|
Caution: This blog is la-halakhah ve-lo le-ma'aseh. Consult your rabbi before following any practices advocated here.
Disclaimer: In reviewing books, I may choose works in which I have a financial interest. I believe that I will still be able to maintain objectivity but judge for yourselves. Important Policy: This blog is intended only for the interchange of ideas for the purpose of Torah study, promoting enlightened public policy and/or the refinement of character. Comments in that spirit are welcome but those that entail denigration of character are not welcome and if they appear will be deleted upon discovery. Since editing is rarely feasible, comments that are deemed inappropriate will be deleted entirely or, if possible, edited. Comments Moderation: For questions and suggestions about comments, please contact the blog's general editor Rabbi Ari Enkin at this e-mail address. Advertisment Policy: Please note that this blog does not necessarily endorse the services of advertisers. Please consider carefully any books and events announced on this blog and decide on your own whether they are appropriate for you. |
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Audio Roundup XLVIII
by Joel RichKorach latched on to popular current issues to further his personal agenda. The medrash about tchailet and mezuzot may be a literary device rather than a factual account (Rabbi Wieder can you hear me?).
Difference (with textual support) between Edah, Kahal and Am. Edah is a faction with a self-serving agenda (no, I did not make this up and anyway, it disbanded), Kahal has a communal agenda and Am has a national identity – people, land and HKB”H.
Shades of R’YBS – need more focus on larger concerns (we are each judged both as individuals and as members of Kahal Am).
Click here to read more
Sources in Tanach and Talmud. Is it a mitzvah, a nice to do or avoid (Rambam)? Parallels with praying to angels or asking someone else to pray for you. Lots of possibility of misunderstanding basic philosophical issues (e.g. do angels have free will?).
[Me – rationalist might argue that the value is increased intensity/focus of individual who is praying. Question: If meitim yodim would avi mori vrabbi Zll”HH wait for my request or be working on it before I knew I needed it?]
Nature vs. nurture in current scientific thought and as viewed by Chazal. We add a third component – the existential. It’s complicated but the bottom line is we’re born with certain predispositions but not bound by them (e.g. blood thirsty – become a mohel or shochet; boring – become an actuary).
Don’t fall back into old routines. Have a Seder. Don’t have a girlfriend. Don’t cut off old friends but don’t compromise your standards. Have concrete goals over the summer. Have a seder around Tfila time and a special place for learning. Have role models and be a walking Kiddush Hashem. But, you can have healthy outlets!
If parent tells you not to smoke, not to take the bus or not to go to camp, do you have to listen? What if they’ll never know or it’s painful for you to follow their directive? Excellent tracing of sources from gemara to present day poskim (I was blessed with great parents – to me it was always yes but then again they employ(ed) the guide at the side approach).
Remember who you are!
Brief Ben Azai history – was he ever married? [ me – fascinating that we might say that there could be an exemption, but then again why don’t we require marriage at bar mitzvah?] Then analysis of his statement about mitzvot – comparing running to a mitzvah and running away from aveirot, restatement of Rabi’s rule about mitzvot chamurot and kalot, the infectious nature of mitzvot and our attitude towards mitzvot.
Not the front page issues but some interesting “real life” examples (“you make the call”).
Introduction to a series on the 3 weeks et al. Especially worthwhile for those who have been inundated with “here’s what you need to know” and not enough “here’s why it is like that”.
An interesting (Hebrew) discussion of tamel hamitzvot = the why of mitzvot (Is this the “why?” that true blue Briskers don’t find of interest?). Rambam says that mitzvot are only litzaref us – so don’t ask why certain # of animals in Karbanot (Maharal disagrees)
R’AW – Perhaps sometimes we are looking at tachlit of the mitzvah or its hagdarah rather than taam (he reviews cases and gives examples).
{me – is it “wrong” to wonder why karban oleh v’yored only applies in 3 cases. Does anyone know of a meta-reason/message from these?}
Thanks to my good friend Councilor K, I get to listen to these pay to play CDs. This one struck me since R’Reisman reveals the great secret of “Bashert” – people prefer to believe everything happens because it’s bashert (comment – this may well be true, but it’s then also easy to see why Marx is quoted as saying “Religion is the opiate of the masses” – BTW, what he actually said is “Religion is the sign of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness”. I think R’Chaim would have agreed with the first sentence).
Practical survey of issues and sources including when to say, what types of trips, how define danger, how far (time or distance)…
Tosefet Yom Kippur, Shabbat and Tisha B'Av – how did the Rambam understand these?
Analysis of a seemingly simple bracha – its nature and the specific meaning of the words.
Beginning of a series - Compare to Talmid Chacham – is it fear (Mora) or respect (Kavod) and some practical differences.
A review of the lst chapter – take note of the use of the 1st and 3rd person, as well as the pervading sense of helplessness.
3 weeks/9 days – building, eating meat, wine at havdalah, showering, clothes washing and the exact time period.
How to understand the importance of Nashim Tzidkaniyot’s role in enabling Talmud torah (formerly called separate but equal) and how it gets them into olam haba.
You can’t learn Yechezkeil without history from Yirmiyahu. Interesting insights into understanding the cross impacts of Eretz Yisrael and Babylonian Jewry. [me – so how does that free will vs. predestination thing really work?]
Summary of the “knocks” (Kol Dodi Dofek) and general take on R’YBS and Zionism. He thinks R’YBS was Chardal.
More jokes than usual for R’Taubes (but you’ve likely heard these already!). How does our current “state of doubt” about who really is a Kohain impact birchat Kohanim (isn’t it safek brachot lhakhel?), avodah in future, aliyot and pidyon haben (story with the Vilna Gaon continually being podeh self until he met a Rappaport).
Interesting opening concerning remarriage (halachically but not legally) of Tzahal widows in order to retain benefits [me - similar issue in U.S. for Social Security]. In Israel not just an issue of gezel/dina dmalchuta [ I know, I know] but of disassociating the government from the people (not good!). Main topic – parsha teaches us that sometimes we must just accept the suffering of innocent (see Karl Marx above?).
One or the Other: Rabbi Yishmael Omer
I recently received an e-mail asking about the proper text in the "Rabbi Yishmael Omer" passage we recite at the end of the korbanos section of the morning prayers. The standard text in most prayerbooks is (translation from the new Koren Sacks Siddur):כל דבר שהיה בכלל ויצא לטען טען אחד שהוא כענינו יצא להקל ולא להחמיר
כל דבר שהיה בכלל ויצא לטען טען אחר שהוא כענינו יצא להקל ולהחמיר
When a particular case, though included in the general statement, is expressly mentioned with a provision similar to the general law, such a case is singled out to lessen the severity of the law, not to increase it.Note that there are two very similar words in the Hebrew -- echad (אחד - one) and acher (אחר - other).
When a particular case, though included in the general statement, is expressly mentioned with a provision differing from the general law, it is singled out to lessen in some respects, and in others to increase, the severity of the law.
Click here to read moreNote that there are two very similar words in the Hebrew -- echad (אחד - one) and acher (אחר - other). That is how the Artscroll siddur has it and, to my knowledge, most others. I checked Dr. Seligmann Baer's classic Siddur Avodas Yisrael and it has it that way also. However, the Birnbaum and De Sola Pool siddurim have both of them as acher. Which is correct?
My theory is as follows:
The source of the "Rabbi Yishmael Omer" passage is the beginning of the Sifra, an ancient halakhic midrash. The texts we have of the Sifra have both words as acher. However, for whatever reason, all of the prayerbooks have the words as echad and acher. Most of the prayerbooks -- including Artscroll and Koren -- want to continue the prayerbook traditions and therefore maintain the difference. Birnbaum and De Sola Pool thought they would correct it based on the source (note that the De Sola Pool prayerbooks' Hebrew was established by R. Chaim Dov Chavel, of Ramban fame).
A correspondent was kind enough to look up the commentary in the Siddur Eizor Eliyahu, whose author investigated old prayerbooks in order to establish the exact prayerbook that the Vilna Gaon used. Interestingly, the first edition of Siddur Eizor Eliyahu had both as acher, like the Sifra, Birnbaum and De Sola Pool. But my correspondent did not stop there. He check the second and third editions, which have it differently. Beginning with the second edition, the Siddur Eizor Eliyahu changed it so that the first is echad and the second is acher. The commentary says that this is the way all of the old prayerbooks have it, and R. Wolf Heidenheim and Dr. Seligmann Baer as well.
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Parashah Roundup: Chukas-Balak 5769
by Steve BrizelZos Chukas HaTorah
Click here to read moreDeath and Closure
The Waters of Dispute
Tumas Kohanim
The Copper Servant
Summer Vacation Special
Bilaam and Balak
Knaim Pogim Bo and Viglilante Justice
Shoalim v Dorshim Department
Wearing a Watch on Shabbos
I. Yes and NoAre you allowed to wear a regular (i.e. not gold) watch on Shabbos where there is no eruv (like in Brooklyn)? The standard answer in English manuals is no, but there is something on which the lenient can rely. For example:
Some permit an ordinary wristwatch with an ordinary band as well. However, a Ben Torah and one who is meticulous in observance of the Sabbath should refrain from doing so. (R. Gersion Appel, The Concise Code of Jewish Law, vol. 2 p. 302 n. 8)II. Jewelery and Clothing
Click here to read moreAccording to leading poskim, an ordinary wristwatch, even if not functioning, is technically a malbush that may be worn in r'shus harabim because it is attached to the wrist. However, it is generally agreed that this leniency should be avoided. (R. Dovid Ribiat, The 39 Melachos, vol. 4 p. 1352)
What could be the problem with wearing a watch? The only way it would be allowed is if the watch is considered either jewelery (takhshit) or clothing (malbush), otherwise you are carrying it. If it isn't a fancy watch and you wouldn't wear it if it wasn't working, then it can't be considered jewelery. That is generally the case with watches that aren't gold. And if you wear it under your sleeve, then it also might not be jewelery. That is the view of R. Nosson Geshtetner (Le-Horos Nassan 4:26), although most posekim disagree (cf. Piskei Teshuvos 303:5).
The question, then, is whether a watch can be considered clothing. On the one hand, who are you kidding? You wear it in order to know what time it is. However, R. Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe, Orach Chaim 1:111) writes that since you wear it directly on your body, it is considered clothing. This also seems to be the view of R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted in Shemiras Shabbos Ke-Hilkhasah ch. 18 n. 111).
III. Why Not?
If that is the case, then why is it proper to be strict and not wear a watch? R. Moshe Feinstein writes that it is so that we shouldn't come to be lenient with other kinds of watches (pocket watches?) or watches that are worn on top of clothing. Note that he wrote that in 1956. I'm not sure how common such watches were then but today they are extremely rare, if they are worn at all. I'm not quite sure whether this reason to be strict still applies.
However, a different reason to be strict could be that there is room to disagree with R. Moshe Feinstein's and R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach's view that watches which are worn on your body are considered clothing. R. Nosson Geshtetner (ibid.) strongly disputes this approach and rules that we are prohibited to wear a watch on Shabbos in a place where there is no eruv.
I suspect that there are posekim who reject R. Geshtetner's view and permit entirely wearing a watch on Shabbos. However, I haven't really looked hard or asked around. In practice, from what I can tell, people in Brooklyn generally only wear gold watches on Shabbos.
See also this post: link.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Post-Denominational Outreach
I recently read Dr. Jonathan Sarna's outreach book, A Time to Every Purpose, and I saw something brilliant there that I have not seen in any other outreach book. Dr. Sarna is a leading scholar of American Jewish history and a professor at Brandeis. This book is written as letters to his daughter but that is clearly just a literary device for letters intended for uncommitted Jews. The main theme of the book is that the holidays throughout the year raise significant theological and existential issues. As each holiday passes, Dr. Sarna writes a letter that discusses the relevant subjects. While that is interesting, it's not the brilliant part. Neither is the general content, which I found fairly standard, albeit with a few insights here and there. That is to be expected from a beginner's book.
Click here to read moreThe brilliant part is that the book does not proselytize. Yes, an outreach book that doesn't proselytize! At first I found it jarring, maybe even offensive. But then I realized that, as a college professor, he is around young people all the time and he really gets it. He understands what young people today are all about. The entire book consists not of him telling readers what to think, but of him putting the onus on the reader -- study more and make your own decisions. He never tells any of them that they should become Orthodox, although he does recommend becoming more observant so that they understand Jewish life better.
He recognizes that his readers will likely reject authority automatically so instead he encourages people to learn more and reach their own conclusions. What's the worst that can happen? They'll become more knowledgeable, but not Orthodox, Jews? That's pretty much a success story, given his audience. And it is likely that those who study more will realize that they need to become part of the Orthodox community because that is where they will find a critical mass of knowledgeable, observant Jews.
This also helps him tackle some of the difficult theological issues without actually addressing them. He simply says, "Some say this and some say that. Study it yourself and make your own decision." It's brilliant. It pushes off the difficult issues until people are more familiar with the basics and are already sufficiently committed to Judaism to retain a Jewish identity. This is a very different approach to outreach than I am used to, one that is quite intriguing and, at the very least, a good tool to keep in your back pocket.
However, Sarna's tactic does get hard to swallow when he says "Not being a Bible scholar myself..." (p. 3). He isn't, but as the son of a world-famous Bible scholar writing to the granddaughter of one, it comes across as a little disingenuous.
The Three Heroic Drug Smugglers
Thanks to a local organization, I received a free copy of Mishpacha magazine this week. I've never read it before but I've heard great things about it. This week's cover story is about a group of activists who are working tirelessly to free three yeshiva boys who were caught smuggling drugs into Japan (link - PDF).When I read newspapers and magazines, it is usually online articles from secular sources. Maybe that's why this article bothered me so much. The language was so superlative and laudatory, the issues were so black and white. It's nauseating. One picture caption refers to an activist as "an angel in human garb." There are references to various rabbis who are famous for their "command of legal nuances" or "giving freely of his medical expertise." In other words, superhuman bundles of brilliance, knowledge and righteousness. I suspect that some people actually believe these exaggerations.
Click here to read moreAdditionally, there is no impartiality whatsoever in the article. One section is titled "Indisputable Innocence." Is it really indisputable? Is it so inconceivable that yeshiva students would knowingly smuggle items and then pretend to be innocent? It's possible, although I choose to assume that it is not the case here. But is their innocence indisputable?
From what I can tell, and maybe I'm mistaken here, the entire story was taken from these activists working on behalf of the accused. Was there any effort made to verify their accounts? Was there any fact-checking done at all? These are the kinds of articles and speeches I've also heard on behalf of Jonathan Pollard. A rabbi or "reporter" goes to speak to him and then repeats whatever Pollard tells him. Did they do any independent verification? Invariably, the answer is no.
But that is all beside the point. From the article and everything else I've seen about this case, it seems that these kids stumbled into this mess by making some naive but not terribly malicious decisions. It makes sense to me that their friends and relatives should be trying to free them from a very long and difficult jail sentence over these crimes. And if their friends and relatives cannot do this, then other members of their communities (i.e. other Jews) should step in.
But when you make this a global crusade, when you organize prayer rallies and publicize it widely, when you give frequent updates to popular frum news websites (link), you are sending two bad messages:
1) To our children and ourselves, we are glorifying the accused as heroes and demonizing the Japanese justice system as evil. They aren't. The kids are stupid and they committed crimes, and the Japanese police caught them smuggling drugs and are trying them accordingly. The kids did everything wrong. Again, I agree that their suffering should not be incommensurate with their crimes -- hence the efforts to free them -- but they are certainly not heroes.
2) We are telling the world that we, the Jewish community, are in favor of drug smugglers. We are turning a Chillul Hashem into a massive Chillul Hashem. We, as a community, will stand by other Jews even when they commit crimes that negatively impact the world, such as drug smuggling.
How about keeping things on the down low and working behind the scenes? Why would we want to publicize the issue? We should be embarrassed about these boys and hang our heads in shame over them. Keep up the good work in helping them attain the best defense possible, and also work to transfer those convicted to Israeli prisons where they will be able to serve their terms with full religious freedom. But why turn this into a communal crusade?
Clarification
Allow me to sincerely apologize if any readers were offended from my most recent post which I have decided to remove. I can assure you that any offense was unintended.
Thank you to those who emailed me offline and shared their thoughts with me on why different people may have found the post upsetting for different reasons. I take reader feedback very seriously and very much appreciate those who take the time to share their thoughts, criticisms, questions, and comments.
I look forward to re-posting next Tuesday.
Ari Enkin
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Torah as Music
The Forward has an article about a recent trend of mainstream Israeli singers using passages from the Bible and other religious texts in songs (link). While it is not clear to me how much of this is a sincere attempt to reach out to God and the Jewish tradition, and how much is making a mockery of Judaism. For a particularly egregious example, try searching YouTube for the group אשת חיל (note that you should pause these videos immediately because listening to them is kol ishah according to almost all views, but you can read the post and the comments to the videos).* What does Jewish tradition say about this?Click here to read moreThe Gemara (Sanhedrin 101a) writes: "Someone who reads a verse from Song of Songs and turns it into a song or reads verses in a bar at the wrong time brings evil to the world." Rashi explains the case of reading verses in a bar as using the verses to joke around, as a source of entertainment and fun.
Rashi explains the case of turning a verse from Song of Songs into a song as meaning that any verse -- even from Song of Songs -- cannot be made into a song. R. Moshe Feinsten (Iggeros Moshe, vol. 2 YD no. 142) rules that this also applies to any sacred text, even prayers. None of them may be made into songs. However, he suggests that there might be reason to say that it only applies to verses from Song of Songs, not like Rashi, and therefore there is room to be lenient. (I have heard people sing actual verses from Song of Songs!)
However, the Sedei Chemed (Assifas Dinim, zayin no. 12) suggests that we can see from Rashi's comments on the second case that the prohibition is to sing verses for a non-religious purpose. But if you are doing it to praise God or to encourage religiosity, then it is considered at the "right time" and is permitted. This is generally accepted and is the religious justification for the contemporary Orthodox music business (cf. Piskei Teshuvos 560:14; Responsa Le-Horos Nassan 4:45; DafYomi website).
What does this mean for the contemporary Israeli music scene? If musicians are singing Jewish texts as a way of praising God, then it is permitted. But if they are just using words that are familiar and turning them into songs, then it is a bad thing. If they are intentionally mocking religion, then it is even worse. Yet, without negating any of that, there seems to be me to be something positive about Israeli youths being sufficiently fluent in Jewish texts to respond to these songs.
* You can also see the description posted by Esther (link), but note that unless you have YouTube blockes, a video begins playing immediately.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Audio Roundup XLVII
by Joel RichOpening – don’t listen to Rabbis back home who tell you that you have to adjust which he defines as compromising – swing back to middle.
Know your enemy (the environment = “out country” {for non-Vietnam era readers – that’s the opposite of “in-country” – in this context Rome vs. Jerusalem [for Zionist history buffs]}, have a plan and have guts.
The plan 1) your room should be a makom kadosh; 2) have a good chaver; 3) keep Shabbat spiritually too; 4) have a Rav; 5) start and end each day with learning; 6) have kviut in learning; 7) have a bet medrash.
Can’t argue with the plan but one might walk away thinking that a 19-year old who spent a year completely in learning on someone else’s dime will never have to make any adjustments. V’ein kan makom l haarech – but we can in the comments if you like.
Click here to read more
Dedicated by me to Professor Gerald Lambeau, in a certain way my soul mate – can anyone guess why?
Hint: Good Will Hunting
How to understand Tanur Shel achnai; (my summary)
1. Sociological – need for central order overrides need for absolute truth.
2. Legal – Absolute truth only exists when bet din decides it
3. Physics – Truth is a probability distribution function which quantum physics tells us is resolved by our observation.
Interesting insights to the uninitiated (meaning me) on the use of biblical poetry.
Some practical Shailot. Can a rabbi ask talmidim to tattle on each other? R’MF – no, it’s teaching Lashon hara (unless 100% Lshem Shamayim), R. Sternbuch disagrees – you can explain the specifics to talmidim.
Can a rabbi give a meshulach names? Yes.
Question (me): What if Baalei Batim specifically ask not to be exposed?
Good basics – some specifics on calc’s and what you can use $ for.
Survey of Jewish sources on permission to heal, doctors fees and resource allocation.
R’A Lichtenstein on R’YBS. The title is not expressive of the power of the presentation. Kodshim within Brisk as representative of true “Ishma” learning and as the “Hakrava”, drawing near, that HKB”H wants of us per R’YBS – giving and sacrifice.
R’Kook and R’YBS from similar background. Yet, R’Kook focused on the mystical and R’YBS on the halachic tradition. Both were dialectical thinkers. R’Kook synthesized the dialectic and viewed tshuva as a perfection of one’s inner self; R’YBS lived with the dialectic and viewed Tshuva as remaking oneself.
Fascinating insight into R’YBS’s experience of illness and the impact on his thought.
How hard do you have to work for your employer? What breaks can you take? Can you use office supplies? Answer – it depends on the employer’s Employee Value Proposition [me – I make a living from such things as EVP’s!]
Sometimes you have to give people a chance to fail.
Not just to a physical place but spiritual journey as well. Why didn’t HKB”H tell him where to go? (or did he?). If not, how did he know? R’YBS on Abraham demonstrating the Jews native attraction to kedusha and Jerusalem being the lodestone. [country roads take me home, to the place I belong]
Torah’s seeming ambivalence? It’s a tool for self-control (me – not an extra credit project).
If an error in one of the five books of Moses, can you still use that scroll for reading in a different book? (maybe)
Discussion of the basics. Nice insight from R’YBS on communal vs. individual responsibilities.
Review of some of the basics. Interesting thoughts on general issue of do we say shechiyanu today on fruits or clothes (me – I guess that one isn’t inherent in the briah). Also, Brisker kula on not fasting based on we’re all like choleh shein bo sakana and why we can’t rely on it without accepting Brisker chumrot (me – I guess this one is inherent in the briah, or is it an argument (gasp!) in mitziut?)
The God, mashiach ben Yosef and Yerushalayim. R’Kahn was very enthusiastic about these insights.
R’Akiva’s message – the dynamic tension of the universal and particular messages of Judaism.
Yetzer hara – is it mans’ primary nature? Nature of the world to come.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Rav Chesed
Here is the table of contents for the new two-volume festschrift for R. Haskel Lookstein, Rav Chesed: Essays in Honor of Rabbi Dr. Haskel Lookstein:VOLUME 1
- Editor's Note - Rafael Medoff
- Introduction - Eli Wiesel
- Foreword - Natan Sharansky
- Citation - Richard M. Joel
- There Never Again Rose a Prophet Like Moses: Except Perhaps Ezekiel? - Hayyim Angel
- זרמים ביהדות ואיחודם - הרב שלמה אבינר
- Abraham: Pioneer Religious Educator, Paradigm for Contemporary Teachers of Judaism - Yaakov Bieler
- "The Hair of a Woman is Erotic:" An Explanation of the Contemporary Practice of Many Married Orthodox Women Not to Cover their Hair - Michael J. Broyde
- I Do? Consent And Coercion in Sexual Relations - Mark Dratch
- Tradition at the Cusp of Modernity: A Sermon by Rabbi Jonathan Eybeschutz - Adam S. Ferziger
- For This Very Time: Parshat Zachor and Purim for Orthodox and Nono-Orthodox Jews in 21st-Century America - Sylvia Barack Fishman
- The Gardener of East of Eden - David C. Flatto
- Bringing the "Russians" Back In: The Ambiguities of Rejoining the Jewish World - Zvi Gitelman
- Helping Students Find Their Own Voice in Tefilla: A Conceptual Framework for Teachers - Jay Goldmintz
- American Orthodoxy in the 1950s: The Lean Years - Lawrence Grossman
- Devotees and Deviants: A Primer on the Religious Values of Orthodox Day School Families - Jeffrey S. Gurock
- Father and Sons: The French Rothschilds and the Yishuv - Jonathan Helfand
- From the Rav's Pen: Selected Letters of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik - Nathaniel Helfgot
- Gersonides on Immortality - Arthur Hyman
- The Political Consequences of Trivializing the Holocaust - Gilbert Kahn
- A King Like Nobody Else's: Parshat Ha-Melech as a Primer for Parents and Educators - Jeffrey Kobrin
- Educating the "New" Jewish Woman: Nation Building, Social Change, and Ethnicity in Vocational Schools for Jewish Women in Palestine, 1911-1914 - Rebecca Kobrin
- The Rise and Fall of the Progressive Talmud Torah: The Central Jewish Institute and Interwar American Jewish Identity - Jonathan Krasner
- Are Women "Lightheaded"? Three Troublesome Passages in Halakhic Literature - Norman Lamm
- ארבעה צריכין חזוק ואלו הן: תורה ומעשים טובים, תפילה ודרך ארץ - ד"ר בריינה יוכבד לוי
Click here to read more
VOLUME 2
- Talmud and Ma'asseh in Pirkei Avot - Aharon Lichtenstein
- Standing Up Against Holocaust Deniers: A Memoir from David Irving v. Penguin Books and Deborah Lipstadt - Deborah Lipstadt
- Dayeinu - Haskel Lookstein
- Sephardi Traditionalism in Ceremonial Art and Visual Culture - Vivian B. Mann
- Meeting Again (and Again): Reading Pinkhos Curgin's Essay Seventy-Five Years Later - Peter N. Miller
- Is Coca-Cola Kosher? Rabbi Tobias Geffen and the History of American Orthodoxy - Adam Mintz
- Middle Eastern Antisemitism: Indigenous Affliction or Imported Plague? - Michael Oren
- Compulsion or Choice? The Jewish War and the Problem of "Necessity" according to Josephus - Jonathan J. Price
- A Man of Egypt Becomes A Man of God: Examining the Relationship Between Moses and Yitro - Sandra E. Rapoport
- Correcting the Ba'al Koreh: Punctilious Performance vs. Public Embarrassment - Moshe Rosenberg
- The Halakhah According to B'nai B'rith - Jonathan Sarna
- Tikkun Olam: Defining the Jewish Obligation - Jacob J. Schacter
- בגדר קדושת ישראל - הרב צבי שכטר
- To be German and Jewish: Hermann Cohen and Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch - Meir Soloveichik
- The Right of Others to Think Differently from Us - Joseph Telushkin
- Becoming Human: What's in a Name? - Shera Aranoff Tuchman
- קבע בתפילה הערות על מושג הקביעות בפרק ד' של מס' ברכות - הרלן ג'יי ווכסלר
- Nationa as Family: The Key to Redemption in Tanakh - Avraham Weiss
- Law and Narrative in the Book of Ruth - Avivah Zornberg
- On Sunday the Rabbi Stayed for Bensching - Joshua Lookstein
- Rav Chesed: The Life and Times of Rabbi Haskel Lookstein - Rafael Medoff (yes, the entire softcover biography)
- Contributors
- Jubille Volume Patrons
Traveling Torah
R. Gedalia Dov Schwartz, Sha'arei Gedulah, pp. 250-252:The author of Shulchan Aruch, Rabbi Yosef Karo, rules that it is prohibited to bring a Sefer Torah to a prison for the people who are confined there, even for Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur.[20] The source of this is a text from the Yerushalmi which states that it is proper respect to go to the Torah, rather than to bring it to another place.[21] However, Rema comments that if the Sefer Torah is prepared a day or two beforehand, then it would be permissible in all circumstances. This is explained by the later poskim to mean that it should remain in an ark or befitting closet after its reading for a day or two.See also: this post.
Click here to read moreHowever, there exists a seemingly popular view that there is a minhag that it should be read three times in that place,[22] and if not, then the Torah should not be taken there. Nevertheless, this minhag of necessarily reading from the Torah three times is not mentioned by any of the poskim regarding the prison situation. The consensus of the rabbinic decisors following the ruling of the Rema interprets his statement as explained above concerning placing the Sefer Torah in an Aron Kodesh or closet to establish a sense of permanence for a day or two.[23] In the commentary Shaarei Rachamim on the classic sefer Shaarei Ephraim on the laws of Torah reading, the author cites poskim who categorically reject the application of the minhag.[24]
Of course the ramifications of the Rema's ruling apply to such situations as in the house of a mourner or a special minyan convened for a particular event, such as a Bar Mitzvah, conventions at hotels, etc. Nevertheless, for actual practice the local rabbinic authority should be consulted as in all matters of halacha and minhag, since the congregation or community might have a certain custom regarding this matter.
[20] Orach Chaim, 135:14
[21] Yoma, perek 7
[22] See Aruch Hashulchan, 135:32
[23] See Mishna Brura and Beiur Halacha, which do not mention the necessity for these readings
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Parashah Roundup: Korach 5769
by Steve BrizelThe Common Sense Rebellion Against Moshe Rabbeinu and the Mesorah
The Election of the Tribe of Levi
Shmiras HaMishkan, Maaser and Trumas Maaser
Almonds, Blossoms, Aharon HaKohen and the Congregation
The Prohibition of Machlokes
The Matnos Kehunah
Special Features
Shoalin Vdorshin Department
Was Nehama Leibowitz Too Traditional?
The final chapter in Yaul Unterman's Nehama Leibowitz: Teacher and Bible Scholar discusses the next generation(s) of scholarship after Nehama. It lists approaches and techniques that Nehama did not use but many of her students developed and adopted. This theme also comes up in some other chapters. It seems to me that the author was too sympathetic with these new approaches and failed to adequately defend Nehama. However, a few weeks ago I had a pleasant conversation with a prominent educator who is a Nehama traditionalist, and he gave me a spirited defense of Nehama's approach.The main competition for Nehama's approach is that of R. Yoel Bin-Nun. R. Bin-Nun's approach is described by R. Hayyim Angel in an article in Tradition (link). R. Bin-Nun and those who loosely follow his approach (and that of R. Mordechai Breuer) read the Bible with fresh eyes and, using a number of innovative methods, arrive at fascinating interpretations of familiar passages.
Click here to read moreNehama, on the other hand, generally surveyed the commentaries and evaluated their various interpretations. On rare occasions she offered her own interpretations, but mainly she dealt with the merits of previous commentaries and how they relate to the biblical text.
In other words, Nehama dealt with commentaries while R. Bin-Nun deals with the Bible itself. That is how someone partial to R. Bin-Nun's approach would put it. A defender of Nehama would say that she believed that part of studying the text and exploring interpretive possibilities is to find out what earlier commentators said. Confident in their wisdom and insight, although reading them criticially, she first looked at the great commentaries of the past before offering her own innovation. In fact, ignoring those commentaries can be seen as a sign of arrogance. You think you are smarter than them and will be able to figure out everything that they have? If you understand them properly and still don't find them convincing, then offer your own explanation. But first study what those greater than you had to say.
I'm no expert in R. Bin-Nun's approach but from what I've heard, he does, in fact, look at other commentaries. However, and this is the real critique, he doesn't teach them. Therefore, his students receive mainly his own insights and not primarily those of earlier great commentators.
Personally, I always look at the commentators first. But I consider R. Bin-Nun and those with similar approaches to be new commentators, whose ideas I include in my collection of commentaries. I'm not sure why Nehama did not do this as well, unless it is simply a matter of age and timing.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Belief and Ancestry
I was puzzled for a long time over a passage in the Rambam's Iggeres Teiman. He writes (Kafach edition, p. 27) that anyone whose ancestors stood at Mt. Sinai will never dispute Moshe's prophecy, since it says (Ex. 19:9), "And they will believe in you forever". However, there have been siblings and children of famous rabbis who have become disbelievers. Does that put the ancestry of famous rabbis into question?I saw an interesting answer to this given by R. Yitzchak Sorotzkin in his Rinas Yitzchak (Num. 16:28). He quotes the Brisker Rav as saying that Korach and his men deviated from two of the thirteen fundamental principles of Jewish faith: they rejected that Torah was from heaven (principle 8) and the veracity and uniqueness of Moshe's prophecy (principle 7).
Click here to read moreWith this, the Brisker Rav explained the repetition in Num. 16:28: "And Moses said: 'By this you shall know that 1) the Lord has sent me to do all these works, 2) for I have not done them of my own will.'" The first phrase refers to Moshe receiving prophecy and the second phrase to the Torah being from God and not Moshe's creation.
However, if Korach and his men really did reject these principles, how can the Rambam state that anyone who was at Mt. Sinai will never reject them? Korach and his men were at Mt. Sinai!
R. Sorotzkin suggests that the Rambam was only referring to someone rejecting Moshe's prophecy. Someone who accepts that Torah is from heaven will never reject the unique prophecy of Moshe (and claim that we received the Torah some other way). The descendants of those who were at Mt. Sinai who continue to believe that the Torah was given there, will always treasure the unique role of Moshe in the transmission of the Torah.
Korach and his men rejected the divine origin of the Torah and therefore their additional rejection of Moshe does not contradict the Rambam's claim. The same can be said for those unbelieving Jews who reject that the Torah is from heaven. Even according to the Rambam, their disbelief does not imply that their ancestors were not at Mt. Sinai. (Note, however, that the phrasing of the Midrash Ha-Gadol on that verse does not allow for this interpretation.)
Books Received VII
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:- Rav Chesed: Essays in Honor of Rabbi Dr. Haskel Lookstein (2 vols.)
- Alei Etzion volume 16 (Special Hardcover Edition in Honor of Harav Aharon Lichtenstein)
Lifespans and Longevity
By: Rabbi Ari EnkinWe all know that when wishing people long life, we traditionally wish them a life of 120 years. What is the source of this idea?
Our first encounter with the concept of defining a lifespan to be 120 years is found early on in the Torah, as it is written: “And God says My spirit shall not always contend on account of man since he is but flesh, his days shall be 120 years.”[1] This verse, which appears almost immediately after the creation of man, is an obvious association of 120 years as being the ideal human lifespan. Some interpretations suggest that this may be because 120 years is the amount of time needed for a person to properly prepare to meet the Creator.[2] Indeed, God allowed Noah 120 years to complete the construction of the ark, in order to allow the rest of the world the opportunity to properly repent and perhaps avert the flood.
Click here to read moreNotwithstanding the above, the prominence and focus of the “120 years” adage likely emerged due to its association with Moshe Rabbeinu who lived to be 120. Before he died, Moshe said, “I am one hundred twenty years old this day, I can no longer go out and come in.”[3] Many commentators explain that “I can no longer go out” refers to a Divine decree that life must end by 120 years of age.[4]
According to tradition four people lived to be precisely 120: Moshe, Hillel, Rabbi Yochanan Ben Zakkai, and Rabbi Akiva.[5] There were some individual exceptions to this rule, but their explanations are beyond the scope of this discussion. Here are some Talmudic tips for a better chance of living to a ripe old age: never use a synagogue as a shortcut, be the first one to the synagogue every day, don’t call anyone by a nickname, never miss Kiddush on Friday night, and never stare at evil people.[6] Ladies – lighting your Shabbat candles with olive oil will increase your odds for a long life even more.[7]
Although living to 120 years old is certainly a commendable goal, we do see that it is not an absolute ideal, and that shorter lifespans are also considered dignified accomplishments. Among the exceptional lifespans was Rabbi Yehoshua Ben Karcha, who lived to 140. It is noted that Rabbi Yehoshua Ben Karcha had blessed Rabbi Yehuda Hanassi (author of the Mishna) that he merit to attain “half of my age,”[8] thus affirming seventy years as a legitimate lifespan. Moshe himself seems to certify seventy years as a complete lifespan as well when he says, “The days of our years are seventy years, and with might, eighty years.”[9]
**********************************
[1] Bereishit 6:3.
[2] Sforno, Sanhedrin 108.
[3] Devarim 31:2.
[4] Rashi and Sforno, among others.
[5] Tosafot, Bechorot 58a.
[6] Megilla 27b, 28a.
[7] Sefer Chassidim 272.
[8] Megilla 28a.
[9] Tehillim 90:10.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
When is the Law Not the Law?
The Gemara (Berakhos 31a) states that when you leave a friend, you should depart with words of halakhah, Jewish law, because that will cause your friend to remember you whenever he thinks of this law. The Gemara then tells the story of how R. Kahana escorted R. Shimi Bar Ashi and then left him with a discussion about the palm trees in Babylonia having been there since the time of Adam.The Maharatz Chajes (Glosses, ad loc.) points out that this is not a matter of law! Rather, it is an issue of aggadah, Torah legends.
Click here to read moreThe Maharatz Chajes (Glosses, ad loc.) points out that this is not a matter of law! Rather, it is an issue of aggadah, Torah legends. The Maharatz Chajes explains that this is just one of many instances where the term "halakhah" refers to Torah in general and not specifically a law.
For example, the Gemara (Sanhedrin 107a) says that King David forgot a halakhah, and then proceeds to discuss a man's sexual appetite, certainly an aggadic and not halakhic statement. Another example the Maharatz Chajes brings is from Rashi's commentary to the Torah (Gen. 33:4) that it is a halakhah that Esav hates Ya'akov. This, the Maharatz Chajes writes, is another example where an aggadic statement is called a "halakhah."
An Interview With A Contemporary Philosopher
Dr. Yoel Finkelman discusses Jewish Thought education with Prof. Shalom Rosenberg, author of In the Footsteps of the Kuzari (two volumes: I, II), at ATID's annual conference of our Fellows and graduates, June 15, 2009: link (MP3, in Hebrew).A Plea to Fathers
I started reading this article (R. Dovid Kaplan, "A Plea to Fathers", Hamodia Magazine, May 20, 2009) and immediately thought, "Oh, no, not again." Another article about how we're all failures as fathers unless we can be perfect and do everything right. But then he ends with suggestions that make it seem that I'm not so bad after all because I already do those things.Definitely worth a read: link
Friday, June 19, 2009
Audio Roundup XLVI
by Joel RichTIM audios can be found in the free section of : http://www.torahinmotion.org/store/prod_search.asp
Are there cases where a chayal should disobey orders? Hard to quantify - his general disposition is towards obedience to maintain cohesiveness. (Look at Tzibbur as basic building block.)
If you don’t want to turn into a baal habayit like all those you didn’t think so highly of when you were a young yeshiva boy back in ’65 (in your idealistic youth), you need to have a rebbi throughout your life to help clarify things. (Hmmm – why don’t I ever hear anyone suggesting a parent might be able to help do this as well.)
Click here to read more
Beginnings of a good discussion, but, of course, it would take a lot of time to fully analyze. (Me - Isn’t it odd that it took till the time of Shmuel to articulate this principle and the source is never stated? Does the torah assume the basic rights of kings?)
Potpourri (= magical mystery tour)
1) Gezeirah Shaveh – needs mesorah? Of what – words or concepts? (me – has anyone totaled them up according to any specific tanna).
2) Tosfot didn’t seem to have most of sifri
3) For which of the midot shehatora nidreshet can you roll your own (depends on who you believe)
4) Why is the silent amida silent? (slach lanu)
5) Why is the Cohain Gadol bsimcha all year round (R’YBS – lifnei hashem)
6) Rebbi paskined against himself in the mishna (me – so it was a sefer of psak?)
Interesting detailed halachic discussion of the halachic status of the manufacture and/or maintenance of pictures, coins, dolls, statues, etc.
Would be interesting to discuss the outside sociological events which led many to a more lenient position than might otherwise have been expected.
Money quote: “Lmaasch a lot of people assered in the old days. Lmaaseh the minhag all the poskim say that today there is no makom to be machmir and a person even cannot take upon himself such a chumrah before he is yarei shumayim bchol kocho, and is mdakdek in all the different chumrah’s” (me – why not?)
Is the requirement primarily on the father or the son? Two possible scriptural sources.
Never mentioned in Nach because the official name was only given later. 120 members because that’s what Persians did. (me – so exactly what was their halachic status? And why don’t we see Sanhedrin mentioned in Nach?).
They were codifiers and compliers.
An extensive discussion of mila shelo bzmana. Shabbat, Yom Tov, Yom Tov Sheni, be in hashmashot. Major underlying additional issue is exact definition of halachic times.
Review of possible halachic issues involved in whistleblowing (involving bnei brit and non-bnei brit) including tochacha and mesira.
Mystical impact of longing for what someone else has or rational result of spiritual impact? (me – whatever gets you through the night?)
Argument of Rebbi and Antonius – 1) Sun’s path – (me) – really about Thomas Cahill – “The gift of the Jews; 2) When is the soul joined to the body? – really about the nature of man; 3) When does the yetzer hara arrive? Cliff hanger!
Starts with my least favorite R’Yaakov story (airplanes/apes). Presents sources which imho conflate more than this issue. Ties a strict constructionist approach on this issue to the charedi narrative.
Understanding whether shlichut bmitzvot works as a function of the mitzvah’s focus on the action, the result or a combination of both.
Mussar on the power of speech in both torah and intrapersonal relationships.
Understanding the halachic significance of kabalat ol malehut. Can a beit din refuse to be megayer someone for tangential reasons (e.g. don’t like his taste in clothes?)
Be mekarev and raise people up – it’s more effective than knocking them down.
New series – Eicha isn’t about one event, it’s about suffering in a theological context. A summary of the history leading up to the Churban.
R’YBS and message of our forefathers’ transition from farmers to shepards and back. Farmer, if not believer, can view self as master of land (he is all engrossed in it), shepard realizes his tenuous status. Mitzvot tluyot baaretz allows them to become farmers again yet maintain beneficial philosophy of shepard. Judaism wants the kind and gentle as shepard but one who knows when to be tough as farmer in defense of his land.
Technical details of ktubah (spelling, dating, drafting), ring (whose, what, where), Chupah construction, which way to face, who stands where, sheva brachot rules.
Putting one in danger to save/help others – required, permitted or forbidden? Is war different and what is war? (hell?)
Triage – halachically very similar to current ethics: Save those who benefit others (eg officers) first – based on the cohain mashuach. (Me – agree with presenter who said psakim here are based on (my term) lev shel torah more than direct sources – else why not just go with the mishnayot in horiyot?)
Mayim sheein lahem sof (we worry that someone last seen drowing came up somewhere we can’t see) – Does it apply in an era of instant communications?
Class R’Sacks – hutrah, dchuya et al.
