Thoughts on Judaism

Hilarious Gemora

2012-01-04T10:37:00.002-05:00

Bechoros 51

Hanina the evil one punched (possibly in the ear) a certain person, and he was required to pay a sela, equaling a half zuz (the coin of that time). He offered a very worn zuz (which was acceptable according to halacha but) which he could not circulate (thus costing him nothing). The man whom he struck did not have change for the zuz, so Hanina struck him again and gave him the coin.

Question:

Were the courts that inept and powerless to administer justice, or is this an allegory about injustice? I rather suspect the latter, but I wonder what fundamentalists do with this story. The sages were about as sarcastic and funny in expressing themselves as jurists in century ever.

New Policy on Fundraising

2012-01-03T13:25:00.002-05:00

Anyone who comes to my door or solicits money from me will now be answering the following questions:

1) Do you have any connections to the Sikrikim in Israel, the NK or the Haredim in Beit Shemesh?

2) Do you support the Sikrikim, the Neturei Karta or the Haredim in Beit Shemesh?

3) Do you sympathize with these groups?

4) Do you condone or defend their actions in Beit Shemesh, or any of the militant activity or harassment of the Sikirikim or Haredim of past few weeks?

If I am not satisfied that the person is truthful and that he is adamantly opposed to these groups and activities, he will be shown the door. Further I will encourage everyone that I know to elicit an active (not a passive) rejection of these ideologies before handing a thin dime to anyone posing as a Jew collecting for yeshivas or communities in Israel, and I will advise them if someone is in the neighborhood collecting and he has not passed my muster.

Beit Shemesh - The cure

2012-01-01T09:04:00.003-05:00

Momma always used to say, "Stupid is as stupid does." People who are by their nature judgmental (emphasis on mental), controlling and overbearing are always playing offense whereas people who just want to make peace and get along are always on defense. In most games, it is far harder if not impossible to score when there is no offensive threat.

The cure in Beit Shemesh is to tell the truth, and to tell it to the Sikrikim themselves. In every video, there are well meaning people standing around arguing with Sikrikim or grubeh yunger who are there merely to be offensive. You are trying to build respect where respect is not available. Try this. Organize an equal number of people to stand opposite the Sikrikim, with their backs to the street and the girls passing by, and yell back, "Shkatzim! Minim! Return to the Torah!" Fighting chanting with chanting will equalize the playing field at very least, and make it sound to anyone passing like a bunch of people yelling at each other, rather than a bunch of scary creepy people intimidating the girls. While it may seem inviting to demonize the Haredim who do this, they are encouraged among themselves and the activity will continue, as long as they feel that people are indeed being intimidated. By taking offensive measures, it will make it clear that Orthodox Beit Shemesh residents are not at all intimidated and are becoming resolved to fight back. It is important that only Orthodox people take up this fight, or the Haredim will become more resolved that this is a war against chilonim or Yavanim or whatever. Do not accept aid from people whose aim it is to damage Judaism. They only help the Sikrikim.

Escalations:
Take photos of individuals and try to get names. Post pictures and names in public forums with Shegetz, baal z'roah, listim, min or any other epithet. Their power is in being anonymous hordes. do not play their game. Make them be individual criminals.

Follow them around as they come and go. Go into the Haredi neighborhood and yell for people to turn over the minim and apikorsim in their midst. Demonstrations should be frequent, brief, and video recorded. Slogans should center on questioning the lineage and halachic basis of the Haredim. This may not be as impressive in the papers, but the line Haredim will not want to support the radicals and you are likely to end the daily insults and incursions, and ultimately the invasion of the Haredim and the uprooting of Orthodox Jews from Beit Shemesh.

Apply cost to every offense. Go into the Haredi neighborhood and speak to the woman and children walking in the street. Do NOT spit on them or intimidate them, quite the opposite. Speak kindly to them and explain that the Jews of Beit Shemesh want peace with them. They will most likely run away quickly. However, when the Sikrikim see that frum Jews will come into their neighborhood, unafraid, and speak to the people there, their own families, they will feel invaded and they will focus on keeping the outsiders out, rather than attacking.

And make no mistake, they are coming to take Beit Shemesh and push out the other residents. And they want to do it throughout Israel. The ones who claim they only want peace need demands made of them, put up or shut up. They must disavow all of the insults and the philosophy of the Sikrikim or they are considered supporters of that gang.

The radicals are not adept at playing defense because Orthodox Jews never think in terms of offense. The time has come.

Chumash question

2011-12-31T22:48:00.002-05:00

An excellent question put to me.

The parsha says that the mitzrim and K'na'anim ran out of money. Then it says that the Mitzrim sold themselves to Paroah, the only supplier with any food to sell. How did the K'naanim weather the famine? They survived as we see them later. They were out of money to buy food and they had the famine. If they sold themselves, why does the parsha leave them out?

Beit Shemesh

2011-12-27T18:03:00.003-05:00

Whether or not this town figured in the Chanukah time battles, it has become the epicenter of a new push by various members of the Haredi community to grab power for themselves. They are often described in the press as "Ultra-Orthodox", but this is a misnomer in my opinion. They feel no kinship with other Orthodox Jews, nor do they adhere to standards based on standard Jewish law. They have their own government, their own tribunals, their own ideas about religion which deviate from Orthodoxy widely. They use standards formed inside the group only. They are more correctly called "minim", sectarians.

There are many in the Haredi community who are Orthodox, and they are just as baffled as the rest of us about what the political forces in their communities are after, and they are just as embarrassed if not far more so, by behavior that is so foreign to what they are taught and what they live.

One such min law is the at the center of the Beit Shemesh battle. According to the Jews, there are standards of modesty in behavior and in dress. For women, this includes covering ones legs to the knee, ones arms to the elbow, and not dressing in an overly alluring fashion. This custom of modesty, though not strictly legal, is universally accepted throughout the Jewish world to differing degrees. In the late 1950's, Orthodox Jewish women shunned wearing pants and traditionally male clothing, since it was associated with the beginning feminist movement. Many Orthodox still adhere to this custom today, as an established norm. Also, one is expected to avoid contact with women in a flirtatious or alluring manner. All contact between men and women that might be construed as flirtatious or alluring is forbidden. For instance, most men do not shake hands with women, even in a social or business setting, as this has become the custom.

However, in the min religion of Haredi, many consider the customs of modesty to be laws of the strictest importance. While Jewish law proscribes, for instance, that a man should not walk behind a woman going upstairs (or as a stringency, even on an equal surface), min law says that it is forbidden in Jewish law to sit on a bus behind a woman, to display a photo with a woman in it, even a child, or to allow a woman into a public job of any kind. This min law caused the fist storms of the fight, attracting even the attention of world leaders, like US Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton.

Now, one might rightly argue that she criticizes the Haredim, while passing on the Egyptian, Saudi, Afghan, Iraqi etc customs, where women are not only shunned, but do not even have a legal structure to protect them. In Israel, women have equal rights under the law, and the law enforcement must protect those rights, even within the insular communities.

However, it is common that self appointed enforcers ride buses through various Haredi neighborhoods, and force woman to comply with min law, such as not riding in front of a man. Now, granted, if they want to create a private bus line that adheres to Haredi law, and practice their religion freely, I have no objection. Women and men may choose their business, and the business may choose their clientele. However, when the bus line is public, there can be no justification. The Rosenblit case was handled correctly. She was asked by police if she volunteered to comply with the min rule, she did not care to, and the police then enforced the law allowing her to ride as she chose, and protecting her from other threats.

Another case was that of the Orit school, which teaches girls to practice Orthodox Judaism. The Haredi enforcers intimidated the staff and even the students on the basis that they did not adhere to min laws created by the Haredim. There is no reason that a Jewish school should not be allowed to practice Judaism rather than min law, so they haven't a basis to object to the school.

However, this is just the political process in Israel. That is until your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. The Haredim did not respect that limit, even intimidating and harassing small children. Until now, I was not aware that min law allowed this, but apparently they have established this challenge to Judaism in Beit Shemesh. We join the Jews who stand together to defend freedom of religion, the freedom to practice Judaism rather than min law, the very right on which Israel was founded.

UPDATE:
More cases:
An Israeli soldier was intimidated and forced to the back of the bus. There is evidence that this case was an organized provocation. I hope that Doron Matalon and anyone behind her understand that actions of this type do not help the cause. They only serve to drive more Orthodox to the Haredi side, and cause them to discount other cases of abuse.

An MK Tzipi Hotovely rode the front of a mehadrin bus and was insulted by an enforcer. She correctly remained in place without provoking or grandstanding. The difference in her case is that she is Orthodox and she did not seek to provoke an attack on herself that she could "cry" about.

In Beit Shemesh, it was reported that Haredi children harassed disabled Orthodox children in wheelchairs and one family claimed that they had been told to move out by "the rabbis of the community" because of "your daughter's dressing habits". The origin and veracity of the story, whether the letter actually came from Haredim in the community, or whether the harassment took place is not clear. I hope it has not descended to this, but the rabbis need to exert LEADERSHIP, if for no other reason, than to stop the PR disaster that is hangs like a fog over religious Jews everywhere. You are supposed to be extraordinary leaders, guardians of Torah, people who just KNOW deep things that we peons cannot understand with mere intellect. When will you start LEADING!!!!!!

More Chumash issues

2011-12-18T08:04:00.003-05:00

Last week, we discussed Dishon and Dishan. We could also have discussed another Rashi comment of "I do not know what it teaches us". When G-d finished speaking, it says, "and Jacob built an altar, in the place that G-d had spoken to him." This latter verbiage is the same as the previous pasuk and is not present when Avraham met the same situation. For Rashi to say that he doesn;t know, it must be that there is an obvious interpretation, but that it does not agree with Rashi's p'shat in other respects. I did not yet find a good resolution for this one.

This week, there is another editorial mishap. To whom did the brothers sell Yosef? They sold him to the Yishmaelim for 20 silver coins. However, the people who pulled him from the pit were Midyanim, socharim (meaning, Midianite middlemen). Rashi implies that socharim means many different middelmen, separate from the Midianites. So it is clear that the Yishmaelites sold him to the Midianites, who then took him to market in Egypt for sale. However, later the pasuk says that he was sold to the Medanim, whose name is spelled similarly to the Midianites, but Medan and Midian were two separate descendents of Avraham in parshat Chayai Sarah. So the Midyanim sold him to the Medanim as implied by Rashi's comment "he was sold many times". However, the Gutnick Chumash among others, and the Medrash list only the Yishmaelim, the Midianim, the unspecified socharim and Potiphar. From where did the Medanim come? Of course, we can escape by saying that they are the among the socharim. However, why mention them by name? Did the Mesoretic scribes simply leave out a yud, at which point the pasukim would flow perfectly?

Medrash is bothered by the question, and answers that the Medanim merged with the Midianim at some point in history and they were the same tribe. OK, that is better than rocks for breakfast. It is even supported by the fact Chayai Sarah mentions the sons of Midian, but not the sons of Medan. Perhaps they merged.

As a side point, there seem to have been many people in the early Torah named Utz. I am not sure I have ever met anyone with that name, at least outside the potato chip industry. But it is a dare to anyone having a bris soon who is a rebellious teenager.

Thought on Gezaila

2011-12-04T06:54:00.003-05:00

ט. כל החומד עבדו או אמתו או ביתו וכליו של חבירו או דבר שאפשר לו שיקנהו ממנו והכביר עליו ברעים והפציר בו עד שלקחו ממנו אף על פי שנתן לו דמים רבים הרי זה עובר [ה] בלא תעשה שנאמר לא תחמוד. ואין לוקין על לאו זה מפני שאין בו מעשה. ואינו עובר בלאו זה עד שיקח החפץ שחמד. כענין שנאמר לא תחמוד כסף וזהב עליהם ולקחת לך חימוד שיש בו מעשה:

י. כל המתאוה ביתו או אשתו וכליו של חבירו וכן כל כיוצא בהן משאר דברים שאפשר לו לקנותן ממנו. כיון שחשב בלבו היאך יקנה דבר זה ונפתה בלבו בדבר עבר בלא תעשה שנאמר לא תתאוה ואין תאוה אלא בלב בלבד:

יא. א התאוה מביאה לידי חימוד והחימוד מביא לידי גזל. שאם לא רצו הבעלים למכור אע"פ שהרבה להם בדמים והפציר ברעים יבא לידי גזל שנאמר וחמדו בתים וגזלו. ואם עמדו הבעלים בפניו להציל ממונם או מנעוהו מלגזול יבא לידי שפיכות דמים. צא ולמד ממעשה אחאב ונבות:

יב. הא למדת שהמתאוה עובר בלאו אחד והקונה דבר שהתאוה בהפצר שהפציר בבעלים או בבקשה מהן עובר בשני [ו] לאוין לכך נאמר לא תחמוד ולא תתאוה. ואם גזל עבר בשלשה לאוין:

He defines titaveh as desiring something that belongs to someone else. Tachmod means that he takes action and acquires it and forces the victim to sell it to him. Gezaila means that, since he won't sell it, he takes it from the victim. Then, he says that one is not guilty of bal tachmod unless he actually acquires the object through forcing the sale. Otherwise it is merely, bal titaveh. Then, he explains that if he desires the object, he is guilty for one issur. If he acquires it, he is guilty for two. If he commits gezel, he is guilty for three

Here is my problem. If he already acquired it through bal tachmod, and this is required to be guilty, then how did he then acquire it through gezaila? He already has it.

Here is my proposed answer. If he desires the object, he is guilty for one, titaveh. If he desires and acquires it, he is guilty for tachmod as well, thus two. If he desires it, and attempts to acquire it through tachmod, but he is unsuccessful, he is still only guilty for one, titaveh. However, when he then takes action to strong-arm the object away from the owner, he becomes guilty for tachmod, since he acquired the object through his action, and for gezaila, since he actually committed gezaila. Thus, there are possible cases for one, two and three issurim

This also resolves another issue in Halacha 9. There the Rambam says that he does not get lashes, because there is no action. But he is not guilty unless he takes action. I believe that he means only that he ultimately acquires the object by forcing its sale. Even if it is the direct result of tachmod, and he is guilty for two, nonetheless, he is does not get lashes, because the victim gave it to him. If he takes action, then the he is guilty for three, and there are no lashes for the reason he describes earlier, that it is lav sh'netek l'aseh

Vivid Dreams-Kabalah

2011-11-30T05:41:00.003-05:00

The title links to an article on Chabad.org about dreams. It starts sanely enough and then drifts off into Kabalah. As many of you know, to my mind, what we call "Kabalah" today is largely a pastiche of traditional Jewish mystical thought with an equally large helping of non-Jewish superstition and magic, and a dash of unsourced utter nonsense on the side. Sadly, it can no longer be sorted, though Chasidic groups made a valiant effort in formulating Chasidut, emphasizing the parts that are beneficial to "avodah" while trying to guide people away from the nonsense.

Is it dangerous? Two words, Shabtai Tzvi. The modern version is based largely on one direction, that of Yitzchak Luria, the Ari, and his school. While he promoted a resurgence of Kabalah and the mystical side of Judaism, he also introduced new ideas that cannot be traced back beyond a century earlier. The rejoinder to this is that Kabalah existed in a hidden form, where only a few people passed down in a clandestine chain. To me, this breaks the whole Jewish model of generational transmission. The idea was that everyone saw at Mt. Sinai and that other religions were passed down by a single person, as with Christianity or Islam. This even spawned the circular Kuzari "proof", which we have already discussed. To have a major change in the religion that only a select few know is not Jewish, because in Judaism, even the king, prophets and saints are not above the law. However, if only an oligarchy know the "true" law, then no one can ever hold them accountable. Even Moses took pains to be seen by the people speaking with G-d, before he would be trusted to transmit the law.

To answer, vivid dreams are the same as any other dream. They reflect what we think about during the day, as he says in the Raisha of the article. Our minds simply prepare us to do something that our bodies are not yet ready to do. When our brains tell us something, we tend to believe it, just as we tend to believe our parents when we are children. If our brain sends us false signals, which we are used to interpreting one way, we are impressed that we have experienced "reality", even if it is weird. Stage magicians understand this. They tell you things and show you things normally interpreted one way, and then they change the field so that you are tricked about what you have reasoned will or can happen next. Usually, when shown the secret behind the trick, people are amazed at how easy it is. Stuxnet virus also works on the same idea. It tells the instruments in the control center false things that are normally interpreted as true by the trusted source.

Overly trusting our brains, any more than our eyes and ears, leads us to endangering ourselves based on hallucinations, or little voices. A vivid dream is no more than a vivid hallucination. If you put your old aunt in the home for believing it, it is not valid for you to believe either. Mental wards are full of people who follow the reality of their mind, when in everyone else's reality, their mind is what is broken.

Just because we receive a message from our minds, rather than from our outer senses, it may not be any more trustworthy. This brings a certain amount of discomfort and insecurity as we deal with the world around us, but it is a truth that we cannot deny. And this is sufficient for he that understands. The rest is passed down only to special students and only the chapter headings.

Even Rashi doesn't know

2011-11-27T21:07:00.003-05:00

The verse says, "And Yitchak sent (shalach) Yaakov, and he went to Padan Aram to Lavan the son of Betuel the Arami, the brother of Rivka, the mother of Yaakov and Esav." On the last words, "mother of Yaakov and Esav" Rashi says "I do not know what it teaches us."

The implication is that telling us that Lavan is the brother of Rivka, a fact we already know, is obvious what it teaches, but that telling us another fact that we already know, contradicts what the obvious implication would be. In my mind, this clears it up.

Why did Yitzchak expect that Lavan would protect Yaakov, and get involved in frateranl broges with the dangerous Esav. Answer: because Yaakov was closest to Rivka and as she favored him, so would Lavan. Whereas Yitzchak favored Esav, and this was further from Lavan in terms of loyalty. This is somewhat confirmed by the next pasuk. "And Esav saw that Yitachak had blessed Yaakov and sent him away (shilach) to Padan Aram. Shalach means to send on a mission to something, whereas shilach means to send him away from here. (This is clear from Rashi's p'shat, that sending him away to escape and sending him to get married, were two different things in Esav's view.) So Esav interpreted the action primarily as Yitchak supporting Yaakov's escape, the rest being a pretense, whereas Yitchak understood it as sending him on a journey to get a wife. So Esav sought to counteract the pretense, rather than to thwart Yaakov's escape, since his father wanted it.

Howeer, in truth, Rivka would have wanted the escape more, so she was relying on Lavan's loyalty to her as her brother. Why then emphasize that Rivka is the mother of both of them? This would inspire Lavan to have the same loyalty to both and not to get involved. Even though Yaakov is mentioned first, nonetheless, this would emphasize that Lavan still would have no reason to completely side with Yaakov. Thus, this pasuk confuses pshat, rather than clarifying it, and we do not know what it meant to teach us.

Sons of Avraham Part 2

2011-11-09T05:31:00.003-05:00

Well, after our failed vacation trip, we returned home to news that some of the "Occupy" movements had become violent, you know, those movements in every city that are directing anger at "bankers", i.e. Jewish bankers, i.e. Jews, who are all bankers. So, my family sat down to discuss possible scenarios to defend our home in case of attack.

Scenario one.

Suppose a couple of bachurim that we have never met before came to the door, and the "occupiers" chose that moment to riot. They surround the house and the bachurim are trapped inside. Now, I like to think out of the box, and so I came up with a really creative plan. My two daughters, who are both engaged BH, were home. So I suggested, in case they were home when the riot began, that we could offer them up to the angry mob to protect the bachurim inside. I could use my influence in town to sell the idea to the crowd and then they would spare us and the bachurim. My wife and family do not always appreciate my ideas, but I feel that their over-reaction to this idea was completely out of line. Both of my daughters also complained to their chasanim, but they tried to placate the girls by saying that I must be joking. Where is everyone's spirit of mesiras nefesh?

So that was a bust.

So, having failed to convince my wife on our adventure to Egypt, I decided to take my sons on a trip. The older one has always been a bit of a wild kid and likes to endanger others just for fun, so I will have him stay with the car while the younger one and I go exploring. We like the mountains. Then, I had this great idea. Let's see how my younger son, a really nice and obedient kid, reacts to my thinking out of the box. So, I suggest that we leave the older son with the car, while we go on a hike and have a personal barbecue up on one of the mountains. I brought picnic basket and we started up the slope. When we got to the top, he says to me, "I see you brought barbeque sauce, ketchup, mustard, and you even brought firewood and a knife. So why didn't we stop off at the kosher butcher and get some meat to roast?" I explained that the voices in my car had told me to barbecue him. At first, he was all into it. However, as I tied him down to slit his throat, he began to have reservations, but it was too late. He just gave me a look, you know, that "I'm so disappointed in you Dad, but do what you think is right" look. Just then, the voices from the car spoke to me again and said that really, tying him down was all that was required and I could now release him. I even saw a ram with its horns stuck in a tree, so voila, barbecue. We had a great time, but ever since, my son has been acting out in school and he keeps muttering strange things to himself. Then, they were going to have a class picnic, and the teacher says that my son freaked out and hid under his desk yelling "Take my brother. He's bigger, he has more lean meat on him and he's a jerk too!"

I tell you, raising kids is tough.

Whose failure?

2011-11-06T08:04:00.003-05:00

After passing the Mishnah in daf yomi and the corresponding Rambam in nearly syncronized cycle about the half mouse half earth impurity, I realized that Rabbi Slifkin had given an excellent examination of the subject, so I relented.

However, over the weekend, I was forced to ponder some of the same experiences that I have had throughout my life when the Orthodox and non-Orthodox interact. Invariably, some poor lamenting souls will ponder the tragedy that X has gone off the derech, that Y is married to a non-Jew and that Z keeps many Jewish laws, but does not keep Shabbat or kashrut k'halacha. Who do they think they are fooling? Or who do they think they are impressing? Or what did they do that deceived them into going the wrong way in life? Kiruv Rabbis around the world have been pouring life blood into the effort, only to see a small dent in the effort to show the entire world the truth of Orthodox Jewish laws, customs and theology. Why so? IMO, they are asking the wrong questions.

The question is not why Jeffrey likes the shikse, or why Pinny changed his name to Parker and works on Yom Tov even though he comes to shul many times when he is not working. It's not even why a hundred people show up to a social event at the shul, but it struggles to make a minyan. Nor is it why Sheila has to go to the treif restaurant when there are so many kosher ones in her city. And they always ask "Who's to blame? The parents, the teachers, the rabbis?" However the correct question is why haven't we inspired them enough, created a Jewish edifice inviting and inspirational enough to earn their hearts and minds?

Now many frum people who read they are infuriated that I would ask that. Why should they? This is why they are failing. For it is not that Jeffrey likes the shikse, but that we have not shown him anything that inspires him enough to accept our advice. Period. He does not understand why his girlfriend should be called a derogatory name, just because she was born to non-Jewish parents. He is told that he is bad for seeing her. But we have not built our relationship with him such that our advice is (or even should be) meaningful to him. Building that relationship means putting ourselves into his position and analyzing the matter from his viewpoint. Remember some vort about "kamocha" that you slept through? ASK THE RIGHT QUESTION!!!! Why should he listen to me? What have I offered him that he should change his world view to mine? Some old stories and ideas that may not even appeal to him? Would that convince you to convert some other worldview, say ... oh, I don't know... Christianity? Of course not!!!

Why indeed? Is it comparable? Isn't there a pintele yid, a Jewish spark that drives the Jew to accept our ideas? Isn't that given in the equation? Answer: So how's that working for you? There is still no minyan, there is still a mixed marriage, there is still a nonreligious person or formerly religious person. And you want to throw a platitude at it.

So who is to blame? Practice the question in front of the mirror a few times to make sure you are asking it forcefully enough. Then realize that you are finally asking the right person the right question. What am I doing to make Judaism more inspiring and more inviting and more enticing to young people? Not programs, not debates, not rational cover for lousy ideas, not pronouncements from out of touch rabbi celebrities. Why should anyone take my advice? Answer that honestly and they will come.

Sons of Avraham? Daughters of Sarah?

2011-11-02T08:50:00.004-04:00

To test the idea that we have the traits of Avraham and Sarah, I decided to play a little impromptu role game with the Rebeltzin. (No, the kids can keep reading.)

From Rashi, we have an interesting case scenario. So I asked the Rebeltzin if she would like to join me on a trip to a hostile country that is full of crime, and is run by totalitarian dictatorship (perhaps Egypt, under military junta). It is imperative that the people in that country (especially the women) and its leaders be abnormally ugly. The Rebeltzin is always up for a challenge, so she is in. I explained to her that, since it is dangerous, and there is a good chance they won't like Jews, especially if we have a few bucks and appear powerful, that they will want to kill me. However, if she pretends to be my sister, instead of my wife, they will take her captive and (at least) sexually molest her and allow me to live. (Were they to know she was married to me, they would probably just kill me and take her captive anyway, they have their standards of morality after all.)

She was not reacting as positively as I had hoped. Where was the adventurous woman that I once knew? Anyway, I sweetened the pot, as it were. I also told her that, if she follows through with this plan, the wealthy leaders of the country will probably give me many gifts and make me much more wealthy than I already am. At this point, she stomped out angry for some reason. If I live to be 100 years old, I will never understand women! Fortunately, the couch is really comfy. However, next year, maybe I will suggest going back to Charan to visit the family.

Daf Yomi - chulin 105

2011-10-09T22:39:00.002-04:00

A treasure trove of entertaining superstition to be sure. I wonder if Abaye snickered through the entire thing or rolled his eyes.

My questions:

Is there a special employment agency for demons, like the one hired by Rav Papa? Are they unionized?

What is the correct spell for counteracting a spell that stops a ship from moving? If one uses the wrong spell, do they have to answer to Prof. Flitwick or Prof. McGonnegal? Had the Rabanim not know the proper spell, would it have helped that they did not eat vegetables bundled by a gardener? Or did that just allow the spell to work? Do you have to do the precautionary superstition AND know the spell as well?

What is catarrh (Soncino) caused by drinking water? Why did it have foam on top? What the heck was in the water back then? Ewwwwwwwwwwww!

If the demon had been in the private domain when the men placed the barrel on his ear, would they have had to pay him from hefker? How did Rav Papa pay his demon? Also from hefker?

Did you know that you do not have to pour off water from every cup, only from the first of the barrel, in order to keep the demon affected water away.

Why isn't this blatt the first one that is taught to a prospective kiruv target?

Chabad on Kaparot

2011-10-07T09:45:00.009-04:00

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/407513/jewish/Kapparot-The-Chicken-Thing.htm

Money quote:

The practice of originally kapores created a certain amount of controversy amongst rabbinical scholars. The Ramban, also known as Nachmanides, who lived from 1195 to 1270 C.E. criticized it as a superstitious practice of the Emorites, one of the neighboring pagan peoples to Israel. Later, Rabbi Joseph Karo (1488 - 1575 CE) also criticized the practice in the Shulchan Aruch (Code of Jewish Law). While there have been communities that do not practice the custom, eventually most of the Rabbinical authorities did support it and encouraged its practice. As such, kapores is practiced by many in both Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities.

Has Orthodox Judaism ever endorsed such a practice with these words before? Do we not always swear that we are following the Shulchan Aruch? Is there a SINGLE OTHER CASE where the Shulchan Aruch openly criticizes a practice and vast swaths of Orthodox Jews do it anyway and refer to it as a "Mitzva"? I mean, granted the Rama disagrees based on gedolim that did it, but the Mechaber actually goes out of his way to denounce it and say why. (See O"H 605:1) This may be the only place where a sourceless practice is defended like this.

The article also mentions that the practice is not mentioned in the Talmud. Actually, it may well be referenced in Avodah Zarah Daf 14, Mishna 1:5

א,ה אלו דברים אסורין למכור לגויים--אצטרובלין, ובנות שוח בפטוטרותיהן, ולבונה, ותרנגול לבן. רבי יהודה אומר, מוכר הוא לו תרנגול לבן, בין התרנגולין; בזמן שהוא בפני עצמו, קוטע את אצבעו ומוכרו, שאין מקריבין חסר לעבודה זרה. ושאר כל הדברים--סתמן מותר, ופירושן אסור. רבי מאיר אומר, אף דקל טב וחצב ונקליבס, אסור למכור לגויים.

For the non-Hebrew speaking, the Mishna lists things that idol worshipers use that you are not allowed to sell to them, for fear of facilitating their foreign practice. One of those things, the bolded words, "A WHITE ROOSTER"!!!

It is most stunning.

Kaporos origin

2011-10-04T21:24:00.002-04:00

The Armenians practice "matagh", where they slaughter a bull, lamb, dove or rooster at the door of the church. It is believed to be based on pre-Christian syncretism. Note that the rooster is the only option which is not used for sacrifice in Judaism. It is important that kaporos not be viewed as a sacrifice outside of Yerushalayim.

The purpose of matagh is to give a gift to G-d and as charity to the poor. It is also eaten on the day it is slaughtered. Is that why we would do it on erev Yom Kippur, so there was no opportunity to leave it over? Think pre-refrigeration. The Sephardic masters claimed that kaporos with a chicken was based on idol worship and the mishnah decrees that it is improper to sell a white rooster to an idol worshipper, except in a bulk context. The custom had died out until it was revived by the school of the Arizal, which immersed itself in "kabalah", though it is unclear to the earlier Sephardim that this particular custom came from any known place in kabalah.

Is the origin of matagh the source for kaporos as well?

Just Wrong

2011-09-05T06:49:00.002-04:00

Note the title linked article which describes a frum West Bank Rabbi's innovation, matching Orthodox homosexual men with Orthodox homosexual women to build and raise families. The commentary has largely been criticism from questioning the Rabbi's credentials to those who say that he should be focusing on changing their sexual orientation, rather than helping them.

This criticism illustrates grandly how Jewish leadership works today. First, there are these icky foreign things that infest the Jewish house called gay people. Ewwwwwwwwwww! Since they are icky, they cannot be frum. So, they cannot really be frum and Orthodoxy, which is the perfect word of G-d, could not possibly accommodate such things. Second, any Orthodox Rabbi who disagrees with these undeniable facts must have something wrong with his credentials, or worse, his own Jewish lineage. No true Jew would see these things differently than we do. Third, ignore the problem. Homosexuals are abominable according to Torah and we must pretend that they do not exist. (Actually, male homosexual relations as sodomy are forbidden as foreign religious practice "to'eva", but homosexuality, deriving sexual pleasure from members of the same sex, is not mentioned in the Torah for either sex. Female homosexual interaction is discouraged as ma'aseh emori, but not definitively dealt with in halacha.) When they come to asking how they fulfill their Jewish lives, given the obstacles in Orthodox society, we need to stick our fingers in our ears and sing a niggun. This is not our problem and you are not our problem. (And my 35 year old son who isn't married just hasn't ... uh, uh ... found the right shidduch yet ... that's it ...). Now that the defenses are up and we can deal with this in terms of helping someone else solve their icky issues with our sage advice.

Fourth, invent some solution that seems overly obvious to someone who has never looked the details of the issue. Let's convert gay people to straightness, or let's "cure" their sickness.
Fifth, when reality or (as the evil world secular culture call it G-d forbid) "science" says that this cannot be cured away or converted away by willpower, we need to reject the reality and insist on our obvious solution. Just another case where science and society do not know what they are talking about when the answer is clear.
Sixth, create a couple testimonials to testify to our solution to trot out when the entire world comes to say that we are daffy. (Pray the gay away, people. Yankel did it.)
Seventh, ostracize anyone who tries to come up with a real solution, implying that our solution could have been ineffective or incorrect.

This is the primary Rabbinic solution to everything, from homosexuality, to Internet family safety, to frum child molesters, to evolution and age of the universe, to frum poverty. Ignore, create imaginary science to define the situation, find a couple of crackpots in the science world to certify that your idea is not provably wrong (or failing that, find fundamentalist Christians who are scientists and already doing some the crackpot work, why reinvent the wheel?), create imaginary solution based on imaginary science, tell everyone else that they are not frum enough if they do not accept your conclusions. Question their credentials and lineage.

And I can tell you how this plays out today in the frum world. The gay man denies that he is gay and stays in the closet. (The open gays leave or cloister themselves away from the frum community.) Either he does not marry and lives a life of frustration in this area (problem solved, right? For us Rabbis, anyway) or he marries a straight woman, trying to deny his gayness for awhile, has a few kids, divorces, and then finally comes out, ruining the lives of his wife and children.

How would a rationalist Rabbi assess the effort mentioned above? Here is a thought.

We have these people who are frum or would like to be, but there is an obstacle in their way. Kiruv Rabbis want said people in the fold, practicing Torah and Mitzvos. Creative kiruv Rabbi finds a way to integrate them, without ruining lives or basing their interaction on dishonesty or resentment. Support Rabbi's efforts and congratulate him on a job well done. Encourage gays and lesbians who want to be frum to look into his program to see if it might be right for them. Then pretend that the gays and lesbians are actually real Jewish people and mekarev them without prejudice or reference to their sexuality. Introduce them by their names, instead of as "my new gay friends".

Something about our Jewish leadership is just wrong.

Traifot - the Drusa

2011-08-19T10:53:00.003-04:00

Chulin 53a gives a story following the discussion of traifot, when a cat claws a bird. We discussed this in relation to the Daat Emet's essay on the subject, but the daf yomi just passed by it, so I want to record it while it is fresh in my mind. The universal underlying assumption is that many animal claws, lions, martens, alley cats, hawks, wolves, foxes and others use their front claws to inject poison into the victim prey. This can be discerned by the bodek if he examines the body cavity and sees redness. That is a telltale sign that it was clawed with poison and is treif. So, I was happy enough to say that they decide the law based on what they saw, and the incorrect underlying fact is simply backstory and irrelevant to the law. Even the idea that in order to inject poison, the predator must retract the claw can be reconciled this way.

However, the Talmud gives a case where one of the Rabbanim saw a cat strike a door in anger and he claims he saw five red marks, indicating that the cat had injected poison in the door. So there can be no doubt that the redness they were discussing above was not the damaged tissue and blood, but the poison itself. Even if I chalk it up to empiricism in the case of the examining the animal, how to I regard the eyewitness account of a legal authority to something that we strongly suspect does not exist?

The primary answer is very weak. One might relate the "poison" to the bacteria responsible for "cat scratch disease". The germ infects the animal turning the inside red as the infection manifests in the body cavity. I might even presume that other predators convey the same cat scratch disease. However, what do I do with red poison presented in a wooden door? The bacteria would not turn it red, unless it reacts with the wood somehow. What did the Rabbis see? Was it the remnants of the cat's last kill? That would refute his point for bringing the story, namely the decision of when the cat injects the poison. Also, with regard to the windpipe, the Talmud sates that a cat scratch in any measure forbids the prey, whereas normally, the puncture of the windpipe require a larger measure, an issar or rov. However, the poison continues to burn, so it will get bigger. This might happen with bacteria, but I do not know. The Talmud says "zihara".

It is also a clear halacha that the claw poison is only injected with the will of the animal. That would not be the case with cat scratch bacteria.

Empiricism has to rule here, since that is all we can base a ruling on, but the facts of the Talmud are very hard to "shtim", and they leak dangerously close to the halacha.

Well, I am sure that there will be a full discussion of this in "The Coming Revolution 2". It is right up his alley after all. (NOT!)

Coming Revolution by Zamir Cohen

2011-08-06T22:50:00.001-04:00

Subtitled “How Science is discovering the truths of the Torah”

The title of this Israeli best seller set my alarms off to say the least. It certainly presumes a conclusion, rather than being an objective reporter of facts, so I am steeling myself for a strong polemic with some jumps of logic, some missing facts, and some broad exaggerations. However, I was unprepared for what I found, though I had even had a little bit of preview.

The book is a series of 2-3 page comparisons of what he claims are the Biblical positions with what he claims are the scientific positions on a variety of subjects. It is apparent from early on that he has never cracked a science text and is unclear even as to what science is. “Cracked” may be the operative term here, as in “pot”. He operates on the assumptions that the Torah, the Tanach, the Talmud and the Zohar are all literal and equal in stature, from a historical and scientific viewpoint, and that the Zohar is 2000 years old. (In reality is probably more like 700 years old, a world of difference in Jewish history.) This is not the view of Judaism nor of history, but he cherry picks arguments in order to make the facts correspond to reality. His recurring theme is that the Torah knew some fact that they had no way of knowing or imagining, and that science is now confirming that fact. He has a couple of interesting hits but nothing really compelling, and he does not even address the reverse argument, i.e. what to do with scientific facts in the Torah that are irrefutably wrong. But, 85% of the book is utter fantasy. He includes many photos, often which have nothing to do with the subject, but they make the book a prettier package.

Hits

He discusses continental shift, corresponding with the Torah view that there was one ocean and then dry ground formed one continent. Later the land separated into seven continents, and that this is revealed in the Zohar, among other places. This is essentially correct. Cool.

He discusses that there are many more stars than meet the eye, and then shows that they could not have known this without divine knowledge. Of course, anyone who had been in the city, even then, and then went to a flatter and less populated place would easily come to that conclusion. He also tries to play the numbers of stars versus estimates today, but his efforts fall short by a factor of over 50,000 times. Nonetheless, it is interesting so we will rate it cool.

Silliness

The book descends into silliness quickly, with assertions based on “parapsychology”, magic and discredited crackpot theories, which he presents as proven science.

Auriculotherapy, the ear form of the magic cure known as reflexology, is presented as a medical fact. He brings the infamous article on the idolatrous cure known as acupuncture, relating it to the positions of the Tefilin (G-d forbid). Get a grip. Science has not shown these therapies to have any medical value or effect, despite many decades of effort.

He presents the work of Masuru Emoto, trying to prove that speaking of nice concepts makes pretty ice crystals where as saying negative things creates ugly ones. Sadly, no one has ever been able to replicate Mr. Emoto’s work. He does the same with Cleve Backster and making plants grow strong with positive speech and emotion. Mythbusters busted this myth 10 years earlier. He quotes Edgar Mitchell and Edgar Cayce on ESP, claiming Torah has foretold these amazing events. At least Mitchell was only deceived. Cayce was likely a mere carnival act.

Then he goes off the deep end. What is that you say? Oh, yes, even deeper. The Torah’s references to life after death are confirmed by photographs of ghosts. He displays a couple of such photos which circulate widely on ghost believer websites. These are “facts” that science is just coming to grips with according to Cohen. Last I checked, science had not accepted the existence of ghosts. Various demons and creatures from mythical lands mentioned in the Talmud and Zohar are attributed to the scientific discovery that alien cultures have been visiting our planet. He proves this with UFO photos and stories. He certifies prophetic dreams using anecdotes, as scientific admission.

There is more but I could not bring myself to write about it. I’m sure you get it by now. But don’t worry. I am sure the Coming Revolution 2 will be around soon, a guaranteed money maker. Why in blazes do I work productively for a living?

My final recommendation: Read this book for entertainment. Try not to get too offended by the comparisons of Torah ideas to nonsense. Do not, under any circumstances, share this book with someone unaffiliated, if they have any education whatsoever.

Judaism and Witchcraft

2011-07-31T18:30:00.003-04:00

With the murder of Baba Elazar Abuchtzeira, I am prompted to face up to finding a place in my personal philosophy for kabbalah. There is such a thing as kabalah, going back to ancient times. I do not know how it resembles what is called kabalah today, if at all. You see, we would have no way of knowing, since it was only taught to select students, and only the topical concepts, except to some small chosen group. This contradicts the entire underpinnings of the traditional transmission of Torah, so I would have to say that anything that cannot be proven from the Torah and halacha thoroughly cannot be true kabalah.

That said, all of the magic that is done in the name of kabalah is HEPECH HATORAH, that is AGAINST THE TORAH!!!!!! Unless you can prove otherwise for any particular practice based on "kabalah", that is what the Torah demands that I say. The Torah gave us open ways to discern halacha, and kabalah magic, which is nowhere excepted in this issur, is rishut, wickedness, plain and simple. When do pseudo-scientific ideas cease to be "wrong" and start to be "wickedness"? That is the line that I have the most trouble defining. However, pure magical ideas, astrology, oriental magic based on non-Torah worldview, like acupuncture, feng shui, qi gong and the like, are easy enough to place on the wicked list, and greater men than I have already done so. The problem is when they claim a "hidden" Torah view. There I have to say that they must prove themselves in Torah, and that even an impressive magical performance cannot help their case, as the Rambam explains clearly in Yesodei HaTorah. I have less of a problem with amulets that are used as placebos to calm a person. However, a Rav should make clear that such things have no real power, so the public will not rely on them.

In the times of the Talmud, such amulets were considered "science" rather than magic. They were never thought of in terms of magic, but as something where a person could develop a skill in the "art" and make to work. Suffice to say that they did not have scientific method and modern logical tools to test the truth of certain ideas. They just did whatever seemed to give them good luck. A person then developed a reputation and his celebrity grew out of one or two laudatory reports spreading from place to place. They had no means to tally failures and successes and determine fairly. Today's Jewish psychics and new age promoters, self styled kabalists, spiritual healers and promoters of new age "alternative medicine" can gain a reputation in the same way, using their famous ancestor and fanning a few flaming half-truths until people want to believe. I mean people do want to believe that the progeny of the Baba Sali have magical powers, I get that. However, for them to use that to bilk people is like the Biblical story of Chafni and Pinchas. For those who slept through Tanach class, the High Priest E'li was a very holy and righteous man, but his sons used their positions as his sons and priests to sell the sacrifices to enrich themselves.

In the meantime, I beg the Jewish leaders in religious communities to stop lauding these people, to stop promoting them to stop giving them "rabbinical supervision" and making them kosher, to stop allowing them a free hand to victimize the Jewish community. Are their victims any less Jewish than they are? Are the grandparents of the victims any less holy Jews? The Baba Sali would say not so. Once more for clarity, people who practice magic in all of its forms are operating AGAINST THE TORAH, they are VICTIMIZING FRUM PEOPLE, and in the words of the Rambam, it is not enough that they spread foolish ideas ... see his strong rebuke in the laws of idol worship. Promoting magic, whether you call it kabalah amulets and charms, alternative medicine, oriental medicine, or anything else, is the worst sin that a Jew can commit, a refutation of the very name "Jew", i.e. one who is "modeh" to G-d and G-d alone as revealed through Torah. A practice can not be kashered without extraodinary proofs from the Torah itself, even if other "sages and rabbis"kashered it that they must present clear and thorough proofs or be overturned, and it is tragic that Jewish leaders are blind to this obvious fact to which they would agree on any other facet of Torah that is this stringent, be it nidah, Shabbat or even the less stringent kashrut.

May 21 is upon us

2011-05-19T23:15:00.002-04:00

The date May 21st has been established as the date of the "rapture". That is when the Christian Bible says that true believers will be taken to heaven to sit out the terrible tribulation here on our planet. It even says that two people will be standing together and one will be taken and the other left, so it should be simple to discern that it happened.

On the remote chance that we exit Shabbat and enter the morning of Lag B'Omer with the world still full of Bible thumping Christian fundamentalists, including Harold Camping, what will the excuse be? And what of the Great Parade in Crown Heights? Does it matter which messianic leader and chasidic you believe in? Do they have Jews in heaven in Christianity? Kosher food? Chinese take out? This could go on forever. So many questions I could not care less about.

However, you gotta love Camping. There are some real lulus in the world, but it takes a special cheeseball to predict the end of the world on a specific day with undeniable effects. I wish I could watch the hem/haw interview. Oprah, magic healing queen, should do the honors. "So, Rev. Camping, you say that you miscalculated because G-d goes by the revised after leap years and daylight savings time are taken into account, and we must add the 70 years for the 4 four horsemen of the apocalypse and divide by the shoe size of Obama the Antichrist?"

I knew it would be locusts. I have already sprayed OFF on my clothes and treated the lawn with the antibug stuff. Who knows what the mark of G-d is? The tattoo parlors should know. It's their job.

Israel Independence and Chabad

2011-05-15T07:23:00.003-04:00

Chabad leadership has disassociated themselves from a Chabad rabbi in Israel for taking part in a Yom Ha'atzma'ut ceremony with Moshe Holtzberg, the survivor of the horrific terror attack in Mumbai. Young Moshe is used by Chabad for the considerable PR he provides, but this attempt to use the child and his grandfather resulted in a mess. While the public face of Chabad strongly supports Israel, as a nation of refuge for Jews and homeland for Jews, the underlying Rabbinic authorities are embarrassed in front of Charedim and other Chasidim to assert this position. It is in fashion for Jews to assert their frumness by stating that, since Israel is not run by Torah law, it is evil at the core. Note that Rav Eliezrie rushed to apologize for the contradictory position by laying out the assertion that while Chabad is "Zionist" in a religious way, serving in the army and paying taxes, yet they are Zionists who reject the secular principles of the founding of Israel.

Rabbi, if that is the case, that you respect Israel as a nation and serve it, then why object to recognizing its founding? Even by your position, Chabad took actions that indicate a rejection of the legitimacy of the state itself, not those that would represent loyal opposition. By comparison, many Americans would consider some of our founding principles deeply problematic, (problems that could legitimately be said to extend into our times), but only the most radical would refuse to sing the national anthem or the pledge of allegiance. Certainly, even more radical would be the proposition that an American would be invited to participate in a ceremonial honor for a non-political purpose to the nation, and his group behind would emphasize that they do not support him. In this case, the participation of Rabbi Rosenberg and Moishe emphasizes the "refuge from persecution" aspect that they supposedly agree on with the state of Israel.

In previous generations, Chabad followed the other Chasidic groups and even enemy Charedi groups (yes, Chabad and Charedim were opponents!) in racing to denounce everything the "Tziyoni" did as secular, destructive to Judaism and not G-d's will. By contrast, Ben Gurion tried to develop a plan whereby the rights of religious and secular Jews could be guarded, in a "live and let live" state. The religious insisted upon the impossible standard of running Israel on Torah law. WHOSE TORAH LAW????!!!!!

Well, to carry their position to its logical conclusion, this is why Eliezrie does not support Rosenberg. He would like to see a state run on Torah law. When the forces of "Torah" get together, they will need to agree on a standard. Naturally, they will want to be inclusive of all groups. Therefore, they will adopt the strictest standard that anyone holds in any matter, by definition. Shaved heads and wigs for all women, enforced tznius to teh strictest known standard short of Burkas, no pictures of women, separate buses, all able bodied men learning Torah and not working as a matter of principle, withdrawal from all international bodies, political, educational, and athletic, education that forbids exposure to modern science and teaches ancient science as fact, nullification of conversions and divorces, even held under Orthodox auspices, enforced Shabbat observance, kashrut to the nth degree only, to the strictest known standard, beit din with the power to give makat mardut as it sees fit without check or control, including floggings, imprisonment, torture, even for things that are merely violations of their protocols. Are you scared yet? Are you packing your bags to move to Torah-run Israel? Pack a weapon, because even if you are as scrupulous as humanly possible, any number fo groups will automatically declare you a heretic and want to kill you. Internecine civil strife would be the rule until a strong dictatorial leader rose up, declared himself the Messiah with the help of some celebrity Rabbis, and killed, jailed or silenced everyone who disagreed with him in any matter. While the "Messiah" would not actually do any of the things that prove him the Messiah, he will be declared "b'chazkat Moshiach" until some undetermined future date.

Is that not the Israel you dreamed of? That is the Israel that Chabad would have us dream of. And they are supposedly the least crazy of all. So next time you hear a Chabad shaliach measure his words and tell you that, while they "support the state" (even though they oppose its founding principles, even ceremonially), they really want to improve it into a state that is run by the Messiah and Torah law, please consider what that really means.

Mistake in the Rambam?

2011-03-11T11:55:00.003-05:00

המקלל את המת פטור הואיל ומקלל כל אדם מישראל חייב למה ייחד לאו על דיין ולאו על נשיא לחייבו שתים נמצאת למד שהמקלל אחד מישראל בין איש בין אשה בין גדול בין קטן לוקה אחת ואם קלל דיין לוקה שתים ואם קלל נשיא לוקה שלש וכן נשיא שקלל

אביו חייב משום ארבעה שמות שלשה של כל אדם ואחד משום האב

In today's Rambam, we find this halacha. The last line does not seem to follow logically. It seems that it should say that if a person curses his father, who is the nasi, he transgresses four times. The halacha says that if a nasi curses his father, he transgresses four times. Why is he chayav on a father who is not a dayan or a nasi? I will update when I get a chance to research.

UPDATE: It should be a bet, not a kaf. U'ben nasi, not V'ken nasi. Mystery solved.

The Anti-Slavery founding Fathers?

2011-02-26T19:58:00.006-05:00

I'll take the sfgate.com account, since it holds no punches, and it covers the main points that others bring up.

"Is there a history tutor in the house? 'Cause Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-MN, needs one bad. The Tea Party fave said that "the very founders that wrote those documents worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States....Men like John Quincy Adams, who would not rest until slavery was extinguished in the country."

True, J.Q. Adams didn't rest before slavery ended...he died. Or maybe he was just taking a dirt nap.

As for a few other points from the rest of Bachmann's Bizarro U.S. History Class, Thomas Jefferson -- who wrote that all men are created equal -- owned slaves. And perhaps did more than own them. George "Father of the Country" Washington owned human property, too.

Oh, yeah, and that Constitution that Bachmann waves around, it established that a slave counted as 3/5ths of a human being. The provision was inserted into the document as a political compromise -- except it compromised human dignity."

I do no usually involve my blog in politics, but my sense of history is a little miffed about this. I want to make this perfectly clear. Rep. Bachmann was 100% CORRECT in her statements here. The proofs against what she said seem damning, but they show a remarkable lack of real historical knowledge and logic on the part of those who propose them. (And for the record, I generally support the original tea party concept of limiting taxation, but I am not a supporter of the tea party in its current iteration, nor do I have a particular interest in Rep. Bachmann's agenda.)

Point one: The founders did not rest until slavery was extinguished.

Did the founders rest until slavery was extinguished? No. In fact, four score and seven years later, the matter came to an unthinkable war between the states, and the government prosecuted that war vigorously, against huge existential threats to the US. An though one may argue that war did not start to end slavery, it certainly was that to many people, the war to free the slaves, by the end. No, they did not rest and did not give in until slavery was abolished.

Bachmann pointed to John "Quincy" Adams, Jr., a man whose unassailable abolition creds include devoting pro bono services to a slave revolt AFTER he had been president, and both he and Adams Sr., a founder by any definition were stark anti-slavery stompers. But were there others? Perhaps, she might have found better examples. Dr. Benjamin Franklin, founder of PA Society for the Abolition of Slavery, comes to mind. Anyway, all she said was that Adams would not rest until slavery was abolished, not that he completed that task. He died trying. Her statement is correct.

Point two: Many founders were slaveholders.

Didn't Jefferson, Madison, all the Virginian presidents in fact own slaves, even the revered George Washington? Of course they did. And they, as well as Mason, Wythe and many others OPPOSED (you read right, OPPOSED) slavery on moral grounds and worked toward its abolition. While later Calvinists promoted an increasingly radical, "not one more minute" solution for slavery, many professional politicians saw this as no gift to the uneducated slaves and a society that might get a dangerous open revolt were they to accept. They advocated liberalizing slavery and moving toward ultimate integration or returning the slaves to Africa, and slave welfare was a concern. There is a reason that Liberia's capital is called MONROVIA after slave-holding president Monroe. Jefferson called slavery "iniquity" and suggested that it be abolished in the Declaration. He very nearly lost the Carolinas and sacrificed abolition to get independence. Freeing slaves was against the law, owing to fears of mass insurrection, but nonetheless, Washington freed his slaves in his will. He had been the chief executive officer of the laws of the US. Jefferson intended to free his slaves in his will, but his creditors were able to foil it. He likely de-facto married Sally Hemmings, though it was illegal, even as he served as president. Most accounts have it that he loved her all of his life, and fought off his daughters in favoring her. Many plans were proposed to moderate and ultimately phase out slavery, though they were shot down by the desperate advocates until war was necessary to remove it. Even into the time of the civil war, in Virginia, slavery was not very popular in intellectual or educated circles, even among land owners. CSA General James Longstreet famously suggested that they should have made clear that this was not issue by freeing the slaves before attacking Fort Sumter. The only real fans that slavery had were majorities in North and South Carolina, and president Jackson (who came from Tennessee, then part of North Carolina), who came up as populist, rather than a professional or intellectual. Bottom line: the founders and most of the educated gentry opposed slavery vigorously on moral grounds, and even slaveholders wanted it abolished, albeit gradually.

Point three: The constitution considers salves to be 3/5ths of a person.

But didn't the Jefferson - Madison constitution count a slave as 3/5ths of a human being? No, of course not. It counted a slave as 3/5ths of a census tick. The purpose was solely to get ratification in plantation states by allowing slaves to count for census, and thus for Congressional representation. At one time, slaves may have been 35% of the population in those states. It was not a statement of their humanity. The slavery advocates wanted them counted as a full human being, and the abolitionists wanted them not to count at all. Ipcha mistabra as we say in the Talmud. Why did the writer of article even bring this up. Was he saying that the constitution was not worth defending? Is that the position he expects Rep. Bachmann to hold? What about President Obama who swore to defend that Constitution, and whose position depends on that paper she waved around?

You do not like Bachmann's "Bizarro" history class, or suggest as did Seth Myers on Saturday Night Live that she was "looking off to the right of the blackboard" during history class? I'd suggest you take a refresher. She passes history based on the facts she presented, albeit too briefly to be thorough. And the writer of the article in sfgate.com, SNL and dozens of others, do pay attention this time.

The disappearing vav

2011-02-06T07:53:00.002-05:00

In parshas T'rumah, Rashi explains the vav in "v'ait kol asher atzeveh et bnei yisroel" that it is extra and that it does not mean that G-d promised to speak and then command something additional. The speaking is the commanding.

However, when one looks at the text, there is no such vav. Rashi has a vav in his sefer Torah and we do not. So was his sefer wrong or is ours? Or are both of them legitimate versions of the text? (Fundamentalists hold that there is one and only one correct version of the Torah, so they may be disturbed by considering this possibility.) Fortunately, there is a fairly easy way to solve the question. We should look at references to the verse before and after Rashi and see if they show one or both versions on a regular basis, across geographic and philosophical lines.

And the winner is ...
Sorry, but I have not done enough research to answer conclusively, but I have a preliminary feel for an answer. The Targum Onkolos and Targum Yonatan that we have before us both omit the vav. While these were attributed as being previous to Rashi, I would have to say that Rashi also had access to them and that the missing letter would have at least merited a comment or forced to him to do some research, so it is hard to say that Rashi just missed this. Other mikraot gedolot commentaries do reference this verse, nor did I find reference in Torat Aharon that might link us to a Gemora. This implies to me that the sefarim before them showed a single version. And I have little choice, given the versions of the Targumim in front of us, but to say that they had our version, without the vav. So, by this incomplete research, Rashi has the wrong version and he has evidence to suspect that his version is wrong. I will add that druing rashi's time, there was no mass printing technology, and no way that one might check multiple sources easily. Books were expensive and hard to come by, and geographic distances between the sources made research prohibitive, a circumstance that it is hard for us to fathom in our times when we can look up any source, anywhere, and easily obtain multiple copies, to compare potential version differences. There was also a greater probability of version differences entering their world, as all written sources were manuscript copies, rather than set machine printing. This even goes for the chumash. Now, we have multiple copies of the chumash for sofrim to copy, even though the sefer Torah itself is a manuscript copy. In Rashi's time, the manuscript copies were, in fact, copies of copies of copies, a lot of room for error to creep in. A bad Torah in Troyes would have raised no eyebrows, but it might have given birth to several other bad Torahs.

However, given no other evidence, Rashi saw his Torah, with the vav, saw the targumim without it, decided that they agreed with him that the vav was actually there, but they had intentionally left it out of the Targumim, and darshaned the pshat from the pasuk itself that the vav indeed was extra, that it had no Targum and that it does not belong, and he was correct by our sefer Torah. Of course, this is only speculation, as Rashi does not mention the Targum Onkolos, as he often does, but I might not expect it, since the Targum is not darshaning anything here directly. I also do not know what Rashi has in his version of the Targumim, but I have no reason to conclude that they were different from ours, so that's that. Rashi interprets as we do, even given a misleading textual error in his sefer Torah.

Now, what did they read on Shabbos Trumah in Rashi's shul? Can of Worms Alert!!!!!

Daily Rambam

2011-01-16T15:37:00.002-05:00

In our daily Rambam, a halacha jumps out among the various laws of overcharging. In the Torah, the BDATZ sets the price and collusion, monopolies, restricting supply or violation of the price controls are punishable except in certain cases. This is called "Honyah", overcharging and it is a law in the Torah itself.

There is also a "Honyah" in words. against taunting a ger or a ba'al tshuva over his past or his lineage. And there is this:

היו חלאים ויסורים באין עליו או שהיה מקבר את בניו לא יאמר לו כדרך שאמרו חבריו לאיוב הלא יראתך כסלתך זכור נא מי הוא נקי אבד:

A person overcome by sickness or suffering or one who has buried his sons, do not say to him as the friends of Job did ... The verse means that G-d did not protect you because you were not blameless.

Did the Rambam forbid theodicy with this comment? I certainly hope so.

AM for a twin cam

2011-01-16T07:09:00.005-05:00

Given the high price of auto repair, the proliferation of mechanics who will defraud the public, and the general untrustworthiness of car manufacturers and auto parts manufacturers and dealers, I have turned to alternative auto repair as a solution. Sadly, my twin cam has increasing operational problems, and there is a limited amount that western allomechanical auto repair methods can do to rejuvenate my automobile. During my last visit to the auto shop, I realized that mechanics only look at the problems with the car when it breaks. they seem wholly uninterested in the proper and optimal operation of the entire car, its spiritual engine hum, as well as its overall fuel and fluid flow. I had given up hope when I stumbled across a practitioner that practices various types of alternative auto repair. Based on methods used since the invention of the wheel, often attributed to Hnbdicyuetgkf (also called Hnbd the wise in ancient inscriptions on caves in Neanderthal), he was able to determine the overall health of my twin cam and fix it holistically, restoring its spiritual and physical pep. (Please note: none of the methods that I will list are shown to diagnose, treat or aid in the treatment of any specific problem with an automobile.)

1) Auto-acupuncture - While this works best on oriental automobiles, it has been brought to the US with great success, though unpublicized. While ASA auto mechanic types tend to scoff, the amazing results are undeniable. At the treatment center I visited, the skilled mechanic identified seven main acupuncture points on the vehicle, and placed electrically charged pins in those points. According to his explanation, this increased the flow of qi through meridians located just under the metal shell of the chassis. The driving of the thin but amazingly strong pins through the metal shell caused little damage to the chassis. While it will take 6 months of treatments, 3 times a week, I saw tremendous improvement from the first few visits. What can I say? I was a skeptic. I am a believer now.

I must add though, on a skeptical note, that, disappointingly, acupuncture used on the tires did not increase their life or tread appreciably and may be counter-indicated. I had to replace them very shortly after this procedure.

2) Auto-reflexology - Did you know that the key to car operation is held right on the doors? No, I do not mean the little sticker that tells you all of the things that your allomechanic and auto parts dealer use to keep soaking you for cash, but I am talking about the fact that the operation of the entire vehicle is represented by areas of space on the door which correspond to each system and part of the car, the engine, the brakes, the steering system, the fuel injection system, even the gas cap. They even showed me how to make my headlights last longer by applying appropriate pressure to points on the door which represent the lights. Engineers still do not understand the intricate connections that are manipulated by this incredible ancient art. However, the auto wellness consultant at the center showed me literature in Chinese that indicates that this method was used successfully on rickshaws and pushcarts for thousands of years. It is far past time that western mechanics were introduced to these methods and properly trained by eastern masters. If it has been used for thousands of years, it must work.

3) Homeo-mechanics - We all know that the cooling system is very important in the car. However, your allomechanic will put dangerous and highly toxic chemicals in your radiator to keep it cool. Try putting some coolant directly into your gas tank and see what happens. DON'T DO IT! It will DESTROY the car. It is poison! The homeo-mechanic consultant at the center explained principals that my allo-mechanic never wanted me to know, so he could keep bilking me. He explained that a scientist a couple of centuries ago discovered that if you want to fix a problem, you must find something that causes that problem. For instance, in the case of the cooling system, he recommended chlorine, which anyone can see will burn skin on contact. So it must be hot, and only something hot can fix something from being too hot. Then, and this is key, he diluted the chlorine many times, taking 1 part tincture to 100 parts water each time, creating a 30 CK solution. He then filled my radiator with this mixture and my engine has been running at the proper temperature all summer. For winter, he will use the same procedure beginning with dry ice, since only something cold can keep cold from doing damage.

He explained that while scientists would say that they can prove that a 30C solution has no chlorine in it, obviously, the chlorine affected the water at a molecular level. Otherwise, how can you explain the proper operation of the radiator. I cannot wait until the winter comes and I will have saved a bundle of money and the danger of putting poisonous chemicals in my car.

That's all we have time for this week. Next week, I plan to take the car back to the center where the naturo-mechanic will look over it carefully and try to diagnose problems that may have gone completely undetected by my western trained mechanic.

Do Jews believe in Jesus?

2010-12-26T07:56:00.003-05:00

Publicly, I do not shy away from asserting that, according to the facts before us, and according to the traditional narratives before us, it is highly unlikely that Jesus, the main character of the New Testament, actually existed as a single historical character. In all likelihood, the stories about Jesus, rose up as did Ba'al Shem Tov stories (l'havdeil ad elef havdalos, ptui ptui, there are you satisfied?), as moderate stories about someone which were pumped up into amazing stories and put under one human umbrella. Oddly enough, Chabadniks are the most offended and insistent that Jesus did, in fact exist. The Gemorra, Medrash and Rambam assert that he existed and who am I to say otherwise? This is used as further proof of my spiritual descent into the abyss, that I do not believe in Jesus. It gets weirder. There is another "traditional" source, albeit very recent, called Sefer HaVikuchim which compiles even more stories about Jesus, based on later disputations. These sages, over the centuries, assumed that Jesus existed, and since they must magically know everything that ever happened from ruach hakodesh, it must be the irrefutable truth.

1) Did the Rambam assert that Jesus exists?

The one comment in Rambam that is quoted is the censored comment in Law of Kings and their Wars 11:10, preserved in the Karpach version (which was preserved in the Arab world, saving it from Christian censors). אף ישוע הנוצרי שדימה שיהיה משיח, ונהרג בבית דין--כבר נתנבא בו דנייאל, שנאמר "ובני פריצי עמך, יינשאו להעמיד חזון--ונכשלו" (דנייאל יא,יד). וכי יש מכשול גדול מזה: שכל הנביאים דיברו שהמשיח גואל ישראל ומושיעם, ומקבץ נדחיהם ומחזק מצוותן; וזה גרם לאבד ישראל בחרב, ולפזר שאריתם ולהשפילם, ולהחליף התורה, ולהטעות רוב העולם לעבוד אלוה מבלעדי ה'.
The first words are, "Even Jesus the Notzri , who seemed that he would be the Messiah, and was killed by a (presumably Jewish) court, was already prophesied by Daniel 11:14, as it says "offshoots of your people will rise up to support a vision, and they will stumble ..."

I am not compelled that the Rambam is saying that Jesus existed. In my humble opinion (as if!), he is saying that the character Jesus (real or invented) was held out to be the Messiah and, according to the story, was killed in a Jewish court, thus disproving their contentions. And Daniel prophesied that offshoots of the Jewish nation (i.e. Christians) would try to support him, but that they would stumble. I think he can still escape with his honor of Jesus did not exist. He is just trying to use common tradition of Jesus to prove that the Messiah does not need to do miracles, and that they are not impressive to certify a candidate.

According to the NT, Jesus was convicted in a Jewish court to death (what for is not clear), and turned over to the Romans for execution, which they did reluctantly on the insistence of the Jews. The Rambam says he was "killed by a Beit Din". According to some Jewish apocryphal sorces, Jesus was actually killed by the Beit Din. Rambam may have relied on these sources or may have been speaking imprecisely about the NT version. (Might he have read the NT? Oh my!) Either way, he feels the case that he was convicted by a Beit Din makes a much stronger statement against his Messianic claims, so he has a good reason to say it. Bottom line - no evidence that Rambam insists that Jesus actually exists.

2) Gemorra sources

I would look for the Gemorra to mention a historical character, between 10 BCE and 50 CE to have done something of lasting historical value, positive or negative, as an official "claim" that Jesus existed.

The Gemorra in Gittin 58 (learned on Tisha B'Av) mentions that three people were punished in heaven, Titus, Bilaam, and "sinners of Israel". Some hold that "sinners of Israel" was inserted by censors in place of You-kno'-'oo. However it is clear from the text that the Gemorra is giving a fanciful allegory about deserved punishment, not a historical narrative. It does not say what they or "he" did to deserve being boiled eternally in excrement.

The Gemorrah in Sanhedrin, perek haChelek (108 toward the bottom if I recall) relates a story of Yeshu HaNotzri (transliterated as Jesus) accompanying Rabbi Yehoshua ben Parachya to an inn. In the story, RYbP complements the inn, and Jesus thinks he means the innkeeper's wife, due to the similarity of the words. RYbP excommunicates him for occupying himself in such thoughts, both a false suspicion and revealing what is going on in the student's own thoughts, a huge Pharisee no-no. After shunning Jesus harshly several times, RYbP decides to forgive him, but Jesus approaches during prayer, and he mistakes RYbP's ignoring him for a final negative answer. Then, he goes to a public place in the Temple and worships an idol, as a sign that he will never be forgiven. RYbP exhorts him to repent, but he points out that RYbP himself has taught that there is no forgiveness. From this the Gemorra learns that one should not push away a student harshly.

Bottom line - This story would have taken place at least a century and a half too early to be the NT character. Even so, the Gemorra blames RYbP for the incident. I have often wondered if this Gemorra is not the source for the name, later attached to the legend. Rashi explains that Yeshu stands for "Yamach Shmo v'Zichro", may his name and mention be erased. Clearly the name is significant. HaNotzri means "the guardian" of the Torah. So, even though he was Tamudic scholar, and a Notri, he was nonetheless Yeshu, as his ego won out over his humility.

However, it cannot be a real 30 year old living in 30 CE or anything close if he was a student of RYbP. The fact that the Gemora does not blame him implies to me that it not equate with the NT character either.

There is one other famous mention in Sanhedrin (in the 40s, I think) which mentions that Yeshu HaNotzri had 5 students condemned in Beit Din. The names are not recognizable, except perhaps, Todah (Thadeus?). Each defendant quotes a verse with their name or something close implying that they should be saved, and the court quotes a verse with the name of each implying that they deserve death.

Bottom line - Whatever the underlying encoded message, it is clear that the Beit Din did not decide capital cases in this way. We do not hear of their real crimes. This story is cannot be literal. It is apocryphal.

3) Medrash - There are no contemporary medrashim that mention Jesus, that I am aware of. There are later ones, even a pamphlet called "Toldot Yeshu HaNotzri", likely dating to the late Middle Ages.

There is an interesting Notrikin in the Chumash, on the pasuk in parshat Va'Yechi (Gen 49:10).

לא-יסור שבט מיהודה, ומחקק מבין רגליו, עד כי-יבא שילה, ולו יקהת עמים

The roshei taivot spell out "lo yesh mum ra' k'yeshu", there is no evil blemish like Jesus.
Even if this is an authentic hint in a prescient Chumash, it can easily refer to the legendary Jesus rather than a particular man. Cool though, no?

4) History

Plenty of ink has spilled on the fact that there are no contemporary historical references to Jesus in Roman or Jewish sources. Josephus, especially, seems to have missed this very important revolution. In fact, there is one paragraph in Josephus that mentions matter of factly, that there was this guy Jesus and that the Jews condemned him and the R0mans killed him and that he was the Messiah. Then he continues the narrative of the story that he was telling in the previous paragraph. So other than this one paragraph, off the cuff, allusion to the greatest event in Jewish history, that every Jew has been awaiting since time immemorial, there seems to be nothing.

Bottom line - Even the Vatican no longer supports the authenticity of the Josephus reference.

So in summary, we really have no compelling case that Jesus was a historical figure. The concept that his name was Yeshua (Joshua) because he "saved the people from their sins" (Hebrew root yud, shin, ayin) does not mesh with the common transliteration IESVS, IE (yud), S (shin), V(vav), S (ending silent S in Roman). The name of Joshua the earlier biblical character is transliterated IESUAS, with the A standing for the voweled Ayin. In Toldot Yeshu, there is a reference to a student of the Rabbis that follows the Christians in order to remove the Jews from the movement. In the NT, Paul hears new prophecies from Jesus and encourages the movement away from Jewish practice, while insisting that Jews maintain the practice. Could he have used the earlier known tradition of Yeshu HaNotzri the idolator to create a code to drive the Jews apart from the non-Jews in the movement. The Jews might have recognized the reference and left the movement whereas the non-Jews would not. The movement then solidified all of its traditional characters under the name that Paul gave them. A grain of truth? Someone more ambitious than I can get a doctoral thesis out of that. But, at any rate, it must be clear that there is no evidence here to compel one to claim that Jewish sources insist that Jesus was a real person corresponding with the character of that name in the New Testament.

A bite outa crime

2010-08-13T12:31:00.001-04:00

Two thoughts today

In daf yomi, we recently passed a sugya in Shavuot that discusses the family obligation to stop a criminal.

It translates:

There is no family that has a tax collector where all are not tax collectors (in there times, a tax collector was presumed to be corrupt and violently disposed). there is no family that has a bandit (word is listis, which implies an armed gangster), where all are not bandits. The gemora asks why we have the uncustomarily harsh tone with people who might not have been involved in crime and it answers "ki m'chapin alav", because they protect him. The gemara then states that the family gets a level punishment for this reason.

The other thought is kanya d'Rava, the cane of Rava.

When discussing false oaths, the gemorra brings a pasuk that forbids "kanya d'Rava". It happened in the court of Rava that a defendant was ordered to swear an oath that he had already repaid a loan to the plaintiff. Duly he gave the plaintiff his walking stick to hold while he went to swear, which he did. In anger at seeing the defendant in such a bald faced lie, the plaintiff through the stick to the ground. It cracked in half and coins spilled out, totaling the amount owed. Technically, the defendant could argue that he was telling the truth, so the pasuk comes to include this type of oath as a false oath.

I understand that the Crown Heights Rabbanim, who universally support Chabad criminals, even if they agree that they are guilty, did not learn this gemorra. It may not have been brought down this way in the Rambam. However, the Rabbanim from Monsey, Boro Park, and everywhere else, "mai ika l'maimar?"

The kanya de'Rava also applies to apologetics. How many times to we build a mountain of goo out of words that had a clear meaning, so that we can say that, literally speaking, the words are not false.

Ron Wyatt's mythology

2010-05-23T01:22:00.002-04:00

Ron Wyatt has been making the rounds on email rumor mills again. You may remember the late nurse turned archaeologist who found, among other things, Noah's ark, Jesus' blood, the Ark of the Covenant, chariots and human remains from the Egyptian army of the exodus, Mount Sinai, the crucifixion location, Sodom and Gemorrah, and others. You would think, with such world changing accomplishments, that the scientific world would be full of his papers, and that museums would be full of his discoveries. In fact, there is not a single one, anywhere. It seems that the scientific world is in shut mouth conspiracy, so that they do not have to admit the truth of Christianity, and they have rejected his irrefutable findings.

In fact, what early peer review is available does not seem to be impressed at all. Can you believe that they do not think that the common rocks and earthen mounds near Ararat that Wyatt displayed do not amount to proof of the Global Flood story in the Bible? Are they just in denial, or is it more sinister? And why won't anyone display even one artifact from the W.A.R. collection? It must be a conspiracy. We know how well that worked with the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Scenes from the parade

2010-05-03T11:10:00.008-04:00

Many people sported "I am proud to be a Jew" T's. Hey lady, me too. She appears to be a non-Jewish neighbor of the community. Apparently, a little respect goes along way.

The rides were all similar but they covered a full city block.

Many of the schools had their own particular mitzvah theme.

Those lines were long, and got even longer in 85 degree 90% humidity conditions.

Wait! It's only a few crazies, right?

Another proud yid'l.

A sample of the great parade T. That will be a collector's item for sure, but who decided on lime green for a background?

A bachur doing what a bachur should be doing, mitvzoyim, as it should be done.

A bachur getting involved in a legal and political imbroglio that he does not understand. He is soliciting funds and giving out solidarity bracelets. No one was trying to take away his mike and the music stopped when he spoke. Why isn't he soliciting letters in a sefer Torah?

The Messiah (pictured here?) promises, no Jew will be left behind in exile. This was part of a float.

A wider view of the back of the float leaving no questions unanswered. "Long live the anointed (Messiah) king."

Behold, the Messiah has arrived. 'Nuf sed?'

Live from the Great Parade

2010-05-02T22:05:00.002-04:00

Whenever Lag B'Omer falls on Sunday, Chabad leaders would organize a parade through Crown Heights. This year's "Great parade" was no exception. The weather was excellent, and NYC security was out in full force, given the events in Time Square the previous night. This year, tickets and passes to march in the parade were sold as lime green T-shirts and wrist bands. The logistical sizing of shirts was compensated with sheer quantity. There was plenty of everything. Seats were placed and reserved in theory, and a huge screen was put up for the benefit of those who were not close to the stage. A poster of the Rebbe waving, the full size of the side of 770 was unfurled right in the place where the Rebbe would stand during the parade. Men were instructed to enter at Kingston and women at Brooklyn.

Our seats were close to the stage, but I never got there. Police closed Kingston Ave. and instructed men to go to Brooklyn. Men and women seating was so mixed that if I had been a firebrand, hellfire and brimstone gadol, I would have banned it and excommunicated everyone involved. Women were crowding full stream at the Kingston entrance after police gave up to block the street and just blocked the entrance. Exit only on Kingston. I chose to enter by going around to Albany. However, unbeknownst to me the entire Kingston avenue was blocked with barracades and goons. there was no way to get to my seat, except to walk about 1.25 miles to the Brooklyn entrance. The rebeltzin went there to begin with and got the spot close to the stage, and I was stuck looking at the stage from afar but with a good view of the screen. Once the concert was over, men and women crowded each other to get near enough the street to wave to little darling as he / she walked by. There was very little of the violent pushing and crushing that I remember CH for, but on the charedi scale, it even made little ol' moderate me uncomfortable. At that point, anyone could (and did) jump over the barrier and join the parade. So my kids got to be with their group after all and all was well. Even I marched in the parade (somewhat unintentionally). The floats, clowns and acrobats were worth seeing. As a bachur, I recall staying up all night to build the float and putting a lot of sweat into them. These bachurim did just as well, and they really made it festive and exciting.

I'll add at this point that the tickets were $5 (I'd be surprised if that covered the T-shirts), Uncle Moishi was $10 and everything was reasonably priced. Even so, you could have stood right next to the barrier without paying and gotten the same experience. IOW, it was the old school Chabad, event oriented rather than money oriented, geared to be inclusive, one of the reasons I joined Chabad back then. The performers were in great form, Lipa, together with Avraham Fried, together with MBD. When they medlied at the end, they even invited Uncle Moishi along.

Traditionally, they invite children up to say the twelve pasukim. In later years, many add yechi x 3 to end. In this case, the MC was fiery "anti" Shimon Hecht, and the twelve pasukim had always been his father's gig, right up to his death in 1990. Most schools are moshichist while most city shluchim are "anti". Thus, the kid was ready to say yechi x 3, which he did. Hecht tried to start the music up to drown him out and turned off the mike. Moshichist leaders then jumped in allowing the kid to get off a punctuated yechi x 3. It seemed rather silly in retrospect as yellow flags were handed out everywhere, Moshichist signs were posted throughout the neighborhood and the kids in the audience were dancing to moshichist songs throughout the event. Let no one make a mistake, Moshichism is encouraged majority policy in Chabad. Shimon Hecht aside, there was little if any resistance.

Twice from the bimah, they called for support for Sholom Mordechai (ben Rivka) Rubashkin, and at the later fair, a table was set up by Justice for SMR, a group dedicated to getting a lighter sentence by distorting the facts of the case to the community, and generating a public outcry. As dubious as this tactic is, the sentiment that Rubashkin is a hero and that he does not deserve to be prosecuted is unanimous in Crown Heights, and official policy encourages support of Rubashkin and shuns any talk of his crimes.

The fair was a bunch of rides set up along E. New York Ave. Most of the rides were the same, spinning tub rides or inflated moonwalks and obstacle courses, and some through the ball through the hole games. The lines were long and arduous, and the humidity was a factor by later in the afternoon, so this I could have lived without. The kids had fun. There were some very good signs and tables at the fair, to get letters in a sefer Torah, in support of Jewish education, in support of tzdakah, proud to be a Jew and the like. There was the Justice for SMR table, loudly proclaiming its existence every few minutes, with soliciting donations, solidarity bracelets and petitions. There was little pushing, cutting the lines, or angry confrontations that you might see in an event of this size. People were considerate and orderly.

I have some pictures that I will add later to make the scene live.

Irrelevant customs

2010-03-07T20:44:00.003-05:00

In the previous post, I mentioned irrelevant customs followed widely in chareidi and Chasidic world. Usually, these are defended as having “spiritual” relevance. I cannot speak to that, but many are just customs that made sense at one time, but do not make sense today. There is a deep aversion in the Jewish world to say that anything is outdated, because then critics will expand the charge to all of Judaism. However, those charges are generally expanded on speculation. For instance, critics claim that pork was forbidden because of the danger of trichinosis. There is no evidence and perhaps counter evidence that this was behind the prohibition. After all, other animals are forbidden in the same verses and very general rules are given to identify kosher animals, none of which has consistent connection to trichinosis or any other disease.

However, there were later customs that had clear reasons associated and those reasons no longer apply. Are they the only reasons for these customs? I do not know. They are the only stated reasons, and they were not forbidden in the Torah before the rabbis forbid them, so I have no information to say otherwise. I like to go by transparent sources, meaning those which were available to every community, rather than some source from a particular rabbi in some corner of the world. There was a school that began kabalah in Tzfat, which was responsible for the spiritualization of some very practical measures as well as plain old syncratism. Many of these customs irk me, and modern rabbis, “poskim” and even “gedolim” are too weak and pusillanimous to examine them, by their own admission.

1) Kaparos using live animals – All evidence shows that this primitive custom began in the Ashkenazic world as a non-Jewish practice of magic. It was forcefully rejected as such in the rational Sephardic world of rishonim in strong terms, and revived without transparent source by endorsement of the kabbalist Sephardic group in the Middle Ages, so it has spiritual street cred, even though most lay scholars are familiar with its sordid history. The strictest practitioners today use a separate chicken for each family member, hens for girls and roosters for boys. In the ultimate fence around the magic, pregnant woman use a hen plus another of each sex, for the baby, even if the baby’s sex is known by modern means. Sympathetic magic meets rabbinic OCD, anyone?
2) Avoiding Kiddush between 6 and 7 – This is not even internally consistent, nor consistent with the sources, as I discussed before. Its ultimate source is non-Jewish astrological religious superstition, and even quoted as such. It is so nonsensical, in fact, that there are no rational explanations for the custom or even how it is supposed to be practiced. In Chabad today, the custom is practiced prolifically, based on each individuals understanding of the strange internal inconsistencies, even though it has no clear basis in Chabad custom. It is only mentioned in the SA-SZL as a custom that some people had.
3) Chalav Yisroel – In more agricultural times, it was profitable to mix unsalable milk from a non-kosher animals with milk from kosher animals to increase the volume without increasing expense. These products had to be made quickly into cheese or butter, as there was no preservative methods that would maintain liquid milk to market. According to the sages, the non-kosher milk would not congeal and easily separated from the cheese at that point. Therefore, they forbid Jews to drink any milk they might be able to obtain, unless a trusted Jew had supervised the process to make sure it wasn’t bulked with non-kosher milk. Non-Jewish cheese or butter was OK, because any rennet used was nullified in amount and taste, and non-kosher milk would not congeal. In the time that this custom was invented, there was no great inconvenience, because people did not buy and sell milk at market, and only traded it in small private transactions, if at all. Milk became a staple in the US with prevailing methods to make milk safe and preservable. Thus, in the last 100 years or so, it became an issue. One of the primary rabbis of the 20th century, Rabbi Moshe Feinshtein, allowed people to use milk for their children as it became a widespread complaint, based on the fact that it is no longer profitable to bulk milk with non-kosher milk, given other better methods of bulking and the fact that such practice was regulated by the government and a violator would risk fines, making it further unprofitable for a commercial dairy to do.

Today, people keep chalav yisroel out of adherence to these old taboos of a yesteryear economy, even cheese and butter, which the sages permitted. (The Sifsei Kohen also brings an objection that milk from treif cows might be mixed in and that might forbid all cheese and butter as well. However, AFAIK, mashgichim are not examining each cow today.) In communities outside of big cities, milk products are difficult to obtain and far more expensive than their counterparts. There are many more products that use dairy today, and thus it is far more inconvenient than the rabbis ever dreamed of when they instituted this rule. Today, all candy and baked goods, all products with cheese or cheese flavoring, and many other products that people would use daily are disqualified. Worse yet, kashrus issues stemming from exposure to non-chalav yisroel, like using dairy equipment, even if the food itself is not dairy, is also disqualified. Defenses for the custom range from defenses that it is still applicable somehow, and that RMF only allowed it narrowly etc. to full spiritualization. It needs to be revised for the modern world, if not dropped altogether, especially in the US.

4) Pas yisroel and bishul yisroel – The laws that bread must be baked by a Jew or that staple foods must be cooked by a Jew were instituted to prevent fraternization with local non-Jews, and possible intermarriage. People made baked goods from their homes, as they did not preserve well to market, and the law was aimed at sharing with the neighbor. By the times and places where there were commercial bakeries in city centers, places that had them allowed people to patronize them, with stipulations, since a professional baker was selling a product, rather than fraternizing. IOW, they recognized the increased inconvenience of the custom and the fact that its reasoning did not apply to them and they allowed it. (This would counter the spiritualization and “other reasons” claims.) Bread is always considered a staple. Cooked items, though, can be differentiated based on their importance. Obviously, if the goal was preventing intermarriage, the foods affected would be those that were impressive to a guest.

Today, almost all baked goods trade is done from commercial bakeries. However, all manner of products are available for sale, as well. What was viewed as a mechanism to keep separation in a shtetl now forbids people from using any local bakery or buying staple products off the shelf. Pas Yisroel, when available, is far higher cost for the same products. Many processed goods are cooked and marketed now, something that did not happen with great regularity on the old days. In response, in the Ashkenazic world many centuries ago, some modifications were made, such that even a small addition, the lighting of the fire by a Jew or the stirring of the pot, was enough to permit the food, since it thwarted the reason for the prohibition (an unsupervised kitchen), with minimal inconvenience for commercial enterprises. In the realm of cooked foods, there are those who forbid potato chips and Cheerios without the bishul hechsher. These are clearly out of the original intention of the law, as it uses the term “presented on the table of the king”, to describe how important it needs to be to fall under restriction.

5) Drawing water for Mayim Shlanu at shkiah – The water that is used for shmurah matzah must be as cold as possible to allow the greatest protection from becoming chametz. According to the Gemorrah and later halacha sources, this time is sunset. The reason is that all day the sun is above us and warming the earth and then at night it goes under the earth and warms the water from beneath the earth. The proof for this is that one can see steam rising from the water in the morning, showing that the sun made the water very hot all night from beneath. Therefore, the best time to draw water when it is perfectly cold is sunset. Nuf said.

6) Black hats and coats – Chabadniks and others today require a black fedora and a suit jacket with a special ceremonial belt to pray. This is because one should dress for prayer as if you were going before the king. This is, in fact, formal dress … if you are a European living in 1930 or one of the Blues Brothers.

7) Rabainu Tam tefilin - Rashi, Rabainu Tam, Ra'avad and other rishonim had different ideas about the arrangement of the parhios in the hand and head tefilin. The SA specifies the way of rashi, but there were various spiritualist rabanim in later times who wore several pairs, some at the same time. In Chabad, this has evolved into everyone wearing Rashi with a blessing and Rabainu Tam without.

Pesach requires its own post.

How can this guy walk?

2010-03-04T22:45:00.003-05:00

The Rebeljew brass pair award goes to Mosab Hassan Yousef.

If we could produce 3 of this guy, Hamas would give up and disband. He will probably reproduce children made of solid steel.

Making Peace

2010-03-01T17:03:00.003-05:00

Continuing on the theme of the earlier post, I would have to say that making peace with your place in Judaism, or any philosophy is the key to making it work as a positive in your life. As I sat at a Purim Seudah, I truly enjoyed what was going on. Previous years, I had approached many things with a trepidation. I know I am going to have to endure bromides for hours. At best, it would not be as bad as I expected. However, I have finally exorcised the demons of needing live according to what is meaningful to others.

Peace began for me as I sat once listening to a rambling speaker discuss Judaism's opinion on some social issue, when one of the audience asked a halacha question on something philosophical he had said. His response was that "you would have to ask a rav" if one were allowed to believe that. Then, it finally struck me clearly. Why should I have to ask someone what I believe or don't believe or "am allowed" to believe. I did this to myself. Once I came to that conclusion, that I would not delegate my right to decide what I believe and what I do not believe, everything fell into place.

Someone asked me how I was able to believe in Torah mi-Sinai, given my abhorrent idea of taking responsibility and ownership of my own belief system. A fair question with a simple answer. I believe in TMS for the same reason that I do anything else Jewish, because I am convinced that it is essential to Judaism. I have no real overriding reason to believe it from scientific disciplines, history or even parallel mythology. So do I believe it like our zeides did, because I am required to? Doesn't this violate my principle? Here is the difference. I must admit to myself that I am taking on this belief to make my connection with Judaism work. But I am the one who makes that choice. That is how all of our beliefs develop. In the face of inconclusive knowledge or even mounting counter evidence, we make a choice of what we believe and amble cautiously down that path. The truth is that I don't "know" that it happened or swear that it happened in any intellectual way, nor does anyone else have any better answer. None of us were there (bromides aside), at least in the sense that we remember anything that happened from direct experience. I accept that believing it makes everything else in the Torah's story work, and so I table the question with the legal presumption that it is true.

For example, I have never put much stock in "kavana", perhaps because it is contrived by its nature. Davening with clenched fist, bouncing up and down vigorously at the waist with face turning purple from stress is not my idea of getting closer to G-d. If that floats someone's boat then more power to him but it does nothing for me. I daven out of obligation, because I have chosen to do so. I do not feel G-d's presence when I do so, I do not have any indication that anyone is listening up there, I do not feel that I am "drowning" and struggling for life (as the first Chabad Rebbe put it), and I do not even fully understand all of the words or why we say them. I suspect that most others have a similar experience. So, I say the words written in front of me. I am at peace with these words, or any part of them that I choose to say or think about. And there is no reason to babble stuff that is entirely incoherent to you, unless you are doing for the public benefit. It is doing nothing for you. For me, the words say that I can't do it alone, and that I need to admit that I need help with many basic things. I am sure that G-d likes to be praised and by me no less, insecure creature that He must be and as concerned as he must be about my opinion of Him, but I do not spend a lot of time or mental energy in these portions. Rather, these praises can only be of value in convincing me of the nature of the One from whom I need help. Seriously, paragraphs in the siddur have nothing to do with my opinion or feeling about G-d or anything else. I did not write them. I did not vote on them. I do not even fully understand them. How much "kavana" is G-d expecting? Nor will I ask a rav how to have "kavana". The term means "intention". I would be asking someone else what my intention is in saying particular words. What is wrong with that picture? And what SHOULD my intention be? That is even less for someone else to answer. But for each person, answering it is the key to making peace with davening.

There is a famous chabad story where a shliach is instructed by the rebbe to encourage a particular ba'al habos to grow a beard. After several discouraging attempts, the shliach said something that inadvertently revealed to the baal habos that the rebbe had given the instruction. So, dutifully, the ba'al habos grew a beard. When the rebbe saw the man with the beard, he told the shliach, "I wanted HIM to grow a beard. This is MY beard." (Presumably, the rebbe knew all that had transpired through his super rebbe powers. Or maybe the shliach told him, it is not clear.) The teaching is sound. We need to make every aspect our own, or it is valueless. Doing things because we are told they are meaningful, is not the same as doing meaningful things. And let's face it, nowadays more than ever, if aspects of religion aren't meaningful to us, why spend any real mental energy on them? As the Gemorrah agaddah relates, "In what was you father most careful?" IOW, not everything carries the same meaning and importance to every person, and that is not only acceptable, that is the way it is supposed to be.

Why I am no longer Chabad

2010-02-24T11:49:00.002-05:00

Many people have asked me why I ceased to identify with Chabad. Another great many simply grunt their disapproval or make annoying insinuations, which are presumptive defense mechanisms for themselves. Others motivations and opinions of me rarely motivate me to care enough to explain myself, but in this case, I find that other people around me take some of the flack. In deference to their feelings, I will give a few words on the subject. The following is a list of reasons which I have heard offered which are absolutely not among my reasons:

1) The misnagdim or skeptics got to me. There are those who seriously think that I am so devoid of the ability to discern and research rhetoric that I am under the influence of the easily refuted talking points of a group of baddies somewhere. Why else would I reject the undeniable truth of Chabadist Judaism? Only Chabad rhetoric would ever be considered by sane and intelligent person when developing a life direction.

2) I had a fight with … There are those who honestly put the cart before the horse. Clearly, my personality is so one dimensional and insecure that if you oppose me or anger me in something, I will throw away years of self identification and training and join the enemy just to spite you. This would even be stronger if had, in fact, joined the enemy, but let’s not confuse a good defense mechanism with the facts.

3) I am dealing with my personal pain. Perhaps this one more or less actually describes why I ever joined Chabad, or even more broadly, why anyone ever goes on any sort of spiritual quest. However, it would be a poor reason to uproot any roots that I had in Chabad and try to accommodate my Chabad family while still living outside its fold. That would increase pain, rather than decrease it.

4) I am too full of myself. Guilty as charged, but not a reason to leave Chabad. I will be with myself wherever I go.

5) I am too centered on ethical matters. When I heard this one, I really did not know where to go with it. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOKayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, moving right along.

6) I expect too much, and I am seeking an impossible standard of perfection. Well, the truth is that I’d settle for a product as advertised, but as the charge presumes, I would not leave Chabad to seek the impossible. This would be stronger if I had gone from one thing to another, min hakatzeh el hakatzeh, as I became dissatisfied with each philosophy in turn.

So, the plainest rationale is that I grew up and outgrew the Chabad way. I began to realize that its philosophy was not healthy for me in many ways, and that following it frequently drove me to a place that was weaker physically, spiritually and philosophically. In other words, it was not making me stronger, even in the ways that it is supposed to. This does not mean that it is a bad philosophy or that it benefits no one. It clearly works for some people and I wish them well. In fact, many of my closest friends and those of my family are Chabad people, who understand that my feelings are personal and do not amount to an indictment against Chabad, in total. So, the following reasons are why chabad is not a good fit for me.

1) Rebbe iber alles. I could no longer be satisfied by striving to be more like the Rebbe or more what the Rebbe wanted me to be. Many Chasidic stories center on a simple person who rejects his own sense and instead blindly follows the advice of the Rebbe. Of course, in the story, it always works out for him. In real life, not so much. This has blossomed today into ideas like communicating with the Rebbe via random selections in a book of letters, divining at the Rebbe’s grave, or simply chanting slogans and expecting revelations. For a chasid, he must be nothing less than an infallible pope of a superhuman being. There is a line between heartfelt reverence and single minded veneration and enshrining. The Rebbe was a prescient, visionary leader in most respects, and he was wrong far fewer times than the vast majority would have been in his position, and sadly, he has passed on. Chabad needs to move on. I definitely needed to.

2) Being an individual is bad. In Chabad, you wear a uniform and you think uniformly. Anything less is “shvach”. Army terms and parables saturate Chabadism. Bitul and following are the highest virtues. Arguing and thinking differently are the signs of arrogance. The Judaism that I grew up with and respected valued critical thinking and rational argument. In Chabad, rationality is often referred to as a negative. I do not do well in that type of uniform environment.

3) Mythology is good. And believing Chabad myths is virtuous. Questioning them shows lack of faith and especially, faith in the saints, the highest virtue. For every situation, there is a story which is supposed to trump your better judgment or common sense. Every Rebbe story that features a miracle is supposed to convince me further that only the Chabad Rebbes can run the world. (And yes, they use that language frequently.) Being that I do not think that celebritocracy is the best way to govern, I never fully got into this.
A note on this one: I went to a Purim display recently, and I saw a representation of Mordechai, dressed in a shtreimel and capota. That rather says it all.

4) Crime pays. Any Chabad criminal is justified, from the top down. I have no respect for the Chabad criminals that have plaques in their honor in buildings named after them, or who collect millions from work a day people for their defense funds. As such, I cannot participate in this, and must speak out against it, as halacha demands. As Chabad establishment fully supports and aggrandizes these people, that makes me “the enemy”.

5) Yechi-ism Chabad politics interest me as much as Capulet – Montague politics interested Mercutio. It is mildly entertaining until one of them stabs you. Which leads to another point. Who cares? It is 15 years later. Why are the slogans or succession still an issue? I have no skin in this game. Each side is as bombastic and self serving as the other.

6) Nepotism and corruption. These are rampant in Chabad as anywhere. I have no family roots or support system in Chabad nor enough money to make a difference.

7) No shared interest. I do not care about Rebbe’s getting out of prison, nor their birthdays and yahrtzeits. Nor do I care for some of the irrelevant halachas and customs, like 7 o’clock kiddush, kaparos complete with 3 chickens for a pregnant woman, just in case, drawing mayim shelanu at dusk, RT Tefilin, chalav yisroel, pas and bishul yisroel, even on things that have nothing to do with the original law, gebrochts, other Pesach irrelevant stringencies, etc. I am more interested in the traditional Jewish observances.

8) Judaism salesman. Every non-chabad encounter is an opportunity to share chasidus. Every non-observant simcha is an opportunity spread the Gospel and put tefilin on people. How is mivtzas sheva mitzvos different than missionary work again? I would rather converse about ideas than convince someone of something.

9) Magic everywhere The practice of non-Jewish magic is sanctioned and prolific, though thankfully not universal. Obviously, not my bag.

10) Fighting the fight. Being in Chabad, you are expected to adopt the enemies of Chabad as your enemies. Similarly, there are people who will hate you for identifying with Chabad. I don’t care enough to endure strange abuse for an honor that I dream not of, nor do I wish to empathize with derision and scorn of others. I do not hold a group or individuals in contempt if they dislike Chabad or have theological problems with Chabad, unless they are contemptuous in their manner.

So there you have the top ten reasons, and there are more as well. Of course, this does not mean that I have anything against Chabad. I appreciate the special character of Chabad, the unique customs, the level of kindness in many members, the fervor they can generate toward good things and the positive thrust of their type of outreach, contrasted with the negative thrust so often used in the past. I like and respect the Rebbe and many of his goals and vision. I only want to explain why it was not good for me. While I cannot wear their uniform or carry their flag, I will never pasul Chabad wine or refuse a Chabad minyan or any of these types of theatrics. I wish them great success, and I hope to share part of their programs, and naturally, I hope that the practitioners of Chabad gain something that fulfills their heart’s desire and lasts a lifetime. Please enjoy with my compliments.

Kuzari must die

2010-01-14T21:23:00.005-05:00

The Kuzari proof often makes the rounds as a proof for TMS, and I realize that I never wrote about it here, so here goes. I think that the word proof should be reserved for things that actually prove something. Let's look at the premises and conclusion and figure out what we must assume for it to be true.

Summary:
The torah claims that millions stood by Mount Sinai and saw the giving of Torah. Had someone not seen it, surely they would have objected and said that they had never seen it. Clearly, if this story were made up, millions would have had to conspire to say that it was not real. Hence, we have no choice but to declare the event genuine based on millions of eyewitnesses and their inability to conspire. QED.

What could break such a proof?:

Well, let's just say that the story did not begin at Mount Sinai. Let's say that people passed around stories over a few centuries that became syncratized, conflated, exaggerated. Not that such a thing could possibly happen, but let's just suppose. Then, let's say there was some emotional attachment to one version of the story or another on the part of various tribes, but that there was a king who would like to lead all of them in unity and peace. What is he to do, with all of these people fighting over the very different stories that they heard relating to their distant ancestors, perhaps 10 generations or more back? (Note: I could not name a single 5th generation ancestor of mine, much less what they really stood for or lived for.) So, a Yiddishe kopf, he has an idea. Let's get all of the heads of the groups together and write a single story that satisfies them enough so that they are not willing to fight over the differences. Then, if we can get 80% to agree that life will be better under the kingdom than as separate warring tribes, we can drive out the 20% trouble makers and everybody is happy. So, Dave, as his friends know him, becomes royalty and strengthens his rule with unified customs and editions to the holy book until it actually prophesies his G-d's will for his eternal kingdom. Get rid of the 20% heretics and shoin, a Torah.

So what would we need to exclude the bubbah maisah that I concocted above.

1. The torah must have been contemporary with the events that it depicts. If it were written later, then "how did they lie?" would be replaced with "how did they know?" My zaide who told me the story is in the same position that I am, relying on what he heard before. He is no closer to the events than I am. What if the first guy in line was no closer than I was. So without clear evidence that the Torah was written and witnessed by contemporaries of its characters, my story is just as probable as its story.

2. The story must not have changed substantially. OK, let's say zaide saw it and agreed that it happened. What was "it" that he saw? If he did not see what the Torah says that he saw, then again, I have no proof, no need of a conspiracy to propagate the story.

3. Third party corroboration would really help. The Torah describes world changing events, the destruction of government of Egypt, the splitting of the sea, the escape of 2.5 million slaves from a total population of 3 million (including the slaves), a violent revolutionary invasion of Cana'an, powerful kings and kingdoms wrecked, and the establishment of a new order in the world, one that the Egyptians did not recover. We may not be able to corroborate all of these, but we should be able to match many of them to historical events, at very least the contemporary existence of the people and places involved.

4. Much is also made of the fact that the Torah records the infighting and failings of its heroes. This, they will claim, is unheard of in the types of contemporary mythology which become national stories. So I will add a fourth assumption. The "uncommonness of this assumes that all of the Torah was written at one time, by one person or by people of similar viewpoint. Suppose, as our story does, that warring factions took pieces of their own texts and joined them together. Some of the factions praised hero X, some pointed out his failings. When they finally agreed, both versions survived the cut.

So essentially, the Kuzari depends on the "ikarrim" of Jewish faith, but those premises are not proofs of anything (and do not claim to be), just points of faith on which the edifice rests.

Until these conditions are proven independent of the ikarim, the Kuzari proof falls flat for anyone outside the faithful who already believe it. Not that any frum person should fret the lack of proof for their religious beliefs, I just hope that they will not trumpet this type of apologetic nonsense in the name of Judaism in a room full of intelligent people.

Dybuk signs off

2010-01-10T21:30:00.003-05:00

Who would have known? The Dybuk story finally has a happy conclusion.

Thanks to OSM for the capper.

Dybbuk in Brazil

2009-12-27T12:42:00.002-05:00

So this link should connect you to the dybbuk story in English, which is reporting on another story in Hebrew on kikar.net

Though endlessly entertaining and fascinating as it is to look through this story and the comments, sadly, it has all the earmarks of an urban legend. Learn these earmarks and you too can vet a story before forwarding it as an urgent email to everyone you care about. Let's look at it in detail.

1) The Yeshiva News starts and ends by calling it a "bizarre" story and one that they cannot verify. HUGE RED LETTERS.

2) There are very specific details in the story, but no specific sources, nor even indication of sources that wish to remain anonymous.

3) The story is clearly trying to persuade us to a particular viewpoint, namely, that the dybbuk possession is real. A real news story usually at least pretends to be objective about presenting the facts of the story.

4) This story relies partially on "appeal to authority". Were they writing this as a report, they would doubtlessly have gone to those authorities or their spokesman. Then we would have an official statement and possibly clear statements on other issues around the main issue. Given the stature of the authorities, this story would not be hard to verify, were it real. This is similar to "Microsoft says its a very dangerous virus" or "snopes says it is real", and such in urban legend circulation.

5) The story does not even name the synagogue, anyone involved, or even the city. I would think that "who, what, when, where", the basics of a news report, might be in the story somewhere, or at least the claim that someone demanded that they be withheld. This is just a silly story somewhere in Brazil, about some shul, where something happened, possibly regarding someone yelling insane things at the kehila. Some Rabanim are referenced, but we do not have any statement from them or their spokesmen, nor any claim that they declined to comment or couldn't be reached for comment.

As fabulous as it would be to poke endless fun at this story and the flaky fundies who would support the truth of the story based on the fact that "we do not know everything", as terrific a proof as that is, we'll have to heap it in with the myriads of other urban legends and not give it any heed. However, a You Tube spoof of Israeli psychic (oh sorry, it seems in Israel they call them "mekubal") Rabbi Batzri doing a song and dance seance would definitely be appropriate.

Dishon or Dishan

2009-12-05T18:40:00.004-05:00

I was frustrated by research of the genealogy given in parshas Vayishlach for Seir Hachori. It lists the sons and grandsons in order from 36:20, but it seems that 36:26 is a mistake in the "maleh v'chasar". There are two sons with similar names Dishon (spelled chasar or maleh vav) and Dishan (spelled maleh yud, chasar vav). Both v 26 and v 28 mention Dishan's sons, giving a different list. According to the order of the verses in context, it is clear and obvious that v 26 should list "Dishon" and not "Dishan". In one of the verses it has the name Dishon by the punctuation "Etnachta", so that cannot serve as an answer.

The parallel genealogy in Divrei HaYamim has it as Dishon, as we would expect. One later mefaresh indicates that Dishan died, and in his honor, Dishon changed his name to Dishan. (This is a bit like marking the bottom of box "TOP" to avoid confusion, but they are not responsible to make our learning easier, I suppose. This answer gets an "A" for creativity.)

The best answer I have is that the Masoretic text has a scribal error here of the type conceded by the Gemorrah, and the traditional voweling followed the errant spelling. However, if we ask a ba'al koreh, he will probably tell us that he reads it "Dishan" anyway.

Ida and us

2009-05-22T17:31:00.003-04:00

As you must know by now, scientists found Ida, a 47 million year old (a lady never tells) protosimian fossil. She has fingernails, opposable thumbs and many features suggestive of humans, while being a pre-ape. It is proposed that she is way up on the simian family tree, before apes and humans took fully separate paths. She is not quite the "missing link", but she intriguing evidence of evolution in primate line.

Naturally, the faithful will write this off like they do all other evolution evidence, but it is now much easier to imagine that "transitional" form that spawned the higher families. It will go to show that no matter how much evidence is amassed, and there will never be enough for someone who is willfully blind and ignorant.

The oldest human fossils to date are in the 3 million year old range. The proto lemur-human will fascinate people who understand the science behind evolution, the medical progress that bolts forward on its account, and the greater new world that will grow from the knowledge that it provides. The Jewish people has accepted the truth of many things that challenged the common wisdom that has grown around it. We withstood the heliocentric universe, the refutation of spontaneous generation, the older than 5769 year old world, the refutation of 4 element physics, the refutation of Talmudic "medicine", the concept that certain anatomical ideas and ideas about pregnancy that were accepted by our sages were false, and severe challenges to our traditional history in archaeology. We are still plugging along, and the acceptance of evolution will not dent Judaism one small bit. G-d created man out of bacteria and ultimately out of other animals. Why is this so difficult for Judaism? Judaism does not even oppose it. The only ones who do are those that claim the mantle of "true Judaism", the Charedim, Chabad, (or for that matter, Jews who practice fundamentalit Christianity) and sectarian Jews of all stripes who imagine that Moses wore their particular type of hat and then throw in a bunch of their own platitudes in place of Judaism's diverse theology.

Ida has testified. But then again, she is a woman.

Pharoah's magicians

2009-01-26T19:47:00.002-05:00

So were Paroah's magicians real magicians or mere conjurers? Rashi says they were magicians, the Rambam implies they were just conjurers, performers who pretend to do magic. The first plague they were able to duplicate, so that Paroah was unimpressed. The second they were able to duplicate but unable to remove. The third they could not manage at all. By the time of Shchin, they could not even help themselves.

The nature of belief in magic is that the observer cannot ascertain whether the performance is real, because even a conjurer looks real to a layman. The Ramban professed to believe in Arab bird readers, called tiarin, having been thoroughly impressed by their performances. Thousands believe that preachers at revivals do miracles. Millions may have believed that people could bend metal with their minds in the 70s, based on the tricks performed by Uri Geller, a former Israeli stage magician. Many thousands more believe today in TV personalities who claim to see the future and talk to their dead relatives.

However, just watch this old Criss Angel favorite, walking on water:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBQLq2VmZcA

or creating life itself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW91Zdng-4A&NR=1

It seems Paroah's skepticism might have been well founded.

Is the Talmud fundamentalist?

2009-01-11T08:54:00.002-05:00

This exchange with badrabbi below emphasizes a very essential point which badrabbi poses perfectly succinctly. The way that yeshivas teach Germora today, as if it were writ, undermines the entire basis on which we should study it. Bad notes the progress of this approach ad absurdum. badrabbi: The trouble, RebelJew, is that the Talmud, the source of the Chanukah holiday miracle, is sold to us as the "oral Torah". We are told that contents of the Talmud are just as holy as the written Torah. Now, both you and I agree that the Chanukah miracle is concocted. Set aside whether the rabbis meant well or not when they invented this fairy tale, the issue is that this "holy document" has in effect been defiled by this obvious falsehood. If you find a chunk of ham in a pot of soup, a rabbi would advise discarding the soup. What do we do with the Talmud now that we have found obvious falsehoods in it? RJ: Bad analogy. The reason we would chuck out the soup is that we cannot fully remove the ham and all of its offshoots. The soup becomes a single entity through cooking. If we had dozens of objects, apparently cookies, and I find one that is not edible in any way, that does not mean that none of the others are edible. The Talmud is more the plate of cookies than the soup. The fact that many rabbis and yeshivas sell it as soup is a problem, but even the Talmud itself does not claim to be so. It is admittedly pastiche over centuries, the forensic efforts of later rabbis to ascertain the actual "oral law", not the oral law itself. Hence, it does not claim fundamental infallibility. That later ignoramuses(ignorami?) claim that for the Talmud indicates that they either do not understand how to learn Gemora or that they are trying to condescend to, (or worse, deceive) their followers, to keep them from thinking critically. The lack of critical thinking in a philosophy based almost entirely on critical thinking is one of the most interesting and ironic things about Judaism.

Rashi invents Incest

2009-01-03T18:58:00.002-05:00

Of all the weird or incomprehensible Rashis, this week's Parsha had a doozy. One of the sons of Shimon was Shaul ben HaCanaanit. All of the other sons of the tribes are mentioned only by name, but this particular one is singled out as "ben HaCanaanit". Rashi says "This is Dina who had relations with Shechem (a Cannani). She did not want to leave his house until Shimon promised to marry her." Presumably, he complied, resulting in Shaul. Besides the obvious fact that Shechem was dead, why should she not want to leave his house? So let's say that this discussion took place before Shimon killed Shechem, aside the fact that according to mefarshim, Shimon was 13 at that time. First, why is SHE a Canaanit? She was forced, according to the Chumash? She was the daughter of Yaakov and Leah. Second, if she wanted to stay, making her a Cannaanit, why does the Torah say that she was forced? Third, Canaanit could be explained any number of ways. Why does Rashi (ultimately the Breishit Rabba) choose this way of resolving the extra phrase? Rashi, recall, is explaining away questions that would occur on topical logic, the kind that a small child would be capable of. What is forcing him into this? Fourth, why isn't the sifsei chachamim, the Malbim etc. outraged? they are silent. (If you know a Mizrachi or Chizkuni on this, please add them, I do not have them available at the moment.)

Possible answers are easily refuted:

1) They could marry sisters, as Avraham said.
This is not an answer, since the question is asked by many on Yaakov marrying two sisters, an issur more easily excused to a ben Noach. It says that the avos kept the mitzvos. But even a ben Noach can only marry a half sister from the father, according to the halacha from Avraham. Shimon and Dina were fully brother and sister.

2) Pikuach nefesh
He killed Shechem and everyone in the city, so there was no pikuach nefesh. The rashi says that she didn't want to leave, not that she needed to be saved. Not to mention that incest is yaharog v'al ya'avor.

On top of this, later Rashi will explain one opinion that each of the brothers married twin sisters that were born at the same time. They all died before entering Egypt.

I am just lost on these Rashis.

3)

See where Family Squabbles go

2008-12-30T19:22:00.002-05:00

In the mid-1980's, a long fight culminated when the Lubavitcher Rebbe won the rights to his father-in-law's book collection. The 6th Rebbe, a noted bibliophile, had collected books by the tens of thousands, covering philosophy, history, science, mathematics and secular Bible study, as well as sefarim from all over, some very easy to come by, some unique and extremely valuable. This huge library was schlepped through the Russian revolution and German occupied Poland, before reaching the US. A battle ensued between the Rebbe and his operatives on one side and the 6th Rebbe's only male descendant on the other. The battling began in 1950, in the wake of the Rebbe's death. As is with chasidic dynastic battles, the supporters of the two sons-in-law tried to make the case for their candidates succession. After some nastiness and thuggery on both sides, the dust settled, and the 7th Chabad rebbe, the younger of the two eidim, took the chair. The elder quickly joined him, partially to avoid further nastiness, and partially, most likely, that he saw that his rival was visionary and charismatic, and he felt that was best for Chabad's future. The elder's son, Barry, was completely excluded, even from sinacure positions or trifling inheritance, even though the Rebbe had unquestionably been very close to him. Thuggery on the part of some of the 7th Rebbe's operatives followed to ensure that Barry would stay away. There is no indication, even in Barry's stated opinion, that the Rebbe himself had known or approved of these actions.

The Rebbe's followers placed the books that they had salvaged in a large library in Crown Heights, and there they remained for some 35 years. Barry Gurary, for his part, attempted to secretly take some of the more valuable books from the library, in an attempt to sell them. Chabad says that he stole them. He claims that he had a right to them, as the Rebbe's sole male descendant. The Rebbe shrei-ed at every public gathering tht the books were martyrs, tht the books were "captives" worthy of redemption, that on them rested the fate of the universe, etc. etc.

Barry felt that no Beis Din in the world would impartially be able to judge a case where the Chabad Rebbe was a party, especially since he had expressed himself so forcefully. The case ultimately fell to a court of law in the US, and Chabad won the case, on the power of corporate ownership. The 6th Rebbe had put the books under corporate ownership, and the trustees of that corporation, known as Agudas Chasidei Chabad, or Aguch, were the official caretakers. End of story. That was 5 Teves, 1987 (if I am not mistaken).

To this day, I do not understand why the Chabad Rebbe felt it so necessary to include every Chabadnik in the family Broiges. (Do I include him in my broiges?) If, as Chabad claims, all Barry wanted is the money, why didn't they just buy him out? Shoin, everyone is happy? Obviously, there was more to it. If Barry wanted to stir up trouble, why didn't he bad mouth Chabad and try to gain a following? Exactly what anyone wanted out of this, other than sheer emotion and one-ups-manship, I do not know, and whatever it is, he did not get it. It became a rallying point for bad feelings and bad mouthing about Barry and his family, and ultimately, it was stained with silly apolocalyptic pronouncements and misapplied fervor.

One good thing did come from it, though. The Chabad rebbe, as was characteristic of him, found a good applicaiton, and bid that all Chabadniks remember the occasion by buying Jewish books for themselves, their synagogues and each other. (Granted even most of the books in question were not "Jewish books", per se, but it was a good way of turning a shameful situation into a positive initiative.) The apocalyptic pronouncements of our times will continue on 5 teves this year, no doubt in Chabad circles. But, it is my sincerest hope, that Chabadniks lose the Broiges aspect, forget the whole senseless historical affair, and concentrate on the message, that all knowledge, Jewish, philosophical, scientific, that strives to broaden our minds brings us closer to our proper service.

and then there was ... nitel?

2008-12-25T20:49:00.002-05:00

What the heck is nitel, anyway? What does it mean?

Obviously, to the kabalistically minded, the holiness of something or other is violated by the shortest night of the year (which it is not anymore, but what the hay). Others specifically learned sedarim on that night, presumably to reject the kabala custom of not learning, and the Chabad Rebbe of that time denounced their actions. When I learned in Chabad, people completed the daily learning shiurim and then gathered for games of chess or just did laundry.

But, who first declared nitel a bad night. I mean, Easter we do nothing. Eid al Fiter we do nothing. Halloween, nothing. Even Christmas day, we do nothing special. Where did the "custom" of not learning, apparently in controvention of a Torah Aseh, get such prominence? Takana de Rabah?

Hanukah - a Fight for Tradition

2008-12-24T21:40:00.002-05:00

I saw this post, from, Jewish Philospher, the guy who is either the scariest maniac in the frum world or its most angry parody writer. When you get past the base ridiculousness of the logic, the argument is actually made frequently in the frum world. It proposes that Orthodox Judaism is unchanged from ancient times until now. Judah Macabee would be perfectly at home in our synagogue liturgy and religious laws and customs.

The truth is, though, that the Hashmonai would be totally bewildered if he walked into a synagogue today. Tefilin might be familiar to him and Talis as well. However, he would wonder why we take them off after prayer. He would wonder at the lack of blue tzitzis. He might be familiar with Tanach. And there it ends. The Talmud as codified today would be unknown to him. The liturgy or the three davening a day regime would be unfamiliar. He would wonder at the lack of karbanos, until someone explained the logic to him that davening is like karbanos. He might or might not be familiar with Assyrian letters, but not as familiar as we are, since that is all we learn in our schools. Even Israeli pronunciation would be incomprehensible to him. Yiddish would draw a dumbfounded look, no doubt.

Hanukah, itself, would be completely alien to him. Latkes, sufganiot, dreidels would be unknown. The concept of lighting the menorah, adding one for each night for each person, and related halacha would be unknown. He might have an idea of lighting candles in general. The legend of the single flask that they found in the Temple with the seal of the Kohen Gadol would likely be unknown to him. It first appears in Talmud, 600 years later. It does not appear in Ktuvim Acharonim. To boot, the way we keep kosher, the way we keep Yamim Tovim, Sukos, Pesach, Yom Kippur would all be completely unfamiliar to him. Certainly, our method of keeping Nidah laws would make no sense whatsoever.

None of this is based modern scholarship. Every bit is based on the fact that the Talmud changed the religion, and he lived long before the Talmud, in the time of the Zugim. Not to mention, our current laws and theoloogy are largely based on modern kabalah, which did not come about for another 1500 years after his time. That is why many Rishonim sound like they could not into modern Yeshivas, because of their variant views of theology.

This JP post is fairly tame. But the concept that Judaism is unchanged for thousands of years is just a plain distortion of the truth.

Note: I will definitely strangle the next person who tells my children that the enemy in Chanukah was "the Greeks". We, in the US of 2008, are not "British", and the Syrians were not "Greeks". They were descendants of a helenistic empire, but with very distinct customs, language (dialectic Greek), and new mixtures of nations and populations, that were not Greek, Bactrian or Persian.

B.A.

2008-12-21T16:50:00.001-05:00

The long silent seclusions, the moodiness, the secret nighttime missions. There can be no doubt. He is blogging again.

Bans from the Rav

2008-12-15T22:14:00.002-05:00

Bans of the Rav

It has been custom to call many people "the Rav". Thus, when someone quotes the Rav, they are ususally safe, since they could be referring to almost anyone in the past 2500 years or so, since Rav in the Gemora. However, for purposes of these pahkevilen, only my Rav, a true chasidishe yid, maleh daas torah, is THE "the Rav". These declarations represent Daas torah, and as such, they are the declarations of the Ribono shel Olam Himself, not subject to discussion of any kind, and certainly not chas v'shalom to any sort of disputation. The real Torah True Jews of the world, who follow a true chasidishe Hashkafa, will be subject to all of these neshama saving measures immediately and indefinitely.

These measures will be tailored to bringing back control to the appropriate authorities through the traditional methods of public shame and accountability.

Internet

The Internet is a medium that users can use to get all manner of filth and garbage into their homes and minds. Emails, blogspots, craigslists, pornography, information about NCSY, modern Orthodox "dvar Torah", apikorsus, smut, filthy jokes, antisemitism, treif foods, and even information about evolution can be accessed in a few moments. Where once one would have to go into a smut store, library, or a Modern Orthodox synagogue to get access to such things, a person can now do so in the privacy of their own home, opening a world of temptation, rachmana litzlan. A community may be totally unaware that a member is accessing these materials. Also, one may order things to come to his home, without anyone of responsibility in the community able to monitor what he is doing. It is needless to say that any Chasidishe house must not have such Internet in their walls.

While "making a parnasa" opens the field to a wide range of ways to kasher this treife Internet, the Rav, in his infinite compassion, will allow certain individuals to have Internet in their homes for parnasa, under following conditions:

1) Responsible community rabanim, approved by the Rav, will be able to monitor all Internet traffic, through software installed on each chasidishe computer, like J-net. Being the most forthright and honest people in the neighborhoods, naturally all will trust the rabanim not to compromise passwords, security codes, or digital signatures.

2) The job or business must be approved by the Rabanim, and its reasons for use of the Internet must be justified thoroughly, under scrutiny of the Beis Din.

3) Anyone attempting to reach a site that is forbidden by the rabanim must face a din Torah so that the rabanim can remove his Internet access, and report all appropriate information in a pashkevil.

Telephones

A chasidishe house should not have a telephone, which can be used in all sorts of unseemly sins. Before phones, one had to go to a treif restaurant and risk being seen by others in the community. However, with a telephone, a person can order treif to come to his home. Even worse things can be ordered in "plain brown wrapping" rachmana litzlan, and others in the community might never know or see. If one must have a phone because it is required for parnasa, he should use only J-phone, which allows rabanim to listen to all of his telephone conversations, to make sure that he does not fall astray lo aleinu, oi meh haya lanu.

Mail

A chasidishe house should not allow mail to be delivered or sent. If a person must send or receive mail for parnasa, he should use only J-mail, which allows rabanim to inspect every piece of mail to make sure that he does not fall astray, oi va voi, hashem yishmereinu.

Electricity and electrons

A chasidishe house must never have electrons. While I am not expert in these matters, as I am just a simple kanoi, the Rav obviously know what electrons are, and would not have banned them without ample justification.

Cars

No chasid must ever ride in an "OTO" because of shmiras henefesh. Many car accidents happen daily, and if the ban saves even one life, it will have performed the act of saving a world, as it says, "One who saves a life, it is as if he saved the entire world." Also, people can go in privacy to places of ill repute, like "adult stores", non-heimishe supermarkets (which sell both kosher and rachmana litzlan non-kosher products), banned concerts, casinos, nightclubs and Modern Orthodox synagogues. People can travel quickly by car several miles to a secluded illicit spot, whereas such trips are impractical on foot. (see section entitled "Shoes".)

Music

All music is a danger to the neshama. Today's "Jewish music" is based on goyishe avoidah zara tunes that have been altered slightly or set to Jewish sounding words, even oi lanu mah asinu, words of holy pasukim, put to treife musical notes. Reports have been given to the Rav of new music being written as recently as a few decades ago, which our fathers and zeides never knew, lo aleinu. Singers create large concerts that are often attended by both men and women. However, even if there are only men at the concert, it is possible that women are lurking outside, waiting to meet illicitly with men. Needless to say, one who totally abstains from music, tavoi alav habracha. However, after much consideration , the Rav would allow one to hum ay ay ay or tum tum tum to no particular arrangement of musical notes. La la la is based on goyishe avodah zara and is forbidden.

News

No one should listen to news, even if it is not conveyed by a forbidden medium such as televison (chas v'shalom), radio or newspaper. For instance, even if a non-Jewish acquaintance offers to tell you "news", you must not listen, acknowledge or receive the "news" in any way. News programs generally use an attractive woman to deliver the news, which raises issues of lo sasuru acharei anaihem (television), kol isha (radio), darchei emori (all other forms). the Rav holds that this issur is d'oraisa, since it involves one of the most stringent rules in the Torah, men coming into contact with women.

Shoes

No one is permitted to wear shoes, except in climates where loss of limb may occur. In those cases, the feet may be encased in cloth and a sandal may be worn over the foot to prevent frostbite. Before shoes, people could not walk so quickly, and therefore, they could not attend the bars, newstands, Modern Othodox synagogues, adult stores, and other places mentioned above except with in a small area. Since no one has ever been killed in a shoe accident, its use may be permitted in extreme circumstances.

Use of language

In a chadishe hois is faran kein goyish. A chasidishe home should use authentic yiddish as its only language. Variants such as Yinglish, unknown to Moshe Rabeinu and the holy Chazal, are permitted only among those who can not remember the authentic pure Yiddish word and may waste time from Torah in trying to remember the correct word. Using languages other than Yiddish also allows Jews to speak to non-Jews chas v'chalilah and they may come to follow the ways of the goyim. As the Rav has taught us, in the days of the Tanach, David Hamaylech, spoke only Hebrew to deraybishter and Yiddish to other people. This is obvious from the pasuk in Tehillim, k'sus k'fered, spoken first to deraybishter in Hebrew, ksus, and then to the people in Yiddish, k'ferd.

Cereal

No Jewish house should ever have cereal, as the pasuk says in parshas vayaitzai, "ufarinu ba'aretz". It is clear that its only proper place is to be thrown on the ground. The antisemitic goyim have purposefully made certain cereals round so that they will roll under the furniture and radiators and cause the Jewish people to transgress Pesach, an issur karais, rachmana litzlan.

Cards

Playing cards are assur because of avodah zara. As we know, non-Jews use cards for fortune telling in a way that the Torah does not specify. Only fortune-telling in the ways that the Torah specifies can be condoned under certain circumstances, as the Ramban clearly states reish parshas Tazria.

Cumin

Cumin will not be found in a chasidihe house. The name of the spice cumin rhymes somewhat with woman, inspiring evil thoughts, hashem yishmarenu. On the same logic, anyone with chest pains must be put out the house immediately.

Photographs

It goes without saying that photographs are forbidden.

Indoor heat and air conditioning

Indoor heating and air conditioning is forbidden in a Jewish house. Such heating may induce women to remove their clothing, chas v'shalom. Air conditioning may induce women to put on attractive clothing.

Colors

Colors are the source of many michshalim and must be avoided at all costs. White, black and gray are permissible, if approved by community rabanim, in some circumstances. A person who is colorblind should say "hatov v'hamativ" along with morning brachas, for the immense blessing that Hashem has given him. Clothing that has "colors" should be removed from the closet and given to a non-Jewish charity.

Pesach for Commies

2008-04-15T18:15:00.005-04:00

This holiday, like many others in our tradition, is based on a vanquishing war. While the Egyptians allowed us a place in their society, secure jobs and 3 squares a day, we repaid them with 10 plagues, the loss of all of their firstborn, the destruction of their armies and the loss of their hired help. They allowed us to build their cities and to go down in history. It is well known that the Jewish leader had a secret summit with Bush on Mt. Sinai before arriving in Egypt, the land of his birth, the land where he was raised in royal fashion. Now we understand! We declared an adventure war. And like all other wars, the big corporate interests were the main benefactors. Companies, led by Reynolds Corporation, soaked us in the blood of innocent Egyptians, and for WHAT? So that they could increase their bottom line of course, and so they did. But this is not the first time that big foil has used our kids as cannon fodder. Passover has become synonymous with rolls and rolls of the sharp silvery menace, something that the forebears of our people would never have tolerated. It is time for us to double our diligence, to stand together and declare with all of our might, NO BLOOD FOR FOIL!!! NO BLOOD FOR FOIL!!!!! NO BLOOD FOR FOIL!!!!

Farrakhan Finds the Problem

2007-02-26T07:24:00.000-05:00

For your morning laugh, just read this article in AP. Here's a money quote for you:

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan stressed religious unity Sunday during his final major speech, saying the world is at war because Christians, Muslims and people of other faiths are divided.

People of other faiths? Who else is there besides Christians and Muslims? Oh, yeah. For those of you younger saplings, Farrakhan was the leader of the Nation of Islam, the radical separatist and racial supremacy organization, who regularly had crowds chant against "the Jews", who referred to Judaism as a "dirty religion" and who asserted famously that there was a large spaceship piloted by the "Hon. Elijah Mohamed" (who has apparently joined the ever increasing minions of dead people who aren't really dead) hovering above the Earth. Also, lots of politicians pander to him for some reason. When you think ecumenical unity, you think Farrakhan.

Hey Neturei Karta!! Why weren't you there?

A Worthy Goal?

2007-02-01T10:15:00.000-05:00

Around the Chabad observance of Yud Shvat (the yahrzeit of the 6th Rebbe), much discussion is expended on the Holocaust, anti-Zionism, mesiras nefesh, and particularly, the ultra-frum response that kept hundreds of thousands from fleeing Europe. The 6th Rebbe of Chabad indeed advised that, given the proper service of Jews, there might be no war. This fits with Chasidus and with the principles of bitachon and emunah, as taught in Chabad. Indeed, stories are told of the Rebbe simply ignoring the dangers of jail when he was on death row in 1927, and that this is how he overcame the evil decree and was set free. Other gedolim advised their followers to stay, counseling that a secular Zionist Israel or a free America would cause damage to the people's frumkeit. Similarly, at Chaf Dalet Teves, the yahrzeit of the first Chabad Rebbe, much discussion centers on the fact that the first Rebbe supported the oppresive Czar over the forces of egalite' under Bonaparte.

As a justification in these cases, Chabadniks will point out that frumkeit remained strong in Russia, but it did not in France. Similarly, they felt it was better for the people to die in Europe than to live in America and risk diminishing their Jewish observance. Granted that when people came to America, many did do away with some of the frum observance. Also, granted that Russia was a frummer place than France, both before and after the Napolean wars.

However, my question is on the logic. Since when do we push away pikuach nefesh vadai on a safek (perhaps they will lapse in frumkeit). Would not a better course have been to save themselves and the people and then attend to them in the new places with extra kiruv, extra leadership, as has occurred thoughout the history of Judaism? Now, we get to the real point. Did these Rabanim not have faith in their own ability to lead? Did they prefer millions of dead Jews or Jews living in squalor and oppression to having to face up to their own insecurity in their abilities to shepherd the flock? Was it more important to keep them nursing from pure dogma than to save them from almost certain death?

Chabad was certainly not the only exporter of this philosophy. Satmar, Munkatz, all of the major Chasidic groups favored this approach in WWII. Complicating the pure philosophy, great efforts were expended to save the king bees themselves. The Rebbes of Chabad, Satmar etc. DID ESCAPE Europe and came to Israel and America, and they did start up their religious bases anew, as most of the communities back in Europe were destroyed by the war. The justification I heard this year is the most amazing that I have heard yet. According to one kiruvist rabbi, these Rebbes saved themselves so that their communities would not lose hope in the future. Also, they saved themselves while advising others to die so that the communities wouldn't take the attitude that they were willing to die personally, but they were not willing to allow their Rebbes to die, so the Rebbes saved themselves so that the people would follow their directives to stay. That's right! The Rebbes left so that the people would allow themselves to be killed!!

An aside about the example from Napolean, many chabad point out that the yeshivas remained in Russia but not in France. I would respond though that France was not a frum place before Napolean and continued not to be frum after Napolean. Would it not have been better to live in freedom and depend on Jewish leadership to stem the religious problems? Isn't that the definition of Jewish leadership or even just plain leadership? If these Rebbes were such great leaders, and they had people willing to sacrifice their lives for them in Europe and Russia, why were they so insecure that they could lead a refugee community to remain frum?

So, here we are today, with Israel and America never stronger in Judaism. People practice Judaism with impunity, spread the word and even get sponsored and protected by government officials to do so. Europe has very few if any of the old yeshivas, and they are all far weaker after the war, owing to the fact that most of their support DIED in the WAR! Russia, so far superior to France in frumkeit that the Czar was preferable to Napolean, was almost devoid of Judaism until about 17 years ago, and it is now being reintroduced. I also grant that much of this is due to the leadership of the 7th Chabad Rebbe, in the environment of freedom that exists today. I would argue that it is the environment of freedom, though, that allows these things to flourish, and that during the time of Communism, for instance, very few inroads were made.

So, with Iran flexing its muscle and trying to replace Naziism, I hope that future leadership is less shortsighted than in the past. I hope no one will say better dead than possibly frei (possibly not). Rather, I hope they will lead ... and live. After all, it is our children and grandchildren we are talking about. Now that is a worthy goal.

Sanhedrin - OK?

2007-01-24T07:06:00.000-05:00

A bunch of alter talmidei chachamim get together and form a Sanhedrin in Israel. They present some reasonable hashkafas and some typical chredi fuming. For example of the latter, see point 3 on their condemnation of the Gay Parade in November:

We are calling on the Israeli Police Force not to provide a permit to this parade, to avoid violence. The manpower the police will invest to validate the parade, together with additional security, will paralyze thwarting attacks. If the parade will not be canceled, there will be a great need to create an investigation committee to investigate the attacks and violence. The results will pale in comparison to the Lebanon War II.

For example of the former see my previous post.

On the subject of General Naveh, they seem torn between a reasonable pleading and threat. They grant that Naveh is a prosettlements guy. OTOH, they disqualify that and threaten him, albeit very cagily, for allowing even one settler in a temporary trailer to be prevented from returning, even implying that, given druthers, the court might have sentenced him to death, "theoretically". Indictments don't make them look good or reputable. One of the prime movers has already been taken to task by the Israeli courts.

So they are reasonable radicals, is that it? On the one hand, they take a rationalist approach to hashkafa, confounding today's yeshiva's. While they stick to some wobbly apologetics, they clearly mean to soften the literalist hashakafas that we have seen. The very fact that they have brought back smicha, in the original sense, and formed a Sanhedrin, implies that they reject the mythical superman interpretation of the ancient sages, and they feel that they, and the people that they elect, are capable of reaching a similar level. So much for Daas Torah, yeridas haDoros, emunas tzaddikim, and the rest of today's Jewish Catholicism. Shteinsaltz is Rabbi Shimon HaTzadik. I can't say that I am disappointed, but it is shocking. The rebel court.

OTOH, they are pushing the same radical political line that is typical of the funadamentalist right wing. It clings to the unreasonable vision of the future of the state, the one that sees the Palestinians driven out to the last person. (I do not object to the morality of it so much as the practicality. It is never going to happen and condemning Israel to eternal war until it does is just ludicrous.) On the Gay Parade, they intimate that they condone violence, that the parade is just cause for the violence against the parade that will follow inevitably. Again, this says nothing about the morality of the parade itself.

So are they fundy wing nuts, or are they rationalist rebels? Or are they BOTH????!!!!

Mi Amar

2007-01-22T19:49:00.000-05:00

Another blogger is on the loose, your typical J-Blogger, who believes in fallible Rabanim and nodding to modernity if modern science conflicts with sagely wisdom. Here is a short excerpt:

We find in the Jerusalem Talmud that one Tana brashly tells Rabbi Akiba, who was the greatest of the Tanaim, that he was mistaken. Thus in Taanit chapter 4, is stated, “Rabbi Akiba, when he saw Bar Cochba would say that he was the Messiah; Rabbi Yochanan ben Turtah responded, Akiba, even when grass will grow from your cheeks the Messiah will not have arrived”. Even the Sanhedrin can err. The first two chapters of Tractate Horayot deal with this topic. It has been stated concerning the Rambam, “From Moses until Moses no one as great as Moses has arisen”. Nevertheless, many wise sages have stated that the Rambam erred. Moreover, Rabbenu Saadiah Gaon states that we do not have to accept the opinion of our sages concerning nature and medicine if it does not agree with our present knowledge. We find a similar statement by Rabbi Avraham the son of the Rambam

Apparently the “error” is the great advantage of creation. There is here a paradox: It is forbidden for you to err, but the ability to err is what gives a value to your deeds and your opinions. Many of the medicines and discoveries have come about from errors. A similar statement can be made with respect to errors of the sages. These errors are essential for the development of a successful Jewish viewpoint that can adapt to the varied cultural realities, so as to absorb, digest and convert them to a Godly idea. An opinion of a Tana or Amora can possibly be entirely invalid at a particular place and time, and yet be completely valid at a different place and time. The Ramhal states in “Mesillat Yeshorim” chapter 20, that the law is forever in accord with Beth Hillel. However, we have a tradition that the law is at present according to Beth Hillel, but in the distant future the law will be in accord with Beth Shamai, which seems nowadays to be impossible, just as is a statement that a mouse is half soil. Possibly in another 50 years it will be possible, or it will then become clear that what was said will become relevant and in place. It seems that that is the explanation of the saying of the sages (Berochot 34:) “Rabbi Abahu said: the position of repentants is more worthy that of the completely righteous”. This means that an error corrected by a repentant makes him better than one who has never sinned. In some respects this is similar to the idea that certain particles in the universe behave at the same time as solid materials and as waves. A perfect item does not belong in the living world. We have not as yet sufficient information and understanding of the world and of the Creator to unerstand such paradoxes.

Sounds kind of like ... well ... me. But it is not. So what is the justification of basing halacha on what is ... in many cases ... error?

There is no sympathy in any culture for the idea that it is possible to claim that the spiritual leaders have erred. Such an attitude lowers the respect for the statements of the leaders. Has anyone ever heard that any country broadcast the statement that their High Court has erred? Moreover, the creative and mental expertise of our sages was in the fields of justice, thought and faith. In general the sages developed their expertise in science as a result of legal problems that were brought before them in the fields of agriculture, zoology, physics etc. Nevertheless, you will find in our culture, a culture of truth without any partiality, that we learn from the Torah that errors are attributed even to our sage Moses. Rashi states concerning three passages (Lev. 10 16; Num 20 10-11; Num. 31 21), that Moses because of anger made an error.

OK, not great, but not the silly, bombastic, condescending apologetics that we are used to. But can this guy's kids get into a yeshiva today? Will his daughter ever get married? Is he some modernishe like Hersh or Carmel Chas v'shalom? He is clearly saying that the Torah sh'beal peh erred in places on science, and that the only reason we follow it today is because we do it out of respect for the system, and in confidence that the system will eventually fix itself. Read his website. Yes, this guy is a throwback and a radical. He even proposes that he would form a group today to examine and correct the words of our holy, saintly, omniscient, ... er ... infallible ... Of those who follow the mystical approach of daas Torah and halacha psak making a new physical reality, he will have none of it. Who is he?

Or, who are they?

They're not cute anymore

2007-01-19T15:30:00.000-05:00

Adin Shteinzaltz and company formed a "Sanhedrin" about 2 1/2 years back, trying to bring Moshaich closer, in the mind's eye if nothing else. They have made some quiet rulings without causing too much stir. One of their number was instrumental in the famous dud death curse on Ariel Sharon. Shayn, they were cute and little wacky, but harmless.

If the title linked article is the direction that they are headed, this Sanhedrin must be opposed by every Jew. Ruling that someone is a moser, and that they should be killed, even without a true Sanhedrin, is just scary. They even quote a Rambam (which they will be quick to tell you, we do not pasken like, if this were a kiruv shiur). While I heard nothing from them on the subject of the Neturai Karta, the nutjobs that side with Iran on the subject of wiping out Israel with nukes, they feel General Naveh is handing Jews directly into the hands of oppressors, so much that he is worthy to be killed, because he did not side 100% with settlers in every case. Of course, they do not advocate murdering the general, of course not. That is just what they said, not what they meant. Don't let anyone get the wrong idea.

Thank G-d that General Naveh has an army, and this collection of fundamentalist (keyword: mental) psychopaths does not .... yet.

Did the Rebbe know me?

2007-01-16T19:46:00.000-05:00

As many of you know, I spent many years in the heart of Chabad, in Crown Heights, on shlichus, in 770, in the mosdos of the Chabad Rebbe. The Rebbe spoke volumes, stood at dollars lines for hours, and he spoke to gatherings every Shabbos, again for hours. He danced on Simchas Torah. He waved to the crowd. But did he ever know me? Did he ever put my name on a din v'cheshbon together with a face?

When I was in Chabad, the usual thought was that the Rebbe knew everyone, magically and omnisciently, like G-d Himself. We had no yechidus, no personal interaction, but Chabadniks envisioned yechidus in certain matters:

1) Between sichos, the Rebbe would nod at the crowd and answer l'chayim presumably. It was difficult to see or hear the Rebbe from much of the shul, but my mashpiyim were certain that the nod was a form of yechidus.

2) After yom tov, the Rebbe would make havdalah and give out kos shel brachah. If you could hold back the tide behind you or the mazkirim pulling you away, you might say something to Rebbe and he might even respond with a few words. Did he know the person or was he just responding to the request. My mashpiyim were certain that even the Rebbe's standard word in passing was yechidus.

3) If one were wealthy enough to donate $20,000 per year to Chabad's Machne Yisroel "millionaire's club", the Rebbe would spend a couple of minutes with the "gevirim". Here he might address a personal question. This was as much "yechidus" as anyone would have.

4) On the line for dollars, pamphlets, or whatever the Rebbe was handing out, again, one might stop in the line for a moment, but mostly, people just took the dollar and walked on. Again, this was yechidus.

5) On erev yom kippur, the Rebbe would have yechidus with the bachurim. This was more of a sicha than a yechidus.

6) On Simchas Torah, when the Rebbe danced, my mashpiyim told me that the Rebbe looked at each individual and that this was a yechidus.

7) In reponse to invitations to simchas, the Rebbe would sign a form letter for the vast vast majority. Even in response to a mailed question, if he answered at all, it would be a response to issue of the letter, usually, rather than a "yechidus". I was told that this form letter was personally crafted for each and every person, and that his non-response to a letter was just as much a response as an actual response.

I'll note here, that I am not blaming or criticizing the Rebbe for this. I would have no desire to try and make a personal connection and respond to the mail of the thousands upon thousands upon thousands. I am sure that the Rebbe made a monumental effort in this regard, and his visibility on the dollars lines and kos shel brachah proves that well.

But, my thought is rather, according to my mashpiyim, I had many personal yechiduses with the Rebbe and many other opportunities. Now, years later, I wonder if I ever even met the Rebbe. I wonder if he ever knew my name, my ideas, my potential, my feelings about anything. As I think of it, he never used my name in conversation or response. He never referred in a letter to anything I had said or mentioned outside the letter. Most of the time, it was a form letter response. When I gave the "duch", did the Rebbe see me walk by and think, that was the guy who put tefilin on Jews here? That was the guy who came from this place and became frum. Did the Rebbe ever know why I was there? Did he know of or care about my concerns, my dreams, my fears, my feelings? I know it sounds like chick stuff, but bear with me.

Certainly, I knew details that were recounted in the official record. I know basically what made him tick, but there was a lot more I wanted to hear. I wanted to know what bore and drove his amazing vision, his grand ideas of what Judaism could be. I wanted to know what he would have us do to bring Moshaich and why he was dedicated to that single goal. I wanted to know what he feared most and what gave him the most nachas. I wanted to know the person. But alas he spoke volumes, but in riddle form. In all the years, sichas, dollars, letters, I never got an inch closer to who this man was.

Did he know who I was? Did I ever even meet him? I guess I will never know for sure.

Is the Rabbinate Headed for Irrelevance

2007-01-07T17:38:00.000-05:00

On the Main Line, linked in the title, has an excellent essay on what the Rabbinate expects from us little people. He is commenting in turn on this guy. A blogger seems to think we should be awed by current RW leaders, that we little peons have no business bashing them, criticizing them, analyzing their priorities and decrees, why, we are not even in the same league with these giants. We should accept their fiats without prejudice and with the humble understanding that we are cannon fodder.

Update: Upon further review of the play, it seems I have misunderstood the original point. Here is a restatement. A blogger seems to think we should be awed by current RW leaders, due to their learning prowess and some perception of his that they have interest in the individuals in the Jewish community. We little peons have no business disrespecting them, though we may analyze their priorities and decrees, even though they seem to be out of touch, at best, why, we are not even in the same league with these giants.

My point is still as ever, that respect as a Talmid Chacham can be earned by learning. Respect as a leader, can only be earned by leading. Respect as someone who take an interest in teg-teglicher Jewish life ... Well, you get the idea. I personally do not see anything that qualifies these "Talmidai Chachamim" to lead the Jewish community or to have their fiats received with fawning reverence, no matter how impractical, obtuse, or out of touch. I can agree that polite discourse can be had, provided that it is polite on both sides, and discourse, meaning two way. I'd even take a representative type discourse over a personal one, as prefereable to what exists today.

This is my response on On the Main Line:
How long has it been since the average person owned books, a couple of hundred years, tops? Then there was a period where "Jewish books" meant Beis Yehuda. Today, the average 12 year old learns Baba Metziah, and everyone has a copy of the text, and they even have learning guides, learning aids and linear translations, aids to learning mefarshim, un azoi veiter. Yesterdays students did not have these resources.

The challenge to the rabbinate is as it has always been, to LEAD. The biggest problem is that the rabbinate wants to lead in the 16th century, not in the 21st. They refuse to acknowledge that the average has changed, that technology has made the average person more learned and that cultures of democracy have made it impossible to lead by fiat, the only method that current RW leadership thinks is appropriate. Until they learn this, until they step up to the challenge, they are lunging headlong toward polite irrelevance.

Since they need to justify leadership by fiat to democracy tainted people, they had no choice but to invent the "mystical approach", a magic world where rabbanic proclamations and decisions make a new physical reality, where they have Torah granted superpowers and where the average highly intelligent layman is to be convinced that he cannot begin to understand their deep wisdom.

If this is their plan to lead Judaism into the future, (and I believe it will be until they are forced to see real reality), then there is likely little need to plan a future for Judaism.

The New Chabad Militancy

2007-01-07T08:23:00.000-05:00

Whereas traditional Chabad had avoided much of the fundamentalist militancy of other groups, recent outbreaks of violent righteous indignation in Chabad-ianity are disturbing. Official Chabad quickly tries to disassociate itself from these incidents as the work of unstable individuals. But one cannot ignore the increasing number of these "accidents" and the complete inability of any authority to stop them or even denounce them unequivocally.

Sadly, this trend seems to have begun (in America anyway) with the vicious attack on Chana Shneerson Gurary, 20 years ago. The person who ran upstairs and committed the attack was declared (by the Chabad Psychiatry Association?) to be unstable and the incident was quickly sanitized, spun and the perp was whisked out of the country. The crime of the victim: She sided with her son and against the Rebbe in a family dispute over her father's book collection.

Lately, at the annual convention of shluchim, a band of one or two dozen "unstable" zealots threw benches at the participants. The victims' crime: They do not openly believe or promote Chabadianity.

Just this week, an "unstable bachur" ran an elderly magid shiur out of the room, to the amusement of his fellow "unstable" students. In fact, there does not seem to be anyone stable in the room.

Today, 770 has become a divided house. Downstairs, is the nut house, a ward for yellow fever, enforced by a small army of the unstable, and unchecked. Upstairs the yeshiva continues to function like a rudderless ship. Monuments, museums, and plaques adorn the area around the HQ of the once vibrant movement. The hopeful look to history to provide comfort where the present cannot. But one thing is certain, the instability ruse is grwoing mighty thin.

OK I admit it

2006-12-31T12:51:00.000-05:00

OK I admit that I am a kofer. Here are some of the ikkarim that I do not believe (with perfect faith):

1) I do not believe that the Baal Shem Tov learned with Achiya HaShiloni.
2) I do not believe that Rav Yehuda Lowy (Maharal) created a Golem with kabalah formulae.
3) I do not believe that, if a woman walks over cut fingernails, she will miscarry.
4) I do not believe that demons haunt the first drop of liquid in a bottle.
5) I do not believe that lice reproduce spontaneously.
6) I do not believe that lava flows from the global flood interfere with scientific dating methods.
7) I do not believe that if a gadol baTorah paskens, that his psak will change physical reality.
8) I do not believe that sages are infallible nor that they could have invented airplanes.
9) I do not believe that people in Monsey heard a talking fish nor that people in yeshalayim met a prophetic dog.
10 ) I do not believe that anything bad will happen to anyone if you do not say "bli ayin hara" after admiring someone's good fortune.
11) I do not believe that people who keep deep chumras are any more religious or holy than people who do not.
12) I do not believe that the Ari Zal conversed with animals and plants.
13) I do not believe that if we conform to modern ideas in science and ethics, we are somehow worse off.

But I do believe with perfect faith in the coming of the Messiah. And the sooner the better. I am hungry!

The little bird is annoying

2006-12-19T23:31:00.001-05:00

OK, I absolutely loathe the "Little Bird" song that they sing in Chabad children's programs. Below is a copy of the lyrics:

The little bird is calling,
It wishes to return.
The little bird is wounded,
It cannot fly but yearn.
It’s captured by the vultures,
Crying bitterly,
Oh, to see my nest again,
Oh, to be redeemed.

The little bird of silver,
So delicate and rare,
Still chirps amongst the vultures,
Outshining all that’s there.
How long, how long it suffers,
How long will it be,
When will come the eagle,
And set the little bird free.

The little bird is Yisroel,
The vultures are our foes,
The painful wound is Golus,
Which we all feel and know,
The nest is Yerushalayim,
Where we yearn to be once more,
The eagle is the Moshiach,
Whom we are waiting for.

So why would I despise a song with such admirable lyrics. It is just so, so SO SO. Here it is.
This song is a parable (note it is not literal even to the greatest fundamentalist maniac) about the travels of the Jewish people. As far as I know, no sage ever gave this parable, so it is simply conceived for the purpose of kiruv. But even if I am wrong, and it was said by the alter zeide of the Shlumkeforendiker Rebbe, this adaptation is so banal, so insulting to our intelligence, so "in your face", that I have to walk out of the room and supress nausea when it is performed.

The song is bad enough. It drones through very slowly and monotonously. As you see, one must endure 3 full stanzas of this repetitive chant. Arrrrrgh! But the lyrics are absolutely written for an IQ of 16.5, perhaps. It tells me the entire obvious parable. It tells me the entire nimshal, as if I am incapable of discerning some deep subtle point hidden in there somewhere. Its imagery is incomprehensible and obtuse, that somehow this little bird is hated by all the other birds, how it is suffering somehow, how it will be set free by an eagle for some unknown reason. It is trying to say a lot in a few words, but it ends up saying nothing in way too many. It stresses the shtetl mentality, how they oppress us, how they are all horrible, how we are all wonderful and righteous.

In the end, I suppose it wants to tell us that we yearn for Moshiach. But by the time we get there, we wish our eardrums had been punctured with an icepick, and the little bird had been mercifully shechted and fried for Shabbos. It teaches its audience the typical victim mentality, and that this is the reason we should want Moshiach. Personally, I don't think we should want Moshiach because of Iran. It is because of the prospect of "knowing G-d" that should keep us interested. Irans come and go and Germanys come and go, with or without Moshiach. Please guys, rip this one out of the song book.

Someone's Listening

2006-12-14T19:41:00.000-05:00

Or maybe just thinking straight.

Thank G-d and kol haKavod to these Charedim. Finally a pashkevil worth posting.

http://extremegh.blogspot.com/2006/12/ban-i-agree-with.html

via Godol HaDor

Iran and Charedim in Sync

2006-12-12T16:54:00.000-05:00

For Iranian moshichist Achmedenijad and his amen corner of neoNazis and whackjobs, it is not surprising to hear that he declares the Holocaust a myth and to hear him prophesy the nuclear destruction of Israel and millions of its inhabitants. It is not odd to see Jew haters the world over applaud his efforts to reunite Nazism. It is not odd at all for Tony Blair to declare the conference, like Durban 2001 before it, shocking beyond belief.

But what draws me out of retirement are the Charedim that applauded along with the creme de la scum of the world, as they did for the late Yasser Arafat, nephew and huge fan of Nazi Haj Amin al Husseini. In their vitriolic, but political, hatred of "Zionist" Israel, they also tacitly agreed publicly that the Holocaust is a myth and that millions of Jews should be exterminated. Congratulations gentlemen, vitriolic vicious antisemitism is now authentic Judaism. Disgusting? Revolting? Sickening? Projectile Vomit inducing? Is there an adjective for such an attitude? And you wonder why it is difficult to mekarev yidden into today's "yiddishkeit". If these people are the true shomrei Torah then I hereby KOFER THEIR TORAH AND THEIR GODS, and I am calling the mohel to SEW IT BACK ON!!!! Naturai Karta and those Charedim who support you, you are bitter enemies of the Jewish people!!!

Plagues of the Pharisees

2006-06-25T07:55:00.000-04:00

Mesichta Sotah 22 Amud Beis (As translated at http://www.come-and-hear.com/sotah/sotah_22.html)

AND THE PLAGUE OF PHARISEES etc. Our Rabbis have taught: There are seven types of Pharisees: the shikmi Pharisee, the nikpi Pharisee, the kizai Pharisee, the 'pestle' Pharisee, the Pharisee [who constantly exclaims] 'What is my duty that I may perform it?', the Pharisee from love [of God] and the Pharisee from fear.

The shikmi Pharisee — he is one who performs the action of Shechem. (Rebel notes: Some explain, one who shows off, carrying his avodah on his "shoulders", others explain: One who performs mitzvos, milah for example, out of insincerity (going on the anshei shchem). Others explain: the deed of Shechem, that he tells others to perform some mitzva out of piety and then proceeds to take advantage of them. (going on the ma'aseh of Shimon v'Levi))

Obviously our sages were not enamored of the idea of people going about showing how they were holier than the rest of the world. It seems that they preferred a more humble and personal approach to avodah, one that did not include ever more extreme declarations of "piety". It is clear that they did not judge people based on how pious they "looked", on how they dressed, or on what sort of headgear they wore. They also had no love for those who mekarev-ed others in order to take advantage of them, under the guise of trying to bring them to a higher place.

The nikpi Pharisee — he is one who knocks his feet together. (Rebel notes: exaggerating that he is not walking with "pesia gassa", that he walks with his head down and with very small steps.)

Apparently our sages had no love for shows of extreme "humility". To them, humility was "done", not "expressed".

The kizai Pharisee — R. Nahman b. Isaac said: He is one who makes his blood to flow against walls. (Rebel notes: Some mefarshim say this means that he would rather walk with his eyes closed, even if it means that he will consantly smash his face into the wall, than look at women. Others say that this was an exaggerated expression of regret of sins.)

No comment required.

The 'pestle' Pharisee — Rabbah b. Shila said: [His head] is bowed like [a pestle in] a mortar. (Rebel notes: In davening, he bends his head so low, in exaggerated intensity, that the crown of his head is pointed down, and he is "shuckling" so hard, it looks like his head is a grinding pestle operating inside a mortar.)

The sages were at no loss for satire and sense of humor. No comment required.

The Pharisee [who constantly exclaims] 'What is my duty that I may perform it?' — but that is a virtue! — Nay, what he says is, 'What further duty is for me that I may perform it?' (Rebel notes: He already does everything perfectly in his eyes, so he is looking for a more challenging avodah.)

The sages are brevity engendered. He is trying to find chumras and "piety" customs to invent or carry on, not because they are the customs of his place, but because they make him appear to be more pious. The sages find this arrogant and worthy of satire. Similarly, the sages characterized Esav as a person who ma'asared salt to impress his father.

The Pharisee from love and the Pharisee from fear — Abaye and Raba said to the tanna [who was reciting this passage], Do not mention 'the Pharisee from love and the Pharisee from fear'; for Rab Judah has said in the name of Rab: A man should always engage himself in Torah and the commandments even though it be not for their own sake, because from [engaging in them] not for their own sake, he will come [to engage in them] for their own sake. (Rebel notes: I think he means that love and fear would be reasons to serve G-d, and the ideal is to serve G-d for its own sake. Abaya and Rava realize that one can use this in a good way, in order to reach the ideal. They understand the human failing.)

Apparently, our sages understood that certain standards were intended as ideals, but that there may be transitionary steps where most people will actually be in practical terms. They respected this concept, explicitly excluding "I am not there yet" from the definition of hypocrisy. They didn't try to bait people into faking compliance with very lofty ideals, but rather they removed such definition from the record.

R. Nahman b. Isaac said: What is hidden is hidden, and what is revealed is revealed; the Great Tribunal will exact punishment from those who rub themselves against the walls. (Rebel notes: R. Nachman's quote supports the ideas above, that false humility does not fool the main Interested Party. "Rubbing himself against the wall" is similar to "kizai" mentioned before.)

King Yannai (on his deathbed) said to his wife, "Fear not the Pharisees (Yannai's enemies) and the non-Pharisees (Tzdukim) but the hypocrites who ape the Pharisees (Rebel notes: so the fakers actually act like Pharisees, they wear the garb, do the shtick, sing the right song. Yannai says that even non-Pharisees, like Tzadukim, Biryonim etc. are less dangerous than people who make a show of it.); because their deeds are the deeds of Zimri, (Rebel notes: who claimed to be serving G-d publicly, even with his most deviant actions, claiming that he was only acting on behalf of the community) but they expect a reward like Phineas (Rebel notes: who was given the service of the Kehuna, power over the army, and a special place among kohanim. In other words, he got the extra measure of holiness in G-d's eyes that the "pious" Pharisees were trying to pretend that they had attained.)

The sages called it the Makos HaParushim, Plagues of the Pharisees. We call it _____________.

Pesach for Real Men

2006-04-11T16:18:00.000-04:00

First of all, a real man would have waited until now to think about Pesach cleaning. I mean, why spend weeks and weeks? If you plan, like some girly man, you might find situations that are different than you expected and then you will PLAN some solution to execute, and then you will operate, given the amount of extra time that you estimate, and ... PLEEEEASE! A real man would attack the unknown, adapt to problems and overpower them. A real man looks at a 20 hour job with 10 hours to go and says "Let me at it!"

Before we start, some of you will say "but my wife will not be happy if I wait and she will pester me, and we will cleaning need help to finish it by Pesach and ..." GET OUT OF HERE!!!!!!!!!!! Here is a Pesach cleaning guide for real men.

Step 1:

EVERYTHING you own or ever owned, even on Pesach, has been exposed to chametz dust and chametz air. Throw all of the clothing in your house, especially custom sheitels, the furniture, the chachkes and all of the food into a big pile and BURN it. A huge fire blazing away, what would give a real man more pleasure than that?! Fire officials say not to do this in your fireplace, but in a well ventilated, outdoors, open space where a large open flame will not endanger people or ... SNORE!!! Burn that puppy right in the fireplace, or if you are really manly, right in the middle of your living room. Do keep a pail of water around nearby. This will strengthen you insurance claim if you do happen to burn the house down. No worries. Of course, some of you will just not be up to this level, but it is highly recommended. It is only required l'chatchila if you have children. If you are serious about Pesach and chametz removal and you have children, you have no other option. Oh, you told them not to bring chametz out of the dining area, especially after Purim. Yeah, RIGHT!!!

Step 2:

Replace everything that you burned except food. Some of you are saying "but that will cost a lot of money, needlessly replacing things." MAN UP, and stop whining!!!! You don't make enough money working on the docks or driving the truck? Get a job giving tattoos and body piercings at nights until you are caught up. Or just throw it on the credit cards and let someone else worry about they are going to get the money from you (the more traditional method).

Step 3:

Purchase your Pesach food. Buy matzah, wine, real horseradish root, an apple, a celery stalk, an egg, a chicken neck, kosher l'Pesach bottled water, and kosher l'Pesach beef (8 days x 6 lbs = 48 lbs.). A real man shops for nothing else. It goes without saying that during steps 2 and 3, you have never left your house, as the only way a real man shops is online. Total time for shopping online in steps 2 and 3, 20 minutes.

Step 4:

There may be a bit of mess after this but three rooms especially need to be dealt with, the living room, the dining room and the kitchen.

The Living Room
Nothing warms the heart of a real man more than the sqealing roar of a power tool in a closed environment. In the living room, you probably have a bunch of worthless crap, even if you did not follow step 1 fully, and it is not charred to ashes. (Not everyone is manly enough for step 1, and their wife stopped them. You can continue here, even if this is case. It will be our secret.) This worthless crap is mostly your wife's hand picked furniture or generational hand-me-downs (but they are sentimental, blech!), books, rugs, coffee tables, pictures and other things that are not power tools and are therefore of no value. Other guides, written for women and homos, recommend that you remove the items from the room and sweep, mop, and shampoo the rugs. No way!

Enter the best tool known to mankind, the leaf blower! Dirt and ashes get caught under around all this stuff and a 250 mph wind storm is just the thing. Just fill it with gas, pull the cord, enjoy the soothing roar, start in the farthest corner and move methodically toward the door. Time: 15 minutes. It's Pesach after all, so do it right.

Step 5:

The Dining Room

Basically, this is the same as step 5, except there is probably actual chametz here. So you must use the leaf blower to blow this out of the house as well. There may be spaces that are small, where the chametz got in and grew through dust accumulation. Use the power drill and / or circular saw to alter your wife's great grandmother's old hutch, so that chametz can be removed more easily. Remember, this is real chametz, not just kitniyos. And of course, use eye protection, gloves, yada yada. (Does that cover us in case some nutball cuts his finger off, Morty?)

Step 6:

Kitchen

Next to the leaf blower, the best tool known to humanity is the BLOWTORCH!! Many people blowtorch the oven and the metal sink, and I agree, but do not miss opportunities afforded by this amazing tool. The refrigerator, the freezer, behind the refrigerator, behind the oven, the shelves, the cabinets, the counters, and under the sink can all benefit from this bit of technological progress. For a real fast clean up, try leaf blower on one arm, blowtorch in the opposite hand.

Step 7:

Go to a hotel for Pesach

The former exercise was really just for enjoyment. Now go to a hotel, and you do not have to sell anything.

Step 8:

Cooking the meat. Fire up the grill! Put the meat on the grill. Wait.

Oh yeah, and have a kosher and freilichen Pesach, dude!

Pesach in the desert

2006-03-27T13:56:00.000-05:00

As I go through the annual ritual of Pesach cleaning, I begin to wonder about some things:

1) How much aluminum foil did the Yidden use in the desert?
2) Did they all carry along a Pesach kitchen, along with their regular kitchen?
3) Did anyone eat together with anyone else, or did they only trust their own kashrus?
4) How much plastic did they carry with them for every exposed surface, double covered?
5) How many utensils did they carry with them in the desert, so that when one fell to the ground, they always had enough to replace it? Did it hover in the air, a miracle perhaps?
6) How much per pound did they pay for shmurah matza?
7) Did they open the door for Eliyahu Hanavi, even though he hadn't been born yet?
8) Did they peel everything, seeing as in my house, a team of three is working almost constantly to maintain this standard for far fewer people than they had?
9) Did anyone's matza or matza crumbs ever get wet, and what happened to them if it did?
10) How many stores did the average person in the desert have to visit on Pesach?

Golden Calf

2006-03-18T20:17:00.000-05:00

This is not an official post since it is a repost, but it certainly bears repeating.

Anniversary

2006-02-24T00:13:00.000-05:00

This week marked the first anniversary of this blog. Surely, you read all about the gala event in the New York Times. All the wires carried it. It has been a long haul since I began by discussing Rambam, magic and Judaism, Rambam's astronomy and whether or not the Chabad Rebbe was actually dead. Since then we have covered magic medicine, the Daas Emes, the Igros, apologetics and QM. We have seen the experience of the BT. We have visited the Rebel's dictionary, Dr. Suess and poetry corner, just for some laughs. We have challenged our kehila with quizzes from time to time. And we watched life move along. Most of the posts are categorized on the right column of this blog.

This blog was even given a great honor when popular blogger Dov Bear recognized great potential here. There are many blogs in my blogroll that will take up the drumbeat of the rebel cause, to stop the fundamentalists from driving the last of our frummy friends far from the fold of faith. I want to thank them all for making this such an enjoyable ride, for arguing with me, for agreeing with me, laughing with me, and for just leaving some plain weird comments.

I will be back from time to time, when subjects are provocative enough, or if I need an outlet for my sophomoric silly moods. But I feel other blogging pursuits calling me. Again, thanks to those who have made the trip so enjoyable.

Are You Chabad? - Part 2

2006-02-19T09:56:00.000-05:00

After the previous test , I decided to tone it down. By popular request, here are some of the other questions. All references to real people living or dead are deleted. Still, there are those who will be offended, though no offense is intended. Deal wid it.

1) How much spit is mopped off the floor of 770 after the final aleinu of Yom Kippur? (Express answer to the nearest litre.)

2) When is the most chasidishe time for shacharis to begin?
a) 1 PM
b) 5 PM
c) 8 PM
d) tomorrow morning

3) My beard contains:

a) the remains of my last 3 meals
b) the remains of the baby's last 3 meals
c) the remains of unknown birds and possibly reptiles
d) a few grey hairs
e) OK, a more than a few
f) all of the above

4) Bobby has just walked into chabad house for the first time. He has never met a frum Jew before, and he is 18 years old. You should:

a) have him chant Yechi 3 times
b) tell him you have nothing to do with those crazy Yechi people
c) run every Yechi person out of town
d) tell him about the Rebbe's miracles
e) say "hi, I am Rabbi __________"
f) find out serepticiously if he has money

5) Friday night davening has ended at 5:45. You live 10 minutes walk from the shul. You should:

a) sprint home with all of the children, prepare kidush and challah, get through Shalom Aleichem and get in kidush at 5:59:55.
b) use white wine
c) fail to believe in the astrology behind this "custom"
d) sit in shul and batul until 6:50
e) learn a sicha until 8:00
f) set your clock back an hour

6) Complete the following sentence: The wedding will be at Oileh Toireh ________
a) if the misnagdim don't come and wreck up the place
b) if the musicians are available
c) if, chas v'chalilah, the unthinkable happens, lo aleinu, and moshiach doesn't come by then, so it can be in Yerushalyim ir hakodesh, im yirzeh hashem, bimhera byameinu mamash takeh mamash shbemamash, at which point Oileh Toireh will fly to Yerushalayim so it makes no difference, baruch hashem
d) if the goyim don't come and wreck the place
e) yechi adoneinu moreinu etc.

7) If you hear a Besht story, the proper attitude is that:
a) it is absolutely true like a pasuk Toireh
b) it could definitely be true but might have been true of someone else
c) he could have done it
d) it is historically true, like the Golem of Prague, but may have been exaggerated a bit
e) the story is not about the Rebbe so who cares

8) What do Aish, Ner Yisroel, Ohr Samaiach have in common?
a) All are institutions of Torah learning
b) All are institutions of torah learning, but are not our derech
c) All are institutions of Torah learning, but are lacking basic fundamentals of Torah thought
d) All are run by scumbag misnagdim for scumbag misnagdim
e) All are satanic

9) Complete the following sentence: Long live our lord, our teacher __________
a) our Rebbe, King Christ forever and ever
b) our Creator, who lives forever
c) our supernal superman, who does miracles forever and ever
d) the Messiah, nuff said
e) the Messiah and then some

10) You are at a farbrengen, when someone questions the judgement of the Rebbe in instituting a particular custom. You try to speak sense to him, but to no avail. He still does not think that the new custom or its reasoning to be sound. You should:
a) slash his tires
b) break a vodka bottle over his head
c) throw herring and pickles at him
d) consider if what he is saying has any merit, however slight
e) call him a frei-ya chutzpan at the top of your lungs, so that he will see the error of his ways
f) threaten to spread rumors that he is a child molester

Science Test

2006-02-09T20:40:00.000-05:00

Science / Torah midterm. Go for it.

1) Science is to Torah as Red Sox are to:

a) Patriots
b) Yankees
c) Red Sox general manager
d) Torah

2) Dinosaurs

a) never existed
b) all died in the Mabul
c) were called "Taninim gedolim" in Beraishis
d) were killed by a comet
e) were killed by eating a lot of food with high fat and cholesterol
f) were turned purple, giddy and touchy feely by a comet

3) Fossils are

a) faked by scientists
b) faked by dinosaurs
c) not mentioned in the Gemora
d) not evidence of anything
e) apikorsus

4) Torah is to Slifkin as Gemora is to

a) Gedolim
b) Elisha ben Avuya
c) Martin Buber
d) Pope Benedict
e) the Satan
f) Hitler, Saddam, Osama bin Laden, the Grand Wizard
g) Slifkin

5) Geological strata

a) show that the Earth is about 6000 years old
b) show evidence of a universal flood
c) seem to imply that the Earth is much older than 6000 years
d) are lying
e) geo … WHAT?!

6) Evolution

a) is a theory not a fact
b) is faked by scientists
c) is faked by dinosaurs
d) takes millions of years
e) is the realm of the Satan

7) Medicine works by:

a) advanced knowledge of infections
b) advanced knowledge of genetics
c) magic
d) scientific method
e) advanced knowledge of traditional methods
f) the hand of G-d
g) sucking the poison out through the navel, via a live pigeon
h) condensing “nothing” into pill form
i) sticking a needle somewhere I’d rather not discuss

8) Astrology

a) only worked in the old days
b) still works for kabalists
c) still works for Jeanne Dixon
d) has magical predictive powers
e) is scientific

9) The best evidence for a scientific fact is:

a) Three people say it’s true
b) Everyone in my shul says its true
c) Falsifiable, reproducible, predictive evidence
d) If it says it in the Gemorah or not
e) If a circuitous apologetic can link it to something in Torah
f) Anecdotes and stories of tzadikim
g) All scientific facts are false, because they are from evil science
h) The devil finds work for idle hands, the devil finds work for idle hands, the devil finds …

10) Claims that science is efficacious are evidence of:

a) misguidedness
b) brain damage
c) extreme brain damage
d) psychosis
e) extreme psychosis
f) effi… Wha?

11) Chicken soup cures:

a) migraines
b) colds and flu
c) shingles
d) insomnia
e) all of the above

12) How many diseases have been eradicated using traditional, nonscientific medical techniques?

Express your answer to the nearest factor of zero. ________________

13) Astrology is to astronomy as:

a) Chasidus is to kabala
b) Engineering is to science research
c) Theodicy is to theology
d) superstition is to science research
e) prophecy is to modern Judaism
f) Red Sox are to Yankees
g) Geology is to geometry
h) Biorhythms are to biology

14) Estimate the number of Jews driven away from Judaism by each of the following:
Express your answer to the nearest 10,000.

a) Fundamentalism and Charedism
b) Silly kiruv apologetics
c) The Slifkin ban
d) Internal politics
e) Closedmindedness
f) Regular kiruv apologetics
g) Ba’al Tshuvas being a bunch of whackos
h) Nepotism, yichus worship, and injustices
i) Wealth worship and favoritism
j) Impotence of batei din

Anniversary Coming

2006-02-08T00:12:00.000-05:00

Oh joy! The anniversary of this blog is coming shortly, and it promises to be quite a bash. We never know who will show up. Of course, the party is planned for Yerushalayim, but if moshiach doesn't come chas v'chalillah a million times kein hora, lo aleinu, rachmana l'tzlan, it will be right here on this site, G-d forbid. We may have our own million dollar challenge akin to Mr. Randi's. I saw posted on Chabad.org a video of Rav Kaduri speaking to the Chabad Rebbe in 1980. The Rebbe seemed pleased that Rav Kaduri had developed a yeshiva with a curriculum of practical kabbalah, not just sefarim. Perhaps he meant avodah, but obviously the imagination takes us to the more colorful parts of kabalah, amulets and magic.

Perhaps, we may offer to pretest for the million dollar reward if any student of the Kaduri yeshiva can demonstrate any effect that is "paranormal". No requirements for explanations of how it happened. Just demonstration under controlled conditions of a paranormal event, magic, psychic, astrological prediction, create a golem if you like.

Stay tuned.

Yud Shvat Kiruv

2006-02-05T07:26:00.000-05:00

In the chabad world, many a tale, spiritual and physical, is spun around the passing of the previous Rebbe, Rayatz, on Yud Shvat, 5710 (Jan, 1950) . When one attends Chabad at this time, he will likely hear of tales of mesiras nefesh, unflinching heroism, and the bursting of spiritual realms, previously sealed to mere mortal humans. He may hear of the encounter of the Rayatz with the Golem of Prague (legend has it that he encountered the golem in the Maharal shul, another legend has it that he transported it to 770 Eastern Parkway in Brooklyn), how he was moser nefesh for every Jew (Rayatz, not the golem), how he was an ohaiv yisroel for every Jew (except for those misnagdim and maskilim who had earned his dislike, of course), and how there would be no frumkeit in America today without him. He will likely not hear of the Rayatz's early holocaust experiences, miraculous escape, nor the theodicy of the Rayatz on why the holocaust occurred. He will likely hear how, when the Chabad Rebbe referred to Rayatz as the Moshiach and leader of the generation, he was really referring to himself. And doubtless, he will hear of the famous Chasidic ma'amar, Basi L'Gani. The Rayatz was to say this ma'amar on that fateful day in 1950, and the late Chabad Rebbe spoke it in his place. This in itself is a wonder, since these ma'amarim come from heaven and are spoken without any notes, but I am sure that the Chabad historians out there can explain how it happened this time.

Anyway, I was at a Chabad shul on shabas when one of the young shluchim spoke on Basi L'Gani. He is a frequent visitor to our part of town, and he had in tow a young college student. This particular shliach is not dogmatic, unintelligent or even misguided, as Chabad shluchim go, quite the opposite. He is a decent and earnest fellow, and a quite a good speaker, besides. On this occasion, he delivered a personal translation of the four words that open the ma'amar (a pasuk from Shir HaShirim), Basi l'gani achosi kalah. His translation was "Come to my garden, my sister, my beloved". The ma'amar continues "l'gani, l'ganuni", which he left out as he continued. The actual translation is "Come to my garden, my sister, my bride" "my garden, meaning my bedchamber". Now all of the Chabad chevra understand that this refers to the sh'china, on two levels, as sister and as bride. They understand that this verse is not to be taken literally, that it is exclusively a parable. On this occasion, though, the speaker saw fit to dodge the obvious literal translation. When called to the mat, he was helped along, that "kalah" actually means "bride" not "my bride" and that "achosi" can mean "relative" not just "sister", as with Sarah and Lot. This is not withstanding the clear meaning of the ma'amar and other Chasidus, in which context "relative" makes no sense. IOW, in front of the uninitiated, they preferred the apologetics to simply commenting that this was a parable. WHY?

It was an odd moment, transfixed in time, whatever that means. The fundamentalists were calling for a nonliteral translation and interpretation. The rebels were calling for a literal reading. And the machine of kiruv rolled on, and I, ambivalently, with it.

DaatEmet - Treifos

2006-02-01T09:31:00.000-05:00

In the Gemorra Chulin, 53, the laws of a drusa are discussed. They are codified in the Mishneh Torah, hilchos Shchita, and particularly, ch 5 on which we will focus. As DaatEmet points out, the only Torah treifah is a drusah, an animal that has been clawed by a predator beyond the ability to recover. All of the toehr 7 signs and numerous restrictions are Rabinic. However, in the Gemora, it states that a drusah dies because of the poison that the claws of the predator inject into the animal. According to their science, the poison is injected at the withdrawal of the claw. Such a poison is assumed to be part of the physiology of predatory large felines, birds, and there is argument about canines. Thus, the gemorra brings the case where a lion's claw is severed during attack and it never withdraws its claw, concluding that it is not drusah. Two poskim stand out. The Tosfos points out that such a case is not practical because the predator may have attacked many times and we have only witnessed the final attack. The Rambam does not mention the poison at all, but indicates that one might examine the inwardds of the prey to determine if were indeed a drusah. One thing is clear from both of the answers. It is the apparent condition of the animal rather than the theory that determines the halacha.

DaatEmet uses this theory of poison to conclude that there is no such thing in reality as a treifah, since a drusah is depends on poison that does not exist. He successfully refutes the Michtav M'eliyahu zt"l, one the most brilliant rationalist rabanim of modern times, who says that the poison is actually the spoiled remains of prey around the nails, which cause infections. The obvious refutation is that this poison is introduced at penetration, not at retraction. And here hinges the big point. A fundamentalist is now forced to conclude something preposterous to defend the poisnon injection. However, if one looks at the matter, it is clear what happened.

Contemporary science saw that predator claws cause redness, swelling and wasting flesh in the vast majority of cases. Its students concluded that some poison was the culprit and therefore, that it was introduced at retraction, like snake poison or any glandular poison. Halacha concluded similarly, and added legal implications. The Tosfos and Rambam make this clear. The Tosfos refutes the practical implications of the case in the gemorra, saying that it is never possible to know for sure that the animal did not retract its claws. On the contrary, appearance of the diseased inwards would effectively prove that retraction had occurred. The Rambam does not even bring the gemorra's theoretical case and bids the observer to look at the flesh itself in determining whether the animal is drusah or not. IOW, the halacha clearly and definitively goes according to the apparent observation of the layman, not according to the carefully controlled observation someone who seeks a deeper explanation. If you see X, conclude Y. In halacha, this is called "chazaka", and the entire sea of Jewish Law depends it. In fact, the entire sea if Rabinic Law that is designated as "fences" was developed, by and large, to protect the lay observer from these gaps. In the case of treifos, the Rambam clearly states the matter that the chazakas of the rabanim stand, regardless of observed reality.

So as we discuss astronomy, zoology, cryptozoology, biology and the like, keep in mind that the attacks largely fall on the fundamentalist approach, though the rationalists are not entirely immune, as we saw before.

DaatEmet's Zoo

2006-01-31T17:06:00.000-05:00

DaatEmet has written a pamphlet and an essay on animals in Chazal and halacha. Not to steal the thunder of R. Slifkin, I will just say the few words that allow the explorer to get a summary of the issues. They definitely amount to a punt for the home team, but it is important to understand why that is. This case is good to illustrate how the kiruv should field a question of this type.

The pamphlet addresses the hare, hyrax and camel. The Torah says that kosher animals have two indicators, split hooves and chewing the cud. Rashi and other Rishonim make clear that "maaleh gairah" means to bring the food back up (ma'alah) through the neck (garon). However, the camel is a classic ruminant. The hare and hyrax do not ruminate in this manner. The apologist is left with four possible answers, none of them very satisfying.

1) The Hirsch answer: Shafan and arnevet are unknown animals that do ruminate.
2) Their mouth and nose movements appear to the lay observer like rumination.
3) The hare and hyrax do indeed process and reprocess food in a manner similar in digestion to rumination, though it is not regurgitation and cud chewing.
4) They do indeed ruminate, though we have not witnessed the matter.

Answer 1 is a punt, plain and simple. There is no basis to say this other than to dodge the contradiction. These words are used throughout Tanach and Talmud and no one questions what they are in any place except this one. Nor does Hirsch try to equate the words with any known or theoretical animal. DE has a field day with this one.

Answer 2 is more in line with what we have seen in arguing on DE before. The layman must make the determination, and it is the layman, rather than the scientist who might mistake the masticulation for rumination. This is weaker in this case, because the gemorra states, as Aish Hatorah unfortunately trumpeted in kiruv pamphlets galore, that these 4, the hare, hyrax, pig, and camel are the only four in the world with one kosher indicator but not both. Obviously, there are many animals, like kangaroos, for instance, which appear to ruminate, but do not. South American camel relatives actually do some form of rumination, but are not listed, nor would the LAYMAN refer to them as camels. This leads into what DE says in the essay, that Chazal did not have any special knowledge of animals, certainly not animals that were not discovered in their times. I would contend that when they say that these are "all the animals in the world", they are only referring to discovered animals. Obviously, they can make no conclusion about undiscovered animals. DE brings the words, "was Moshe a bowman or hunter, that he should know?" as proof that he meant all animals that would ever be discovered. However, these words emphasize the opposite. He only meant those animals that would have BEEN KNOWN by a bowman or hunter, not those that would have required prophecy. Anyway, the Torah is satisfied by this answer, but not the common interpretation of the gemorra. In fact, animals that a bowman or hunter would have known in the Middle East, rodents, appear to ruminate.

Answer 3 trivializes the matter. In the Gutnik Chumash, the editor notes that hares eat soft pellets that pass through their digestive system and come out the rectum. These are separate entities from fecal material, but technically, they are digested and redigested so the process is similar to rumination. This "cacotrophy" is unique to rabbits and hares. Similarly, the hyrax has a stomach extension that is peculiar within its kind. It could be seen as redigesting. This is sort of the opposite approach to answer two. Here we broaden the definition of maaleh gairah, so that ONLY a SCIENTIST can distinguish the indicator. IMO, this makes the indicator useless. It also trivializes the indicator. Once I broaden maaleh gairah, why am I including cacotrophy and double maw, and not including animals who eat from amongst their feces, like rats and horses. Not only that, if pigs have a split hoof, but do not chew cud, but they do eat from amongst feces, and if I extend maaleh gairah to redigestion, then why aren't pigs kosher? There is no reason why redigestion of one type should be included, but not another type. Thus, it is the same sophistry as answer 1. It answers this question, but one would not have derived the answer as a distinction without the question. Which ever animal I want to include, I just find a uniqueness about their digestion and call it maaleh gairah. It also requires the fundamentalist to go against the consensus of Rishonim in redefining maaleh gairah. All of them say that rumination means bringing it back up, as Rashi in parshas Shmini.

Answer 4 is the typical fundamentalist, Gossean burp. It gets a little support in this case, because a 1975 study claimed to confirm that hyraxes do indeed chew their cud for very short periods during a 24 hour period. The study claimed to witness the cud chewing, though I have not seen any peer review. This is still weak on grounds that it is not much of an indicator if only one study under 24 hour surveillance could show evidence, so how could the average observer ever see it. It does not help our friend, the hare, either. However, since someone says that hyraxes chew their cud, who is to say that hares do not. Maybe they do, and more studies will show that they do at some time. If the Torah says that they do, then we just don't understand how they do, but they do. Uhhhh .... OK.

R. Slifkin has already written extensively on the evidence in The Camel, The Hare and the Hyrax, so I hope this summary is helpful, but it is rehashing. So, DE has a strong point on this one. However, kiruvistim should not be hiding on these points. One, they should admit that the Chazal knew nothing of animals to which they had not been exposed and drop all proofs of Torah min HaShamayim from the 4 animals and animal based prophecies as proof. Two, they should declare that, while we do not understand how this matter correlates with Torah, we must continue to ask the question. Ultimately, with some data that does not exist today, we may obtain an answer that does indeed correlate clearly, without stretching or forcing, but we do not yet have that answer. Nor should there be a time limit, since scientific discovery is not limited by time. (This is a bit answer 4-ish, but that is OK as long as you acknowledge the weakness of it, that it has not been shown, and that any answer is speculative.) Three, they should acknowledge that such questions broaden the base of Torah learning and interest, and that only by encouraging the question to be asked, will it ever be answered. Four, they should state they they are not afraid of questions that they cannot currently answer, because they are confident that an answer will one day present itself. In short, they should acknowledge that it is a good question, and like all good questions, it is good that we have Jews knowledgeable enough to help us extend our study of Torah.

I have not used a lot of links in this, but the matters discussed are pretty open to google search.

My karma killed your dogma

2006-01-30T11:37:00.000-05:00

We will pick up with the DaatEmet presently, but I wanted to pause to say a word about dogma. I have rarely found a less attractive trait among the thinkers of the world than dogmatic zeal. Dogma chews up the intellect and defecates it indiscriminately about the psyche. Dogma comes in all breeds, but it inevitably turns into pit bull. What is it?

Looking in the only definitive resource, the Rebel's Dictionary, dogma is the fervent drive to declare my values infallible and impose them upon you. With dogma, the vice of closedmindedness becomes the virtues of fervor and resolve. The virtue of self-examination becomes the vice of equivocation. The virtue of humility becomes the vice of liberality. The virtue of independent thought becomes the vice of rebelling. The virtue of diversity becomes the vice of diversity. And, most importantly, the virtue of reconsidering and changing a bad direction becomes the vice of heresy. Dogma is standing water that stagnates by its very nature and grows mildew on anything that comes near, causing the most beautiful cloth to smell repelant. It is a spiritual supernova, spewing forth loudly and brightly, followed inevitably by a spiritual black hole, falling in on itself and dying under its own weight for eternity.

It is the sign of the ketana emana (ye of little faith). The drive to make sure that others do not disagree with his beliefs, that they understand that they are not allowed to disagree, that it is a grave sin to disagree, that it is HERESY, is firmly rooted in personal insecurity with one's own belief system. He assures that he will not have to face tough questions, that he will not have to do the hard work of self examination, that he will not have to punt on any important question, but that he can firmly march forward with full faith that he and his are right, beyond common sense, beyond the casual sweeping aside of personal judgement, and beyond any need to wonder.

Curiosity may kill the cat, but the greater fear is that it will kill the dogma. Good riddance.

Daat Emet - PI

2006-01-29T12:10:00.000-05:00

The value of PI, the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter, has been determined to millions of decimal places and growing. Just plug it into the formula and determine the next place. There is no observation. It is all mathematical.

The ancients saw PI as 3. Even by Ptolemaic times, it was known to be approximately 1/7 more. Even more precisely, a circle is the superset of all points equidistant from a given point, called the center. Any observer with a stick and piece of string can see that Pi is a bit more than 3. However, the mishna in Eruvin 13b states that we can assume that it is 3. The Rambam says that it is imprecise and approximate. DaatEmet characterizes this as a "trick", bringing the gemorra and a famous pasuk. His essay is here. The argument centers on the Yam HaMutzak, the Gemorra's Pircha, and the Tosfos.

As you can read yourself, the essay asserts that the measurement of the circular molten sea was exact, and that the Tosfos relates it to the case of the round scrolls fitting in the ark, and asks on why the Gemorra uses 3 when the mathematicians are more precise. And according to Tosfos, it is a good question. However, for our purposes, it is fairly weak, given one obvious fact. The entire concept of PI only applies to perfect geometric circles. A rough circle like the Yam Hamutzak might have had a precisely 3 to one ratio. Certainly the scrolls in the ark are not perfect circles since they are flexible.

Going back to the principle that the halacha must be discernable, not to the engineering professional, but to the common person who is erecting an Eruv, it makes no sense to require him to make 3 1/7x measurements. How do you do that with no tools or particular skills assumed? Answer: round it off to something easy, that is within the parameter, like 3 to 1. For rough circles, it is close enough.

Conveniently, DE leaves out the next part of the mishna, that all circular things in halacha are considered squares for the purpose of measurement. If an Eruv is round, we square it off and one may carry in the corners of the square, even though this adds area to the Eruv. In hilchos Shabbas 12:17-18, the Rambam explains that a person may carry 4 amos. This would form a perfect geometric circle by definition. However, he is patur within the diagonal of a square of 4 amos, which 4 times the square root of 2. So the area of a circle is never an issue as one can use an approximation and still be within the schar hapinot.

The issue would arise l'kulah (like the succah case that he brings) e.g. when one needs a 4 x 4 amos square and has a circumference to measure. Halachically, if the circumference were 12 amos, the bayis, succah or whatever would be 4 x 4, but in reality, it would be a little less. The truth is though, this is also approximate by nature. Eruvin are not perfect circles, nor are ceiling beams and the halacha gives us a reasonable way to approximate. Since the method is halachic assumption, we can presume that the halacha accomplishes what it wishes to accomplish. IOW, we are not required to fulfill the halachic measurement precisely, but to be under the reasonable, halachically accepted presumption that we did so. Many, many places in halacha presuppose that we do not have the means to be exact and allow us, require us to estimate.

So, Tosfos aside, the Gemorra pircha "still we must subtract" is a moot point with regard to exact measurement. So again, the fundamentalists are confounded, but halacha is not particularly in question here.

Note: DE's point about Kav and Kavah is well taken. How do we know how to apply the gematrias to make this work. To find some particular combination that gives us an answer that we like is no big trick. How do we know to divide them? How do we know to add three? And if the purpose was to show us the exact value of Pi, instead of an approximation, why wasn't it even closer?

Daat Emet - Niddah

2006-01-28T19:08:00.000-05:00

Originally, I had wanted to do a full examination of the DaatEmet pamphlets and essays. DaatEmet is a former yeshiva talmid in Israel, who publishes his questions and runs an organization that helps charedim leave the charedi world. From his writing and goals, he seems to be a "weak atheist" type, who rejects Judasim as internally inconsistent. Implications have been made that the site is connected with hate organizations, and I have no doubt that antisemites use some of this type of information to nefarious ends, but I do not really have indication of the truth or falsity of any of this.

However, our esteemed orthoskeptic sites have tackled many of these issues. So, I will take some select essays to examine and make a brief explanation of a few of the issues. The first is his essay on Chazal and the laws of niddah. His essay is here.

His main charges are that Chazal did not understand the structure of the female anatomy and paskened based on complete falsity. However, on careful examination, with an understanding of how this matter was understood by the sages, we will see what we would expect to see, that the Chazal were not infallible in their knowledge of anatomy nor their acceptance of common superstition, but that the basic pesak, the mesora is not materially affected.

His scientific examination is factual. Menstrual blood is not different from any other blood, though it was commonly believed to be an evil omen in ancient times, and it was commonly believed to be materially different than regular blood. The Ramban in Acharei mos 19:18 is one that I have mentioned before in this blog. The Ramban does seem to have been receptive to certain superstitions, among them that a woman who is bleeding can kill with her stare and can see the blood spots in a mirror. As I mentioned, this was more likely related to the poor quality of mirrors at that time than to any apparition. He also brings down the Chasam Sofer, who states outright that there are parts of the niddah description that to not mesh with the reality, especially according to Rashi and Tosfos. However, a look at the Rambam should show us where the real problems are.

The Mishna states that "The chachamim created an analogy", comparing the female lower abdominal anatomy to a three tiered building. Here is the text and below is a fair translation from Rambam halacha Issurei Biya 5:3-4:

3 The chachamim created an analogy regarding a woman: The womb, where the child is born, is called the "source", and the place where the blood of regular and irregular menstruation exits is called the "room", because it is inside. And the neck of the womb (Rebel notes: the cervix), which is the place which is constricted at its head (Rebel notes: the mucus plug) at the time of pregnancy so that the fetus will not descend and it opens wide at the time of birth, is called the "hallway" because it is an entry way to the womb. At the time of full insertion, the "limb" enters the "hallway" but does not reach its head inside, but is short by inches.
4 And above the room and the hallway, between the room and the hallway, is the place of the two "testicles" of the woman, and the paths in them prepare her seed. This place is called the "attic". And there is a semblance of a hole open from the attic to the roof of the hallway, and this is called the "holding pen". And the limb enters beyond the holding pen at the time of full insertion

At this point, the Rambam explains that blood from the "room" causes impurity. Blood from the attic doesn't cause impurity, and blood from the "hallway", if it is beyond the holding pen, causes impurity, since it is assumed to be from the womb, and if it is in front of the holding pen, it is a safek or doubt whether it came from the room or the attic. The DaatEmet wonders at this, and says that it does not fit with reality.

However, it does for the most part with an obvious observation. The Rambam describes the "head of the hallway" and the "roof of the hallway". What is the difference between the two, as the head must also be the roof. However, visualize the woman laying on her back, and we have a direct correlation of all the elements. The womb is still correctly placed. The hallway is the vaginal cavity. The head of the hallway is the outside of the cervix. The "testicles of the woman" are the ovaries. The "paths" are the Fallopian tubes, albeit incorrectly described as being in the ovaries. (The ancients probably visualized the process of female seed emission as blood being emitted at orgasm, just as the male process works with sperm, only inside.) The attic is the bladder, albeit incorrectly described as containing the ovaries. (Given the actual proximity, the unskilled viewer might think that the ovaries were inside the bladder.) The "holding pen" is the urethra. Thus, blood emanating from the reproductive system causes
impurity, while blood from the urinary system does not.

There are other descriptions in the Gemora which I will mention briefly. There are said to be "teeth" near the cervix. I think this refers to roof of the vaginal cavity, which might be described as teeth. The Rambam, in his explanation of the mishnah, has the Fallopian tubes connecting at the cervix, whereas they actually connect at the top of the womb.

DE also brings other points of contention showing that the Chazal thought some common misconceptions of their day, that menstrual blood turns to breast milk, that the fetus dwells in different places, and the Rishonim as well, had some common superstitions and misconceptions about menstruation.

In the end, however, the Rambam in halacha is essentially correct, and his imprecise knowledge of the anatomy does not really affect the halacha. DE tries to build this into a case where the psak has nothing at all to do with the reality, but we see that essentially, we can say that blood that is related to the reproductive system is impure, and blood related to the unrinary system is not. Doubt goes to the stricter side, since the matter is from the Torah.

DE adds that menstrual blood is not materially different than the blood of wound and should not be impure. IMO, this is unfounded. In halacha, we make reasonable assumptions all the time. If we can reasonably assume that the woman had some externally caused wound, we can differentiate between that and the menstrual type bleeding. Again, halacha is described so that a layman observer can make a determination, not so that a scientist is required to describe what is really going on. Fundamentalists will still have trouble with DE on this, but halacha does not. If you disagree, please comment and state why. If there are points in the essay that I have not covered or have covered insufficiently, also please comment.

Just Plain Weird

2006-01-21T20:30:00.000-05:00

BTA has just asked a question about the ikkarim. Are they too hard to believe? My response to him is that they seem pretty straight forward except for 12 and 13, Moshiach and Techiya. These seem to be ones that, if you were not indoctrinated, they never would have occurred to you. Whereas, by navua, for instance, if it is not true, then why begin with it. If it is the source of the things we believe, then naturally it is an ikar, and without it, you are not practicing Judaism or even part of Judaism. IOW, once it disappears, there is no more semblance of Judaism. In comparison, 12 and 13 seem "extra", that if they were discarded, it would have little effect on day to day Judaism. Nonetheless, the Rambam considered tthese beliefs central.

In the course of discussing the Chartumei Mitzrayim, the discussion wended around to magic, the Rambam's pronouncement that there is no magic (AZ 11:15) the Rambam's general view on kishuf (the deed rather than the accomplishment is the issur), and whether there really is or was magic and magicians. One of the esteemed Talmidei Chachamim (not sarcastic, a true TC and gentleman) asserted the Golem of Prague as proof that magic (holy and nonholy) was real. Another asserted that nonJewish history affirms this. Thank G-d there was whiskey on the table.

So, BTA, are the ikarim too hard to believe? Who are you talking to?

Whose Teva?

2006-01-14T23:51:00.000-05:00

In the time of Techiyas HaMaisim, all of the tzadikim will return to the world. Question is whose world will they return to? For instance, the Rambam writes 2 perakim in MT, hilchos Dayos on good health practices, which are different than those written in the Talmud. Many of these health practices and facts are different than what we find today. The obvious answer is that nature has changed, nishtaneh hateva. These matters are halacha, so that good health is an obligation, not just avoiding illness. One could argue that cures are not relevant after Techiyas Hamaisim, but optimal health would still be.

The question is, when Talmudic Rabbis return, will they return to current nature or to nature as it was in their times? Will they require different halachas? Based on what? And if we change the halacha based on their nature, why is it anathema that we change halacha based on our changed nature? Why is that a nonfrum concept?

And while we are at it, will the planets continue to go around the sun or will they revert to nature at the time of the Rambam and go around the Earth, well roughly anyway? Or will nature revert to the Talmudic time and have the sun go through the rakia, eliminating all time zones and unifying the calculation of the entry and exit of Shabas for the entire world?

Ariel Sharon

2006-01-08T00:06:00.000-05:00

A heartfelt wish that the Jewish hero, Ariel Sharon, should have a refuah shlaima. His brash courage as a war hero led Israel through its toughest times and forced the Arab world to think peace, when decades of poor leadership had led them to be intransigent. Ariel Sharon will always be the man who advocated peace through strength, and I, for one, thank him for the courage that took him across the Suez, stood firm against Arafat, and yet was willing to deal with any Arab leadership that might bring their people to a modern place.

Sadly, he may be remembered for the ill advised but inevitable Gaza evacuation. When he took office, Israel was experiencing bomb attacks almost daily. He sent troops 100 yards into Arab Gaza to the condemnation of almost every government. Through his initiatives, the army uprooted much of the terrorist weed in the West Bank, and won the respect of a US administration. Rather than calls to abandon and deal, the US responded that "Israel has the right to defend itself". Believe it or not, this is the first time that this was ever heard from a US administration, even in response to the most blatant aggression. His rash, blunt, arrogant pure sabraness won him many enemies and admirers.

And yes, the Jblog prophets are rearing up their foolish heads to tell us why this has befallen Sharon. But let's just put them aside for long enough to thank Ariel ben Vera, and pray that Hashem give him peace and comfort. Read a book about the war in 1973, and remind yourself what he meant to the Jewish people in their hour of need.

Daat Emet

2006-01-03T08:49:00.000-05:00

Because there is a link in my blogroll to Daat Emet, I have been getting anonymous comments that are part of a coordinated effort to attack Daat Emet or at least reduce its publicity. On this blog, it is listed under SKEPTICS and is uniquely designated ANTI-FRUM. Like many antifrum skeptics, the site examines many of the same subjects that we examine in Jblogs, and he comes to conclusions that overreach and pontificate. On the other hand, he brings sources, quotes relevant Talmud, rishonim and acharonim, and states his premises and conclusions, according to his understanding. In the process he brings a relevant point of view to the table, one that would certainly be influential to someone seeking get a comprehensive look at a particular difficult issue in these areas, if that person were already disposed to be skeptical. I had also intended to do some examination of his conclusions and write my responses, which I felt were valid and which were overreached. His essays are usually long and involved. Perhaps the time has come.

Nonetheless, the link remains relevant to the discussion and remains here as it should. Probably, those who have a simplistic view of the world (Linked there=bad, not linked=good) will not be satisfied with this, and they will somehow lump me in with the "bad guys" somewhere, if that has not already happened. Sadly, they only feed the fire that is consuming the frum world from the bottom (its children) up. Nowadays, we do far more service to discuss, argue and even concede that we do not know some things, than in trying to silence the opposition. You heard it here first.

Rebel's dictionary II

2005-12-29T20:06:00.000-05:00

A continuation

Emunas Chachamim - Faith that whatever is said by a particular sage who agrees with me is true

Emunas Tzadikim - Faith that agreement with me bestows on the person the level of a tzadik. It follows that a person with practices with which I disagree cannot be a tzadik.

Emunah - belief in the truth of the contents of certain books

Apikorsis - belief in the truth of the contents of certain books

Tzadik - 1) a saintly person to whom I look for inspiration. 2) Someone who has died recently. 3) A person who can perform magic.

Daas Toireh - Rationalization for not thinking independently

G-dliness - things I like or approve of.

Pure - not defiled by things I disapprove of.

Lakewood - NJ sister city to Kandahar, Afghanistan

Monsey - NY sister city to Lakewood, NJ

Christianity - a religion where adherents believe that, though the Messiah is dead, he continues to "live" and perform miracles. Many adherents believe that the Messiah is a god and bolster their opinion with spurious quoting of biblical verses. They believe that the only true path to G-d is through connection with their Messiah - god - savior. See Moshiachist and Elokist.

Moiser - Someone who reveals my criminal activity to the police. See RAT and DOITY RATFINK.

Tzedaka - Money given to a Jewish institution or Rabbi in exchange for respect

Poor people - People who must depend on Jewish institutions and Rabbis for basic needs and get no respect, and in some caes. (Hey, I just had an idea! Why don't we just cut out the ... Oh, never mind.)

Holiday Tree - a Christmas tree in a city with Jewish lawyers

Evolution - Only a theory, not a fact

Intelligent design - Neither a theory, nor a fact

Skepticism - Belief in the improbable but plausible situation that something of which someone wants to convince you may not be true

Carbon dating - a false art where science is used to confound Torah, based on silly principles (see Science) which, while they are observable repeatably in a laboratory, must be approached with the highest critical skepticism

Uranium dating - see carbon dating. Uranium dating is claimed to be valid to over 100,000 years, so it is silly and impossible. Feh!

4 element physics - Torah true science discussing the composition of all matter from air, water, fire, and earth, based on sound principles (see Medieval tradition) that the propogaters of silly principles (see Science) reject. Must be approached with minimum critical skepticism

Galgalim - Orbits of planets, moon and sun around the Earth, supposedly disproven by the silly principles (see Science), whose proponents claim to have sent spacecraft to these celestial bodies, based on their errant "scientific" calculations. Galgalim and Ptolemaic astronomy must be approached with minimum critical skepticism. Galgalim, mazalos and kochavim are not only spiritual and intelligent, but also a bit sensitive so don't say anything that might offend them.

Ptolemaic astronomy - A workable geocentric model of the universe that is Torah true, despite being neither workable nor geocentric

Chicken Soup for the Blogger's Soul

2005-12-27T18:45:00.000-05:00

I should be learning
I should be jogging
But I just sit here
unhealthily blogging

Tis I who wants it
Tis I who needs it
I often wonder
who even reads it

So I went to
the naturopath
he said to take
a nice warm bath

Next to the homeopath
with wisdom infinite
He gave me a pill
with nothing in it

After that
to The OMD,
for an herbal tea
with bubbling chi

The acupuncturist
was next to pass
He stuck a needle
in my elbow, near the first arm meridian

Next to go
was the wise po-wa
he scratched my back
with a grizzly's claw

Reiki, ayurveda
energy of asia
ginger root, ginseng
and echinacea

I tried
the chiropractors cracks
algae weed
with soaking flax

I still feel
slower than a dog
I might as well
just sit and blog.

A Mother's dream

2005-12-25T15:23:00.000-05:00

My Dream

At 6 AM the bell went off
calling me from my sleep
I fought and strove for half and hour
to keep my slumber deep

At 6:45 I was resolved
I gave up on my dream
I rolled myself right out of bed
To take one for the team

At 7 it was time to tell
the kiddies the bad news
The snow did not impress the school
put on your rubber shoes

"I can't find my shoes and socks!"
"I can't find my book!"
"I can't find my pants and shirt."
Did they ever think to LOOK?!

Feed 'em pack 'em pile em in
its minutes after 8
No telling what they'll do to those
who come 5 minutes late

I'm sick, I'll barf yells chayim'kl
If I must go in that car
Tell them to move the school to here
It's really much too far

Away we go, right through the snow
our tires spin and spray
We slip, we slide and sideways glide
at last we're under way.

"I forgot my bookbag"
yells Moishe from his seat
"Sara'le keeps touching me"
"There's nothing I can eat!"

We're stuck behind a snowplow.
We're stuck behind a wreck.
We're at the reddest stop light
That truck just covered us in dr***.

Pull in, park and pile out
and don't forget your lunch.
"And don't forget the baby!"
who just landed with a crunch

Go Moishe, Go Chayim'kl
go Sara'le and kayla
On Yossi, on Gavi
On Chana and Bayla

Now its back, the way I came
the slushy mushy street
Finally home, I see the goo
that's now stuck to the seat.

I jump, I yell, I'm free at last
They won't be back for hours
I'll learn to play the violin
I'll plant some indoor flowers.

I'll clean the house, I'll call my aunt
I'll take a writing class
I'll finally clean the shower
Why, I'll even do the glass!

As I enter my front door.
I hear the primal call
There it is enticing me
as it did all fall

I follow its alluring sound
its lovely siren song
Curses, its almost 9 AM
this day's been much too long.

I climb the stairs so slowly
A yawn consumes me whole
My sheets and blankets welcome me
My dream entraps my soul.

My dream is of tomorrow
The day I'll run and play
The day that I'll do all that stuff
That I didn't do today.

What's Taking Him So Long?

2005-12-21T18:54:00.000-05:00

Is the Moshiach coming?
What's taking him so long
We are crying,laughing, humming
We have tried to sing a song.

We have written mounds of drasha
We unfurled a yellow flag
We have punished every rasha
We've rejected every (insert epithet for homosexual)

We have eaten only yashan
We have shechted only chasidish
Chanukiyas like melech Bashan
Our kids learn only yiddish

We have danced around a bima
We have walked in a parade
We have called from here to Lima
Our music's only Jewish played

Our clothes are black as midnight
Our shirts as white as snow
We have studied shas by moonlight
Our hats are creased just so.

Our cholent's hot and steamy
Our kugel's very sweet
Our stories are long and dreamy
We've m'kareved the elite.

We've followed every hidur
We've carried all the bricks
We've davened slowly in the sidur
We've made kidush before six

We've prepared the rooms and hallways
We've yelled full heart and soul
Yechi HaMelech always
Unbelievers to She'ol

We wear the finest sheitel
We are extremely tznius
In our town, it might be fatal
To wear skirts above the knee'es.

Through our sefer we are thumbing
We are singing still the song
WE are ready for his coming.
What's taking HIM so long?

Treifos and Mystical Approach

2005-12-19T17:27:00.000-05:00

MT, hilchos Sh'chita 10: 12-13 (unedited translation) Note: Some editions do not separate these two halachas, so they are designated halacha 12 in those editions.

12. One may not add to these Treifos at all, since everything that happens to a domesticated animal, undomesticated animal or bird other than these which the sages of the first generations designated and the courts agreed with them, it is possible that it will live, and even if it is known to us from medical practice that it will not live in the end.

13. So too these that they designated and said that they are Treif, even though that we see in medical practice that is available to us that some of them will not die, and it is possible that some of them will live, we have none other than what the sages designated, as it says "according to the Torah that they will teach you."

Rational interpretation:

When we are judging treifos, we must go by the standards set in place by the mesora, not by our observation. Thus, even if we can cure something or prolong its life, now or in the future, that does not change the halacha. Similarly, even if we know through experience that an animal cannot live under the condition, but the mesora is that it is kosher, then we must judge that, in the experience of the first generations, it is possible that the animal will live. Since, they would only need a small number of cases to establish possibility of life, halacha 12 seems reasonable. We have never known a case where one lived, but the sages had heard of it and judged accordingly.

Mystical interpretation:

When looking at treifos, if a condition is considered kosher by the first generations, but we now observe it to be treif, then the reality warps around the psak of the first generations and the batei din, and it is physically possible that the animal will live, regardless of the laws of biology. Similarly, if we observe that an animal can live in a certain condition, but the sages said that it was treif, then we must rely on our sages and not change the halacha.

Rebel's observation:

Obviously, the mystical interpretation can be read into halacha 12, but not so well into halacha 13. You cannot apply the principle that reality warps around halacha, because in halacha 13, you are observing the refutation of that. They said that the animal cannot live, but we observe that it can. That is why it does not follow the language from halacha 12 and say "it is impossible that it will live". Yet, halacha 13 begins "so, too", implying that the Rambam saw these two siyifim as extensions of each other. Rather it points out that we must pasken like the sages regardless of the quoted reasons behind the halacha. The quoted reason may only be PART OF THE REASON that the halacha came down as it did.

One might also conclude that, since the Rambam states this as a halacha in Treifos (Sh'chita), it is not a general principle of halacha that we follow the sages when the circumstances change, but it is specific to trefos. When the Rambam learns one halacha out as a general rule, he states so. Yet, the pasuk that he quotes does not have any specific connection to treifos. So why tuck it away here in hilchos shchita? Perhaps it is because shchita is completely defined by mesora, with only a remez in the written Torah. Therefore, the entire matter of shchita is dependent on the ability of the sages to define mesora, even if it will fly in the face of later discovery that they have not anticipated. In other words, whatever they will discover in the future (unknown to the chachamim), the mesora that they transmit in the name of "mesora" will still stand, since they have transmitted only part of the reason for the psak, in order to define and limit the halacha properly. In the introduction to mishna part IV the Rambam lay sout how we can tell what is mesora and what is not.

Chabad Rebbe and Spontaneous Generation

2005-12-11T08:21:00.000-05:00

Follow the link and search spontaneous generation, and you will find an answer from Chabad apologists Ginsberg and Branover (two fo the most quoted on scientific issues) based on letters from the CR himself. It is a positive defense obfuscation. IOW, they argue that just because we see eggs and worms, does not mean that these worms came from those eggs. Ergo, there CAN BE spontaneous generation, and no one can disprove it. The Pasteurs would quickly counter that no such "spontaneous generation" occurred when outside access was denied. However, our brilliant apologists would say the often quoted axiom that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absense" and that cases that are "highly improbable" are nonetheless feasible.

Well, gentlemen, then there is no disproof of anything ever, and the Rambam's implication to the contrary is false. I challenge you to produce any positive evidence, a single observation, from anywhere, that spontaneous generation, the generation of life from the inanimate occurs. It should be easy enough given today's technology. (Note: the Talmud and early sources assume that it occurs in many species with regularity, not just that it is "highly improbable". Note the discussion about lice and lice eggs.) I hear only the chirping of spontaneously generated crickets.

Without examining this struggling apologetic line for line, shooting fish in a barrel, I offer the following defense of the position. (Did he say DEFENSE? My G-d I think he did!)

When one observes very small eggs, larval worms, and grown worms or insects, it is difficult to make the connection between each of these stages from the previous. The reproduceable effect will be that if one puts these eggs and / or larvae in proper environment, in a place unaccessible by an uncontrolled environment, the worms or insects will grow. If one were to put in only sterile spoiled fruit or sterile mud, no organisms would grow. However, halacha goes by observation, and the observer sees two or three separate entities, an egg (if it is microscopic, halacha might not even consider it existent), larvae, and mature organism. Thus, halacha must deal with them separately, because halacha is instructing the average OBSERVER in what must be done. Thus, the organisms ARE spontaneously generated from a halachic point of view, and the descriptions of that process are correct, from that point of view. The underlying apologetic argument emerges OK from this. We cannot say that the eggs, larvae, mature line is OBSERVED, not by a scientist in a lab, but by the OBSERVER in any particular case, trying to make a halachic determination. Hence, the "we cannot say that it never happens, even though we observe it in a lab" type proof is SUSTAINED, and all runners are safely on base.

1) Spontaneous generation proofs in science are sustained.
2) The halacha that some organisms are treated as spontaneously generated is sustained.
3) The defense premise of the apologetic is even sustained.

And most importantly, the only way to explain all of this is with the hashkafa that the Chazal were discussing halachic assumptions, rather than scientific reality, and the fundamentalists are REFUTED.

Update: Even more nauseating apologetic at Frumteens

Jerusalem Compass

2005-11-30T13:07:00.000-05:00

UPDATED:

On the Observant Astonomer site, someone claiming to be "Moshe", the creator of the miracle device, and Zev, an interested customer, go head to head. Others of us also chime in. Moshe tries some evasion like appealing to the authority of his haskamas and accusing his questioners of malintent, both common ploys. He still has not explained how the device "defies the laws of physics".

Observant Astronomergets to the bottom of this quickly. For a mere 25 bucks, you can get an amazing compass that points toward Jerusalem, provided you are west of Jerusalem and you do not believe that the Earth is round. OA even asks if it can altered for Mecca. I would only respond that naturally Mecca and Rome do not give off the magic holiness rays that allow this amazing device to function. (Observer notes that some calibration of the device may be needed. He still cannot find the magic part.)

I think this guy wants a piece of the action too. Anyone who can make this compass perform as advertised, hey, $25 investment for a sure $1 million payoff.

And of course the obligatory Chabad version.

I knew I was in the wrong business. GET YOUR RED STRING HERE! PIPING HOT RED STRING!!

The Heshy of the Dor is Gone

2005-11-29T15:13:00.000-05:00

Who will tell us why things like the holocaust, 9/11, and disengagement happen now that Heshy's House has closed shop? Seeming to be from no particular derech, he constantly provoked on behalf of the "UltraOrthodox" (his word, not mine) and against the MO. I was most certain that he was a provocateur until someone informed me that he had gone to school with the Navi HaDor. On the scale of predictability, Heshy was about as subtle and surprising as the 1970s Ohio State offense (for the uninitiated, not very, Griffin up the middle, 1 ,2, 3).

My heart is welling up with ambivalence. On the one hand, great choizek. On the other hand, he empasized how little of a life a person can actually have (I mean me and possibly this guy, not him). Yes, mister "coffins in the basement at midnite", "death to the infidel", "women in the kitchen", "come to my house but don't look at my chicks" Taliban frum guy, this Bud Light is for you!

A Community Worthy of BTs

2005-11-27T08:14:00.000-05:00

So let's suppose that the story had a different ending and Noam had decided that the Judaism that he had sought in Yeshiva was not really there. He wants to accomodate his family but he can no longer maintain any feeling for Jewish practice. Increasingly, he does less and less and drops any involvement in his community or its ritual practice. If anyone cares to discuss the subject with him, he is more than happy to tell them that Judaism disillusioned him, and he realizes that, while it is a wonderful life for some people, it is not for everyone, certainly not for him. He was expecting an ethical and theological base, and instead found situations with which he was not ethically nor theologically comfortable.

The reactions will be predictable Keibler Ross type reactions (if anyone cares to react all, and not just let him go):

1) Denial - Really, he believes in Judaism since no one could possibily leave for the reasons he states. There is something else going on with him. Really, just under the surface, there is some single question that is bothering him. Someone just said the wrong thing to him. It cannot be that there is something wrong with the community or the "system" ethically. Aren't all communities the same? No, people aren't leaving for central core reasons, only personal reasons.

2) Anger - There was something wrong from the start with him. It was personal problems. I'll bet there were problems with his yichus. He thinks HE'S so ETHICAL. He is just too foolish and arrogant to accept things that he doesn't understand. Just because it is beyond his understanding, or he doesn't have money, or someone said the wrong thing to him, he is going to reject all of Judaism. We will never again give him or his family the time of day. He is now an enemy like the goyim and all the other freiya.

3) Bargaining - Maybe he will turn around if we just ...

4) Depression - Oy what has become of such an ehrlich guy! Such a waste, gone to the wolves! No offense! What could we have done?

5) Acceptance - Good bye and good riddance.

But is this the healthiest way for a community to respond to someone who has decided that their lifestyle is not for him? Will they all forever view him as some dark, forlorn near psychopath who just could not see the light? Will they all view him as some evil emanation of the "other side" to be avoided, to be shunned? Interestingly, before he became frum, before he "knew anything", they would have welcomed him with open arms. What has changed now? If a person rejects the derech or voices their opinions openly, does the whole fabric of the universe collapse around it? Perhaps the question is even darker. Does Judaism, as practiced today, with all of its practical offshoots, bear examination in the light of day? Or are there some things we would rather hide? And if the latter is true, do we not owe Noam a little more?

I write this as a former kiruv-ist who has seen the situation from every side. I have seen every shade of Noam that there is to see. The Noam that never truly buys it all. The Noam that reacts with anger and fights back l'hach'is. The Noam that tries to resolve. The Noam that withdraws, freis out and doesn't care. And YES, even the Noam that happily grows and prospers, buys in more deeply. But if we, in whatever kiruv role we have, do not make an honest assessment of our product and the customer experience, if we are increasingly satisfied with our product and say that we are not interested in the special challenges of the BT, we sell what we sell and that's it, then we are not destined to gain many of the latter Noams. More importantly, the main mitzva of kiruv will be lost. That mitzva is not convincing the unaffiliated person that Judaism is rationally, theologically, or ethically superior. It is helping them to become part of a community that acts together to make it so, that admits its shortcomings, that works to solve them, instead of hiding them. The mitzva is not bringing BTs into the community, but making the community one that is worthy of BTs.

Happy Thanksgiving

2005-11-24T09:50:00.000-05:00

via onionsoupmix

BT Permission Slip

2005-11-24T09:18:00.000-05:00

I, ______, want to become frum, because I am convinced that Judaism is a viable path for life. I certify, under penalty of disillusionment, that I have read and agreed to the following stipulations.

(Note: Here, I get the life sized picture of Chico and Groucho doing the contract scene in Night at the Opera. "The party of the first part shall be known as the party of the first part ...")

1) Judaism operates just like any other lifestyle. People with money and power get special treatment and impunity. Jobs and critical life requirements are filled through nepotism and netwrok ties between family and friends. You will likely lose any such ties that you have, so be prepared to survive and build your empire on your own.

2) Judaism professes belief in some far out, magical, superstitious, anti-scientific (or outdated scientific), downright weird stuff. These things are vestigial remnants of ancient apologetics, retained for value that they provide in understanding lines of reasoning. They are not meant to be everlasting physical truths or mesoretic pronouncements. The BT agrees not to base his practice of Judaism on these matters, nor to promote them as proof, as said proof relates to reality, henceforth known in this document as REALITY.

3) BT understands that "Armageddon is coming", "Moshiach is coming today" etc. are only expressions of eagerness and hope, not a lifestyle. KP is not responsible for any damage caused by adherence to said philosophy as lifestyle.

4) BT understands that his efforts are not in any way "heroic", not to be challenged in any way by any statement made to or about BT by KP. All sacrifices of family and professional opportunity are solely the responsibility of the BT. No special consideration is due to BT from any party.

5) BT understands that he is now required to have many children, 5, 10, more, G-d willing. BT is responsible for all expenses, especially yeshiva tuition. Since this expense will likely exceed the cost of buying a new sports car or SUV every year for 15 years or more, BT is responsible to show proof of financial viability and sources of potential income before entering into this contract.

6) BT understands that certain mores of society such as considering Jews and non-Jews as equals, viewing intermarried couples as "living the lifestyle of their choice" rather than "an earthshaking tragedy", teaching science, rather than religion, in a science class, viewing the assimilated Jew as another person, rather than a "target", getting to really know a person before marrying them, advocating professional careers for women, must be specificly rejected by BT under penalty of expulsion.

6) BT understands that integration into a community is required for full acceptance of this contract. BT understands that said integration is entirely, wholly, utterly and completely, the responsibility of the BT. BT understands that efforts to gain emotional support or lifestyle advice within said community may lead to suspicion and ostracism.

7) BT understands that the lifestyle requirements are extraordinarily expensive. BT understands that external forces, rather than personal commitment may require him to keep very strict and contrived rules that increase this expense. BT understands that if he thinks he can get by on a normal income, say 80K to 120K (depending on where he lives and how many kids he ultimately has), he is out of his cotton picking mind. BT further understands that efforts to obtain more money may be hampered by said community restrictions, like forbidding use of the Internet, lackadasical adherence to announced minyan times etc. Accommodations will only be forthcoming at the discretion of the community parties, aka anyone affected by the ensuing lack of money.

8) BT is forbidden to ever read a weblog, henceforth BLOG.

I have read and fully accept this contract.

__________________________________
Signature of starry eyed BT here

I have read and made sure that no responsibility can be pinned on me

________________________________
Signature of KP

A Better Kiruv

2005-11-22T01:29:00.000-05:00

In better kiruv, less is more. But two things are paramount.

The first is the recognition that Noam doesn't happen in a vacuum. A potential BT is a real human being with real life. You are about to tell him that everything that he holds true is false. You are telling him that his common sense is really just an evil inclination. In doing so, you are changing his priorities, estranging him from his family, and challenging every survival skill that he has. But as the sign says, you break it, you own it. Recognizing that we asking nothing less of Noam than to leave everything that he knows about how to make a living (no more Shabos work, no shaking hands with the opposite sex, no lunch and dinner on late or unexpected assignments etc.), how to find a shiduch, how to relate to others in his world, and how to just fit in and get along and adopt to a new lifestyle. The KP is responsible to replace that family with a new family, people who are actively pursuing Noam's full and proper integration into the frum world. If you are not willing to go that far, don't be a KP, period. I am not just suggesting a passive role of answering questions and making sure that he serves your purposes. You must serve his purposes, making sure that he is going about things, pursuing a living, pursuing a shiduch, making a life plan, in a realistic manner, making sure that he is truly integrating with frum society, not just some idealized kiruv version of reality. Knowing Noam as we do, we see how very important is this point.

The second is to avoid ANY AND ALL APOLOGETICS!!! If confronted with the inevitable questions in deifficult areas, respond truthfully and there is only one truthful answer. I DON'T KNOW, and no one else does either. We do not have the means to resolve apparent contradictions between our tradition and apparent fact. Perhaps we will sometime in the future, but we do not have enough knowledge to understand this now. Do not quote kiruv sources or silly backwoods proofs.

The biggest proponent of this type of approach was the Chabad Rebbe. Regarding our first point, the CR demanded that everyone make a mashpia for himself. In Noam's situation, the KP is the natural person to do this, and the requirements are far heavier when we are taking away his baseline of survival and replacing with something foreign to him. The KP must make sure that he enters frum life as a savvy adult, not as a starry eyed child. Regarding the second, in his first directives on kiruv, CR announced twelve separate "military campaigns" or mivtzoyim. Each was a particular mitzvah. Never did he suggest to bolster it with apologetics. He offered apologetics himself only after much prodding and they were of a very weak and noncommitted nature. They were stated very softly as "perhaps we could say". Ultimately, he answered that if we do not have an answer for a question, we cannot put a time limit on finding it. This was obviously very wise. For instance, the entire ideas of relativity and QM, so popular among apologists today, were not available to apologists 200 years earlier, a mere blip on the Jewish timeline. Apologetics that were proposed 1000 years ago are now useless, based on long outdated science. They can only do harm, as they only convince the convinced.

Next: The BT permission slip. What the BT must sign to be allowed to become frum.

Acronyms

2005-11-21T11:21:00.000-05:00

A comment below asks for a review of the acronyms, and I see his point:

KP - kiruv professional
SD - sugar daddy (pimary supporter(s) of the kiruv professional)
BT - Ba'al Teshuva
FFB - Frum from birth
KPB - the kiruv professional's brother (who runs the school in our case)

Revenge of the Myth - Part VI

2005-11-20T14:35:00.000-05:00

As we have seen, the SD himself is not really the issue (the issue could be with any situation where an injustice is condoned based on external considerations, or considerations that are the opposite of our ideals), nor is the KP, nor even the community. The issue for Noam is reconciling the kiruv version of practicing Judaism with some truly practical lifestyle. Earlier, we offered up four possible endings for Noam, but our real goal is to resolve why Noam feels "misled". Obviously, he feels misled because he was learned that a Jew is a Jew, no matter what his level of wealth, no matter what his family name. He finds that this is not a practical way to approach life in any frum community, as wealth, family ties and other external matters obviously change the very people that have driven his ascent. The ideals for which Noam was enticed to pursue with mesiras nefesh have little place in the lives of "normal" people, other than lip service and the occasional project.

One can hope that the story ends like this. Noam is disillusioned, but not beaten. He decides that he must focus on life pursuits other than increasing his devotion to G-d and improving his practice of mitzvos. Not that he will abandon these goals entirely, but he will simply retrain himself to render lip service to the ideals, rather than take them so seriously. He finds a level that he can live with, and devotes more time to his family, his profession, making friends on the basis of common interest. He realizes that what he views as sacrifices are not necessarily recognized or viewed that way by others. Perhaps, he will drop some of his more strict or sectarian customs and simply do what is convenient.

What his children get at home will change a bit. He will tell them Torah verter about devoting oneself to Torah study but in practical and exemplary terms, he will no longer teach them to apply themselves fully to Torah study. He will encourage them to be careful with whom they form friendships, and he will give them insights into why some person might like them while another might not. In short, he will state one set of beliefs, yada yada, and then move on with his life. His relationship with the KP will change also, as will his attitude toward others that come for kiruv. The KP will no longer be a mashpia. He will listen to everything Jewish with half an ear, and pass it on with a grain of salt.

This is the best and most healthy ending that we can hope for. Other possibilities are 1) total frei-ing out, and possible attendant breaking up of the family, 2) total denial, which is like to last for only a short time, and 3) total orthopraxy, with Noam turning on Judaism with a passion.

Next:

A better kiruv

Mentalbloggers Take Up Arms

2005-11-18T15:15:00.000-05:00

The rest of the story will be laid out after Shabbos. Meanwhile, a vigorous discussion has taken place on mentalblog, with representatives on all sides of this story. If you thought the characters or situation was not typical, just read some of the comments.

PS: This story can have a happy ending.
Good Shabbos all.

Relevant post from anonymousette

2005-11-17T17:01:00.000-05:00

Anonymousette posted:

I was just having a thought about becoming a BT that I thought I would share. I think most BTs originally don't want to become Orthodox at all. They know that such a move will alienate them from their family and closest friends, and just make their life harder. For this reason, they rationalize why they are not Orthodox and why Judaism is wrong. There comes a point when they can no longer rationalize anymore, and thats when the realization hits that Orthodox Judaism is the only way to go. I think this is lost by becoming a BT through a kiruv rabbi, because I really feel able to combat any doubts I am having because I have had to rationalize all of them before I became a BT.

Rebel' note:
So you were better prepared for being frum WITHOUT any kiruv.

Revenge of the Myth - part V

2005-11-17T16:53:00.000-05:00

First, a reminder that all of this story is contrived, for a purpose. We need to understand Noam if we want to keep him. Do we? Not everyone does.

After all, on the one hand, he has been handed a dose of old fashioned reality. On the other hand, he has laid down roots and he wants that part of frumkeit that he was striving for, the community, the egalite', the common goals of reaching G-d, by recognizing that we are all humbled before a higher source. He was willing to believe it was practical and achievable, but he finds that business is conducted in the frum community in the same way that it is conducted in the rest of the world, a world with ways that he spent years learning to reject and ridicule. He realizes that certain philosophical and theological problems have returned to haunt him. The beliefs that he is expected to promote are no longer the same as his true beliefs. In yeshiva, he was told that his common sense was just secular thinking, and if he truly trusted in G-d, he would proceed without calculations, based on mesiras nefesh and G-d would take care. And most of all, he realizes that he does not know who he can trust.

But, in our shteibel, there is also a non-kiruv FFB, call him Yitz. By non-kiruv, I mean that he has no real interest, other than a very mild acknowledgement of its theoretical value, in m'kareving Jews to Judaism. He keeps Torah and mitzvos and many chumras, just as he was taught since he was a child. Lack of secular education and disdain of the secular world has not enhanced his professional ambitions, but he has some holdings that his grandparents invested in for him, not much but something, and he is happy. He sits across from Noam, and overhears him telling someone about some of his concerns. He needs to go outside for a smoke, anything to get away from this kvetching.

He tries to concentrate on his brother's upcoming bris, when the family will all gather and celebrate together. His own son's bar mitzvah is coming up as well, and Yitz's father is already learning mishnayos, laining and helping the boy to commit his learning to memory. Yitz's mother, were she still among the living, would be beaming with pride. His sisters and nieces will take care of everything. None of them could be happier with all of the upcoming family simchas. And the SD always has some good funny story to lead off, often about his goyishe in laws. In-law stories are always the best.

He wonders why this Noam is such a downer lately. How could he not sense the joy in yiddishkeit? Our KPs forsake their own interests to m'karev guys like this, they take him into their home, when they have their own kids to deal with, their kids get a Jewish education, our KPs teach them how to connect with G-d, and here they are complaining about what they DON'T have. They come take our resources and then they are ungrateful. It is likely some personal problem, disguised as some question in frumkeit. It is well known that he and his wife often fight about money, he and his kids do not show up to some events when the entire community comes, and he shushes us during k'riah. Definitely, there is something wrong with that guy. If he doesn't like it here, who made him come? Let him go and stop whining. It is not like everyone doesn't have problems. We don't go whining about everything and blaming it on the next chair. Maybe he has some personal problem with the SD. WHO CARES! The guy was always a bit off.

He finishes his cigarette and returns to the room, avoiding eye contact with anyone.

Update: The first comment will testify to the point. It was entered by Shneur, the source of much fabulous information, on mentalblog.com.

BT Experince - part IV - Paradise Lost

2005-11-16T22:54:00.000-05:00

Without getting into sordid details, let's just say that our SD gets caught doing something on a regular basis that most people would consider less than ethical, downright krum. Of course, we all know that this happens with any group of people. And let's just say that our KP is a nonjudgemental and forgiving fellow, at least when it comes to the SD. This is also understandable as the KPs entire livelihood may rest on this SD or a few like him. So Noam looks on. This SD will continue to get shlishi, shvi'i and maftir, he will continue to speak about how yidishkeit has changed the world, and he will continue to conduct business out of the public eye as he sees fit. Everyone will call him up to "say a few words" at public gatherings and simchas, and stammer on about how is a pillar of the shul and the community. Said people will continue to look with distain on Noam's old dusty hat, his old suit (a little short for the dry cleaner until the end of the month), and his loud kids.

Noam begins to wonder about the philosophy that the KP and his yeshiva teach. On the one hand, he is an authority on morality and ethics. On the other hand, he has rationalized this behavior and even found halachic rationalization, perhaps stretched out of shape somewhat, to support his position. Noam begins to understand how alone he really his, how, when the chips are down, it is money and standing that count, not the ethics and morality that had been drummed into him. Perhaps for the first time, he takes an honest look at the basis on which he was convinced to drop his entire repetoire of common sense, his basic values, his ideas on what it would take to make a living without "G-d helping", his acceptance of Jewish fundamentalist and mystical approach positions, the way he had built his life on a litany of chasidic or tzadik stories, and he begins to wonder what else he had been "sold".

Clarify here that it is not that the KP does anything wrong, per se. Noam understands the "grey area" of this case (though my caricature has drawn it more black and white). What he finds is that, (and if you miss this, you miss the point), contrary to what he was taught, he is not part of the "family". He has been told that his soul will burn in hell if he eats the wrong potato chips. He has given with mesiras nefesh so that he and his family can follow this philosophy. He estranged himself from his family of his youth. who told him that his crazy philosophy would lead him to disappointment and financial hardship. And now it has, and he finds that when the magic doesn't work, his symbol of frumkeit simply darshans it out of existence. When he confronts the KP, he is told that he just doesn't understand, that he is too new to Judaism to follow the nuance, that there is something wrong with him. Noam's bubble has now burst. He realizes that he has no landsmen, his family was not all crazy when they told him that his newfound philosophy, right off of the kiruv presses, was a bit starry eyed and not livable in the real world. He realizes that he must adjust quickly.

One of four things can happen here. 1) Noam will react with anger, reject Judaism and act l'hach'is publicly. 2) Noam will meekly accept the entreaties of his KP dutifully, and he will simply continue in his bubble, rationalizing that this is just a personal thing, and he needs to get over it. 3) Noam will join the many thousands that simply drop all enthusiasm and continue to practice outwardly for the sake of his wife and children. 4) He will adopt some middle position where he still believes in the dream that he chased to yeshiva, but with the realization that he has no basis to start from, no family to rely on, no real way to discern true from false or trustworthy from untrustworthy,

Philosophically, he changes radically. He knows that "G-d will help", but he does not know what that means any longer. He knows that "right is right" and "wrong is wrong", but he doesn't know what that neans either. He doesn't know if the people that he was taught were saintly and pure also have lackeys that rationalize away their faults.

And the sad thing is that it did not have to go down this way at all, even under the same circumstances. More on that.

And enter the nonkiruv FFB. He listens to Noam discuss his concerns. Perhaps Noam considers him a friend. But, his view may be totally different.

Next, Revenge of the Myth

Maven Yavin

2005-11-16T17:38:00.000-05:00

4 of the Godol Hador's talented and learned chasidim, Krum as a Bagel, LamedZayin, S (Mississippi Fred McDowell) and ADDeRabbi have joined forces to try and fill the missing Godol's shoes (I mean that GH is missing not his shoes). As serious and deep as these guys seem to be, they are very likely to collaborate on a worthwhile blog that gives direct and deep consideration to the issues. Hatzlacha gentlemen, and I will look on with great anticipation.

The Baal Tshuva Experience - Part III

2005-11-16T00:11:00.000-05:00

Roll back a few years. Let's have a look at Norman. Norman was a promising student, but he saw a life ahead of him that made him shudder. He is somewhat a loner, but not pathologically so. It seems that people are just not interested in his main interests. He is fascinated by Jewish history and Israel, he has a warm feeling about Judaism from his grandparents, but his family never kept anything. He hooked up with a Rabbi on campus, who is cool and seems surprisingly modern so he goes to synagogue and classes occasionally. The Rabbi insists on calling him by his Hebrew name Noam, which he finds a little annoying but quaint.

Norman grows a bit more mature and finds himself disinterested in hanging around with "kids" or going to bars to drink, pick up chicks for meaningless encounters, or just hanging around and watching a ball game. He decides to search for meaning in life, and who is ready with the answers? You got it. He attends more, and voila, he is getting hooked. A half ton of kugel and several gallons of chicken soup later, he is keeping kosher, keeping shabos and spending his free time at the student center / Chabad house. He dons yarmulke and tzitzis, and is that 5 o'clock shadow?

The Rabbi suggests that he take a little detour from his studies. Noam's burnout is all over that, so he decides to go to yeshiva or a discovery program associated with or in the midst of some heavily Orthodox community for a semester to "clear his head". He is still bothered by the questions of Torah / Science and fantasy stories that the Orthodox seem to believe, but he is drawn to the ethical pursuits, the promise of mystical secrets, the meaning of life, and the family and community warmth. He fears that he never would have been happy just caught up in the legal profession rat race anyway, where most of the people are workaholic balls of tension, bouncing between marraiges and life pursuits.

Noam's talent in law school translates well to yeshiva. He shows promise.

Fast forward, Noam is now in a shul with his 7 kids. He is happy enough doing mitzvos and teaching his children how important it is that they daven from the sidur with intense kavana and do the mitzvos with great love. He tells them that their grandparents love them, though we cannot get together too much because "they lived in hard times and never got to go to Jewish school like you. So they do not keep kosher etc." He has made the necessary accomodations at work to keep a good job, where he does not work Shabbos and Yom Tov, does not shake hands with women, and is not required to go to lunch with clients or anyone else. He hasn't a penny to save and he has just taken another large loan to pay for tuition this year.

It is worth it to him though. He is having mesiras nefesh and he enjoys his frum family. Until something goes very very wrong.

Our Little Shteibl (or Chabad House) - Part II

2005-11-15T06:18:00.000-05:00

Now let's turn to the kiruv pro. He perceives his mission in life to bring the good news of Torah to every Jewish ear. And how can he lose? Does he not have great frum scientists in every field to ward off pesky questions while his wife cranks out the most modern healthy low fat yoga friendly foods? Can he not discuss modern current events, the rotten Arabs, the intrigues and secret antisemitism of the current US, Canadian administrations, whomever they may be at the moment, the chutzpah of the antireligious Israeli government, the heroism of the Yesh(a) settlers and so on? Can he not show how "migdal haPorayach b'Avir" preceded the Wright brothers by 2000 years? His voice will crackle with excitement and his manner exudes friendliness to every young unaffiliated face.

Financially, he must find a sugar daddy from among the wealthy yidden to fund his efforts and his own salary. As I said before, this person never hears the truth. He will sit up front, get every honor, donate the Max J. Goldman memorial solid gold candlabra (and pay the heating bill). He will get shlishi and shvi'i and maftir and musaf etc. If he has a problem with the mechitza, a compromise will be found. If something in learning might offend his sensibilities, it will be skipped or vigorously apologized for. Because, you see, our sugar daddy did not leave university to go to yeshiva, his wife worked as they spaced their two kids carefully so that both could pursue their careers with full attention. They would never allow their two kids to be as wild as the frum kids. The sugar daddy and therefore the kiruv pro look with derision upon the 40 something man who sits in the back and davens with force, looking very much like he has swallowed the alien seed from the original movie and it will burst forth any minute. He has 7 kids, no money, though he can discuss how the theories of Pasteur were actually foretold in the Parsha. It is not that he is not intelligent enough to be in medicine or law, but he simply has no ambition in those directions, as he will tell you that only G-d provides sustenance and not the profession. He dropped out of law school to go to yeshiva, where he learned how degrading it was to be a university trained professional, and how much a waste of time it was to do anything but sit and learn, and how women should really not work outside the home. He learned that he should not plan his life out, but he should marry and have as many children as G-d gave him, the results of which now have runny noses, are yelling and running indoors, and the youngest of them have come to shul today, primarily because mom needed them out of the house for a few hours. He makes good money, but not enough for his extravagant lifestyle of feeding kids, clothing kids ... oh yeah and educating them. (The KPs brother JUST HAPPENS to be in charge at the school. Small world.)

So this kiruv professional has just devoted years to turning people like his SD into people like this young man. He has courted his SD for that express purpose. And here the three of them sit. Until something something goes really, really wrong. More to come ...