linked by common genetic ancestry: link

The Holocaust in Lithuania: One man's crusade to bring justice: link

NY's 'Kosher Meals on Wheels' in trouble: link

SALT today: link

Thursday

Matzav blasts YWN for publishing PETA letter: link
An open letter from PETA’s senior researcher to YWN: link
NY to conduct civil ceremonies for gay couples: link
Links to opinion pieces on Israel and the flotilla: link 1, link 2
Prof. Aryeh Frimer: Women in Community Leadership Roles – Shul Presidents: link
The life (and death and life) of the Lubavitcher Rebbe: link
Groups want stronger U.S. defense of Israel, Obama not obliging: link
SALT today: link

Wednesday

Almost half of US supermarket products kosher: link
Too many articles and links about Israel so just visit the Muqata for news, pictures and videos: link
55% of seculars prefer not to buy Eda Haredit Badatz products: link
Fairfax teacher found not guilty of molesting girl: link
Lone Jewish high school student faces down Arab mob in LA: link
SALT today: link

Tuesday

Only one thing in the news now - Israel and the flotilla. Too many articles and links so just visit the Muqata for news, pictures and videos: link
SALT today: link

Monday

At JTS, Goodbye Wissenschaft, Hello Relevance: link
Private schools failing on fingerprint checks: link
IDF plans massive haredi recruitment: link
Treasury proposes exempting Haredim from IDF draft at 22: link
SALT today: link

Audio Roundup XCVI

2010-06-03T21:32:00.000-04:00

by Joel Rich

For my B-I-L who liked this issue better than Tachanun. Here are 2 viewpoints on the 2 people in the desert issue where a third party has the water.

Chazon Ish
It seems that if someone has water and two thirsty people are in front of him, this too would be dependent on the argument; according to Ben-Petura he gives both equally and both will die and even if he gave one of the two, that one would have to split it with the other. And according to R’Akiva, he can give it to either one. And even though for the giver, there is no situation of “his life comes first”, even so since the one getting it will save himself, the giver can give it to one.

R’Chaim
It seems that if Reuven has a jug of water, and both Shimon & Levi are thirsty, all would agree that you give an equal amount to both and they will both die, since if he gives it to Shimon, Levi will die now and Shimon keep the water for tomorrow.

Questions: 1) Is R’Chaim based on the understanding that R’Akiva’s “your life first” is the exception to the general rule? What is the principle behind the general rule? (me – who says your blood is redder?); 2) According to R’Chaim, if Reuven gave the water to Shimon, is it now a case for Shimon of “your life 1st?” If so, how does this inform on the case where it’s just Shimon and Levi and Shimon steals the water from Levi?; 3) According to the Chazon Ish, what does HKB”H want Reuvain to do (split or not, and how does he choose if he wants to give it to one – based on the mishna in Horiyot or coin flip or whim?

Rabbi Shmuel Marcus -Worms in Fish: When Torah and Science Collide?: link

“Mr., is this fish fresh?” Well done (as opposed to sushi?) shiur tracing the worms in fish skin issue from Talmudic sources to shulchan aruch to 1970’s/80’s (comes around like Haley’s Comet?) to present day.
Parallel to other seeming torah/science “conflicts” (e.g. spontaneous generation) and how halacha approaches these issues.
Personally, I prefer the symmetric approach to halacha (i.e. call ‘em consistently as you see ‘em whether l’chumrah or l’kula). Funny that R’Slifkin has a letter to R’Belsky post up recently!

Rabbi Eli Ozarowski -Hilchot Hashevat Aveidah - Find Lost Objects: link

1st in a series. Three mitzvot involved in lost objects and practical applications and exceptions. (Question – does returning a “generation lost in space” qualify?)
R’Ozarowski’s call for help from YUTORAH listeners to understand the historical background of a R’Moshe Tshuva yielded the following link from a semi-alert, old fogey.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_Hills_Co-op_Houses

Rabbi Yona Reiss -Retroactive Nullification of Geirus: link

Does geirut work on a snapshot basis (i.e. it’s yes or no at the split second of conversion, or can later events inform on the conversion?) [another “Daddy” issue – the whole space/time continuum in halacha] The Rambam’s famous unclear section on the issue. Differing opinions discussed (both as to the actions of the ger and of the beit din).

Rav Binyamin Tabory -She'elot uTeshuvot - Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner - Shevet HaLevi: link

“Kulah” – can make a bracha on seeing a queen (no snickering please). Rabbi who forgot sfirah one night can count with a bracha in the shul future nights due to a kavod hatorah.
“Chumrah” – driving is not Tzanuah nor is public speaking or singing zmirot or seeing a male ob/gyn.
“Actuarial” – it’s not a lack of bitachon to save for retirement or buy life insurance (but “special” people can rely on bitachon?!)

Rabbi Daniel Z. Feldman -Ona'as Devarim: link

Good review of the general rules. Interesting insight from R’Bleich that underlying issue is treating people with lack of respect. Good discussion of the import of the talmud’s statement that embarrassing someone is akin to murder.

Rabbi Chaim Eisenstein -Bamidbar - kedushat seforim in halacha and machshava: link

The halachot of selling sfarim from your personal collection (seems like shouldn’t be able to from the original sources). R’ Eisenstein – here’s the link to the R’YBS shiur on “Nosiim anachnu” – There’s more than one Baal habayit who cries when he hears this parsha being read: link

Rav Assaf Bednarsh -Theology - Divine Providence and the Natural Order Part 1: link

a) Hishtadlut (making our own efforts) vs b) Bitachon (it’s all up to HKB”H)
1) Rambam – heavily a) (= natural order) except for those who (almost) completely actualize their intellect to understand HKB”H; 2) Ramban – there is natural order, it would be perfect to rely on HKB”H; b) but no guarantee

Rav Assaf Bednarsh -Theology - Divine Providence and the Natural Order Part 2: link

Mussar approach (chovot halevavot up through R’Dessler). There is no natural order – “but myself I can’t deceive, I know it’s only make believe”. So why make any effort? - a few reasons – my favorite - so others will have free will to be deceived into believing there is a natural order.

Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky-Halachos of Paskening Sha'alos: link

What do you need to be able to give psak? 1) Torah knowledge; 2) factual knowledge (mitziut); 3) ability to communicate properly; 4) not bfnei rabo (in front of his rebbi) – could be due to respect or concern HKB”H won’t assist in this situation. Does this only apply to rebbi muvhak (that you learned the majority of your torah knowledge)?
We are not so concerned nowadays about answering our own questions!?
Need a combination of fear of heaven and effort/knowledge.

Rav Moshe Taragin -Talmud Torah - Torah of Love and Torah of Fear: link

The study of torah as a step in increasing both Yirat Hashem (awe of HKB”H) and Ahavat Hashem (love of HKB”H). A very nice insight on the meaning of the Shimon Haamsoni story (he learned something from all the etim in the torah and then unlearned them when he got stuck on one) – a lesson in coherence.

Rav Binyamin Tabory-She'elot uTeshuvot - Divrei Yetziv - Rav Yekutiel Halberstadt - Sanzer Rebbe: link

The Klausenberger Rebbi was very active in the community (Kiryat Sanz) as well as writing many sh”ut.
Discussed here 1) Bar mitzvah boys – no tfillin prior to bar mitzvah; 2) Tfillin on chol hamoed – pre marriage the boys wear tfillin, post not! Perhaps based on seriousness that people at those ages exhibit; 3) bringing weapons into a shul (how it is ok?); 4) status of mosques in halacha.

Rabbi Moshe D. Tendler -Geirus I: link

Geirut is a transfer of Kedusha (holiness) by the beit din, assumes at the point of geirut a total commitment to following commands.
Discussion of locating the mitzvah of geirut.
R’MT defines 2 classes of geirim – 1) Kedushat Yisrael; 2) Kedushat Kahal Yisrael and some differences in rights and requirements.

Rabbi Hershel Schachter -Talmud Torah Kineged Kulam: link

Some nice stories about torah learning’s centrality. Importance of simple pshat & knowing what and when to learn.

Rabbi Moshe Shulman-Seeking G-d in a Turbulent World: The Mystique of Kaddish: link

Some of the standard source material on Kaddish transitioned into an interesting take on why Yehei Shmei Rabbah remains in Aramaic. He ties to the saying of baruch shem kvod after the churban and the angels not understanding Aramaic (don’t ask me about this) – angels see things in black and white (and immediate?). We see future (yhei shmei is reference to messianic era where all recognize HKB”H).

Rabbi Ari Enkin- Kol Isha: link

Good review of sources on Kol Isha (women’s voices) and specific possible exceptions to a broad based prohibition (me – “once upon a time – there was a tavern; those were the days my friend”).

Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz - Intuiting Ratzon Hashem: link

2 requirements – 1) want to do good; 2) know what HKB”H wants of you. R’Asher Weiss talks of the ratzon hatorah or ratzon hashem where the key issue is to be yashar and connected to the ratzon hashem (R’AL – only through talmidei chachomim?) There are no specific directives.

Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz -Seudah Shelishis: link

Good review of the specifics of shalosh seudot:
*Rabanan of duraita
*women’s Chiyuv
*earliest, latest, most appropriate time slot
*what foods
*lechem mishna?

Rabbi Eliakim Koenigsberg -When is Oseik B'Mitzvah Patur Min HaMitzvah: link

Discussion of the parameters of haosek bmitzvah (if one is doing one mitzvah they are exempt/not bound by another). Exempt/not bound is the issue – e.g. if it’s a temporary exemption (ptur) then maybe should do make up later, if not bound (eino chayav) then not.
Discussion of why talmud torah is not subject to this rule – one possibility mitzvah is to learn when no other chiyuv.

Rav Moshe Taragin -Talmud Torah - The Clarity and the Mystery of Torah: link

Duality/dynamic tension between the clarity and magic/mystery of torah. (Nice illusion to creiti and pleiti representing these.)
I loved the comparison of the Brisker and scientific methods (ha to all of you who make fun of me for calling sugyot “data points”.)

Was Rabbi Hillel a Heretic?

2010-06-03T21:28:00.003-04:00

There is a surprising statement in the Talmud that, at least initially, denies one of the fundamental principles of Jewish faith. The question, though, is what did the statement mean?

Sanhedrin (99a):

Rabbi Hillel said: There is no messiah for Israel for he was consumed in the time of Chizkyahu. Rav Yosef said: May Rabbi Hillel's Master forgive him. Chizkiyahu lived during the First Temple while Zechariah prophecied during the Second Temple.

Who is this Rabbi Hillel? R. Aharon Hyman (Toledos Tanna'im Ve-Amora'm, vol. 1 pp. 362-375) lists 14 different people named Hillel who appear in the Talmud. He attributes this statement to Hillel II (late second century), grandson of R. Yehudah Ha-Nasi and younger brother of R. Yehudah Nesi'ah I. It seems from the Gemara that Rabbi Hillel accepted the concept of a messiah but limited it to a time period that had already passed, to which Rav Yosef pointed out the Zechariah's prophecies of a future redemption seemed to disprove.

What did R. Hillel mean and how could he deny Zechariah's prophecies?

Rashi (ad loc.) explains that R. Hillel accepted the concept of a future redemption but merely held that there will be no individual who will bring that redemption. Rather, God will do it without a human messenger. If so, the debate with Rav Yosef was about whether Zechariah's prophecies necessarily entail a messiah or can be understood as foreseeing a redemption by God alone. R. Ya'akov Ibn Chaviv, in his introduction to Ein Ya'akov, and the Maharal (Chiddushei Aggadah, ad loc.) follow this approach.
R. Moshe Ha-Levi Abulafia (Yad Ramah, ad loc.) begins by suggesting that R. Hillel denied any redemption but then said that some explain that R. Hillel was only denying the person of the messiah (like Rashi), which he disputes. According to R. Abulafia, it is unclear how R. Hillel understood the prophecies of Zechariah.
Rabbenu David Bonfil, a student of the Ramban, explains in his commentary to Sanhedrin (ad loc.) that R. Hillel was saying that we will go straight to the period of the World-to-Come and skip the period of redemption known as the Messianic Era, in which there will be battles and the messiah will rule as king until the dead are resurrected (this follows the Ramban's views and not the Rambam's). He is not denying the coming of the messiah but stating that the process of redemption will be condensed. Presumably, R. Hillel believed that Zechariah's prophecies can be interpreted as referring to the World-to-Come.
R. Yosef Albo (Sefer Ha-Ikkarim 1:1) suggests that R. Hillel was not denying that the messiah will come; he fully believed in it based on a tradition. Rather, he was saying that there is no proof for this belief from the Bible. R. Albo then rebuts this explanation and explains that R. Hillel denied the concept of the messiah. However, he was not a heretic because he accepted the bare minimum of beliefs (God, Torah and Reward & Punishment) and only mistakenly rejected this. The Radbaz (Responsa 4:186) takes this same general approach. It is unclear, according to this approach, how R. Hillel understood Zechariah's prophecies.
R. Avraham Chaim Schorr (Toras Chaim, ad loc.) seems to explain that R. Hillel believed in a messianic redemption but that it will occur without miracles, because all of the miracles already occurred. Rav Yosef argued that Zechairah prophesied miracles and therefore they must happen. The dispute, then, was over the interpretation of Zechariah's prophecies.

Theological Analysis of Nonsense

2010-06-02T21:38:00.001-04:00

R. J. David Bleich, “Lomdut and Pesak: Theoretical Analysis and Halakhic Decision-Making” in Lomdus: The Conceptual Approach to Learning, pp. 106-107:

Elsewhere, I have had occasion to point out that the gross distortion of Halakhah that has been committed in some quarters in groundlessly declaring a state of kiddushei ta’ut [marriage based on error] and issuing annulments is based upon a misunderstanding of the principle tav le-meitav tan du mi-le-meitav armelu (better to dwell as two than to dwell alone).The proposition that women prefer marriage to persons suffering from certain physical defects over spinsterhood is cited by the Gemara, Bava Kamma 110b, in explaining why levirate obligations exist even when the brother-in-law suffers from such a condition.

In recent decades the argument has been made that in the modern era, in light of changed economic conditions making it possible for women to earn their own livelihood, different social attitudes toward single women, the higher regard and dignity in which women are held, as well as women’s own heightened sense of esteem and self-worth, the Talmudic vision of women has been rendered obsolete and continues the argument, halakhic provisions based upon the presumption of tav le-meitav must be regarded as nugatory. Years ago, R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik declared that rejection of Hazal’s application of tav le-meitav “borders…on the heretical.” To my mind, the more fundamental point is that such rejection does not border upon, but is squarely within, the boundaries of am ha’aratzut. Nonsense is nonsense; theological analysis of nonsense can only create an aura of cogency where none exists.

UPDATE: Full article available here: link.

Parashah Roundup: Shelach 5770

2010-06-02T21:24:00.000-04:00

by Steve Brizel

The Sin of the Spies

Rav Soloveitchik ZL explores the connection between the sin of Miriam and the report of the spies: link (audio)

R Mosheh Lichtenstein , R Yaakov Meidan, and R Michael Rosensweig examine who were the spies, their mission, and the reaction of Yehoshua and Kalev and why the Mitzvos of Nesachim, Challah and Sieri Avodah Zarah are revealed in the aftermath of the report of the spies: link 1, link 2, link 3, link 4, link 5 (audio)

R Yissocher Frand explains why Yehoshua and Kalev were not influenced by the report of the spies: link

R Yitzchak Etshalom, based in part on an essay by R Yaakov Meidan, examines the consequences of the sin of the spies: link

The Nesivos Shalom suggests where the spies erred in their evaluation of the Land of Israel: link

R Shlomoh Riskin evaluates the decision making process that motivated Moshe Rabbeinu to send the spies on their mission: link

R Asher Brander explores how Moshe Rabbbeinu was able to change a Divine Decree in the wake of the sins of the Golden Calf and the report of the spies: link

R Avigdor Nevenzal discusses the long term historical effects and reverberations of the report of the spies: link

R Ephraim Buchwald examines why the report of the spies was a graver transgression than the sin of the Golden Calf: link

R Baruch Simon explains why the letter “Yud” was added to Yehoshua: link (audio)

R Dovid Gottlieb examines whether there is a religious litmus test to count in a minyan and the transgression of the woodchoppers: link 1 (audio), link 2 (audio)

The Mitzvah and Halacos of Challah

R Hershel Schachter and R Joshua Flug explore the halachos of Hafrashas Challah: link 1 (audio), link 2, link 3

The Halachos of Lashon Harah

R Daniel Z. Feldman discusses the Halachos of Lashon Harah: link (audio)

The Mitzvah of Tzitzis

R Asher Weiss discusses the Halachic aspects of the Mitzvah of Tzitzis: link (audio)

R Berel Wein explores the relationship between the Mitzvah of Tzitis and a faithful adherence to the Mitzvos: link

Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks examines the hashkafic differences between the Talis Katan and the Talis Gadol: link

R Dovid Gottlieb discusses the halachic issues involved in machine made Tzitzis: link (audio)

R Avraham Gordimer explains why the Mitzvah of Tzitzis represents a new approach to emunah that is exemplified by education, as opposed to the experience of miracles: link

Jewish History Department

R Dr Shnayer Leiman examines the failed attempt to bring Torah and Derech Eretz to the Land of Israel , a “ban” on secular study in Jerusalem and the reaction of R Dovid Karliner ZL: link 1 (audio), link 2 (PDF)

A King For Israel

2010-06-01T21:37:00.012-04:00

Right now we are hearing a lot about what Israel needs. Better PR, better military planning, more concern for human rights, etc. You won't hear many people suggesting that what Israel really needs is a king. But that is precisely what Dr. Michael Wyschogrod suggested in a recent article in First Things (link - no longer available for free online).

Dr. Wyschogrod will be speaking on this topic on Thursday with an introduction by R. Meir Soloveichik (link). I bumped into R. Soloveichik last week and asked him what the deal is with this article, which seems incomprehensible to me. He said that he thinks it's brilliant but I need to dig below the surface. Here is what I found after digging, which could be more my own intepretation than Dr. Wyschogrod's idea.

Dr. Wyschogrod begins by pointing out the crisis in Israel due to its lack of a constitution. His solution is the appointment of a Regent for the messianic king, a figurehead with no authority (like the President) to represent the king in what will be a constitutional monarchy. In this way, Israel will define itself as a Jewish country and make a point that God is its king, with the messianic king His representative.

The way I understand it, this suggestion makes a unique case for the role of a democratic government in the State of Israel. As discussed in this post (link), R. Avraham Kook saw the democratically elected government as functioning in the role of a monarchy while R. Shlomo Goren saw it as self-rule in lieu of a monarchy. Dr. Wyschogrod sees it as serving below a monarchy, remaining within the confines of monarchal and Divine (which he equates) fiat. Instead of a government serving as a monarchy or instead of it, he sees it serving together with the king. They are partners in governing, with the king defining the basic parameters of Divine rule and the government involving itself with the details. God's rule, as embodied by the king, serves as the nation's constitution.

Dr. Wyschogrod does not state what role he sees a democratically elected government playing once a king arrives in Israel to take his throne. Presumably, the representatives will serve as the governing body while the king is the figurehead with veto power. This is an interesting and innovative suggestion. I don't know that it has the biblical and talmudic backing that other approaches do but perhaps, with further work, that can be established.

I don't know whether I will be able to attend Dr. Wyschogrod's lecture but I look forward to hearing what else he has to say on the subject.

Mark Your Calendars

2010-06-01T12:55:00.004-04:00

As mentioned in this post (link), we are organizing a Hirhurim get-together/dinner on the occasion of the 100th Audio Round-Up. All readers, commenters and friends of the blog are invited to this free event.

When: July 7, 7-9pm
Where: The Jewish Center, 131 W. 86 St., New York, NY 10024 www.jewishcenter.org

You must RSVP so we have a headcount and can make appropriate accommodations. Please do so here: link. Leave questions in the comments to this post or e-mail me.

Expect light food (sandwiches), a few speeches (~~R. Steven Weil~~ R. Kenneth Brander will be giving a brief devar Torah) and some interactive programming including a trivia contest and a survey about likes, dislikes and future directions.

Joel Rich, Steve Brizel and I will be in attendance, as will some other interesting people from the Jewish community. We will be giving away Hirhurim trinkets (including coffee mugs) for free.

I will be paying for the evening but I am asking for help subsidizing the event by those who can. As encouragement for large donations, I am publishing a special Torah journal for the occasion with articles from prominent rabbis. The journal will have a section on Judaism and communications technology. I have commitments from many interesting rabbis and I have already received articles from R. Norman Lamm, R. Jonathan Sacks, R. Shlomo Aviner, R. Michael Broyde, R. Yitzchok Adlerstein, R. Yaakov Klass and R. Yair Hoffman. Even if you will not be able to attend, you can still donate and receive the journal via mail. Order the journal on the RSVP page: link.

The Haftara - A Brief Historical Review

2010-06-01T02:43:00.003-04:00

By: Rabbi Ari Enkin

Readers are no doubt familiar with the Haftara, the additional reading from the prophets, which is chanted immediately following the reading of the Torah portion on Shabbat and holiday mornings. The word "Haftara" itself is an Aramaic derivative meaning "conclusion", referring to its role in concluding the reading of Scripture at public services. Although no longer practiced, there used to be a custom of reading a Haftara on Shabbat afternoons, as well.

While not inherently connected to a bar-mitzvah in any way, common custom is to have a bar-mitzvah boy read the Haftara on the Shabbat of his bar-mitzva. The source for this may be that the reading of a Haftara, which requires much preparation, study, and skill, was considered an appropriate medium for the bar-mitzvah boy to show his competency for entering the learned adult community.

The Haftara was likely solidified as a public practice in the Maccabean era when the ruling Syrian-Greek authorities forbade Jews from studying or teaching the Torah itself. In order not to completely loose touch with Scriptural studies, the sages of the time introduced a public reading, and by extension, study of the Jewish prophets. Oddly enough, these authorities didn’t seem to have a problem with Jews studying the prophets – it was the Pentateuch alone that seemed to bother them. Even when the decree forbidding Torah was lifted, the Haftara remained a mandatory component of the service.

To further highlight the importance of this reading, a blessing was instituted to be recited before it is read, along with an additional four blessings at its conclusion. Historically, the congregational rabbi would deliver a sermon to the congregation following the Haftara reading, a sermon whose theme was often taken from the Haftara itself.

The one who is honored with the reading of the Haftara is known as the "Maftir" and, correspondingly, would receive the last Aliyah of the weekly Torah reading. The "trop", tune, in which the Haftara is chanted is a unique one reserved for the reading of the prophets. Although in disuse today, there are other books of Tanach with their own distinct cantillation. Unfortunately these trops have been forgotten throughout the ages. The only trop which remains with us today are those for the Torah, Haftara, and the five Megillot.

By the time the Talmud was completed, the inclusion of the Haftara in the Shabbat service was already mainstream. Although it seems that according to halacha, any selection from the prophets relating to the weekly Torah portion may be chosen as the Haftara for that week, the sages decided to legislate a specific Haftara for each Shabbat of the year to ensure that Jews worldwide would be reading the same Haftara each Shabbat.

Unfortunately, marginalizing and belittling of the Haftara is common (cf. kiddush clubs). Make no mistake; every congregant is obligated to follow along the Haftara reading. Whether it is through talking or leaving the sanctuary, mistreating the Haftara is a serious error. The Haftara's place within the liturgy is legislated in the Shulchan Aruch, and its history and teachings should be a source of weekly inspiration.

This post is a work-in-progress. Readers are welcome to share other halachic/historical tidbits on everything related to Haftara.

A Rabbi's Right to Refuse

2010-05-30T21:28:00.001-04:00

Does a rabbi have the right to refuse to answer someone seeking his guidance? If someone asks him an halakhic question, may a rabbi choose not to answer? Or is he, like a doctor, duty-bound by his special skills to serve the public that needs his services?

I. The Rule

The Gemara (Sotah 22a) explains Proverbs (7:26) as follows: "For she has felled many victims" -- this is a scholar who is not qualified to rule but does, "The number of her slain is huge" -- this is a scholar who is qualified to rule but does not. This seems to obligate a qualified rabbi to rule on halakhah, and it is quoted in that context in Shulchan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah 242:14; Choshen Mishpat 10:3). R. Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe, intro to vol. 1) takes this very seriously as not just a responsibility but an obligation.

There is a related rule, based on Deut. 1:17 ("You shall not tremble before any man"), that a rabbi may not refuse to be part of a religious court that judges a powerful man. He is not allowed to let fear deter him from ruling. However, this is only after he has heard the details of the case. He may refuse to serve on the court prior to hearing the details (Shulchan Arukh, Choshen Mishpat 12:1). In other words, once he knows the questions and can determine an answer, he is obligated to issue a ruling.

I think it is obvious that a rabbi is not obligated to be the victim of a persistent nudnik, someone who pesters him with unnecessary questions. A rabbi is allowed some peace and quiet. However, if someone legitimately asks a question, a rabbi is evidently required to respond. However, I have seen and heard of famous rabbis tell questioners to ask a different rabbi.

This has been in the context of someone asking a rabbi who follows an unusual stringency. If the rabbi were to answer the question, he would have to be strict and cause the questioner extreme hardship. The rabbi, instead, tells the questioner to ask someone else, with a more mainstream view, and avoid the hardship of this stringency. I've only once had it done to me but I've heard of it being done to others. How is this allowed?

II. Two Explanations for an Exception

It could be that the rule is only speaking in general terms. A rabbi cannot entirely serve in academic functions but must also involve himself in the practical rabbinate. However, perhaps, on any given case there is no obligation for a rabbi to rule. This does not seem to me to be the simple meaning of this law but I could be mistaken.

Rabbenu Chananel, in his commentary to Avodah Zarah (19b), explains that the obligation to issue a ruling only applies if there is no other, more qualified rabbi. Similarly, the Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Sanhedrin 20:8) writes that the rule only applies if the generation requires this rabbi to rule on halakhah.

While this seems to mean that a rabbi may entirely refrain from ruling on halakhic matters if there are capable experts already engaged in the activity, perhaps it also applies to specific cases. If on a given issue, this rabbi is unusually strict and will cause the questioner undue hardship, then there are others better than he for this case.

Waddling

2010-05-28T12:10:00.000-04:00

From Bloom County. Change some of the details and this makes a great Chassidic story.

(click on image to enlarge)

Audio Roundup XCV

2010-05-27T21:39:00.001-04:00

by Joel Rich

HELP WANTED- "A friend" is looking for a psychologist/psychiatrist/counselor. OK truth is it's me, and to the disappointment of many who know me, it's not to help me figure out why I'm a few degrees off. Rather I want to discuss the sugyot of adam bahul al mamono ( a man gets confused over his money) and the differing impacts on halacha (i.e. sometimes we're matir and sometimes assur certain actions) in the light of current psychological understanding. Please email me at audioroundup613@comcast.net)

Question:
You are visiting a friend early one afternoon and there is an early mincha there where they will not say tachanun due to a rebbi’s yahrtzeit. 1) Should you preferably go to a different minyan where they will say tachanun? 2) If you go to the rebbi’s minyan, should you say tachanun (if yes, do you do nfilat apaim or go into a corner? 3) If you don’t say tachanun there, do you say it later or not at all? 4) Is any of this permissive or all compelled?

Rav Moshe Taragin -Talmud Torah - Some Learn More and Some Learn Less: link

Different understandings of “echad hamarbeh” (HKB”H measures effort not results) – [me – are interpretations based on the interpreters overall world view??] (Rich’s rule of symbiosis – our torah informs on us and we inform on our torah)

Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz - Ten Minute Halacha - Al Naharos Bavel and Shir Hama'alos: link

R’Aryeh wonders why no one says Al Naharot before Birchat Hamazon (I’ve asked that here before – someone will comment that it is said by many [but I know of only one person who does it regularly]). Source of Al Naharot and Shir Hamaalot is zecher l’churban, it’s not mentioned in S”A. (I suppose most of us don’t need to be reminded???)

Rabbi Michael Taubes -Parshas Behar Bechukosai Is There a Mitzva To Arrange Shidduchim: link

Is being involved in helping set up shidduchim a mitzvah in itself or misayeah (assisting) others to do a mitzvah?

Rav Binyamin Tabory -She'elot uTeshuvot - Rav Yehoshua Menachem Ehrenberg - Dvar Yehoshua: link

Rabbi Ehrenberg was a holocaust survivor – via the Kastner train. You must answer questions as a posek if asked. No yichud allowed (generally) even in extenuating circumstances (e.g. there’s a fine in society for a Ben Brit and non Ben Brit to be alone). Faxes on Shabbat? Washing in bathroom? (ok)

Rabbi Yehoshua Grunstein -Sefira-before or after Aleinu?: link

(Hebrew) Is Aleinu at end of tfila purposely (to remind us not to rely on idols when we go out to do business) or does it just have to be in tfilla. May make a difference for when we say sfira and do you need to say aleinu twice when we have mincha and maariv together?

Rabbi A Weiss - Lifnei Iver: link

(Hebrew) An analysis of lfnei Iver (placing a stumbling block) – why is the injunction not simply taken literally and what is scope and force. Is the issue advice which yields negative results or just negative advice (and some differentials)?

Rabbi Shalom Hammer -Torah UMesorah: Saw you at Sinai: link

An analysis of the pre-history of Avraham and Sarah. Avraham and Nachor doing early version of yibbum – parallels to Ruth story and lessons of chessed – restore “name” in this world (of both Avraham’s brother and of HKB”H).

Rabbi A Mintz-Hasidism Comes to America: link

Comparison of development of Bianer and Bobover chassidut post WWII. The need for Chassidish Yeshivot to continue the Chassidish tradition narrowed the differences between chassidut and mitnagdut. It was also very much a function of the individual rebbi.

Rabbi David Hirsch -Geirus Bizman Hazeh: link

Discussion of need for smicha for determining geirut – is it a specific requirement of geirut or of smicha in general? Is smicha a license for psak or an ingredient required for beit din?

Rabbi Wayne Allen- UTJ Lecture in memory of Rabbi Professor Saul Lieberman: The Term ‘Halakhah’ and Its Implications for Jewish Life: link

Discussion of halacha – R’Shaul Lieberman said the term halacha was based on a pre-existing term for land tax which implies a regular, fixed, permanent tax measured by boundaries. Philosophic discussion of minhag and halacha. Difference of opinions on force of minhag – can it establish a practice or is it only a proof that a rabbinic takana had originally established a practice. R’SL would’ve (maybe) said halacha “establishes boundaries” within which practice can be found/chosen.

Rabbi Chaim Brovender-Art, Tefillah, and Redeeming Modern Orthodoxy: link

Art as a bridge to helping students feel something beyond what they intellectually “see”. Analyzing art from both an art historians viewpoint, as well as a “naïve” viewpoint. See the significance of the moment!
Modern orthodoxy should be at the forefront of being able to view the results of the total human enterprise (including non bnai brit contributions and non narrow torah accomplishments.

Rabbi Ezra Schwartz -Contemporary Halakha Review #2: link

Excellent review of YU smicha shiurim – here mikveh and mezuzah. Interesting how there’s an issue with all the approaches to mikveh construction and how we try to cover all bases (me - at a real $ cost. BTW there's an interesting article on chumrah in the recent Kol Mevasser which mentions this point).
Practical mezuzah issues (surprise – there are differing opinions!) on walk in closets, offices, schools and how decide which door post.

Rabbi Benny Eisner -Yom Yerushalayim Through the Eyes of a Soldier and Rebbi: link

Yerushalayim should always be on our mind! (makes me think of R’YBS on zachor – not just remembering but bringing us to action). Some reflections on war and individual responsibilities.

Mrs Ilana Saks -Boaz's Blessing: link

Why did Boaz greet others with HKB”H’s name (a change in practice)? Either because people were forgetting HKB”H’s name or need to increase kavod habriyot (respect for people).
Lessons of chesed and need sometimes to be courageous to keep torah in proper way.

Rabbi David Fohrman - Themes In Megillat Rut: link

While the primary mitzvah of teaching torah is parent to child, R’YBS points out that the grandfather, being one generation closer to Sinai, has a special responsibility to transmit the mesorah/emunah.

Rabbi Michael Taubes -Parshas Bamidbar Transporting a Sefer Torah and Using a Sefer Torah for a Temporary Minyan: link

Interesting – based on the primary sources (and the Gra) you would think we’d never move a sefer torah to another room or house yet practice has evolved differently – not clear where the aruch hashulchan got the “ok if use it 3 times” rule or where R’MF got the “ok, if it has an aron” rule (me – assumedly these are efforts at maintaining dignity while allowing the sefer to be transported).

A Modern Orthodox View of History

2010-05-27T21:36:00.005-04:00

I. What is History?

If you look at history dispassionately, building up the facts from evidence into a coherent story, you are missing the point. Yes, history as a discipline has to be practiced without bias and following strict methodologies. But you also have to take a step back and look at the larger picture, interpreting the facts and stories into larger trends and themes. I look at history through the lens of a religious Jew and see it through that perspective.

Ken Spiro, in his Crash Course in Jewish History: From Abraham to Modern Israel, does this magnificently. In his massive survey of Jewish history, he both informs and interprets. He tells the story and the meta-story; he shows the hand of God in the acts of man. This is something that is missing in most of the history that I read, even that written by Orthodox Jews and rabbis.

II. Broad History

How do you write a history of everything Jewish? It is, by definition, a survey. The author has to pick out the important issues and quickly summarize the main points and lessons. Spiro made many interesting choices in this book, some with which I agree, some disagree, and at least one I am conflicted. Spiro builds up to the modern State of Israel, as the highlight of history that I agree it is. In doing so, he wisely spends a lot of space on the Holocaust and the struggle to settle and maintain the land of Israel. He incorporates developments in the wider society as important to understanding Jewish developments, spending, for example, an entire chapter on the Protestant Reformation.

Someone in my (old) synagogue once showed me a two-volume Jewish history and my first instinct was to look in the index for Charlemagne. When it was missing, I assumed that the discussion of the Middle Ages was lacking. Spiro has one mention of Charlemagne (p. 244), but not in the context of the Carolingian Renaissance. He does, however, discuss the general Renaissance (p. 273ff.).

III. What is a Historical Survey?

Another thing I look for in the index is mention of R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik. Spiro, to his credit, cites him exactly as many times as he mentions R. Aharon Kotler. However, it is only one time (p. 336). This is because Spiro almost entirely ignores the US after World War 2, focusing instead on Israel. On the one hand, it is hard to ignore the most important Jewish community in the world at the time. On the other, it is an ideological minefield which Spiro avoids with good reason. Furthermore, if his goal is to build up to the State of Israel, the US Jewish community is a passing phenomenon. So I'm conflicted about this decision.

All of this shows, in my opinion, a fairly thoughtful construction of this survey, even if you can argue with some of the decisions. Additionally, the book contains over 500 endnotes. It is sufficiently, but not copiously, documented, as is appropriate for a survey. Having no endnotes speaks down to the readers, perhaps allowing for gross inaccuracies, while having too many endnotes is tiresome. Spiro cites texts ranging from primary historical sources to important works of history.

However, there is something here to which I object. Allow me to offer my theory of a survey. Primary sources are historical documents. Secondary sources are scholarly analyses of these documents that piece the history together. A survey is a tertiary source. A survey can quote primary sources but must generally quote secondary sources to avoid excessive detail. When a survey quotes another survey, that turns the book into a quaternary source. Readers deserve better than that. Granted, occasionally a tertiary source has such a delightful turn of phrase that it must be quoted. However, a survey necessarily simplifies and a survey citing another survey is simplification squared. In my opinion, Spiro quotes R. Berel Wein's surveys of history too often and in doing so cheats his readers. He would have been better advised to quote primary or secondary sources.

IV. Interpretations

Additionally, and this is where I have to get picky, I find a number of his historical interpretations to be overly superficial and cliched. Note that I write this not as a historian but as someone who has read quite a few primary, secondary and tertiary sources. For example, in discussing the Misnagdic opposition to Chasidism (p. 296), he fails to mention the grave concern for serious halakhic violations. This is evident in the primary sources (see Mordechai Willenski, Chassidim U-Misnagdim) and in the secondary sources (see Elijah Schochet, The Hasidic Movement and the Gaon of Vilna). And in his discussion of Chasidism, he fails to mention the vast diversity within that movement, including the internal opposition to antinomian elements of its leadership. His conclusion that Chasidism had positive effects on Judaism, without mentioning any potential negative effects, and that opposition kept it going too far off the Torah path (p. 297) seems to me to be cliched and lacking insight. He could have done better.

A few pages earlier, he writes that "because [R. Moshe Chaim Luzzatto's] mystical inclinations aroused fears of more false messianism, he was driven out of Italy" (p. 292). In my understanding, it wasn't just his mystical inclinations but his semi-messianic activity.

His discussion of the Enlightenment, Reform and Conservative (pp. 298-311, 333-334) does not discuss the scientific study of Judaism. This is missing essentially the main pillar of their ideologies. It might be more convenient to dismiss Reform and Conservative that way but it is inaccurate history. Additionally, the discussion of Mendelssohn and the attribution to him of the idea that "if the law of God seems irrational, then man must follow reason" (p. 307) does not follow from anything I know about the man.

I've focused on modern history, even though the book starts all the way back in the beginning. I did this because the ancient history is based entirely on traditional Jewish scholarship. I don't think there is anything in Spiro's account that could not have been written by an eighteenth century Polish rabbi. While on the one hand that is playing it safe religiously, it means that it is entirely uninformed by modern historical scholarship. I had started comparing these sections to Dr. Lawrence Schiffman's From Text to Tradition: A History of Judaism in Second Temple and Rabbinic Times, but the books are so different that there are few points of comparison. Schiffman operates within the world of scholarship, arguing for an interpretation generally in consonance with traditional Judaism. Spiro operates within that Jewish tradition and outside of the world of historical scholarship.

Let me just make two points about the very beginning of the book. In discussing Creation, Spiro writes, "Once Adam was completed, God took off his watch, so to speak, handed it to Adam, and said, 'Now we switch to Earth time.'" (p. 11) It seems to me that this is a veiled reference to the idea that God created the universe in billions of years and the description of six "days" is from a Divine perspective that in human terms means much longer. But to avoid the condemnation piled on R. Natan Slifkin, the author refrained from explicitly stating it. Probably a wise decision.

V. Writing History

In an Author's Note (pp. xxii-xxiii), Spiro discusses the discrepancy between traditional Jewish dating and conventional historical dating, i.e. the missing 164 years (on this, see Mitchell First, Jewish History in Conflict: A Study of the Major Discrepancy between Rabbinic and Conventional Chronology). If I understand him correctly, he says that Judaism has a single chronology while historians have multiple views. Therefore, we accept the single approach as more authoritative and accurate. The truth is that the Jewish chronology is also a matter of debate (see this post: link). Even regarding the halakhic issue of which year is a Sabbatical, there is a debate and the Rambam does not trust his own calculations (see this essay: link). Be that as it may, Spiro was well within reason to choose to use a traditional Jewish system of dating in this type of survey.

In a Modern Orthodox survey of this nature, an expert historian would write a history that summarizes and simplifies based on a deep understanding of the events and issues. It would avoid cliche and superficiality yet embrace an Orthodox Jewish interpretation of history. It would defer to tradition but within a framework of modern historical methods. Ken Spiro's Crash Course in Jewish History: From Abraham to Modern Israel accomplishes much of this and is a good book that I like. However, it is not a great book that I love because, it seems to me, it is missing some of the depth I expect from a serious work of history.

Weekly Links

2010-05-27T08:34:00.007-04:00

Rules: link
Friday

Quebec wants Montreal yeshiva closed: link

No more kosher slaughter exceptions to New Zealand pre-stunning requirement: link 1, link 2

More confusion about who said what regarding worms in fish (this is why you never rely on articles for halakhah, always ask your rabbi): link 1, link 2

More from Rabbi Horowitz on the Areivim pseudo-life insurance program: link

The full text of R. Nathan Lopes Cardozo's essay On the Nature and Future of Halakha in Relation to Autonomous Religiosity (discussed in this post: link): link

Rabbi: one of 50 best careers: link

Interesting letters to Azure about Jewish-Christian relations and Chabad messianism: link

Halacha and Autonomous Religiosity: What’s the Problem?: link

SALT today: link

Thursday

The ‘Jewish Establishment’ won’t respond, but others do: link
Day schools or nothing?: link
No eulogies allowed for a molester: link
In Yiddish author’s papers, potential gold: link
GM sued over use of Einstein in ad: link
New marriage license/Jewish identity guidelines in Israel: link
SALT today: link

Wednesday

The Deceptive, Destructive Legacy Of Moishe Rosen: link
Precocious yeshiva girl starts a cursing-prevention group: link
The Modern Orthodox Israel Parade: link
Prof. Daniel Sperber appointed Chancellor of Canadian Yeshiva & Rabbinical School (seems to be between Conservative and Orthodoxy): link
Nationwide kashrus gathering on worms in fish, with video (I still don't get it, see also this post: link): link
Conservatives’ ethical seal nearing kosher marketplace: link
SALT today: link

Tuesday

Dr. Erica Brown: My year of reading books: link
Synagogue shuts counseling center due to ‘immodesty’ (I agree with the closing, a shul is not the place for a hangout): link
Jim Joseph Foundation gives $33 million to Jewish rabbinical seminaries (surprisingly, not YCT): link
Mixing Torah and flour: link
Ask the Rabbi: What’s the controversy over the building of the new emergency room in Ashkelon’s Barzilai Medical Center?: link
SALT today: link

Monday

Talmud for everyone?: link
Profs. Aryeh and Dov Frimer on partnership minyanim: link
IDF Chief Rabbi Ronsky's contribution: link
Secular Israel senses threat in rise of the ultra-orthodox: link
Ultra-Orthodox Jews lose grave battle in Israel: link
SALT today: link

Jews vs. Jesus

2010-05-26T21:57:00.001-04:00

After the death of a famous Christian missionary to Jews, a blogger for the Chicago Tribune asks why there is so little debate from Jews about the divinity of the founder of Christianity (link). I don't know what he is talking about. There are many books on the subject. Here are some of them. I found the first two in particular to be useful:

The Jew and the Christian Missionary: A Jewish Response to Missionary Christianity by Gerald Sigal

You Take Jesus, I'll Take God: How to Refute Christian Missionaries by Samuel Levine
The Real Messiah: A Jewish Response to Missionaries by R. Aryeh Kaplan
Twenty-Six Reasons Why Jews Don't Believe in Jesus by Asher Norman
Why the Jews Rejected Jesus: The Turning Point in Western History by David Klinghoffer
The Jewish Response to Missionaries: Counter-Missionary Handbook by R. Bentzion Kravitz
Their Hollow Inheritance: A Comprehensive Refutation of the New Testament and Its Missionaries by Michoel Drazin

Here are links to two organizations that put up a great fight also:

UPDATE: Here are links to two webpages that explain why Jews reject Jesus:

Parashas Roundup: Beha'alosekha 5770

2010-05-26T21:33:00.000-04:00

by Steve Brizel

The Reassurance of Aharon HaKohen

R Yissacher Frand , based on a reading of Rashi, suggests that Aharon HaKohen was depressed over his not being able to participate in a mitzvah: link

The Nesivos Shalom, as explicated by R Yitzchak Adlerstein, illustrates why we should always remember to keep our goals in Avodas HaShem in front of us so that we may avoid the pitfalls that will confront us in life even when we are faced with challenges: link

R Yitzchak Etshalom discusses the purpose of the Mishkan as well as the views of Rashi and Netziv on the meaning of “the front of the Menorah”: link

R Avraham Gordimer examines the message of the Menorah: link

The Unique Role of the Leviim

R Baruch Simon discusses why the unique role of the Leviim is a fundamental principle in education and outreach: link

Pesach Sheni

R Michael Rosensweig discusses why the Torah reveals the Halachos of Pesach Sheni in response to the petition of the Tmeim: link

R Asher Weiss discusses the halachos of Pesach Sheni and Tumah Hutrah BaTzibur: link (audio)

The Preparation for Entry to the Land of Israel and the Failure to Seize the Moment

Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks, based on Rav Soloveitchik ZL’s Kol Dodi Dofek, explains the difference between a camp and a congregation: link

R Mosheh Lichtenstein analyzes the crisis of leadership presented by the episode at Kivros HaTaaveh.http://www.vbm-torah.org/parsha.62/32beha'alotkha.htm and the relationship between the Haftarah and the Parsha: link

R Asher Brander analyzes why the Jewish People remembered the “free fish": link

R Berel Wein reminds us that we always should seek to seize the moment of an opportunity: link

R Avigdor Nevzenzal reminds us to avoid the attitude set forth in the Yalkut Shimoni of children running away from school with respect to Limud HaTorah: link (audio)

R Ephraim Buchwald discusses why we should not emulate the conduct of the Tribe of Dan: link

The Refutation of the Arguments of Aharon and Miriam

R Soloveitchik ZL examines the elements of Jewish leadership: link (audio)

R Herschel Schachter analyzes the Midah of Anavah: link (audio)

R Mordechai Willig , based on the understanding of R Chaim Volozhiner in Ruach Chaim (1:1) explains why Moshe is described as an Anav: link

R Mayer Twersky discusses the Seventh of the Rambam’s Principles of Faith: link

R Avishai David discusses the uniqueness of Moshe Rabbeinu: link (audio)

R Shlomoh Riskin examines why Aharon HaKohen and Miriam HaNeviah so strongly criticized Moshe Rabbeinu: link

R Aryeh Leibowitz analyzes contemporary case studies in Hilcos Lashon Harah and who is the true victim of Lashon Harah: link 1 (audio), link 2 (audio)

Praying for a Choleh

R Lawrence Rothwachs examines the halachic issues involved in praying for a Choleh and seeking a Bracha from a Mkubal: link (audio)

Eruvin and Non-Participants

2010-05-26T21:31:00.002-04:00

The theory of an eruv is that it is the joining of homes and property together into a communal area. There is a problem, however, when the community includes non-observant Jews or those who do not wish to be a part of the eruv.

I. Gentiles in an Eruv

The Mishnah and Gemara (Eruvin 61b-62b) states that gentiles cannot be part of an eruv but need not be. Technically, their presence within an area does not require their participation in an eruv. However, on a rabbinic level, two or more Jewish families who live in an area shared by gentiles must rent permission from the gentiles to use their property. As it happens, my front walkway is shared with my gentile neighbors but since we are only one Jewish family, we do not have to rent permission.

Because this rental is only a rabbinic requirement added onto the generally rabbinic laws of eruvin, the requirements for rental are low. The Gemara allows a weak rental (sekhirus re'u'ah) and permits rental of even just the right of a worker to place items on the gentile owner's property. You are also allowed to rent permission from a worker or government official who has some rights to enter the land without the knowledge or consent from the owner.

II. Renting from a Jew

Rishonim debate whether rental can also work for a Jew. The Rosh (Eruvin 6:13) rules that it works while the Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Eruvin 2:16) rules that it does not. The Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 380:3) quotes both views and the Magen Avraham (ad loc. 6) and Mishnah Berurah (ad loc. 13) are lenient. However, acharonim debate whether, even according to the lenient view, a "weak" rental works for a Jew. Can we rent the rights from a worker or government official, or do we have to go straight to the owner? R. Chaim Na'eh (Ketzos Ha-Shulchan 105:26) is lenient but most are strict (e.g. Avnei Nezer 45:10). According to them, you must obtain the consent of the owner, or at least cannot go against his explicit refusal. What, then, if he doesn't like the idea of the eruv and refuses to be a part of it?

R. Yehudah Leib Graubart (Chavalim Ba-Ne'imim vol. 1, Responsa no. 5) quotes R. Chaim Berlin who in turn quotes a ruling of the Atzei Almogim (391:3) that nowadays renting from the government is particularly effective. Tosafos (Bava Basra 55a sv. I'm) writes that in a place where taxes are levied based on the property, the government has a lien on the house and is considered its owner, to a degree. Therefore, the government has sufficient ownership over the town's houses to give permission for the eruv. This would solve all problems of Jews who choose not to participate in the eruv. The government is sufficient to authorize participation.

R. Baruch Simon (Imrei Barukh on Eruvin U-Reshuyos, pp. 212-213) quotes R. Yoel Wosner who holds that the government's right of eminent domain, to seize anyone's property, is sufficient to consider the government an owner of the property. Therefore, as above, the government is authorized to rent out property of both Jews and gentiles for eruvin purposes.

Agudah and the Internet

2010-05-25T21:31:00.001-04:00

I may be mistaken but my impression is that the official policy of Agudath Israel of America is not to have any web presence. This is, I believe, in order to avoid the appearance of legitimating usage of the internet or looking hypocritical by telling others not to go on the internet but still maintaining a presence there. This is a principled stand that demonstrates how strong they consider the well-known dangers of the internet.

We can see this by considering how important the internet would otherwise have been to the organization and how maintaining a web presence is, absent the dangers, a fulfillment of one of the organization's mandates. If not for their principled stand, they would have created early a website, blog, Facebook page and Twitter account.

Jeremy Stolow, Orthodox by Design: Judaism, Print Politics and the Artscroll Revolution, pp. 60-61:

We must ask ourselves how many neshomos [souls] have we lost because we have refused to use more effectively the weapons that have been used against us. Just as in modern war, rifles are not an adequate defense against aircraft, so too must we arm ourselves with the same weapons used by the enemy.
--Alexander Zusha Friedman ("The Fundamentals of Agudath Israel")

[...Haredim believe that to] communicate this putatively pure and disinterested knowledge [Da'as Torah], Haredi intellectuals must avail themselves of the existing terms of social address. To have influence, their words must be able to forge sustainable bonds with diffusely located students, followers, interested lay audiences, and even intellectual and religious competitors. This constraint is symptomatic of the structure and character of all modern fields of politics and culture, where the industried, technologies, and symbolic economies of mediated communication delineate the horizons of action in which "the masses" are made to appear. The very possibility of having influence is tied to the performative principles of becoming visible and of reaching out to others and winning their assent within a cacophonous arena of competing voices and images within generalized conditions of spectacle, distraction, and of readily dissolving attentions. This is the public culture within which Haredi scholars and intellectual producers must labor to attract and retain a following and to legitimate their intellectual, religious, and cultural authority.

The strategic importance of being able to control the resources of mediated communication has been acknowledged within Haredi circles for some time. As succinctly stated by one contributor to an early edition of the Jewish Observer (the English-language journal of Agudath Israel of America), "The ability... to master the new media has become the key to success -- or failure -- to win the allegiance of the masses.... Jewish leadership is in the hands of those who can best make use of the new techniques of communication." The mastery to which this author refers depends, in the first instance, on the success of Haredi Jews to redefine the terms by which they have been represented in the larger public sphere. Through polemical modes of address, Haredim seek to rescue Orthodoxy from the obloquoy heaped upon it by its detractors.

Announcements #155: Wyschogrod Lecture at First Things

2010-05-25T17:28:00.000-04:00

First Things invites you to attend a lecture by

Professor Michael Wyschogrod:
A King in Israel: A Theological Approach to Israel's Constitutional Problem

June 3, 2010 at 6:30 p.m.
35 East 21st Street, 6th Floor

Introduction by Rabbi Meir Y. Soloveichik, Associate Rabbi of Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun

A wine and cheese reception will follow the lecture.
Please join us!
RSVP: events@firstthings.com

In an essay published in First Things (May 2010), Professor Wyschogrod proposed a solution to the State of Israel’s constitutional stalemate. Israel, he proposed, should declare itself a constitutional monarchy ruled by a successor to King David, represented by a “regent safeguarding the Throne of David until such time that divine intervention identifies the rightful heir to the Davidic kingdom.” He explains: “The crowning of an actual Davidic monarch today would require prophecy to select the proper person. In the absence of prophecy this is impossible—and the sages of Israel declared almost two thousand years ago that prophecy was gone from Israel. Israel nonetheless can be declared a Davidic monarchy without a reigning king. This action would build into the self-understanding of the State of Israel the messianic hope of the Jewish people, while excluding a messianic interpretation of the present State of Israel." Prof. Wyschogrod will lecture on Jewish covenantal theology and its application to the present challenges of the Jewish people and the State of Israel. First Things is honored to present this important thinker to our readers.

Praise for Michael Wyschogrod:
Michael Wyschogrod is “perhaps the most original Jewish theologian of the past half century,” Rabbi Meir Soloveichik wrote in the pages of First Things.

He is “a man of supple metaphysical imagination and expansive systematic mind,” R.R. Reno wrote in an On the Square essay, describing Professor Wyschogrod’s influence over an entire generation of theology students. “He became something of a cult figure among the cognoscenti. The theology of Karl Barth hovered over our discussions as a presiding presence, and in The Body of Faith Wyschogrod engages Barth’s theology in subtle and profound ways. In fact, I’d wager that he is the Jewish thinker of the modern era with the most sympathetic grasp not only of Barth, but of Christian theology generally.

(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. Please note that announcements now cost $36 each.)

"Brich Shmei"

2010-05-25T02:36:00.003-04:00

By: Rabbi Ari Enkin

Whenever the Torah is taken out to be read, the enigmatic Aramaic prayer of Brich Shmei is recited as it is removed from the Aron Kodesh. Taken from the Zohar, [1] Brich Shmei is a prayer which asks for God’s compassion and mercy upon His people, and that He rebuild the Beit Hamikdash. It is also a very powerful and potent declaration of faith in God and His Torah.

We are taught that when the Torah is removed from the Aron Kodesh in preparation for reading, the Gates of Compassion are opened in Heaven. It is therefore most fitting that the Brich Shmei be recited at that time, taking advantage of these auspicious moments. There are different customs regarding when to begin the recitation of Brich Shmei. Common custom is to begin reciting it immediately upon the opening of the Aron Kodesh, preceded first by the “Vayehi Binsoa” verses.[2] Nevertheless, there are those who maintain that it is to be recited only after the Torah has actually been removed from the Aron Kodesh and is being held by the leader.[3] If one has not recited Brich Shmei earlier, it may be recited up until the commencement of the Torah reading.[4] It is commendable to make every effort to recite it along with the rest of the congregation.[5]

Some authorities maintain that Brich Shmei was originally intended to be recited only on Shabbat and Yom Tov.[6] Some include Rosh Chodesh as well in this original enactment, in this way limiting its recitation to those days on which Mussaf is recited. This is because Brich Shmei discusses the "Crown of God", as does the Kedusha of the Mussaf prayer, “Keter Yitnu L’echa”, according to the Sefard rite.[7] Other authorities claim that Brich Shmei was only truly intended for the Shabbat afternoon Mincha service.[8] There have even been authorities in the past who had prohibited reciting Brich Shmei on weekdays![9] As such, there are differing customs today as to when Brich Shmei is to be recited, especially amongst Sefardic congregations. Among the majority of Ashkenazi communities, Brich Shmei is recited any time the Torah is removed from the Ark in preparation for a public reading.[10]

It is interesting to note that there have been a number of authorities who have advocated omitting Brich Shmei entirely.[11] Among their grievances with Brich Shmei is its inclusion of the words “V’la Al Bar Elahin Samichna” (“we do not rely upon the sons of God”) which can be interpreted as acknowledging heresy.[12] In reality, however, the words “Bar Elahin” are translated as “Angels”, as if to say that we don’t trust in angels – only in God. Indeed, we find in a number of places throughout scripture that “Bar Elahin” refers to Angels.[13]There is also a small community of Yemenite Jews known as the “Dor Deah” movement that have omitted all references from the Zohar in their prayers, including Brich Shmei, due to their doubt on the authority of the Zohar. There is reason to suggest that the Rambam omitted Brich Shmei, as well (-ahem-, Professor Kaplan?).

There are those who recommend that when reciting the words “Ana Avda D'kudsha Brich Hu De'sagidna Kamei" ("I am a servant of the Holy One, blessed be He, who bows before Him") one should bow so as to act consistently with the words one is saying.[14] This is similarly the case regarding the Aleinu prayer where we are to bow slightly when we say “V’anachnu Korim” (“and we bow”).[15] Others are not particular about this bowing, perceiving it as a figure of speech rather than an intended motion.[16]

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

[1] Zohar Vayakel
[2] Igrot Moshe 4:70, Aruch Hashulchan 282:1
[3] Mateh Ephraim 619:48, Rav Pe'alim 3:8, Sha'arei Ephraim 10:1
[4] Mishna Berura 134:13
[5] Mishna Berura 101:19
[6] Magen Avraham 282, Kaf Hachaim 134:11
[7] Rav Pe'alim Sod Yesharim 8, Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz
[8] Sha'arei Teshuva 488:2
[9] Nagid U’metzaveh p.130, but see Yechave Da'at 1:54
[10] Be'er Heitev 282:1, Pri Megadim E.A.282, Ma'aseh Rav 164
[11] Siddur Avodat Yisrael
[12] Piskei Teshuvot 134:13
[13] Bereishit 6:2, Iyov 1:6
[14] Yabia Omer 4:8
[15] Yabia Omer 4:8, Yitzchak Yeranen 3:12
[16] Kaf Hachaim 113:12

Hirhurim Get-Together

2010-05-24T14:17:00.002-04:00

We are starting to plan a Hirhurim get-together in the first week of July, to mark the occasion of the hundredth audio roundup. Initial plans are to hold it in the Upper West Side of Manhattan. Food will be served; admission will be free; and a few interesting activities are in the works. More information to follow in the coming weeks.

There might be a Hirhurim-branded trinket or two, possibly something major. Celebrity appearances are a possibility also (two celebrities whose schedules I am currently planning around are Joel Rich and Steve Brizel).

Some potential activities include:

Hirhurim trivia contest
Survey of demographics, likes/dislikes and requests/recommendations
Other (add your suggestions in the comments section)

Announcements #154: YCT 2010 Yemei Iyun on Bible and Jewish Thought

2010-05-24T10:11:00.000-04:00

Where can you have the opportunity to choose from 60 Tanakh and Mahshavah shiurim in less than 48 hours?

At the eighth annual YCT Rabbinical School Yemei Iyun on Bible and Jewish Thought to be held on Sunday, June 27-Monday, June 28, 2010 at the Maayanot Yeshiva High School,Teaneck, NJ.

In memory of Riva Koschitsky z"l dedicated by Tamar and Eric Goldstein

Come and hear leading educators and scholars including Ms. Wendy Amsellem, Rabbi Hayyim Angel, Rabbi Shalom Carmy, Dr. Gabi Cohn, Rabbi Yiztchak Etshalom, Ms. Elana Flaumenhaft, Mrs. Rachel Friedman, Rabbi Zvi Grumet, Rabbi Nathniel Helfgot, Rabbi Shmuel Klitsner, Rabbi Menachem Leibtag, Rabbi Dov Linzer, Rabbi Dr. Gil Perl, Rabbi David Silber and many more.

Program is co-sponsored by Beit Morasha of Jerusalem, The Center for Modern Torah Leadership, and The Drisha Institute for Jewish Education.

Registration online at www.yctorah.org

Deadline for early bird discount is June 16, 2010

(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. Please note that announcements now cost $36 each.)

A Call for Autonomy

2010-05-24T00:23:00.006-04:00

The story of modernity is the struggle for greater individual autonomy. But a religion with obligations, such as Judaism, is about the individual submitting to an outside authority. Balancing these directly competing priorities is the complex task of the modern Jew.How do we maintain our personal autonomy while submitting to divine authority? The specific answer to this is unique to each person, although there are some general approaches that people in different groups adopt.

Whenever we discuss autonomy in religion, I think back to R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik's classic approach to the Korach rebellion, as described by R. Abraham Besdin in Reflections of the Rav ch. 13 ("The 'Common-Sense' Rebellion Against Torah Authority"). R. Soloveitchik offers three reasons why halakhah does not give primacy to each individual's spiritual feelings:

Religious emotion constantly changes and religion would have to likewise continually change in format and structure. There would be no continuity of religion.
Everyone has different feelings, so there would be no consistent communal practices.
We have no way to tell what is legitimately religious and what is a secular, self-indulgent emotion.

Penciled into my copy is my own addition:
People automatically tend to choose rituals and practices that are lenient and self-serving.

The upshot of all this is that religious autonomy cannot create a reliable, consistent religious community throughout the ages.

In a recent essay, R. Nathan Lopes Cardozo offers a somewhat radical thesis ("On the Nature and Future of Halakha in Relation to Autonomous Religiosity" in the May 2010 issue of Conversations). Based on the feedback I've received from a number of people, I think he was misunderstood as being more radical than he really is. Allow me to summarize what I believe he wrote:

The younger generation today is searching for spirituality in their own individual ways and are being turned away by the current conformist system. We need to allow for individualism and autonomy. We need to make halakhah more flexible in order for people to find their own way to God.

This can easily be misunderstood as advocacy for religios anarchy. However, we have to keep in mind both R. Cardozo's personal track record and his intended audience. He is not a Reform rabbi. He is a proud Orthodox rabbi writing for other rabbis. He is not suggesting that people take halakhah into their own hands and choose minority opinions that "speak" to them. He recognizes R. Soloveitchik's objections to this "common-sense" approach. Rather, R. Cardozo is pleading with halakhic decisors to show more flexibility when dealing with highly individualistic people. Give them the ability to choose that they need, within what a broadly defined halakhah allows.

I disagree with R. Cardozo on two counts. First, autonomy is not strictly a Gen Y or Millennial concern. It has been an ongoing theme for 250 years and it was certaintly predominant in the 1960's and 1970's. This was precisely what prompted R. Soloveitchik to respond to their claims. A strong desire for autonomy is nothing new.

What might be new, though, is a rejection of authority by Orthodox Jews. If that is the case, then we have to consider whether pretending that halakhah is an autonomy rather than a theonomy will work. Without a kabbalas ol malkhus shamayim (acceptance of the yoke of Heaven), can you truly be a religious Jew?

The second point on which I take issue with R. Cardozo is the extent to which he encourages halakhic decisors to depart from precedent. I do not believe that it is wise to undo centuries of halakhic precedents, nor do I believe that decisors can wipe away rabbinic laws or longstanding customs. What R. Cardozo asks for is, I believe, beyond the ability of any contemporary rabbi.

That said, I applaud the idea of rabbis guiding every individual in the uniquely appropriate way and taking into account each person's specific circumstances. While we cannot empower an individual to choose the halakhah he wants to follow, a rabbi can find the right precedents and opinions that fit each person's temperament and needs. In the end, though, Judaism is about what God wants you to do and not what you want to do for God.

Weekly Links

2010-05-21T08:33:00.004-04:00

Rules: link
Friday

Facing financial, identity crises, JTS to reorient historic mission: link

Ex-Charedim challenge school system: link

Artscroll, Inc.: link

Founder of Jews for J dies: link

Fascinating related site Ex-Jews for J: link

First woman CEO of a major Jewish federation: link

SALT today: link

Tuesday

David Brooks: On the Upper West Side: link
The failure of the American Jewish establishment: link
OU IPA reaction to the article: link
R. Yisroel Belsky on worms in fish: link
Pol Position: How a Soloveichik landed in Pennsylvania's Senate race: link
Report reveals stagnation in country’s conversion mechanisms: link
Israelis exploring other aspects of Judaism: link
Brooklyn’s oldest Orthodox synagogue celebrates 141st birthday: link
SALT today: link

Monday

R. Efrem Goldberg on meeting with top White House aides: link (PDF)
A Jewish Nobel Prize? (You mean it isn't already Jewish?): link
Tebah - Shabuot Reader: link (PDF)
Is the Areivim "Life Insurance" program actuarially sound? (doesn't look like it to me): link
YU's Shavuot-to-Go: link
Captivated by the Dead Sea Scrolls: link
The Case for a Jewish Snopes: link
Violent Haredi riots over relocation of ancient graves: link
Pirate Ashkenazi schools (the more I read about this, the less it seems like discrimination rather than elitism against those with non-religious relatives): link
"Shiksa" as a hate crime category: link
Noam Chomsky denied entry to Israel: link
UJA budget and fundraising numbers: link
SALT today: link

Audio Roundup XCIV

2010-05-20T22:29:00.002-04:00

by Joel Rich

Question 1
The Chavos Yair wrote that seems to be the first sh"ut on women saying kaddish. He lived in the 1600's. IIUC it's generally assumed that the saying of kaddish by yatom was in response to the crusades (100's of years earlier)
Any insights on the reason it took so long for the question to come up?

Question 2
See the article labeled "Push Button Judaism" http://www.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/hamodia/yissachar_zevulun.pdf - what need is this tit-for-tat approach filling and if there is at least a minority opinion that supports it, and the masses find it attractive, is it best not to hit it head on (or will the masses ignore these articles anyway)?

Rav Mordechai Gifter-Yom Ha’Atzmaut in Halachah and Hashkafah – Part 1: link

Halachic precedents to be considered when analyzing the implications for recognition of the miracles of milchemet hashichrur (War of Independence) and sheishet hayamim (6 Day War).

Rabbi Yonah Gross -Kedoshim - Understanding Chukim: link

Analysis of several chukim (law without obvious reasons) – message here – be patient in trying to understand them.

Rabbi Yehuda Balsam -shelo livayesh es mi sheain lo: link

Focus on embarrassment (avoidance thereof) – here based on issues regarding ketuba. My favorite mishna in bikkurim – why we stopped having each individual read the bikkurim text and appointed an official reader – to avoid embarrassment (or worse, cause them not to bring bikkurim) of the farmer.

Rabbi Yehoshua Grunstein -Does Jewish law change with life?: link

Examples of how the torah is eternal but applications change as society/technology changes. Opened with one of my favorite insights on the difference between a shiur and a speech (BTW – it is from R’YBS). My paraphrase – Speech = I know everything, you know nothing, shut up and listen. Shiur = I know a little, you know a little, let’s see what we can figure out together.

Mrs. Chani Newman -Maaseh Avos_ Lessons From my Grandfather Through the Lens of the Omer: link

Lessons from her grandfather’s life – it’s interesting how we can extract important lessons from all those around us.

Rabbi Meir Pogrow-Daf Shiurim - Horayos 12a: link

A nice “glatt” (as in smooth) daf type shiur. I’m curious (is there an underlying pattern as to when we find that the different parts of the mishneh seem to be authored by different tanaim and the gemara gives two answers: 1) so what; 2) no, it’s really the same tanna, and I’ll re-explain it) [i.e. will the same amoraim consistently take a similar position, and why the need for a second answer]

Rav Hamburger-"Ashkenaz and Sephard: Two different approaches to Torah.": link

Sponsored by Michael Poppers of Elizabeth (Hillside?). Discussion of origins of differing minhagim with a focus on the Arizal. Then a discussion of examples where Yekkes and sfardim share common minhagim. Not a lot of explanation of sources.

Rav Binyamin Tabory -She'elot uTeshuvot - Rav Yitzchok Yaakov Weiss - Minchat Yitzchok: link

Dayan Weiss (Minchat Yitzchak’s) history and 3 shűt – 1) turning in speeders in Israel (ok); 2) gas meters you need to feed coins (don’t ask me, I didn’t resonate); 3) Hagomel on airplane travel? (not needed).

R Moshe Weinberger -Chizuk_For_Parents_Who_Are_Raising_Hashem's_Children: link

Chizuk to parents whose kids went OTD – HKB”H gave them to you to raise and accept that you did your best, perhaps these souls needed a tikkun. This is the generation’s test (wait – I thought we were feeling triumphal – see cross currents blog). We all should feel these parents' pain!

Mr. Charlie Harary -Stealing To Save Someone's Life: link

Halachically can you steal to save your life? Someone else’s? (yes – but pay for damages, yes – no charge). Review of sources and comparison to U.S. law.

Rav Moshe Taragin -Talmud Torah - Ameilut baTorah: link

Review of various statements of chazal focusing on how HKB”H desires our tireless efforts in torah study, noting its overwhelming nature. Also, note the ascetic lifestyle nature required that is not consistent with current society.

Rav Assaf Bednarsh -Theology - Theodicy Part 2: link

More possible explanations of theodicy (why do the righteous suffer).
Perhaps not everything is a direct result of a person’s actions!!! Bmazla talya milta (it’s the result of mazel = predisposition?) is a gemara but some reinterpret it to stay away from this challenge to “everything" is HKB”H’s direct intervention).
Some answer my question from 2 weeks ago by saying we may have varying predisposition and so may have objectively different results from the same efforts in this world (why? HKB”H is inscrutable!)
Rambam – HKB”H connects to us on an ongoing basis to the extent we connect to him – else it’s mechanistic. (What % of Jewish laity would think this is heracy!?)
How we lead our lives is greatly impacted by how we view this issue (I guess R’Assaf didn’t read my disposition of this question = past-assume all predestined, future – assume all up to you!)

Rabbi Yosef Blau -Halakhic Responses to the Changing Role of Women in Society: link

Historical examples of now external changes have impacted halacha related to women.
1) Can a man say kriat shma in front of a woman whose hair is uncovered? (famous aruch hashulchan) - since it’s common now, we allow).
2) Can a man walk behind a woman to board a bus (trumat hadeshen – Talmudic times women did not go in the marketplace so prohibited then).
3) Beit Yaakov (famous chofetz chaim that in old days women learned from the home - thus now it’s ok since they don’t).
3) Women’s suffrage in State of Israel (no real sources quoted by poskim) – practically settled (who wants to give up power that turning out voters brings?).

Two good questions – 1) what society do we look at when we want to see what is “common” practice? 2) Are these changes reversible if society changes?

Rabbi Menachem Genack -Shechita in Today's World (5770): link

Is/was the shochet a position of srarah (communal authority)?
Why using a rotating pen wasn’t halachically needed but practically (Israeli poskim) required in U.S. (vs the ASPCA/R’YBS method) and how that caused all the problems.
Everything you need to know about sirchaot (adhesions) and how industrialization has caused havoc in the kosher meat industry. How checking for them today bears no relationship to Shulchen Aruch or Rama definitions.
Bonus discussion of Rubashkin issues and PETA.
Plain Kosher meat today is a problem because shochtim do their own thing (actually sounds like “do your thing” is pretty standard historically as well for shochtim).

Rabbi Hanan Balk -"Accept the Truth Regardless of Its Source" : What About Sinners and Heretics?: link

Can you learn from an evil person? Sources provided that you can learn from an Apikorus as long as you don’t mention his name. R’A Soloveitchik said that doesn’t include biblical critics or those who are anti-chazal (i.e. can’t learn from them at all).

Rabbi Benjamin Blech -Women If Brit Milah is the Sign of our Covenant with G-d, What About Women?: link

Do we look brit milah as removing negativity or increasing holiness? Plus implications.

Rabbi Hanan Balk -The Soul of a Jew, the Soul of a Non-Jew: Two Views: link

A shortened version of a longer shiur presenting opinions on the comparison of the soul of a non-ben brit to a ben brit. Historical and contemporary sources quoted running the gamut.

Rabbi Assaf Bednarsh -Yom Yerushalayim - Jerusalem in Halacha and Hashkafa: link

Was Yerushalayim split amongst the tribes originally or not? Technical discussion of the differing opinions. Then hashkafa of Yerushalayim as a unifier – e.g. we all pray towards Yerushalayim and it is the source (when sanhedrin functions) of all halacha.

Rabbi Benny Eisner -Yom Yerushalayim Through the Eyes of a Soldier and Rebbi: link

R’Tzavi Yehuda’s famous pre-1967 “premonition” of “our Chevron”. Understanding that HKB”H is in combat with Tzahal. Understanding that each of us is a shaliach (agent) in the U.S. to educate everyone around us.

Books Received XXV

2010-05-20T22:14:00.001-04:00

I don't always have the chance to review each book, so I'll list the books that I receive. Some of them will be quoted or reviewed in future posts. Here are the books I've received recently:

Orthodox by Design: Judaism, Print Politics, and the ArtScroll Revolution by Jeremy Stolow
Who Really Wrote the Bible? by Eyal Rav-Noy and Gil Weinreich
Jewish Bialystok and Its Diaspora by Rebecca Kobrin

Rus and Boaz: Funny Business?

2010-05-20T22:11:00.000-04:00

The scene is late night on the threshing floor. Rus and Boaz are all alone. They spend the night together, with the scene ending "And she lay at his feet until morning" (Rus 3:14). Does this mean that they slept together? Is this a euphemism for marital relations?
While it might seem like a convenient and perhaps poetic way to say it, everything we know about the book argues against such an interpretation. It should, rather, be taken literally. They slept in the same room near each other.

Dr. Moshe J. Bernstein ("Two Multivalent Readings in the Ruth Narrative" in Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 50 [1991], pp. 17-20) explains:

[T]he book of Ruth has a fourth chapter whose impact would be vitiated and whose very existence would be threatened if the third chapter ended with Boaz and Ruth consummating their relationship. The scene at the city gate would be a sham with Boaz tricking the other redeemer into relinquishing his rights to a woman who has already physically bound herself to Boaz. Considering the nobility of character shared by Ruth and Boaz, the dramatic tension would not be present, nor would the false ending in 4:4 have any force whatsoever. A careful reading of the narrative, therefore, convinces us that Ruth and Boaz cannot have been sexually intimate on the threshing floor.

More serious, however, is the textual factor which could lead us to believe that what did not happen happened. It may, in fact, be the remote cause of the non-textual factor discussed above. The vocabulary of ch. 3 contains a number of words whose usage admits of double entendre: bo ('enter'; 4, 7 twice, 14), yada ('know'; 3, 4, 14), shakhav ('lie'; 4 thrice, 7 twice, 8, 13, 14), me-raglosav ('place of his feet'; 7, 14), gilah ('reveal'; 4, 7), and kanaf ('garment'; 9). In none of these cases does the word's primary function necessitate its sexual connotation (except according to those who read va-tishkav me-raglosav in that way), but there is little doubt that the accumulation of such terminology has an effect, intended by the author, upon the reader or the listener...

Takena lone, out of the context of the chapter, these ambiguous words could point to the occurrence of sexual activity, but the configuration of the words, the sense of the sentences which they form, points in the opposite direction...

The artistic function of the conflicting connotations of words versus sentences must be to furnish, on a level beyond the literal, the sense of the sexual and emotional tension felt by the characters in the vignette. The narrative tells us straight-forwardly that no sexual intercourse has taken place on the threshing floor, that final resolutions await the scene at the city gate. All the while, however, the vocabulary of the scene indicates that it might have, that the atmosphere was sexually charged. Thus the ambivalence. The words point, beneath, the surface, to the might-have-been which the characters felt might be, while the combinations of the words emphasize the opposing reality. The author of Ruth is relying upon ambiguity of language to depict the tension of emotion, enabling him to convey the atmospherics of the scene without digressing from his narrative to describe them.

Hirhurim - Musings

This Blog Has Moved

Weekly Links

Parashah Roundup: Matos-Masei 5770

Top Ten Signs You Read Hirhurim Too Much

Welcome to the Hirhurim Dinner

Get-Together: Today

Is Creativity Possible in the Information Age?

Shabbat Mevarchim

Get-Together: This Wednesday

Drinking Wine During the Nine Days and the Authority of the Shulchan Aruch

Weekly Links

Audio Roundup C

Quick Takes

Parashah Roundup: Pinchas 5770

Avrekh

Books Received XXVII

Back to Disqus

The Old Comments Are Back

On the Meaning of a Mysterious Line in a First-Crusade Kinah

Eating in Public

Get-Together: More Information

Comments Update

Rav Soloveitchik on Women Rabbis

Emmanuel Compromise Approved; Parents Released

Weekly Links

Audio Roundup IC

Listening to Your Parents

Parashah Roundup: Balak 5770

A Case Study in Contemporary Halakhic Rhetoric

Praying on the Subway

Kiddush Levana & Toothaches

Get-Together: More Stuff

The Emanuel Beis Yaakov Controversy

Sephardim Switch to 'Ashkenazi' Surnames to Ensure Their Children's Admission to Charedi Schools

A Mature Freedom

Acronyms

Weekly Links

Announcements #158: Ask OU 10 Summer Programs

Koren Mesorat HaRav Kinot

Audio Roundup XCVIII

Solving Some of the Agunah Problems

Parsha Roundup: Chukas 5770

Footnoting Tradition

Charity Today

Air Pollution

Get-Together: They've Arrived

Announcements #157: YCT 2010 Yemei Iyun on Bible and Jewish Thought

Books Received XXVI

Working Women

New Periodical: Tradition 43:1

Announcements #156: Pepsi Challenge

Weekly Links

Audio Roundup XCVII

Speaking Halakhah

Parashah Roundup: Korach 5770

Ball Playing on Shabbos

Barukh Dayan Ha-Emes

Rabbi Halevy on New Women's Religious Roles

Kissing Children in Shul

Get-Together Reminder

Me-Am Lo'ez: The Lost Translation

Weekly Links

Audio Roundup XCVI

Was Rabbi Hillel a Heretic?

Theological Analysis of Nonsense

Parashah Roundup: Shelach 5770

A King For Israel

Mark Your Calendars

The Haftara - A Brief Historical Review

A Rabbi's Right to Refuse

Waddling

Audio Roundup XCV

A Modern Orthodox View of History

Weekly Links

Jews vs. Jesus

Parashas Roundup: Beha'alosekha 5770

Eruvin and Non-Participants

Agudah and the Internet

Announcements #155: Wyschogrod Lecture at First Things