JNews Roundup VIII

by Raphael Davidovich and Gil Student

Biblical Wall found (Breitbart)

City of Jerusalem brings suit against stores that sold Chometz over Pesach (Yeshiva World)

R. Raphael Marcus, son-in-law of R. Ahron Soloveichik, passes away at age 57 (Canadian Jewish News)

Professors debate about Jewish History Library (Forward vs. Forward)

Detroit Federation vs. the National Umbrella Group (Forward)

American Gentile fights to preserve Lithuanian Jewish Library (Forward)

Union protests Kosher Slaughterhouse (Forward)

Rabbis discuss Facebook (Canadian Jewish News)

NY State fighting over Religious Freedom Bill in Albany (Jewish Week)

Revitalizing Fairlawn, with help from YU (Jewish Standard)

Annapolis and Chanukah related News is all over the net, so I didn't bother.

Read the rest of this entry »

Rav Soloveitchik's Two Dreams

In this week's parashah shi'ur (audio link, at minute 25), R. Hershel Schachter discusses the kiddush that R. Aharon Lichtenstein made at Yeshiva when he became engaged to R. Yosef Dov Soloveitchik's daughter. R. Ahron Soloveichik, the bride-to-be's uncle, was in the neighborhood for Shabbos and said the following devar Torah at the kiddush (in my own words):

Yosef had two dreams, one about the sheaves bowing down and another about the sun, moon and stars bowing. The first dream about the sheaves (Gen. 37:7) is interpreted by many as referring to Yosef's physical dominion and the second about the celestial beings (Gen. 37:9) as referring to spiritual leadership. Ya'akov, however, had only one dream about a ladder going up to the heavens (Gen. 28:10). The brothers objected to Yosef's two dreams because they were a deviation from their father's single dream.

So, too, R. Yosef Soloveitchik. Some of his contemporaries objected to his two dreams of Torah and philosophy as being a deviation from his grandfather Reb Chaim's single dream of Torah.

The truth is, though, that Ya'akov's single dream had two parts to it--the ladder had its base on the earth and its top reached up to the heavens. The base on the earth (mutzav artzah) refers to the physical and the top reaching the heavens (rosho magi'a ha-shamaymah) refers to the spiritual. Yosef's two dreams were only a more explicit manifestation of Ya'akov's single dream. So, too, R. Yosef Soloveitchik. Reb Chaim was not only a devoted Torah scholar but also spent a great deal of time studying philosophy, particularly Rambam's Moreh Nevukhim. The grandson Soloveitchik was only being more explicit of the grandfather Soloveitchik's vision.

I would expand this a bit and say that many Torah sages throughout the centuries have engaged in secular studies (not just philosophy) and included that in their vision of a Torah personality (while many have not). Even if Yeshiva University or other Modern Orthodox institutions and Jews might be more explicit than others were in the past, this is not a deviation but simply a more explicit manifestation of prior views.

Read the rest of this entry »

How Big of a Yarmulka

R. Gersion Appel, The Concise Code of Jewish Law, vol. 1 p. 35 n. 5 (based on R. Moshe Feinstein, Iggeros Moshe, Orach Chaim 1:1):

Size of Cap or Yarmulka

As long as it is considered a head covering, a yarmulka, or cap, of any reasonable size suffices, inasmuch as it complies with the requirement to cover the head as a sign of piety (midat hasidut), and likewise removes the concern lest one appear to be following the customs of the heathens. While one who is more strict in his observance will take care to cover the greater part of the head, a head covering of any reasonable size nonetheless meets the basic requirement, and can be worn in the house or on the street, and even while reciting blessings or during prayer.

The reason R. Appel uses the vague term "reasonable size" is that R. Moshe Feinstein never defines a minimum size. R. Eliezer Waldenberg (Tzitz Eliezer 13:13) points out that this information is missing. All R. Moshe Feinstein says is that the yarmulka must be of the size that one's head is generally considered by people to be covered. R. Ovadiah Yosef (Yechaveh Da'as 4:1) writes that a yarmulka must be big enough and properly placed so that it can be seen from all sides.

A stricter view is that of the Chazon Ish. Piskei Teshuvos (2:9 n. 58) quotes from sources that state that the Chazon Ish held that a yarmulka must cover the majority of one's head.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Ennobling Nature of Torah

I. Moral Failings and Mussar

In R. Avi Shafran's recent article "Sin and Subtext", discussed in this post, R. Shafran makes an interesting point:

I believe – and it is Judaism’s belief – that Torah is transformative, that human inclinations are harnessed and controlled by Torah-life and Torah-study. To be sure, there are Jews who lead publicly observant lives yet who are not truly committed to Torah, who have not internalized “fear of Heaven.” And so, there will always be anecdotal evidence of Orthodox wrongdoings of many sorts, with perpetrators identifiable, and duly identified, as Orthodox.

I do not believe that Torah is transformative, or--more precisely--that Torah is necessarily transformative. And I think R. Shafran would agree to this. Torah is only transformative if one works hard to let it be. The Gemara (Bava Basra 78b) tells us that those who rule over their inclinations must make calculations (cheshbonos) in order to prevail. Similarly, the Mishnah (Avos 3:1) teaches us that the way to avoid sin is to reflect on three things: from where you came, to where one is going and before whom one will ultimately give an account and reckoning. Avoiding sin is not something that necessarily comes from Torah study or from living an observant lifestyle. It comes through concerted effort. The Gemara (Berakhos 33b) asks surprisedly, is fearing G-d a simple, small matter? Yes, it answers, to Moshe Rabbenu it was a simple thing. To the rest of us, however, it is something we must struggle to acquire.

Click here to read moreThis was the whole point of the Mussar Movement--that students of Torah must dedicate time and effort to become better Jews because the study of Torah alone was not succeeding. Over a hundred years after R. Yisrael Salanter's efforts, he seems to have wildly succeeded in some respects but sadly failed in others. The study of mussar books is now common in yeshivos, as is the occasional mussar "shmuess". However, the intensity and focus that R. Yisrael Salanter demanded, the personal accountings and group discussions about moral improvement, seem to be almost entirely non-existent. However, while his methods may not have survived, his main point that people need to focus on their character traits in order to improve them remains an accepted truth. Torah study alone or an unexamined religious life alone, it is now generally accepted, is insufficient.

II. The Eternal Struggle

However, even someone who is a mussar devotee does not miraculously lose his desire to sin. People are engaged in constant life-long battles, and depending on the stage in their lives they may fall prey to sin; even religious Jews; even Torah scholars. None of us are immune to failing religiously. That is why we repent every year during the High Holiday season, and even every day in our various prayers.

The non-religious do not have a monopoly on moral failings.

I do not for a minute believe that religion encourages sin or somehow creates people who are more prone to sin. Frankly, I don't think that anyone believes that, or at least very, very few people do.

In theory, religion would reduce moral failings but that assumes that we live in a religious community where people not only learn Torah and observe commandments but consciously struggle daily to identify and overcome their desires to sin. It is not at all clear to me that Mussar is sufficiently strong in our community for us to be free to make such a claim.

III. Double Standards

However, if it were true, and we did live in a truly religious community that was sensitive to Mussar demands, then we need to think about our accusing the media of holding a religious community to a double standard, expecting more of us than they expect of non-religious people. Shouldn't they? If we claim that the Torah ennobles our community, shouldn't we--"a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Ex. 19:6)--be expected to live according to a higher moral standard? Just like it is more scandalous for a rabbi to curse than a layperson, it should be more scandalous for a religious Jew to fail morally than someone else.

Is that not how God Himself treats people? The Gemara (Yevamos 121b) states that God is more exacting of the righteous. He has higher standards for those who are supposed to be better. This double-standard is a common theme in understanding narratives in the Torah and is presumably a model for human interaction as well. Certainly teachers have higher standards for students who can accomplish more. The successes and failures of those with the ability and the tools to achieve higher morality should be evaluated accordingly.

If we cannot reach that higher standard then we need to ask ourselves the difficult question of why not. I believe that it is the lack of Mussar but others might have different answers. Regardless, it seems to me that it is self-defeating to argue in our defense that it is unfair that we are held to a higher standard. We should demand it.

Leaving that aside, I suggest that complaining of a double standard for a Torah community and arguing that the Torah ennobles people is self-contradictory. If Torah truly ennobles people then they should be held to a higher standard. However, this higher standard should be acknowledged by all involved. Those who criticize the Torah community must make it clear that they are holding this community to a higher standard and what their evaluation would be according to a more generally applicable standard.

Read the rest of this entry »

Parashah Roundup: Vayeshev 5768

by Steve Brizel

Yaakov and the Life of a Tzadik

R. Shlomo Wolbe zt"l explains that a Tzadik's life is always busy: link (DOC>

R. Yerucham of Mir in Daas Torah (as prepared by Eliezer Kwass) shows us how Yaakov surmounted life's travails: link

Yaakov and Yosef's Brothers

R. Yitzchak Etzshalom discusses the fullfillment and interpretation of dreams and prophecy: link

R. Yaakov Horowitz explains the deeper meaning behind the coat of many colors that Yaakov gave to Yosef: link

R. Jonathan Sacks tells us why Yaakov refused to be comforted after the sale of Joseph: link

R. Avigdor Nevenazal proves how proper Midos are learned from observing the actions of Joseph and his brothers: link

R. Yaakov Medan compares both the pshat and Midrashic approaches in investigating Joseph's encounter with his brothers: link

R. Yain Kahn explores the conflicts between the views of Joseph and his brothers in light of modern ideological conflicts within the Jewish world: link

R. Zev Leff analyzes the relationship between Yosef and his brothers. link

Yosef HaTzadik

R. Berel Wein explores how Joseph resistance to the tempations of the moment is a hallmark of a committed Jewish life: link

R. Shlomo Riskin explores the relationship between Yosef, Channukah and the individual and communal struggles against succumbing to the immoral: link

R. Yissachar Frand tells us why the Yetzer Tov is not a Noodnik and about the historical significance of the interpretation of dreams: link

The Teshuvah of Reuven

R. Mordechai Willig demonstrates how both a FFB and BT can learn from the teshuvah of Reuven: link

The Teshuvah of Yehudah

R. Asher Brander shows us how Yehudah's teshuvah was instrumental in his shevet becoming the source for Jewish political leadership: link

Read the rest of this entry »

Announcements #013

Get your Anti Loshon Harah Ear Muffs here: link

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

Read the rest of this entry »

Hashavas Aveidah in the News

Pair learn finders not always keepers:

Mon Nov 26, 11:01 PM ET
SALEM, Ore. - A pair of Salem residents learned the hard way that finders are not always keepers. Lonnie Anderson, 47, and Jacqueline Shimmin, 37, were arrested last week failing to return a lost ring. Each faces a charge of first-degree aggravated theft of lost or mislaid property, said Sgt. Albert Gordon of the Salem Police Department.

Oregon law states someone must make a reasonable attempt to return lost property to its rightful owner. The property may be kept if no one comes forward in 30 days.

"It's a universal law," Gordon said. "If you find something, you need to make some effort to return it to the rightful owner."

Gordon said a reasonable attempt would include posting an advertisement or bringing it to police. The law applies especially to property of high value or unique design, Gordon said.

The large, emerald-cut diamond ring was lost at a Salem grocery store on Nov. 15. That same day, a man and a woman brought a ring to the jewelry department at a Fred Meyer store, requesting an appraisal.

Fred Meyer employees said the appraisal would take a few days. The man and woman filled out paperwork but left with the ring, Gordon said.

Meanwhile, on Nov. 17, Nov. 18 and Nov. 19, a classified ad ran in the Statesman Journal newspaper: "LOST Large Diamond Ring: Generous Reward."

One woman connected the dots. She saw the ad and told detectives that she heard a story from a friend about two people finding a ring and taking it to a Fred Meyer store.

Detectives tracked down the person who placed the ad, then went to Fred Meyer. Detectives were convinced they were dealing with the same ring.

Detectives then found the pair who had requested the appraisal.

It didn't take long for them to admit they had the lost ring, Gordon said. He noted that they also acknowledged seeing the newspaper advertisement.

Police declined to say how much the ring was worth, but the charges Anderson and Shimmin face apply to items worth more than $10,000.

In other words, the ring has identifiable marks so even though it was lost in a public place one still must try to return it. But I don't think halakhah allows one to keep it if no owner comes forward in 30 days.

Read the rest of this entry »

Rav Herzog and the Tel Aviv Election

In response to my post on Chaim Herzog's account of his father's election to the position of Chief Rabbi of Israel, I was asked to post about the highly contested election for the position of Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv which R. Herzog lost. Here is what Chaim Herzog has to say about that, from Living History, pp. 20-21, beginning with the funeral procession in Israel for R. Herzog's father, the rabbi of the Orthodox community of Paris:

The procession moved to the Great Synagogue of Tel Aviv on Allenby Street, where my father recited the kaddish and tributes were paid to my grandfather by the leaders of the city. From here our convoy proceeded up the Jaffa-Jerusalem road... Our first stop was at the Etz Haim Yeshiva, at the entrance to the city [of Jerusalem]. Here rabbis and students emerged, and again the appropriate prayers were recited...

We made it to the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva, where Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, the chief rabbi of Palestine and a saintly figure, great scholar, and philosopher, cam out and stood behind the truck. The prayers were recited, my father again said kaddish, and Rabbi Kook delivered a eulogy. When he finished, my father spoke. Though we did not attach any significance to this even, Rabbi Kook was in the last months of his life--indeed, this was his final public appearance. While my father was not a candidate to replace him, this meeting was later much remarked upon. My father was running for rabbinical office in Tel Aviv, not for the chief rabbinate. That he was the last man to follow Rabbi Kook on the podium, as it were, was later seen as a sort of passing of the rabbinical baton...

While in Palestine, we visited friends' orange groves and went to kibbutzim, but the bulk of our time was spent in Tel Aviv, where my father campaigned for the city's chief rabbinate. His main supporter was a Rabbi Yitzchak Pinchas, who was pushing his candidacy against the Mizrachi (a religious party). My father met all the leading luminaries, religious and not so religious, demonstrating his Talmudic prowess, delivering sermons in the Great Synagogue, and giving Talmudic discourses both in the great yeshivot of Jerusalem and in centers of learning in Tel Aviv. In the yeshivot, scholars tried to upset his theses, interrupting his remarks and arguing vociferously, but he floored them with his phenomenal memory and profound understanding of the Talmud. By the time his trip was over, he had made an indelible impression. However, the struggle in Tel Aviv was a political one, and Rabbi Amiel of Antwerp, the Mizrachi candidate, won the war of backroom politics, receiving twenty-one votes to ten for my father and three for the renowned Rabbi Soloveitchik of the United States.

For a perspective on R. Soloveitchik's candidacy, see R. Jeffrey Saks' article "Rabbi Soloveitchik Meets Rav Kook" in Tradition 39:3. He lists the following additional sources in his note 1:

Shaul Farber, Community, Schooling, and Leadership: Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik's Maimonides School and the Development of Boston's Orthodox Community (PhD diss., Hebrew University, March 2000), pp. 81-85. See also: R. Tsevi (Hershel) Schachter, Nefesh ha-Rav (Jerusalem: Reishit, 1994), p. 84; Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff, The Rav: The World of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik (Hoboken, NJ: Ktav, 1999), vol. 1, pp. 36-8; and Shlomo Pick, "The Rav: A Pressing Need for a Comprehensive Biography," B.D.D. 10 (Winter 2000), pp. 48-9, and p. 52, esp. at note 30.

Read the rest of this entry »

Announcements #012

Sunday, December 2
Cong. Beth Abraham, 396 New Bridge Rd, Bergenfield NJ

• 8:00 PM - Rav Mayer Twersky - How Much is Too Much? Work/Life Balance In Today's Technologically Driven Environment
• 8:45 PM - Rav Hershel Schachter - How Open Is Too Open? Halachic Guidelines For Internet Use

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

Read the rest of this entry »

Child Sex Abuse Is Not An Anecdote

Rabbi Avi Shafran, Director of Public Affairs of Agudath Israel of America, recently published his latest contribution on the sex abuse problem in the Orthodox Jewish community. "Sin and Subtext" appeared on Cross-Currents and elsewhere (Cross-Currents, Yeshiva World, Am Echad). The article deserves more careful analysis and critique than I have the time and expertise to perform. Nevertheless, I think it requires at least a basic comment.

Rabbi Shafran writes:

What is also lamentable, though, is that its [abuse's] existence—to whatever extent—in the Orthodox world provides fodder for those who are always at the ready to pounce on the flimsiest of anecdotal evidence to "expose" what they believe are the moral shortcomings of Orthodox life.

This may be true but the solution isn't dismissing accusations as "the flimsiest of anecdotal evidence.” This alarmingly poor choice of words implies that largely, and especially regarding the case mentioned in the subsequent paragraph, all that exists is “the flimsiest of anecdotal evidence.”

This impression is terribly mistaken.

On the contrary, there are sworn testimonies in this case that have led to multiple indictments. While an indictment is not a conviction, it is certainly more than a flimsy anecdote. It means that victims of sexual abuse, often terrified schoolchildren, have overcome their trauma and fear to testify under oath in a room full of strangers and serious consequences.

Rabbi Shafran's next paragraph is the following single sentence: "Last year, an article appeared in New York magazine that told the tawdry tale of an alleged serial Orthodox child abuser.”

“Alleged” may be the legally and journalistically correct term because this yeshiva rebbe has only been indicted on multiple counts of child sex abuse and not yet convicted.

“Tawdry tale,” however, is yet another poor choice of phrases because it greatly diminishes the seriousness of the matter and implies that the multiple charges are nothing more than invented stories rather than serious and frightening accusations from multiple accusers.

While the many accusations about abusers may or may not imply something about the general Orthodox community, the cover-ups, the diminishing of the seriousness of these accusations, and the belittling of the victims and the immense courage that many of them have shown by coming forward, is in my mind a greater indictment of our community than any Brooklyn courtroom can issue.

There are public figures who have said that we should not report to the police the wrong-doings of abusers but the greatest rabbis of our times – including those to whom the Agudah looks for guidance – have disagreed. Whatever Chillul Hashem emerges is saddening but the protection of past and future victims is a more overriding concern. Let us not belittle the ongoing revelations but instead work together towards ensuring that these abuses never happen again.

The first step to doing that is admitting that abuses have occurred and encourage the speedy and just resolution of such cases.

Read the rest of this entry »

Announcements #011

Get your last-minute Chanuka presents at SilverHeaven.com Menorahs, Kiddush Cups, Candlesticks, Candelabras, Trays and much more.

Cyber Monday special: Free shipping within the USA. Use coupon code "cyberm". Offer good today, November 26, 2007 only.

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

Read the rest of this entry »

Wikipedia Entry

I don't know the rules about this, but perhaps an interested and sufficiently informed reader can either explain or intervene regarding the pending deletion of the Wikipedia article about me: link

Read the rest of this entry »

New Periodical: Meorot, Nov. 2007

There is a new issue available of Meorot - A Forum of Modern Orthodox Discourse (formerly the Edah Journal):

• Editor's Introduction by Eugene Korn
• Farteitcht un Farbessert (On "Correcting" Maimonides) by Menachem Kellner
• Ethics and Warfare Revisited by Gerald J. Blidstein and Michael J. Broyde
  
  I didn't get this stream-of-consciousness article. Dr. Blidstein is a brilliant scholar but I can't make heads or tails of what he wrote in response to an article by R. Broyde in a previous issue. I give R. Broyde credit for managing to find something in this article to respond to.
• Women's Eligibility to Write Sifrei Torah by Jen Taylor Friedman (apparently an argument that women may halakhically write Torah scrolls
• A Response to "Women's Eligibility to Write Sifrei Torah" by Dov Linzer (R. Linzer argues that woman may NOT write Torah scrolls)
• Authority and Validity: Why Tanakh Requires Interpretation, and What Makes an Interpretation Legitimate? by Moshe Sokolow
• Maimonides Contra Kabbalah: A Review of Maimonides’ Confrontation with Mysticism by Menachem Kellner by James A. Diamond
  
  I found this review of Menachem Kellner's recent book to be interesting in that it validated my belief that R. Soloveitchik was essentially a kabbalist who utilized Maimonidean thought rather than the other way around.

Read the rest of this entry »

New Book: Flipping Out? Myth or Fact: The Impact of the "Year in Israel"

Just in time for Chanukah!

“Flipping Out? Myth or Fact: The Impact of the ‘Year in Israel’” by Shalom Z. Berger, Daniel Jacobson and Chaim I. Waxman (published by Yashar Books) takes a hard look at a phenomenon that has become a major source of both inspiration and consternation in the Jewish community.

Just a generation ago, taking off a year after high school to learn Torah in Israel was uncommon if not rare. Somehow, while parents were focused on their children’s university and careers, a new “tradition” took root in Modern Orthodox high schools that would change their children’s future: a year of Torah study in Israel. The tradition has had a deep effect on the students and their families. With growing alarm, many parents see the Israel/Torah experience as threatening to their aspirations and their lifestyles.

“Flipping Out?” dares to ask some tough questions... and unflinchingly deals with the sometimes shocking answers. Is the year of learning merely an institutionalized lark or is it a real life change? Does it inspire spiritual growth... or a dangerous religious radicalization? The answers, both encouraging and eye-opening, are vital to students and their families and educators.

Noted educator Rabbi Shalom Berger, psychologist Rabbi Daniel Jacobson and sociologist Dr. Chaim Waxman combine their unique perspectives to provide a three-dimensional look at a movement that--depending on whom you believe--promises a golden age.... or threatens to tear apart the Jewish community.

The book was published in conjunction with Yeshiva University’s S. Daniel Abraham Israel Program and includes an introduction by Richard M. Joel, President of Yeshiva University.

Learn more about the book: here
Ask for it in your local Jewish bookstore (currently available in these stores but will be in more soon)
or buy it online: here

(Post moved to the top)

Read the rest of this entry »

JNews Roundup VII

by Raphael Davidovich

Artzeinu Hakedosha

Israel prodded to freeze settlements as pre-Annapolis gesture (Forward)

Gedolim attempt rent control and Chareidi housing expansion in Jerusalem (Yeshiva World)

Israel to reduce Gaza's power next week (Haaretz)

New kind of Peace Plan suggested by National Union endorsed by Labor MK's (Arutz Sheva)

New poll finds lower percentage of secular youth in Israel than ever before (Arutz Sheva)

Chutz La'aretz

Zalmi side wins another Satmar court battle (Record Online)

New group endeavors to create more humane kosher slughterhouse (Forward)

More Frum Jews Clerking for Justice Scalia (Forward)

Another Jew beaten up in Lakewood (Jewish Week)

AIPAC criticized for supporting PA demands (Forward)

German Court rules on "Self-Hating Jew" syndrome. (Jewish Press)

Read the rest of this entry »

New Commentator

New issue of The Commentator:

• University to Take Step Back, Ease Spending
• CJF Obtains Major Grant to Fund Student Programming
• Honors Program Aims to Replenish Funds
• YC Looking to Hire New Assistant Dean
• Students Need to Reexamine Priorities, Survey Indicates
• English Department Considers the Issue of Adjuncts Teaching Freshman Composition
• Wilf Campus Travels to Connecticut for Third YUnite Shabbaton
• New Target for ORA: Rabbis
• Letters to the Editor (correctly bemoaning the implied insult to the Economics faculty in the previous issue)
• Healthy Stealthy Dating: A Modest Guide to Dating in YU
• The YU Cynic



• Yeshivatising YU One Curriculum Review at a Time
  
  This article asks why Yeshiva College offers courses that are contrary to Jewish law. This is not an issue that will ever be under my discretion, but let me state anyway that I agree 100%. The courses taught at YU should be guided by and conform entirely with halakhah. However, and this is a big however, Jewish law must be implemented in a very broad-minded and inclusive way. For example, there are times when knowledge of the Christian Bible is important and the courses must be structured to incorporate that. Yeshiva College is not the place for being overly strict on these issues but nor should it be the place for ignoring them. YC should offer a top-notch secular education but that can and must be done within the confines of halakhah. It is not the latter that must be sacrificed for the former but, rather, vice versa.

Read the rest of this entry »

Online Yeshiva II

---

- Sponsored Link -

---

WebYeshiva: A Revolutionary Way to Learn Torah

WebYeshiva, Rabbi Chaim Brovender's innovative new enterprise, opens the doors of the Yeshiva and Midrasha experience to anyone with an Internet connection. Attend class with some of the world's top Rabbis and teachers wherever you are.

Whether you are experienced or beginner, on lunch break or retired, at home or at work, WebYeshiva offers a new way to access the treasures of Torah learning which have guided the Jewish people for thousands of years. Join us today and start growing in Torah according to your schedule.

Sign up for a two-week free trial and try it out with no financial obligation whatsoever.

The semester officially begins this Sunday, November 25th with live, interactive video conference classes on all different levels.

Read the rest of this entry »

Being Normal

R. Hershel Schachter has a great shmuess on this week's parashah from 2000 about being normal: link (audio)

It's an action-packed 20 minute lecture, full of important lessons about not being too frum, knowing where to be strict and where not, and raising children to be normal and respect other Torah paths. On an halakhic note, he rules that if a court has to choose between awarding child custody to an observant woman who will likely damage the children psychologically and a non-observant father, the court should choose the father: "The Torah doesn't want meshuga'im. God wants us to be normal."

Read the rest of this entry »

Homework Overload

It isn't often that my daughter will read one of my printouts with so much enthusiasm that she even underlines passages. But that's how it was when I printed out this item from the November 9, 2007 issue of Five Towns Jewish Times. On page 61, the newspaper informed readers of a new policy at Bnos Leah Prospect Park: no written homework on Tuesday nights (but reading or studying can be assigned) and no homework at all on Thursday nights. Because of this, teachers will need to restructure their lesson plans and methods. This is no small change!

This is particularly interesting because Prospect Park is notorious for its grueling homework schedule. That is actually one of the reasons we did not send our daughter to the school. My daughter, who, unlike her father ever was, is very conscientious about her homework, spends a few hours each night doing homework. I hope that the Prospect Park experiment succeeds and spreads to other schools, so kids can have a chance to be kids.

Full article here:

Read the rest of this entry »

Parashah Roundup: Vayishlakh 5768

by Steve Brizel

Yaakov and Esau and Ecumenical Dialogue

R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik zt"l delineates why ecumenical theological dialogue is a futile and ultimate demeaning gesture to its participants: link (Those interested will find articles from a symposium at this link. The Commentator's archives also have many articles on the vitality of this article.)

The Yaakov-Esau Confrontation and Jewish History

R. Shalom Noach Brozofsky zt"l (Nesivos Shalom, as prepared by R. Eliezer Kwass) compares the battles of Yaakov and Yisrael and Esau and Lavan: link

R. Shlomoh Wolbe zt"l tells us why Yaakov Avinu, according to Rashi, was emphatic about not being attracted to Lavan's way of life: link (DOC)

R. Herschel Schachter discusses why a Torah Jew in a secular society must take additional stringencies upon himself: link

R. Berel Wein probes why Yaakov was accompanied by Melachim enroute to his confrontation with Esau: link

R. Tzvi Sobolofsy delineates different tactics that we must use communally and individually to confront Esau: link

R. Asher Brander explores why Yaakov is a model of spiritual heroism: link

R. Jonathan Sacks reveals the moral dilemma that Yaakov felt as he met Esau: link

Yaakov's Personality and the Challenges of Parenting

R. Shlomo Riskin show us how Yaakov's personality evolved during his life as he met each of the challenges within his family: link

Gid HaNasheh

R. Avigdor Nevenzahl explores the hashkafic lessons of the Issur of Gid HaNasheh: link

Leah and Dinah

R. Yissachar Frand explains how Dinah expressed the true values of Leah link

Reuven and Bilhah

R. Yaakov Medan analyzes the episode of Reuven and Bilha in light of different views and means of understanding the actions of personae in the Chumash: link

R. Yaakov Horowitz explains Yaakov's reaction to Reuven's impulsive actions: link

Hilchos Ishus

Dr. Yoel Shiloh explores Mohar, Matan and the Kesubah: link

Shimon, Levi and Shechem

R. Amnon Bazak seeks to understand the role of Shimeon and Levi and why they were ultimately separated by Yaakov: link

R. Zev Leff tells where Shimon and Levi erred in their approach: link

Read the rest of this entry »

Increasing Unity

Steve Savitsky has a fascinating interview, on OU Radio, with R. Berel Wein and R. Avi Shafran titled "Dividing Unity" (link). The interview revolves around articles by the interviewees in the Summer 2007 issue of Jewish Action. R. Wein wrote an article titled "Weeping and Wishing" (link) in which he bemoans the divisiveness in the Orthodox community. R. Shafran had a contrary article titled "La Différence, La Similarité" (link) in which he argues that there is actually growing consensus in the Orthodox community. These two views are repeated in the interviews.

In general, R. Shafran comes across as a really nice guy who just seems so optimistic that even though you can't agree with him you just wish you could. R. Wein is more of the realist, although in doing so he commits what I consider to be a false argument for the sake of even-handedness. He emphasizes in his article and interview that the guilt lies on both sides of the growing split. For example:

Agudath Israel is currently not allowed to deal with the writings of Rabbis Kook or Amiel, nor is the Religious Zionist camp likely to publish the thoughts of Rabbis Elchanan Wasserman or Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn. The lines of division in the ranks of Orthodoxy have hardened over the last half-century. We are all the poorer for that, and this is a cause of tears for me.

I don't think this is correct. Religious Zionists and Modern Orthodox quote from across the spectrum (see this post) and, in general, show immense respect for scholars and institutions on the right. I find R. Wein's "moral equivalence" hard to swallow and unnecessary.

The most important part of the interview begins at the end of minute 8 when R. Wein discusses how to increase unity. He calls for teachers and rabbis to be trained to be careful not to delegitimize other groups of Jews. I was thinking of how to realistically implement a solution of this nature and it seems to me that the only organization with both the mandate and the ability to do anything of like this is the Chofetz Chaim Heritage Foundation. Similar to their B'Drachov program, they can create a curriculum and a campaign that discourages speaking badly of and delegitimizing other groups of Jews. This can, I think, be realistically accomplished and implemented. In addition to impacting on children, it will also affect the teachers and parents who have to teach and reinforce the curriculum.

If any readers of this blog have connections at that organization, please strongly recommend a campaign of this nature. It can only increase peace.

Read the rest of this entry »

Rejoice In An Amazing Book On Your Festivals

I've previously quoted a few times insights from R. Zvi Dov Kanotopsky (link). He was, as I quoted from R. Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff, the top student of R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik from the 1940s. He went on to become probably the most popular pulpit rabbi in Crown Heights--a huge Jewish community in those days, a rosh yeshiva in YU, and after his aliyah a instructor at Bar Ilan. Sadly, he died prematurely in a tragic accident in 1973. His synagogue derashos (sermons) were famous and, thankfully, he kept careful records of them. Over the years, a few books have been published of his sermons. This past year, his daughter (my high school teacher), son-in-law (my high school principal) and one of R. Kanotopsky's former congregants teamed up and published a collection of his derashos on the shalosh regalim (Pesach, Shavuos and Sukkos) titled Rejoice in Your Festivals.

I've gone through the entire book, cover to cover, and it is fantastic. The derashos are beautiful, many brilliant. Someone who appreciates the art of the derashah will enjoy this book even more because the author was an unquestionable master.

Interestingly, all of the derashos are dated so the reader can know exactly when they were given, and some have footnotes explaining the historical context (one is undated). This adds insight because the derashos span from early 1945 through after 1967, and discuss topics such as the Allied victory in World War II, the discovery of the horrors of the Holocaust, the United Nations debate over and eventual establishment of the State of Israel, and the Six Day War and its aftermath. With a mastery over midrash and Talmud, R. Kanotopsky finds insights that speak to the religious and emotional significances of these momentous occasions.

Click here to read moreGiven that many of these sermons were written half a century ago, one might expect that they are somewhat dated and do not speak to contemporary concerns. I don't think that is true at all. For one thing, many of the essays relate to eternal concerns such as the need to find spirituality and joy in Judaism. Additionally, since Pesach is the holiday of the Exodus and Shavuos is the holiday of the giving of the Torah, R. Kanotopsky dwells at length about the nature of the Torah and Jewish belief. When he speaks out against the powerful Conservative movement of his day and provides the Orthodox responses to their religious challenges, he does not just react to the threat but he builds a thoughtful worldview regarding the development and sources of Judaism that respond extremely well to the challenges of today as well. Perhaps this says more about the cyclicality of life, however I believe that the sermons on these topics are extremely relevant even today.

While the reader must keep in mind that the book does not contain exhaustive essays but synagogue sermons, and that this genre includes loose readings for rhetorical purposes, he will be extremely rewarded with this book of derashos from a master of the trade. Put this on the must-read list.

---

In a sermon on the five names of the Sinai desert listed in the Gemara (Shabbos 89a-b), R. Kanotopsky writes as follows (pp. 131-135):

Our rabbis say that the wilderness of Sinai is sometimes called מדבר קדמות--the wilderness of Kedemot. Why is it called by that name? שנתנה קדומה עליו--because the Torah, which is kedumah, so ancient, was given there...

There are groups in Jewish life today that insist that the midbar Sinai, that the wilderness we know as Sinai, where the Torah was given, should be referred to and should be known as midbar Kedemot, because upon that mountain and in that wilderness there was given or revealed an ancient Law, the product of an ancient civilization--she-nitnah kedumah alav, an old Law that reflects the moral and ethical standards of an ancient people...

If we say that it is proper for men and women to be seated together at prayer services, we are, in effect, saying we have reached much higher standards of moral values. We are saying that while the rabbis of the Talmud may have been distracted by the presence of women during their prayer, we have no such problem...

Let us now pose our original question again. Has Torah lost its validity and its vitality? Has it been outdated by the tremendous strides of modern civilization and the modern world? I think the answer is both yes and no. It depends from what perspective we approach the problem. It also depends upon what strides and modern progress we are dealing with.

If anyone should tell us that our advanced modern religious philosophy indicates that the concepts of korbanot, of sacrifices to be brought in the Temple, are antiquated and outdated, or if anyone should tell us that we are so morally and ethically advanced that the laws of the Torah do not conform to our standards, then I know that this is the reference to Sinai as the midbar Kedemot. These people are simply wrong and their arguments run counter to our covenant with HaShem. Our Torah, our Law, is absolutely as valid today in its entirety, as it was on the momentous day whose anniversary we celebrate today, when God revealed His Word to us.

On the other hand, if you ask whether we have done everything we can to continue to apply the Torah to the peculiar needs of our times, I think that, unfortunately, the answer is no. Too often we see a reluctance, a fear to really address the problems we face, problems for which precedents are not readily obvious. We face new questions raised by our technological advances. We face new questions as a result of our having our own government for the first time in two thousand years. WE should be facing these new questions with excitement and confidence.

We must not forget that something else happened at Sinai in addition to the formal revelation of the Law. That something is contained in another name for Mount Sinai. It is called midbar Kadesh, the wilderness of Kadesh. Why? שנתקדשו ישראל עליו--because the Children of Israel were thereupon sanctified. We were endowed with kedushah...

In today's world, we often confront new and sometimes challenging issues that call for creative responses from our contemporary sages. Their role is clear. They must be mehadesh within the "four cubits of halakha"; they must innovate but within the very well-defined boundaries that are part of our heritage from Sinai. At the same time, we must be mindful of those who pose as prophets of a new world and wish to eliminate halakhic institutions and practices in the name of modernity. Our Torah may be ancient, but it is as relevant today as it ever was...

Read the rest of this entry »

More Conversion Developments

The following letter was disseminated by the Badatz (religious court) of the Edah Charedis of Jerusalem, a very right-wing but influential and respected group of scholars. I don't know where they receive their information about what will lead to more intermarriage on a different continent and am therefore skeptical whether they have any right to issue a ruling on this matter, especially since no one asked them. But since they are delegitimizing the Eternal Jewish Family organization, that itself is trying to delegitimize Modern Orthodox rabbis (I, II ), I see the turnabout as a welcome development.

[Rav Sternbuch, shlita approved translation by Daniel Eidensohn]

5th of Kislev 5768

Concerning the Holiness of the Jewish People – the Holy Nation.

The senior dayanim of the Bedatz met today to discuss allegations that certain kiruv activists are actively proselytizing the children of intermarried couples to convince them to convert – even though according to Torah law there is no halachic relationship with their Jewish fathers. They are calling for the acceptance of these non-Jewish children in Jewish programs and religious schools. Such an action is literally a disaster and self-destructive. It is self-evident that such a program is absolutely prohibited by the Torah.

Furthermore until now anyone who wanted to marry a non-Jewess – Heaven forfend! – knew very well that this act would sever them from the Jewish people forever. Because of the dire consequences of intermarriage, there was a strong barrier that prevented many from intermarrying. However now that the consequence of exclusion from the Jewish people has been removed - this motivation not to intermarry has been lost. Consequently these intermarried couples and their children remain amongst the Jewish people. This results in their non-Jewish children being accepted into religious schools out of the hope that they will eventually convert.

Therefore we are warning that this activity is against the Torah. It has never been acceptable to proselytize non-Jews. Furthermore as we mentioned it actually encourages intermarriage.

We therefore are turning to the poskim and the roshei yeshivos not to participate in their conventions - such as the one that occurred in America last week. Even if their motivation was to improve the standards of conversions – they are making improvements in one area while making things worse in another. This approach is directly causing serious problems.

Those who heed our cautions will benefit and receive blessings.

We - the members of the Bedatz in Jerusalem - affix our signature to this document out of fear and concern for the holiness of the Jewish people – the holy nation.

Read the rest of this entry »

Announcements #010

Mazel Tov to Joel Rich (KT) on the aufruf and chasuna of his son Noson.
If you are in the Waterbury area please stop by the Connecticut Grand Hotel on Sunday.
(Note: This was not posted by Joel Rich.)

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

Read the rest of this entry »

An Interview with Rav Hershel Schachter

If you have not yet read the interview by Ari Lamm with R. Hershel Schachter in the most recent issue of The Commentator, then I highly recommend you do so. The interview is full of humor, insight, and important views (link). What follows is a funny story (with a point) and a viewpoint that is relevant to this blog:

Rabbi Soloveitchik was a Misnaged, and would often tell jokes about Hassidim. Once, he told a joke about a Hassidishe Rebbe who got up to speak on Shabbos of parashas Lekh Lekha, and asked the following question: why is “Lekh Lekha” spelled with two big letter hets? There was a skeptical Misnaged in the crowd, and he protested that, first of all, it is spelled with two letter kafs, and second of all, the letters are not larger than the other letters. So the Rebbe says, “that’s one good teretz, but I have a better teretz…”


Is there room for non-traditional scholarship? A lot of the non-traditional commentary works on peirush ha-milot, and on peshuto shel mikra, which is very important. We’re not sure about the meaning of a great deal of Biblical words, and we follow the principle, “kabel es haemes mimi sheomro.” If someone has a suggestion, we would be happy to listen – and some of the suggestions of the non-traditional scholars are gevaldig! But as far as the overall picture of Tanakh is concerned, Chazal had their own tradition of interpretation. Why should we assume that someone living centuries later is going to have a better interpretation?

But there is certainly room for this. For instance, archaeology is discovering practices that existed years ago in the days of the Tanakh, and based on these findings, we can understand problematic verses in Tanakh. It is certainly a mitzvah to understand the peshuto shel mikra, and to know what the verse is talking about.

Read the rest of this entry »

JNews Roundup VI

by Raphael Davidovich

Israel

No more Tzedaka collecting at the Kotel (Arutz Sheva)

Thousand year-old Aleppo Codex Manuscript found ( Ynet News)

Olmert calls for PA to recognize Israel as a Jewish State as a pre-condition to talks. (BBC News)

USA

Houston attorney scores victory for Texas Jewish community (Jewish Herald-Voice)

Annual Chabad Shaliach Conference held in NY (Jewish Week)

Seattle soda-maker promises ham flavor will be kosher (Ynet News)

North Jersey Y goes Kosher (Jewish Standard)

Rabbis and Imams meet (link)

White House implores Jewish organizations to support Annapolis Summit (Forward

Norman Mailer dies (Forward)

Revisiting Pollard again (Jewish Press

Other Countries

Bnai Brith Canada faces Revolt (Forward\

Trouble in the Berlin Jewish community (Forward)

Neo-Nazis and anti-Nazis clash in Prague (Forward)

Ukrainian President pledges Reb Nachman's gravesite Safety (YNet News)

Staff emails indicate that British Royal Family not keen on ever visiting Israel (Jewish Chronicle)

Read the rest of this entry »

Parashah Roundup: Vayetze 5768

by Steve Brizel

Yaakov and Lavan

R. Ephraim Buchwald, based upon R Samson Rafael Hirsch, explores the interaction between Yaakov and Lavan: link

Yaakov and the Jewish Home

R. Zev Leff shows why the Jewish home and Yaakov are integrally related: link

The Personality of Yaakov

R. Avigdor Nevenzahl explores how Yaakov prevailed over the atmosphere and environment in Lavan's household: link

Dr. Amos Bar-da discusses Yaakov's spiritual growth: link

R. Amnon Bazak analyzes why Yaakov fled from Lavan: link

R. Yaakov Medan investigates how Yaakov fulfilled a Neder Bes Tzarah: link

R. Michael Rosenzweig contrasts Yaakov and Esau and helps us undestand that persistence and initiative are essential in Avodas HaShem: link

R. Berel Wein emphasizes the importance of teaching Torah values in addition to Torah knowledge: link

Yaakov and Galus

R. Asher Brander discusses why Yaakov is identified with Galus: link

Yaakov and Tefilas Maariv

R. Jonathan Sacks investigates why Yaakov Avinu is associated with Tefilas Maariv: link

Spotted and Speckled Sheep

R. Shlomoh Wolbe zt"l discusses the positive power of the imagination: link (DOC)

Kever Rachel

R. Shlomo Riskin investigates the historical significance of Kever Rachel: link

Acharon Acharon Chaviv Department

The OU has asked all of us to emphasize the importance of Jerusalem in our faith this Shabbos: link

R. Aharon Lichtenstein explores the special merit that our generation has to a united Jewish Jerusalem: link

R. Ezra Bick discusses why Jerusalem is so important to us and the structure of two brachos in the weekday Shemoneh Esreh: link (DOC)

Read the rest of this entry »

Clapping, Dancing and Musical Instruments on Shabbat

by R. Ari Enkin

The Mishna[1] lists a number of seemingly innocent activities which are forbidden on Shabbat by rabbinic decree lest one come to violate Shabbat by means of a related activity. Clapping and dancing are among these forbidden activities due to their frequent association with musical instruments. Though once part of the formal Shabbat service, musical instruments were later banned due to the concern that one may be tempted to repair a musical instrument in the event it breaks – a severe violation of the laws of Shabbat. In order to properly distance the community from the prohibition of repairing instruments, the rabbis forbade clapping, dancing and all forms of music making as well.[2]

Click here to read moreAlthough there are authorities who continue to rule stringently and prohibit dancing and clapping on Shabbat even in our day,[3] there are those who advocate a more progressive approach to the issue as well.[4] Indeed, even the earliest of the Talmudic commentators argued that clapping and dancing should be permitted given that the concern which led to the decree was no longer relevant. These sages felt that since nowadays very few people are skilled in instrument repair there was little reason to fear that someone would come to repair an instrument which had broken.[5]

Additionally, there are those who are of the opinion that it was only clapping and dancing to instrumental music which was prohibited, not dancing to the tunes of vocal song. It also seems that the dancing of the Talmudic era was a different, more professional form of dancing than we have today. The spontaneous recreational dancing as is common at religious events would pose no problem according to this view.[6] Indeed, it is unanimously permitted to clap in the normal fashion in order to get someone's attention or when otherwise clearly not in the context of music.[7]

Some suggest that clapping and dancing really should be avoided on Shabbat, though they acknowledge there are grounds for leniency for more distinctive occasions, such as Simchat Torah.[8] According to all authorities clapping in a backhanded fashion is always permitted, as that alone serves as an adequate reminder not to get carried away with musical instruments.[9] The Chassidic authorities are exceptionally lenient regarding dancing and clapping on Shabbat, even claiming that it is a component of the mitzvah to be joyful on Shabbat.[10]

Although many individuals and communities have legitimately chosen to follow the lenient approach and allow clapping and dancing on Shabbat,[11] nevertheless the original enactment to avoid musical instruments is very much in place.[12] As such, the use of door knockers[13] on Shabbat is prohibited as is using a rattle[14] to calm a child. One should not use forks, knives, or other tableware in order to make a beat or rhythm while singing.[15]

The tuning forks that are often used by Chazzanim are permitted by some authorities[16] but forbidden by others.[17] Those who are lenient regarding the use of tuning forks argue that since it is only heard by the person using it and can only play a single note allows for leniency. So too, the bells that are often attached to the crowns placed upon the Torah scrolls pose no halachic problem since there is no intention for them to serve as music but rather to announce the arrival of the Torah.[18] Whistling is permitted on Shabbat.[19]

---

[1] Beitza 36b
[2] Beitza 36b, Aruch Hashulchan O.C. 339:7
[3] O.C. 339:3, Igrot Moshe O.C. 2:100, Yechave Daat 2:58
[4] Rama O.C. 339:3, Aruch Hashulchan 339:9
[5] Tosfot Beitza 30a, Rama 339:3
[6] Aruch Hashulchan O.C. 339:9
[7] Mishna Berura 338:2,4, Aruch Hashulchan 338:5
[8] Magen Avraham O.C. 33:91, Mishna Berura 339:8, Kaf Hachaim 339:10,13
[9] O.C. 339:3, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 16:43, 28:36
[10] Minchat Elazar O.C. 1:29, cited in Halacha Encounters, Clapping and Dancing on Shabbos, by Rabbi Avi Weinrib at: http://www.cckollel.org/html/parsha/vayikra/tzav5763.html
[11] Kaf Hachaim 339:14
[12] O.C. 338:1, Aruch Hashulchan 338:1
[13] Rama O.C. 338:1
[14] O.C. 339:3
[15] Bnei Banim 1:12 where it is suggested that doing so may be an issur d'oraita
[16] Yabia Omer 3:22
[17] Mishna Berura 338:4, Aruch Hashulchan 338:8
[18] Aruch Hashulchan 338:3
[19] Aruch Hashulchan O.C. 338:7

Read the rest of this entry »

Conversion and the Age of the Universe II

I was contacted by R. Leib Tropper, who presented at the recent EJF conference discussed in this post, and he offered the following clarifications (in my words, which he approved):

1. R. Tropper does not believe that R. Eisenstein said in the name of Rav Elyashiv that someone who believes that the world is older than 6,000 years is a heretic. Rather, he is not worthy of being a dayan. Presumably, this means that the past conversions he performed are still valid.

2. R. Tropper quoted Rav Chaim Kanievsky as saying that a person who believes that the Sages of the Talmud could have made mistakes should not be converted. He does not rule definitively on someone with that view who already converted.

3. R. Tropper stated that dayanim should dress conservatively and that even secular courts have dress codes. However, he did not state that dayanim who do not dress appropriately are disqualified from serving as dayanim.

4. R. Tropper also said from the podium that it is the opinion of R. Elyashiv and R. David Feinstein that a Beis Din performing a conversion should release the "Te'udah" (certificate) immediately so that the convert can move on.

My comments:

1 & 2. It is impossible to have truly universal standards for conversion (and dayanim) because the standards of different communities are contradictory and, even if not, would be incredibly restrictive. For example, the Satmar community would demand that Zionists cannot be dayanim because they are heretics. I do not know how literally they take this, but the Satmar Rav wrote that anyone who votes in an Israeli election has the halakhic status of an idolator and, presumbly, is disqualified from serving as a dayan. On the other side, there are communities that follow the rulings of the Rambam and Maharal that those who pray to angels or human beings (including rebbes) are heretics. Should we disqualify from serving as a dayan anyone who is a Zionist or recites "makhnisei rachamim"? I don't see how that is possible. If you are a follower of Satmar or of an ultra-Rationalist, then you must follow those rulings and disqualify as dayanim as above. But if that is the case, then you should not be trying to institute "universal" standards that exclude large segments of the current Orthodox community.

If (and I stress IF) Rav Elyashiv holds that the majority of Orthodox rabbis in the US--including the most active dayanim in America who oversee hundreds of gittin and conversions a year--are disqualified for serving as dayanim, then his followers must abide by that ruling. But I don't see how they can impose that on the general community or claim that by following him they are implementing standards that are anywhere near universal. As above, truly universal standards are impossible. Close-to-universal standards would be as inclusive as possible, not incredibly divisive and exclusive.

3. I think every rabbi and dayan agrees that dayanim should dress appropriately. The question is what is considered appropriate, and on this standards differ based on time and place. No one would require dayanim to dress the way dayanim in Rambam's Egypt dressed, nor in Rav Ashi's Bavel. Therefore, I don't know that an out-of-town rabbi should need to dress according to Boro Park fashion, nor should a Boro Park dayan need to dress according to Wall Street fashion. Colored shirts and wedding bands may raise eyebrows in Monsey but in Teaneck they are considerable respectable, formal and wholly appropriate.

4. Nothing to add.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Book of Dreams

Before Rosh Hashanah, I spent Shabbos with my parents while my mother's second cousin from Israel was there. I've known him for most of my life but during this visit I learned something about him. It seems that he grew up around Prof. Yishayahu Leibowitz and even sat a few rows behind him in synagogue. We discussed Prof. Leibowitz for a while and what he was like in person (intentionally provocative). My mother was recently in Israel and saw a sale on two books by Prof. Leibowitz. Remembering that Shabbos discussion, she bought the books for me. So I am now the owner of seven years' worth of Prof. Leibowitz's teachings on the weekly Torah portion.

On Va-Yetzei, Prof. Leibowitz makes the interesting observation that the book of Genesis is unique in the number of dreams it contains when compared to other books of the Bible. For example, Avraham (Gen. 16:12), Ya'akov (28:12), Avimelech (20:7), and of course Yosef (37:5) and Pharaoh (41:1). And there are more. What is it about this book that makes it so full of dreams?

Prof. Leibowitz offers two suggestions, while insisting that they are only tentative. First, he suggests that the book of Genesis in general consists of many things that are unknown or unknowable. It is a book of mysterious and unfathomable beginnings, and man can only approach these topics through dreams rather than intellect.

His second suggestion builds on the fact that Genesis precedes the giving of the Torah. After the Torah was given, man's approach to God is through the Torah, through the conscious intellect. However, prior to the giving of the Torah, man could approach God through intuition rather than just rational thought. Knowing God non-rationally is knowing God through a dream, which is clarified and crystallized through the lens of the Torah.

Read the rest of this entry »

New Periodical: Hakirah volume 5 (Fall 2007)

A new issue of Hakirah was recently published. Articles include:

• Letters to the Editor - A very extensive debate over R. Yehudah Henkin's article in the previous issue about shaking hands with women
• What is "Emunat Hakhamim"? in which R. Nachum Rabinovitch argues that "Emunas Chakhamim" is: "faith that the words of our Sages contain deep significance and truths that are worth seeking out" and "faith and self-confidence that with one's G-d-given mind it is possible to comprehend the wisdom hidden in the words of the Sages."
• Rambam and Zevulun: Boz Yavuzu Lo by Asher Benzion Buchman, about the Rambam's personal financial situations throughout his life and its halakhic implications
• Review Essay: Worship of the Heart by Lawrence J. Kaplan, a fairly harsh review
• Divine Providence -- Goals, Hopes and Fears by David Guttmann, a very involved exploration of Providence in the Rambam
• Reclaiming the Self: Adam's Sin and the Human Psyche by Menachem Krakowski, by a descendant (grandson?) of the Avodas Ha-Melekh
• Symmetrically Designed Sifrei Torah: A Quantitative Analysis by Sheldon Epstein, Bernard Dickman and Yonah Wilamowsky, all about how many letters and verses are in the Torah
• Tikkunei Soferim, an Analysis of a Masoretic Phenomenon by Avrohom Lieberman
• Review Essay: Bach, Rabbi Joel Sirkes by Heshy Zelcer, a review of this book from Yashar
• On the Nature of the Debate Between Chassidim and Misnagdim, and What Emerges From It by R. Gedaliah Rabinowitz
• On the Subject of Conjoined Twins by R. Avraham Zucker

Read the rest of this entry »

Shemitah in the Diaspora II

R. Hershel Schachter explains his view that even one who does not rely on the heter mekhirah may purchase and eat produce from a farmer who does (and, presumably, treat the food with the proper holiness of shemitah): link. He bases this on the Mishnah Berurah (318:2) in the name of the Pri Megadim, that whenever there is a dispute among the posekim about a prohibition then the lenient view -- even if you do not follow it -- prevents food produced in such a fashion from becoming prohibited [R. Schachter doesn't say which Mishnah Berurah but I believe that I have identified the one he means].

See also this post.

When I was first married, someone once gave us a Jaffa orange on a Shabbos during a shemitah year. I asked R. Feivel Cohen on that Shabbos and he told me that the orange is muktzeh because one is not allowed to eat it. Not only would R. Schachter say that it is not muktzeh, but he would allow one to eat the orange even though he does not follow the heter mekhirah.

Read the rest of this entry »

ORA

Stephen Savitsky does a fascinating and important interview with Josh Ross of ORA on OU Radio (link). Includes a discussion of how to define an agunah and how many there are in the world (around minute 18). ORA currently has about 70 open cases and has been involved in close to 150.

A few young people got together to try and make a difference. Yeyasher kokham!

Around minute 22, learn how you can easily get involved. After Josh Ross, R. Kenneth Auman comes on and explains the importance of the general community taking this issue seriously and making a big difference.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Election of Rav Herzog

I had not previously known of Prof. Saul Lieberman's efforts in the election of R. Yitzchak Herzog to the position of Chief Rabbi of Israel. The following is from Rav Herzog's son's memoirs, Chaim Herzog, Living History, pp. 27-28:

Four months after my arrival in Palestine, Chief Rabbi Kook passed away. The process of selecting his successor was long drawn out--and, of course, quite political. Many names were bandied about. First and foremost, what was needed was the excellence and erudition to sit in judgment as head of the Rabbinical Supreme Court...

The chief rabbi, much more so in those days, was a central figure in community leadership. He represented the Palestinian Jewish community not only to Jews everywhere but also to Moslems, Christians, and the British Mandatory authorities. My father's scholarship was well known and established. Since he also met all the other qualifications, he emerged as one of two main candidates. The other was Moshe Charlap, the rabbi of a district in Jerusalem and the supervisor at Rabbi Kook's yeshiva. Though a great holy man, he had little experience of the world and was unlikely to display the kind of leadership needed at a time of great turmoil and change. So the lines were drawn--between the old and the new--and the battle began.

Strangely enough, many in the Mizrachi religious Zionist movement again opposed my father, although Rabbi Meir Bar-Ilan, its head, as well as a number of other leaders, supported him. But the party hacks preferred someone they could control, regardless of the effect on the rabbinate. My grandfather [R. Shmuel Yitzchak Hillman] and Shaul Lieberman, Rabbi Bar-Ilan's son-in-law and one of the world's greatest authorities on the Jerusalem Talmud and Hellenism in ancient Israel, organized a small campaign staff. It was my own initiation to the world of campaigning. In the time-old tradition of Jerusalem and politics in general, there was quite a bit of mudslinging. The main objection to my father--that he held a doctorate--meant he had departed from the straight and narrow path of religious piety and was "tainted" by exposure to foreign intellectuals...

However, the heavy artillery of Orthodox Jewry was soon activated. Rabbi Chaim Grodzinski of Vilna and Rabbi Joseph Rozin of Dvinsk supported my father's candidacy, and as they were the greatest Jewish religious leaders of the age, their endorsements were vital. Gradually, the main centers of learning, the yeshivot, also endorsed my father; the secular community realized that the country needed a spiritual leader who would deal with and answer the problems of the time.

After a long and intense battle, the elections took place in an orphanage on Jaffa Road in Jerusalem, on 1 December 1936. I waited tensely at my grandparents' small apartment for the results. Suddenly we heard footsteps running up the stairs. Supporters burst in and announced the results. My father had won, thirty-seven votes to thirty-three, and we rushed to cable the news to my parents in Ireland.

Read the rest of this entry »

Accountability of Charities

I

When Jeremiah the prophet was frustrated with the people of his hometown for tormenting him, he cursed them as follows (Jer. 18:23):

ואתה ה' ידעת את כל עצתם עלי למות אל תכפר על עונם וחטאתם מלפניך אל תמחי והיו (ויהיו) מכשלים לפניך בעת אפך עשה בהם.

Yet you, O Lord, know all their plotting to kill me. Do not forgive their iniquity, do not blot out their sin from your sight. Let them be tripped up before you; deal with them while you are angry.

The Gemara (Bava Basra 9b) asks what the last part of this curse means -- "let them be tripped up before you". Rabbah explains that Jeremiah asked God that when these people decided to give charity, God should "trip them up" and have them give to people who do not need charity. This, evidently, would undermine the act. While they might have thought that they would be giving charity, in fact they would be giving money to someone who does not need it, which is not a mitzvah.

Because of this, the halakhah is that before one gives charity to someone, he must verify that this person actually needs the charity. Otherwise, there is no mitzvah. The Shulchan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah 251:10) writes that if someone comes and asks for food (or money for food), then we give it to him immediately because it is a matter of life and death. But if he comes for clothing (or anything else), we must verify that he truly needs the money.

Just last week, R. Shlomo Aviner sent out the following question and answer:

Question: When I visit the Kotel, there are so many people asking for money, should I give money to the beggars? What about people on the street? What about people who knock on my door and ask for money?

Answer:
A. Most Beggars are Swindlers
The Halachah is that we do not give money to beggars until we clarify that they are truly poor. This is a "Takanat Chazal" (Ruling of our Sages) since most beggars are swindlers. This ruling is found in the Gemara in Baba Batra (9a) and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 251:10) and it applies to this day. Ninety percent of people who ask for money today are swindlers. If someone asks for money we do not give it until he provides verification from a reliable Rabbi. If someone asks for food, however, we give him immediately. What if he is being deceptive? It is a potentially life-threatening situation and we therefore provide food without delay. Today, most beggars in Israel do not ask for food because there are many soup kitchens, and if you offer them food, they say that they prefer money...

In sum: We only give tzedakah to people who we can verify are poor or to trustworthy organizations. Give to one, two, three trustworthy organizations. It is not possible to provide for every poor person in any event. Most beggars are not evil people, they are mentally and emotionally unstable. We do not judge them, but we only give tzedakah to actual poor people.

II

Perhaps I am misapplying this rule, but it seems to me that when giving to an organization one must also verify that the organization is performing charitable work and that it needs more money to perform its good work. If not, perhaps there is no mitzvah in giving to them.

Yet, how many charitable organizations open their books to the public so we can verify whether they truly need money and whether the money we give to them is used for charity? And if not to the public, which I understand is not necessarily a good deal, then have an independent auditor certify their financial statements. I don't doubt that yeshivos are significantly underfunded and need to raise money from the public. But how can I give any money to them when I am unable to verify that the money given to them is used appropriately? Religious organizations in the US are exempt from filing certain forms so we are unable to verify this on our own. So what are we supposed to do?

I supposed I will ask a posek when and (hopefully not but) if I am asked to be honored by a charitable organization, whether I am allowed to do so if their financials are not audited. Perhaps, despite all the wonderful people there and due simply to inadequate management rather than ill will, they are not using their funds properly and do not qualify as a charity. Otherwise, how am I allowed to give them money or encourage others to do so? Aren't we concerned that the large sums of money we are allocating to charity are not being used to fulfill the mitzvah, as per Jeremiah's curse?

Finally, why isn't everyone in our community demanding this? Maybe if tuition vouchers or some other similar program is approved, the government will require audited financials from any school that receives such money. That, I think, might be an extremely positive unintended outcome. But until then, why are we ignoring this simple concept. Regardless of whether halakhah requires it, it's just common sense which perhaps, as the saying goes, isn't so common.

UPDATE: A commenter directed us to this excellent resource: Just-Tzedakah.org.

Read the rest of this entry »