Bari VeShema

Icons II

2006-12-13T18:23:00.000-08:00

Icons

2006-12-13T14:41:00.000-08:00

The 9/11 scenario in Halachah

2006-10-25T23:02:00.000-07:00

A. Background

Is it permissibile to shoot down a plane full of passengers in the 9/11 (or the Corey Lidle) scenario, where the plane headed for a building with occupants?

The passengers of the plane will certainly die upon impact, and some of the occupants of the building will likely die if the plane is allowed to hit the building. The question is, may one actively deprive the passengers of the plane of Chayei Sha’ah, a short span of life, for the sake of preserving the extended life span of the building occupants.

The place to begin this discussion is the well-known Yerushalmi in the 8th Perek of Masseches Terumos:

"A group of people who were walking on the road and non-Jews accosted them, and said: ‘Give us one of you and we will kill him, and if not, we will kill all of you, even if they will all get killed they should not hand over one soul of Israel. If they designated one like Sheva the son of Bichri [In Shmuel II:20 Sheva ben Bichri is demanded by Yoav, the general of David’s army, for rebelling against the king] they should hand him over and not get killed.

R’ Shimon ben Lakish said: This is only so if he is liable for death, like Sheva ben Bichri.

And R’ Yochanan said: Even though he is not liable for death like Sheva ben Bichri (it is still permissible to hand over the one who was singled out)."

The first Halacha here, that where no particular individual was singled out it is forbidden to hand anyone over, even if they will all die as a result, is recorded in Rambam (Yesodei HaTorah 5:5) and by the Rema (Yoreh De’ah 157:1).

This requires some elucidation. Generally speaking, one is obligated to give up his life rather than murder another, based on a Sevara of מאי חזית דדמא דידך סומק טפי - "Why do you think your blood is redder?", meaning that there is no benefit in killing the other person, since either way a Jew will die, so there is no reason to allow the murder. However, in the case in the Yerushalmi, if they do not hand over one person, they will all die, including the person being handed over, so why do we not allow the handing over of one person to save the others?

The Kesef Mishneh on the Rambam (ad. loc.) explains that the Sevara of Mai Chazis is only necessary when the non-Jew who is asking you to kill has designated another particular Jew to be killed. In this case, however, even without the Sevara of Mai Chazis it is clearly forbidden to hand over one Jew, since there is no way to determine who should be handed over, and we cannot condemn one to death more than any of the others, and therefore they must all die and not hand anyone over.

B. Can one volunteer to die to save the others?
Yes. In fact, it is a Mitzvah to do so. The Chazon Ish (Yoreh Deah 69) proves the permissibility of this act from the story of Papus and Lulianus (who confessed to a crime of murder that they did not commit in order to save the Jews who were under threat - Rashi to Taanis 18b), about whom the Gemara (Bava Basra 10b) says that no person is allowed into their exclusive area in Olam HaBa.

However, the reason for this is a dispute among the Poskim. The Chazon Ish (ad. loc.) says that the reason for this is that this is considered primarily an act of saving others and not an act of getting oneself killed. On the other hand, the Binyan Tzion (2:173) states that the reason for this is that since if he does not volunteer he will die in any event, it is permitted.

(An apparent practical difference would be in a situation where the person who is volunteering has a chance of escaping, where the Chazon Ish would still permit it, whereas the Binyan Tzion would not. This is not the 9/11 scenario, however.)

C. Can we assume that the passengers on the plane would willingly volunteer, and shoot down the plane?

In a Sefer called Mishnas Pikuach Nefesh [by R’ Yosef Aryeh Lorincz, Bnei Brak 5763] (Simman 50), the author (when discussing this 9/11 scenario) assumes that there is an Anan Sahadei - a clearly valid assumption - that the passengers would be willing to give up their lives in this scenario, and it should be allowed.

However, he points out that usually there are minors (below Bar Mitzvah) on the plane, and for them the Anan Sahadei will not help (I assume, since they cannot waive their own lives, and we
cannot do it for them).

Additionally, in the Sefer B’Chol Nafsh’cha (10:(32)) the author is not sure whether one can volunteer to be actively killed by a Jew to save the many. (He says that from the Yam Shel Shlomo to Bava Kama (8:59) it would seem that is allowed, based on what he writes regarding Shaul HaMelech committing suicide, but it still requires more thought).

D. What is the Halachah in the dispute between R’ Yochanan and Reish Lakish?

When the non-Jews do designate someone to be killed, who is not liable for the death penalty, may he be handed over?

This is a Machlokes Rishonim. The Rambam (ad. loc.) says that they may not hand over the Jew who has been singled out, in accordance with the position of Reish Lakish, whereas many other Rishonim decide the Halachah in accordance with R’ Yochanan [The Beis Yosef (Yoreh Deah 157) quoting the Rash to the Mishnah in Terumos and the Ran to Yoma 82a; Bach understanding of Semag (Lavin 165) and Semak (78); Issur V’Hetter HeAroch (Klal 59).]

The Rema (Yoreh Deah ad loc) brings both opinions.

The Bach and Taz (157:7) decide the Halachah in accordance with the Rambam.

However, in Teshuvos Rema (11) he holds that the primary opinion is like Rabbi Yochanan. This is also the position of the Shaar Efraim (72), Tiferes Yisrael (Mishna Terumos 8:12) and the Chazon Ish (ad. loc.) say that the Halachah is in accordance with Rabbi Yochanan.

Most authorities hold that Rabbi Yochanan’s position is only true if the one who is singled out will certainly die in any event.

E. What is the rationale for R’ Yochanan’s position?
This is a further dispute. From many Rishonim (Kesef Mishneh ad loc., Rashi to Sanhedrin 74b s.v. Yatza, Ran (Yoma 4a in the Rif folio), Ritva and Maharam Chalawa to Pesachim 25) it seems that the reason for R’ Yochanan’s position is that the Sevara of the Kesef Mishneh quoted above for the prohibition of handing one of the people over is no longer applicable. Since the one who has been singled out is going to die anyhow, there is no reason why he should not be handed over to spare the others.

However, the Maharam Shick (Yoreh Deah 155), the Chazon Ish (ad loc) and Igros Moshe (Yoreh Deah 2:60) all say that the reason why he may be handed over is because, after he has been singled out, he has the status of a Rodef. [However, the Igros Moshe there does end up proving that the Ran and the Rash hold of the first reason as above.]

F. Does this hold true even at the expense of the condemned’s Chayei Sha’ah?
Yes. This is clear from the Chazon Ish and the Igros Moshe. R’ Moshe explains that the reason for this is because whatever time there is in excess of that Chayei Sha’ah which they are depriving that person of, only he is a Rodef on the others, but they are not a Rodef on him for that time span, since he will not have that time to live in any event.

Presumably, according to the first reason mentioned in the Rishonim as well, there is still reason enough to hand the one who is singled out over the others, since his lifespan is inevitably limited to Chayei Sha’ah.

[Although the Yad Avraham on the margin to the Shulchan Aruch seems to disagree, the Sefer B’Chol Nafsh’cha says that that position is in accordance with Reish Lakish].

G. Can we extrapolate from the Hetter to hand over the person, that it allowed to actively kill him to save the others?
The Meiri (Sanhedrin 72b s.v Zeh) as well as the Arugos HaBosem (brought in the Hagaha to the Mordechai (end of Perek Arba Misos) say that, while one may hand over the Jew to a non-Jew, one may not actively kill the Jew.

However, the Sefer B’Chol Nafsh’cha says that this is not implied by the simple reading of the other Rishonim (since the logic used should apply to direct murder as well).

If we were to decide the Halachah in accordance with the position of Rabbi Yochanan, then, it would seem that it is permissible to shoot down the plane, since they will die in any event, and the occupants of the building will be saved as a result.

However, we cannot simply discount the weighty position of the Rambam on this issue, as there are major Acharonim who decide the Halachah like him, as above.

H. Are there Hetterim even if we were to decide the Halachah in accordance with Reish Lakish?
Perhaps.

a) There are positions in the Acharonim (Lechem Mishneh to Rambam ad loc., Tosefes Yom HaKippurim (Yoma 82) who hold that even Reish Lakish would only argue if there is some slim chance that the person singled out will escape. But if there is no chance at all, he would agree that he should be handed over.

b) The Chazon Ish (ad loc) discusses the following scenario:
"We must delve into a case where one sees an arrow about to kill many people, and he can divert it to a different side, where it will kill only one person on another side, and those on this side will be saved, and if he were to do nothing, the many will die and the one will live. It is possible that this is not the same as the case of handing over someone to be killed, since that handing over is a cruel act of killing someone, and in this act there is no salvation of others in the inherent nature of the act, it is only that the particular circumstance caused that this act will bring about salvation to others, so the saving of the others hinges on the handing over of a Jewish soul.

However, in the diversion of the arrow from one side to the other, there is essentially an act of salvation, and it is not connected at all to the killing of the individual on the other side, rather it is only now, in this circumstance, that there is another Jew on the other side. And since on this side many Jews will die, and on the other side only one, it is possible that we must make every effort to reduce the loss of Jewish life to whatever extent possible. After all, Lulianus and Papus were killed to save the Jews, as Rashi writes to Taanis 18b, and they say that no person can stand in their section.

However, here may be worse since he is actively killing, and we only find that we may hand over Jews, but to kill with one’s hands, perhaps we do not do so, and that which they killed Sheva ben Bichri was because he was a rebel against the king. But, this requires more delving into.

So, the Chazon Ish has a doubt whether one may do an act which is primarily one of salvation, which will actively kill an individual, to save the multitudes. It seems that the accepted position by the Sefarim on the topic is that the Chazon Ish permits this. [The Sefer B’Chol Nafshecha seems to understand that this case of the Chazon Ish is not really direct killing. He holds that the Chazon Ish’s doubt is only in real active murder, like swerving a car away from the many to run over an individual. Though I do not see how that fits into the language of the Chazon Ish.]

In the Sefer "Chashukei Chemed", which is a collection of Psakim by R’ Yitzchak Zilberstein Shlit"a of Bnei Brak in order of the Dapim on Pesachim, brings from the preface of the Pnei Yehoshua to his novellae on Shas, that he had vowed to dedicate his life to delving in to the depths of the Torah, after he was trapped under some collapsed buildings, and many came to save, "And those that they killed by their trampling (in the area) were even more than those who had originally died, although there was no way out of this, since their intent was to save and remove the rubble."

Rav Zilberstein understands that the Pnei Yehoshua is approving of what they did. (It seems to me that the language of the Pnei Yehoshua implies that the Hetter is because - if they don’t do this they would all die anyhow, in addition to this being an act with the intent of saving. This would be a parallel to the 9/11 scenario. Though it is not clear in the Pnei Yehoshua whether he would hold this to be true even according to Resh Lakish, nevertheless, in the final analysis, he says it is allowed).

I. Is shooting down the plane primarily an act of saving or of killing?
One could perhaps distinguish between that Pnei Yehoshua and the 9/11 scenario, wherein in the Pnei Yehoshua’s case they were not actually doing acts of killing, they were only inadvertently shifting debris that caused people to die.

Rav Chaim Kanievsky Shlit"a, quoted in the Sefer Mishnas Pikuach Nefesh, says that he is unsure whether this should be considered an act of killing or of salvation.

J. Is a situation of war different?
In the Sefer Mishnas Pikuach Nefesh, the author raises the concern that if we were to conclude that it is impermissible to shoot down the plane, we would be in a terrible quandary. Our enemies could take a few Jews from their countries, put them on a plane (with a nuclear bomb!) drop it on the concentration of the Jews!

He therefore says that in the context of war, the rules are different. Here, everyone must fight and be willing to sacrifice his life to save the multitiudes from the enemy, and therefore it is allowed to down the plane although we are killing Jewish passengers.

This would even be true if there were children on the plane who are not obligated to fight against the enemy, since that is the Halachah, that in war we sacrifice the few to save the many.

And, so, a plane hijacked by terrorists would come under the rubric of war, and would be permissible, especially in light of Rav Yaakov Kamenetzky’s position on the impermissibility of ransoming the kidnapped Rav Hutner, on a hijacked plane, at the time, due to Israel being engaged in a war with the Arabs since ‘48.

[What would be in a case where one is not sure whether a terrorist attack is being perpetrated, like initially on 9/11, or in the Corey Lidle case, is an interesting question]

K. Conclusion:
We have a number of Tzedadim that would allow for downing the plane:
1) If all the occupants are adults, based on an assumed volunteering to save the multitudes.
2) If we hold like the many Rishonim who hold like Rabbi Yochanan, as some Acharonim aver, it would likely be allowed.
3) Even according to the Rambam and Resh Lakish, if it is clear that they will all die if nothing is done, some Acharonim say that it is allowed.
4) This may constitute primarily an act of salvation, with the killing being a side-effect, which is probably allowed according to the Chazon Ish.
5) In the context of war, this would certainly be permissible.

Rav Moshe Feinstein on Government

2006-10-23T13:07:00.000-07:00

This post is in reaction to Jak Black's over at Mishmar . It is a translation of Darash Moshe Derush 10 (page 415) in the standard edition:

"Remember that which Amalek did to you etc., do not forget". It is seemingly not understood what purpose there is in remembering the action of Amalek orally and in our hearts. What can we do about it?

However, the Passuk in Parshas Tetzaveh answers this, in that it seems difficult, that here (Parshas Tetzaveh) is not the place where Bnei Yisrael are commanded (about lighting the Menorah with pure olive oil), rather Hashem is only saying now that He will eventually command them, as Rashi explains in Parshas Emor (24:2), and, if so, what purpose does it serve now? This is not done by the other Mitzvos!

We also must understand the reason that the Torah commands that it be pure-pressed oil, that never had any sediment, since it will burn with sediment as well.

The reason is that the Torah is telling us a great thing. Every empty belief in the world, and every vapid value system in the world, declares that it illuminates the world, and portrays some nice things to mislead the eyes and to ensnare souls. But since many people are not interested in it, they force their opinions upon anyone they can with swords and spears, that they should accept their beliefs and value system, as is known in every period and era, whether in beliefs or value systems, whether in the past or present, and even more strongly so (now) such as with (Communist) Russia and Germany and the like. This is the sediment in their light, and in the end all that is left is only the evil and not the system that they portrayed, which they no longer have any use for since they have a sword and a spear. And it turns out that since there was sediment mixed into their light, which is the waste of the sword and the spear, there was room to err ansd think that the sediment provides light, until, finally, all that is left is the sword and spear alone, and the light is completely extinguished, as we saw with our own eyes with Russia and Germany on both extremes.

And we derive from this that no government, which is the authority, has the right to accept one particular belief or value system, because in the end all that will remain is force, devoid of values, and there will be destruction in the world, as we see with our own eyes.

If so, there is a difficulty, since the path of the Torah is also that the Jewish government supervises the law of the Torah as well, and this is represented by the Mikdash which is the foundation of our Nation, and if so, how can we have a claim against the Kings of the Nations that they supervise their beliefs and values?

The answer to this is that it is true that the Jews can hand over the implementation of the Torah to their government as well, because in the end He will command them to light in the Menorah only pure-pressed oil that was never with sediment, meaning that only with the light of the Torah will it be illuminated, in that it is a wise and understanding Nation, to influence the entire world, as it was in the days of David and Shlomo that all the Nations streamed to them, and many converted, out of a pure love for Hashem and the Torah, because it is forbidden for the Jews to force other Nations to convert, and we do not coerce any nation or country to do so, and on the contrary, we do not accept converts if there is even a doubt whether they want to convert because of some fear or other mundane matter, and therefore there is no need to be concerned about this - rather the righteous king will see, through the might of the wisdom of the Torah, to influence the entire world.

And even those among the Jews who are liable for the death penalty - it is so difficult to have an individual be liable for the death penalty! For only righteousness and justice is our our light, with no addition of sediment. And therefore Hashem hurried to inform us, in the middle of the commandment to erect the Mishkan, to answer that which Hashem gave over the Torah to the leadership of the monarchy, that they need to use pure olive oil, although here is not the place for that commandment.

Now, Amalek, who came to fight against the Jews, also had a value system. They wanted to show, erroneously, that there was nothing miraculous about the Jews and there is nothing to fear about them, and if so they should have initially argued with words and to show that they were right if they could, or to admit that they were wrong if they could not. But they did not do so. They came immediately to fight. They showed that the primary part is the sediment. So we must remember, orally and in our hearts, so that we know that any belief or value that uses its authority and force, and is not satisfied with its light alone, is full of vapidity and lies and they are merely fooling the public, and that is the benefit of remembering Amalek for us as well.

We conclude from all this that any kingdom from the Nations of the world is not allowed to espouse one particular belief system. It must only do its job, which is to make sure that noone wrongs his fellow by stealing or murdering, for without the fear of government each man would swallow his fellow alive, but regarding value systems and beliefs and other things everyone must be free to do as he wishes.

And if so, the government of the United States, which already 150 years ago set as a law for its government that they will not espouse one particular belief or system, rather each man can do as he pleases, and the government will only ensure that one man does not swallow his fellow, they are doing the Will of G-d, and therefore they were successful and they became great during that period. And we are obligated to pray for them that Hashem grant them success in all that they endeavor.

And soon may Yehudah and Yisrael be redeemed, Amen.

Shaarei Teshuva XIII

2006-08-21T23:53:00.000-07:00

Sorry it took me a while to get to the next segment. I haven't quite found the time to do this properly lately...

ד ועוד התבונן ברעת המתאחר מן התשובה כי רבה היא, כי לולא התמהמה כי עתה שב איש נאנח במרירות לב ברגזה ובדאגה ודלפה עינו מתוגה, כי יפגשהו יצרו שנית ויזדמן החטא לידו יכבוש את יצרו ויזכור אשר עברה עליו כוס המרירות ולא יוסיף לשתותו עוד, כמו שנאמר (תהלים ד, ה): "רגזו ואל תחטאו" - באורו: רגזו והצטערו על אשר חטאתם ואל תחטאו עוד! כי הזכיר חטאם למעלה (פסוק ג) באמרו: "תבקשו כזב סלה". ויעיד על זה הפירוש אמרו "רגזו" מלשון: "אל תרגזו בדרך" (בראשית מה, כד); "ותחתי ארגז" (חבקוק ג, טז), וענינם הצער על הדבר שעבר ועל ההווה, ולא אמר "יראו" או "גורו". וכאשר יאחר לשוב, בבא החטא לידו יפול במוקשו כנפול בתחלה, ויגדל עוונו האחרון מאד, ותעלה רעתו לפני השם, כי מראשית לא חשב כי פתאום יבוא היצר השודד עליו אך אחרי אשר ראה דלות כחו ואשר גברה יד יצרו עליו וכי עצום הוא ממנו, היה עליו לראות כי פרוע הוא ולשית עצות בנפשו להוסיף בה יראת ה' ולהפיל פחדו עליה ולהצילה ממארב יצרו ולהשתמר מעונו. ואמר שלמה עליו השלום (משלי כו, יא): "ככלב שב על קאו כסיל שונה באולתו" - ביאורו, כי הכלב אוכל דברים נמאסים, וכאשר יקיאם נמאסים יותר והוא שב עליהם לאכלם, כן ענין הכסיל, כי יעשה מעשה מגונה וכאשר ישנה בו מגונה יותר, כאשר בארנו.

"And also ponder the severity of delaying Teshuva, how great it is, for if delays not, rather repents now, groaning in bitterness of heart in anguish and concern, and eyes shedding tears from misery, when his Yetzer will encounter him a second time, and the opportunity for sin presents itself again, he would conquer his Yetzer, and recall that the cup of bitterness had passed over him as well, and he would not partake of it anymore, as it says: "Be anguished and do not sin" - meaning: Be anguished and pained due to your sinning, and sin no more! For he mentions their sin earlier: "You seek out falsehood constantly".

And testimony to this explanation is provided by the use of the term "Rigzu", similar to "Do not (bicker in) anguish ("Tirgezu") on the way"; "And in my place I am in anguish ("Ergaz"), and their meaning is one of pain over the past and present, and it does not say "be afraid" or "be frightened".

And when he procrastinates his repentance, when the sin will come upon him again, he will fall into its trap just as he fell initially, and his latest sin will be very magnified, and his bad deed will come before Hashem, becuase he initially did not think that the Yetzer bandit would come upon him suddenly. But after he saw the meagerness of his strength, and that the hand of the Yetzer had overcome him, and that it is more powerful than him, he should have realized that he is exposed, and to place counsel for his soul, to add Yiras Hashem to it and to place His fear upon it, to save it from the ambush of his Yetzer and to protect it from his sin.

And Shlomo HaMelech Alav HaShalom said - "Like a dog returning to his vomit so is a person repeating his folly" - meaning, the dog eats disgusting things, and when he vomits them they become even more repulsive, and he still returns to eat it. So is the manner of the fool, that he does a repugnant act and when he repeats it, it is even more repugnant, as we explained."

This is a very important segment in Rabbeinu Yonah. It underscores the obligation upon a person to be cognizant that he is in an ongoing battle with his Yetzer, and it requires strategizing. בתחבולות תעשה לך מלחמה -"With stratagems you shall wage war for yourself".

If a person sins, it is not enough to just think - "I sinned, I'll try not to do it again". That's like a general in an army, after suffering a rout in battle, not studying what went wrong, but just saying - "Well, its too bad. Next time I'll do better." An attitude like that gets the general demoted! He has to pore over the battle plans, assess his capabilities, strengths and weaknesses, and actually think how he will defeat his enemy next time! If he loses - there was a root cause! Determine what it is! Don't let it just happen.

Here, Rabbeinu Yonah is talking about a loss where the key element in favor of the enemy was exploitation of a heretofore unknown weakness - a chink in the armor. Like, we shouldn't know from things like that anymore, a 9/11 attack. Who ever expected something like that to happen? Nobody did. But after it did happen, the number one responsibility was to shore up the defenses in the aviation arena.

To fortify ourselves against another sneak attack, a person has to realize that if he sinned - that indicates that an exposed flank was exploited. The first step to protecting that flank is to fortify it. How does one do that? By motivating oneself to place guards there - and that is done by feeling the pain and anguish of that loss. If the attack doesn't bother you too much - you won't be watching it next time it is attacked. So, one must do Teshuvah right away for a sin - or the weak spot remains exposed.

Shaarei Teshuvah XII

2006-08-16T23:52:00.000-07:00

ג ולא ימצא איחור התשובה זולתי בעמי הארץ, אשר הם ישנים שוכבים ולא ישיבו אל לבבם, ולא דעת ולא תבונה להם למהר להמלט על נפשם. ויש מהם נדחים מעל השם ברוך הוא ולא יאמינו לעונש החטא. ואמרו רבותינו זכרונם לברכה (ברכות יט א): אם ראית תלמיד חכם שעבר עבירה בלילה אל תהרהר אחריו ביום, כי באמת עשה תשובה.

"And one will not find delay of Teshuvah except by the Amei HaAretz, who are sleeping, lying down, and they do not instill into their hearts, and they have neither the intelligence nor the understanding to make haste and escape for their lives. And some of them are distanced from Hashem, and they do not believe in the retribution for sin. And Chazal say - 'If you've seen a Talmid Chacham who violated an Aveirah at night, do not think badly of him in the day, for he has truly repented"

Delaying Teshuvah on sins which we know we have done is only by people who are not spiritually focused. If their thoughts were, consistently, geared toward spiritual pursuit, they would immediately regret the Aveirah and resolve not to do it again.

Virtually everyone lapses here and there - they doze off spiritually and fall into sin. But the quality of the Am HaAretz vs. the Talmid Chacham, in this context, is that the Am HaAretz sleeps lying down. That means he's not just caught snoozing - he's crawled under the blanket to take a good shluf. That's when the individual becomes desensitized to his shortcomings, and does nothing to repair the breaches in his wall of observance.

These people may even intellectually know what they need to do, but it is not part of their Avodah to actually get that into their consciousness. They may have וידעת היום , but the והשבות אל לבבך is lacking - as Rabbeinu Yonah says. I think it was the Kotzker Rebbe who said that the distance between וידעת היום and והשבות אל לבבך is like the distance between Heaven and Earth - there's alot of travel time.

A Rebbe of mine remarked, that in order to get something from your mind into your heart, one of the things you have to do is loosen your tie - or you'll choke off the pathway between them. While I think he meant this slightly diffferently, (in that you have to let your inner self come through to receive the intellectual data and mesh it with your soul - and not be too 'cerebral'), I'll borrow the metaphor and say that I can't be sitting in my suit and tie at my mahogany desk, and have a white-collar kind of attitude toward my Avodah. It will take some blue-collar effort - straining to build the spiritual muscle needed to maintain our connection to the Ribbono Shel Olam.

אין הדבר תלוי אלא בי

Shaarei Teshuva XI

2006-08-15T22:59:00.000-07:00

ואמרו רבותינו זכרונם לברכה על הענין הזה (קהלת רבה ז, לב): משל לכת של לסטים שחבשם המלך בבית האסורים, וחתרו מחתרת, פרצו ויעבורו ונשאר אחד מהם. בא שר בית הסוהר וראה מחתרת חתורה והאיש ההוא עודנו עצור, ויך אותו במטהו. אמר לו: קשה יום! הלא המחתרת חתורה לפניך ואיך לא מהרת המלט על נפשך?

"And our Rabbis of Blessed memory said on this matter (Kohelles Rabbah 7:32): A parable, of a group of robbers who were incarcerated by the king, and they dug a tunnel, breached and passed through, while one of them remained. The warden came and saw that that there is a tunnel which was dug, and that man was still in jail! He struck him with his staff, and he said :"Ne'er-do-well! The tunnel is dug in front of you, how did you not quickly escape?"

This parable has always bothered me. It would seem to be an even more exacerbated rebellion against the king to escape from jail. I mean, this was illegal. How can that be compared to missing the opportunity to do Teshuvah?

I'm still not certain of the answer. But perhaps the meaning is, that in reality Teshuvah is not something which makes any sense, as we mentioned earlier in the series. How can we erase a deed which was already done? And yet, we are granted this "illegal" escape route - we should take advantage of it.

Shaarei Teshuva X

2006-08-14T16:03:00.000-07:00

ב ודע, כי החוטא כאשר יתאחר לשוב מחטאתו יכבד עליו מאד ענשו בכל יום, כי הוא יודע כי יצא הקצף עליו ויש לו מנוס לנוס שמה, והמנוס הוא התשובה, והוא עומד במרדו והנו ברעתו, ובידו לצאת מתוך ההפכה, ולא יגור מפני האף והחמה, על כן רעתו רבה.

"And know, that the sinner, when he delays repenting for his sin, his punishment weighs more heavily on him each day, because he knows that there is wrath upon him, and he has a refuge to escape to, and that refuge is Teshuvah, and he remains in his rebelliousness and is still in his wickedness, and it is in his hand to get out of the rubble, and he has no fear of the anger and wrath, therefore his wickedness is great."

After dedicating the opening paragraph to words of encouragement, the carrot, if you will, Rabbeinu Yonah now turns to the stick. This is really the second derivative of his opening statement that Teshuvah is "among the good things that G-d did for his creations". Delaying use of that gift is hurtful.

This paragraph is harsh. After I sin, I usually feel bad about it, but in my mind, after a while, the pangs of conscience get weaker, and fade away. And I assume that that is how the Ribbono Shel Olam relates to it - at the moment of sin, it is severe, but He puts it into the minus column in my tally book, and "gets over it". But Rabbeinu Yonah is saying that that mental image is wrong. Hashem's anger has been kindled, and the fact that He does not punish me is a constant restraint of His anger, כביכול. When we say in Davening of Rosh HaShanah אין שכחה לפני כסא כבודך - "There is no forgetfullness before Your Throne of Glory", that does not only mean that everything is recorded, but that the deleterious impact of the Aveirah upon the relationship between myself and the Ribbono Shel Olam has not subsided at all.

This is reminiscent of what Rabbeinu Yonah says in his commentary to Massechet Avos (3:1):

[This is one of the most terrifying pieces of Mussar you will read. You have been warned:]

ולפני מי אתה עתיד ליתן דין וחשבון - שהנבראים לא נבראו אך לירא את ה'. כי איך יחטא האדם אם יחשוב לפני מי עתיד ליתן דין וחשבון ויותר על הפורענות והנסיון שיהיה לו על חטאיו כי יתבייש בשת גדול. משל למלך שנכנס אדם לפניו אם ימצאהו מרמה במעשיו או משקר דבריו הלא יתבייש בשת גדול. על אחת כמה וכמה לפני מלך מלכי המלכים הקב"ה גם כי בהתבייש הנפש אחר שנתפרדה מן הגוף הבושת ההיא גדולה מהבושת בעודנה שמה כי טבע הגוף משכח וכי יעשה האיש דבר כיעור ויתבייש עליו מבני אדם לשנה או לשנתים ישכח הדבר וילך הבושה מעליו וגם כי לא ישכח מלבו. יהיה הדבר ישן נושן והוסרה קצת הבושה כי טבע השכחה שבגוף מתערב עם טבע הנפש וכי אינו יכול להתגבר עליו לשכוח הדבר לגמרי על כל פנים יתגבר עליו להתיישן הדבר שהוא קצת השכחה שמסיר רוב הבושה אך בהיות הנפש לבדה אין שכחה לפניה כי כלה ברה וזכה ואין שום טבע מהגשמים בתוכה. ושמתביישת לפני מלך מלכי המלכים הקב"ה. לעולם ולעולמי עד תעמוד בבושה באותה שעה שהיתה עומדת לפניו וכמו הפעם ההוא תעמוד מבוישת לעולם וזהו שאמרו רז"ל אוי לה לאותה בושה אוי לה לאותה כלימה לכן על כל פנים המעלה על לבו דברים אלה לא יבא לידי עבירה:

"And before Whom are you destined to give an accounting - Hashem's creations were created for the sole purpose of fear of G-d. For how can a person sin if he thinks before whom he is destined to give an accounting? And even more so, if he thinks about the punishment and tribulation he will have for his sins, for he will be very shamed. This is comparable to a king, where if someone comes before him, and the king finds that he is being deceitful in his actions, or lying in his words - he will certainly be greatly ashamed. Certainly before the King of Kings, HaKadoah Baruch Hu. Also, when the soul is shamed after it separates from the body, that shame is greater than when it is still there, for the nature of the body is to forget, and when a person does something turpid, and he is embarrassed in front of other people, after a year or two [Now its MUCH less than that] the matter will be forgotten and the shame will dissipate. And even if the matter itself is not forgotten from his own heart, the matter will become stale, and the shame will have subsided somewhat, for the nature of forgetfulness of the body meshes with the nature of the soul, and if it cannot overcome it to forget the matter completely, nevertheless it will overcome it to the extent that it makes the matter old, which is the bit of forgetfulness which removes the majority of the shame. But when the soul is alone, there is no forgetfulness for it, for it is all clear and pure, there is none of the nature of the physical in it. And when it is shamed before G-d, it will retain that same shame that it had at the moment it stands before G-d, for all eternity! And that is what Chazal said "Woe to that shame, woe to that humiliation." Therefore, one who brings these words to his consciousness will not come to sin."

Shaarei Teshuva IX

2006-08-12T22:41:00.000-07:00

והוזהרנו על התשובה בכמה מקומות בתורה, והתבאר, כי התשובה מקובלת גם כי ישוב החוטא מרוב צרותיו, כל שכן אם ישוב מיראת השם ואהבתו, שנאמר (דברים ד, ל): "בצר לך ומצאוך כל הדברים האלה באחרית הימים ושבת עד ה' אלהיך ושמעת בקולו". והתבאר בתורה, כי יעזור ה' לשבים כאשר אין יד טבעם משגת ויחדש בקרבם רוח טהורה להשיג מעלת אהבתו, שנאמר (דברים ל, ב): "ושבת עד ה' אלהיך ושמעת בקולו ככל אשר אנכי מצוך היום אתה ובניך בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך". ואומר בגוף הענין (דברים ל, ו): "ומל ה' את לבבך ואת לבב זרעך" - להשיג אהבתו. והנביאים והכתובים דברו תמיד על דבר התשובה, עד כי באו עקרי התשובה כלם מפורשים בדבריהם כאשר יתבאר.

"And we are warned about Teshuva in a number of places in the Torah, and it is clear, that Teshuva is accepted even if the sinner repents due to his multitude of troubles, certainly if he repents out of fear of Hashem and love of Him, as it says: "When you are in distress, and all these things have befallen you, at the end of days, you will return unto Hashem your G-d, and hearken to His voice."

"And it explained in the Torah, that Hashem will aid those who repent when their natural abilities are unable to achieve, and he will create anew inside them a pure spirit to achieve the level of love for Him (alternatively: to comprehend the great achievement of loving Him) as it says: "And you will return unto Hashem your G-d, and listen to His voice, according to everything that I command you today, you and your children, with all your heart and all your soul." And it says in the matter (i.e. in the discussion of Teshuva in the Torah there) itself, "And Hashem will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring" - to achieve love of Him. And the Neviim and Kesuvim speak constantly on the matter of Teshuva, to the point that all the fundamentals of Teshuva are elucidated in their words, as will be explained."

Here, Rabbeinu Yonah is continuing to tell us not to despair of Teshuva, even if the conditions to our success seem to be adverse. In the previous section Rabbeinu Yonah told us that even if the depths of sin we have sunk to seem impossible to extricate ourselves from, we still have not forfeited the opportunity.

Now, Rabbeinu Yonah tells us that even if our motivation is not out of true recognition of the need for Teshuva, due to our fear or love of the Ribbono Shel Olam, but, rather, due to distress and suffering, it is still accepted. (This is a nice segui from the Gemara quoted yesterday, how Acher repented at his last breath.)

And, additionally, whatever we cannot achieve on our own, G-d will propel us forward, will give us a Hand. As the well known Medrash (Shir HaShirim Rabbah) states:

אמר הקב"ה לישראל בני פתחו לי פתח אחד של תשובה כחודה של מחט ואני פותח לכם פתחים שיהיו עגלות וקרניות נכנסות בו

"Hashem said to Yisrael, My sons, open for me one opening of Teshuva like the point of a needle, and I will open entranceways for you that wagons and chariots enter through".

However, we must start the process, as expressed in this Medrash. Rabbeinu Yonah says that Hashem will aid לשבים - those who repent. We cannot sit back and wait for Teshuva to just "happen".

In truth, much of this section in the Rabbeinu Yonah is quite a Chiddush. The Pessukim that he quotes seem to relate to: a)Klal Yisrael as a whole, not an individual trying to do Teshuva. b) The end of days. (The first Passuk says this explicitily, and the last two Pessukim, from Parshas Nitzavim, according to the Ramban, are a prophecy of Moshe that we will ultimately do Teshuva before the final Redemption.) Nevertheless, Rabbeinu Yonah opines that these Pessukim are just as applicable to individuals doing Teshuva at any time.

The Satmar Rebbe zt"l asks on a Passuk we read yesterday:

"ארץ אשר תמיד עיני ד' אלקיך בה מראשית השנה עד אחרית שנה"

"The Land upon which the eyes of Hashem are constantly, from the beginning of the year to the end of a year".

Why does it not say "The end of the year"? He answers, because every year at Rosh Hashanah, we decide, we make resolutions, to be better, to be different. This is the year! But, as the year drags on, we, all too often, realize - its just another year.

With Elul around the corner, we cannot afford that Hashem cast His eyes on Eretz Yisrael, once again, and sees that it was just another year.

May Hashem grant us the wherewithal to indeed make this year different. It is not too late:

תהא שנת סוף וקץ (לכל צרותינו) אכי"ר

May Klal Yisrael be Zocheh, indivually and as a whole, to return to their Father in Heaven, and in that merit may all of His, and our, enemies, be obliterated from the face of the earth.

Shaarei Teshuva VIII

2006-08-11T00:00:00.000-07:00

ואם הרבו לפשוע ולמרוד ובגד בוגדים בגדו, לא סגר בעדם דלתי תשובה

שנאמר (ישעיה לא, ו): "שובו לאשר העמיקו סרה". ונאמר (ירמיה ג, כב): "שובו בנים שובבים ארפה משובותיכם

"...as it states - 'Return, those who have become deeply enmeshed in turning away'. And it says "Return, children who have rebelliously strayed, I will cure your rebellion."

Here, Rabbeinu Yonah, as is his Mahalach throughout the Sefer, provides Pessukim from the Neviim to support his points. The Pessukim are of a לא זו אף זו (not only x, but even y) construct, as we have seen a few times already (Maaseihem/Pish'eihem; save from punishment/retract anger; callous/rebellious/treason).

The first Passuk refers to the people who are deeply enmeshed in sin. As we said, this is descriptive of the state of mind of a פושע - ("This is as a result of being so ensnared in sin as to develop a cognitive dissonance from the consequences."). They have gone into a deep-freeze in their relationship with the Ribbono Shel Olam, and they are callous. Hashem calls to them to return.

The second Passuk - שובו בנים שובבים - refers to those who are rebellious. The Radak explains the word שובבים as מורדים - even they are given the chance to be healed - ארפה משובתיכם.

But where are the people at the lowest level - the בוגדים? The people who have tasted the Divine experience and rejected it - as we said yesterday, the "Acher"s of the world?

Well, Acher just came into my head last night when I was composing yesterday's post as an example of who might meet this lowly stature, and tonight, I saw the Gemara in Chaggiga (15a):

שאל אחר את רבי מאיר לאחר שיצא לתרבות רעה: מאי דכתיב +איוב כ"ח+ לא יערכנה זהב וזכוכית ותמורתה כלי פז - אמר לו: אלו דברי תורה, שקשין לקנותן ככלי זהב וכלי פז, ונוחין לאבדן ככלי זכוכית. - אמר לו: רבי עקיבא רבך לא אמר כך, אלא: מה כלי זהב וכלי זכוכית, אף על פי שנשברו יש להם תקנה - אף תלמיד חכם, אף על פי שסרח יש לו תקנה. - אמר לו: אף אתה חזור בך! - אמר לו: כבר שמעתי מאחורי הפרגוד: שובו בנים שובבים - חוץ מאחר.

"Acher asked Rabbi Meir after he had gone off, what does it mean when it says - "It cannot be compared to gold and glass, nor be exchanged for fine-gold utensils"? (Rabbi Meir) said to him: 'these are the words of Torah, which are difficult to acquire like utensils of gold and fine-gold, and are as easily lost as a glass utensil'. He said to him: 'Akiva your Rebbe did not say so, rather: just like gold and glass utensils, if they break, they can be fixed, so too a Talmid Chacham, even though he spoiled, he can be rectified.' He said to him - 'You too, return!' He said to him: "I already heard behind the curtain: Return, sons who have rebelliously strayed - except for Acher."

It seems that there is some kind of hint in the Passuk, some kind of מיעוט - which excludes Acher from those who are offered the opportunity to do Teshuvah. Where is this exclusion? Apparently, Acher had heard that this Passuk was limited up to the penultimate level of depth of sin - "מרידה". But not "בגידה".

This is even more explicit in the version of this story as brought in Yalkut Shimoni to Koheles (974)

אמר ליה וכל הדא חכמתא אית בך ולית את חוזר בך, אמר ליה לית אנא יכיל, אמר ליה למה, אמר ליה פעם אחת הייתי רוכב על הסוס סמוך לכותל מערבי של בית המקדש, ושמעתי בת קול יוצאה מבית קדש הקדשים מפוצצת ואומרת שובו בנים שובבים חוץ מאחר שהיה יודע כחי ומרד בי

"(Rabbi Meir) said to him, 'you have all this wisdom and you do not repent?' He said: "I cannot". He said: "Why?". He said: "Once I was riding on a horse near the Western Wall of the Beis HaMikdash, and I heard a Heavenly Voice thundering: 'Return sons who have rebelliously strayed' except for Acher, who knew my power and rebelled against me.

So, we must ask then, how does Rabbeinu Yonah know that even the בוגדים like Acher can repent? Doesn't it say that he could not?

Tosfos in Chagigah there quotes a Yerushalmi, and it is brought down in that Yalkut Shimoni as well, that tells us 'the rest of the story':

לאחר ימים חלה אתון ואמרין ליה לרבי מאיר, אזל לגביה, אמר ליה חזור בך, אמר ליה עד כדו מקבלין, אמר ליה לאו הכי כתיב תשב אנוש עד דכא עד דכדוכה של נפש, באותה שעה זלגו עיניו דמעות, שמח רבי מאיר אמר דומה לי שמתוך תשובה נסתלק

"After some days, Acher became ill. They came and told R' Meir, he went to him, he said: 'Repent!'. He said to him - 'even at this point they accept?' He said: 'Doesn't it say 'You will bring a person until he is sapped of his strength (and You say, return, ye men)' - even to the point of the soul being crushed?' At that time his eyes shed tears. Rabbi Meir rejoiced and said: ' It seems he was removed from the world while repenting."

The Maharsha says in Chagiga there: "(Acher) should not have paid attention to that (Heavenly Voice), as Rabbi Meir told him when he was ill... and we say that there is nothing that stands before Teshuvah."

The Rambam (Hilchos Avodas Kochavim 2:5) says that an Apikores cannot do Teshuvah, and the Kesef Mishneh there brings the case of Acher as a proof. However, the Pri Chadash says that he does not understand why this would be a proof, since obviously Rabbi Meir felt he could do Teshuvah, and we pay no attention to a Bas Kol when it comes to Halachic matters!

The "lomdus" of the debate between Rabbi Meir and Acher seems, then, to revolve around whether Acher's predicament should be classified as a completely new grade below מרידה - and hence excluded from the Passuk of שובו בנים שובבים, which is limited to מרידה, or merely a particularly severe, treasonous, type of rebellion, and included in the term שובבים. While the Bas Kol may have held the former, this was a matter, apparently, in the domain of the Halachic decisors, and Rabbi Meir was of the opinion that it was the latter.

It seems that Rabbeinu Yonah understood that, L'Halachah, the conclusion of the story was that Acher did repent, R' Meir felt it would be accepted, and that even this type of severe מרידה - of the יודע כחי ומרד בי variety, which he terms בגידה , is indeed but a severe form of מרידה - not an entirely new category, and hence included in the opportunity granted in שובו בנים שובבים.

Shaarei Teshuva VII

2006-08-09T23:55:00.000-07:00

ואם הרבו לפשוע ולמרוד ובגד בוגדים בגדו, לא סגר בעדם דלתי תשובה, שנאמר (ישעיה לא, ו): "שובו לאשר העמיקו סרה". ונאמר (ירמיה ג, כב): "שובו בנים שובבים ארפה משובותיכם".

"And if they sinned many times, whether through carelessness, or rebelliousness, or treason, still He did not close the doors of Teshuva to them, as it states - 'Return, those who have become deeply enmeshed in turning away'. And it says "Return, children who have rebelliously strayed, I will cure your rebellion."

Rabbeinu Yonah goes through three states of sin of increasing severity:
a) פשע - this is serious in its own right. Of the three grades of sin that the Kohen Gadol refers to in his Vidui - חטא,עון,פשע - this is considered the worst.

We refer to a Shomer who was neglectful of his duty to guard the object as a פושע. Apparently, this word has a connotation of callous ignoring of the duty at hand, to the point of being indifferent to any consequence. This is worse than מזיד - which is intentional sin. That would mean that he is aware of what he is doing but too engrossed in the moment to consider the severity of what he is doing. A פשע is complete indifference - as if the whole matter does not relate to me, I have no responsibilities. He has erased the opening charge of the Mesillas Yesharim from his lexicon - חובת האדם בעולמו.

(This is as a result of being so ensnared in sin as to develop a cognitive dissonance from the consequences. Hence what Rabbeinu Yonah refers to earlier as "פח פשעיהם")

b) מרידה - rebellion. This seems to be someone who is יודע רבונו ומתכוון למרוד בו - "He knows his Master and intends to rebel against Him", as Rashi (Bereishis 10:9) refers to Nimrod and his ilk. These are people who have developed a desire to completely throw off the yoke of Avodas Hashem, and feel like they need to show Him that He has no dominion over them. G-d should 'get off their backs'. He cannot dictate to them what they should do. "I'll do what I want! Do something about it!"

We read about these people in last week's Parshah - ומשלם לשונאיו - "He pays back those who hate Him".

Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaar 3 sections 160-161) describes some of the people who are categorized as G-d haters.

(We can sometimes discern one of these types, cloaked in pseudo-concern for the welfare of the Jewish Nation):

"The category of G-d haters can be found sometimes also among people who do the Mitzvos and they are careful not to do any Aveirah in act and deed. If their soul feels bad, and in their heart it is difficult for them, when their friends learn Torah, and it is bad in their eyes when people serve G-d and fear Him - so just as you would say that a person who does not want that people should honor the king and serve him, that he hates the king, certainly if they've acted upon their evil thoughts in discouraging the heart of people from learning Torah and doing Mitzvos; and so too the people who do not "fargin" (untranslatable Yiddish word- it means they can't stand when others have something that they themselves don't) the honor accorded to Talmidei Chachamim who are upright and righteous, and they hate their crown of glory, or their hearts feel bad when unto them is given dominion over the generation... and certainly if they seek to denigrate their honor or humiliate them... all these are truly שונאי השם"

These people rebel against G-d. They seek to see a world in which His service, and the honor accorded His loyal servants, be diminished.

c) בגידה - treason. This is the lowest level. This is a person who was given a certain closeness to the King, had built a relationship of trust with Him, and turned around and stabbed Him in the back. This is being showered with love and bounty, and reciprocating with a slap in the face.

This is descriptive of a person who has tasted that sublime bliss, that elusive experiential element of Yahadus which propels us to greater heights, and has abused it. People like Acher - who were granted great talent and were blessed with achievement, and turned around and threw it away.

Yet, even these people have the opportunity to do Teshuvah.

Shaarei Teshuva VI

2006-08-09T01:48:00.000-07:00

ולמדם והזהירם לשוב אליו כי יחטאו לו, לרוב טובו וישרו כי הוא ידע יצרם, שנאמר (תהלים כה, ח): "טוב וישר ה' על כן יורה חטאים בדרך"

"...And he taught them and warned them to return to Him when they sin toward Him, because of His goodness and uprightness, because He knows their Yetzer, as it says (Tehillim 25:8): 'Good and upright is Hashem; therefore He guides the sinners on the path'"

A number of comments:

1) I translated למדם as "taught" them, but I think that perhaps a more apt translation would be "prodded". This is based on what the Navi (Shoftim 3:31) calls a מלמד הבקר - a cattle prod.

[This gives us a clue on what the ultimate role of a מלמד - a teacher - is. It is to prod the student to take the path that we place before him.]

Rabbeinu Yonah is expanding on the idea of תכין לך הדרך which we talked about earlier - this prodding, cajoling, is another dimension of guiding us on the path toward Teshuva.

2) Along the same lines, הזהירם was translated as "warned", but, in reality, this word comes from the word זוהר - illumination. [זהירות - being careful, really means to be mindful - to illuminate your mind - 'to turn your brain on']. Hashem provided lampposts for us to illuminate the road to repentance even when it would have remained dark due to our wandering into some of the gloomiest parts of the forest of sin.

Those lampposts are saying -"Here! This is the way to go! Take this path!"

This is what is meant by Hashem "warning us" - it is a huge neon sign, blaring: "THIS WAY!"

3) We understand how Teshuva is an expression of the "goodness" of Hashem - but how is it part of his Yashrus? Don't we normally associate Yashrus with following the letter of the law, and "goodness" with the willingness to go beyond it? And haven't we said that Teshuva is something which is not really part of what our 'just desserts' should be?

Yerushalmi to Masseches Makkos, second Perek:

אמר רבי פינחס טוב וישר למה הוא טוב שהוא ישר ולמה הוא ישר שהוא טוב על כן יורה חטאים בדרך שמורה דרך תשובה

"R' Pinchas said - why is He good - for He is upright, and why is He upright - for He is good, 'therefore he guides sinners on the path' - that He teaches the path to Teshuva."

The Gemara seems to say that these two elements mesh, and the boundaries blur, when it comes to Teshuva. Yes, we know that we are undeserving of this opportunity. But at the same time, as Rabbeinu Yonah says - הוא ידע יצרם - He knows that our Evil Inclination provides with challenges each moment anew, and that it is a formidable foe. Yet, we are not given tests we cannot pass. Then again, there is no Tzaddik who goes through life sin-free.

It is an expression of Hashem's goodness, in that He considers it the "right" thing to do, to give us this opportunity.

This sentiment is, in essence, the Netziv's portrayal of the Avos in their role of Yesharim, in his famous Preface to Bereishis:

"היו עמם באהבה וחשו לטובתם באשר היא קיום הבריאה"

"They were with (the Nations) with love, and they were concerned for their well-being, as that maintains the existence of the world."

This is how Hashem relates to Teshuva - it is goodness, pure unadulterated goodness, that Hashem considers it, K'vayachol, the upright thing to do - as it is, ultimately, Kiyum HaB'riah.

4) Finally, fascinatingly, Rabbeinu Yonah quotes the Passuk from Tehillim above as the proof text for his first idea in the Sefer - of Hashem kindly guiding us along the road to Teshuva.

That same Yerushalmi, immediately prior to that statement of R' Pinchas, says -

תני ר' ליעזר בן יעקב או' מקלט מקלט כתיב בפרשת דרכים כדי שיהא הרוצח רואה את הכתוב והולך אמר רבי אבון כמין יד היתה מראה להן את הדרך

"A Beraisa: R' Eliezer ben Yaakov says, 'Miklat','Miklat' it would say on the crossroads, so that the murderer will see what is written and go. Rabbi Abun said - a form of a hand would show them the way"

The Yerushalmi is saying that this Passuk of טוב וישר ד' על כן יורה is referring to:

a) The guiding of a murderer to the city of refuge

b) The guiding of a sinner on the path to Teshuvah.

(Rashi on that Passuk in Tehillim quotes these two explanations.)

All of this is encapsulated by Rabbeinu Yonah's words, echoing what the Torah writes in regard to an Ir Miklat:

הכין להם הדרך

Does Every Generation Have Torah Leadership?

2006-08-08T19:53:00.000-07:00

In my post here, I said, "I fully believe in the words of Chazal that HaKadosh Baruch Hu provides each and every generation with top-caliber Torah leadership."

In the comments section to that post, I was challenged to find a source for this assertion. Ultimately, the source I provided was inconclusive.

Well, here's what I found in the preface of the Mabit to his Sefer Beis Elokim:

"And also hinted in that which the Medrash says - 'Zeh Sefer Toldos Adam - this teaches us that Hashem showed Adam each and every generation (Dor Dor) its exhorters, each generation and its wise men, each generation and its leaders' - that just as the primary product of a man are his Torah and Maasim Tovim, so too his primary offspring, and their product, are the Torah and Maasim Tovim of his offspring. And therefore they said "each generation and its exhorters", because the Amei HaAretz are not called the product of Adam, only the exhorters the wise men, and the leaders, and similarly those who heed them. And that which it says "Dor Dor" and not "Dor V'Dorshav, Dor VaChachamav etc." is to hint that Hashem will not abandon His Nation in any generation without exhorters, wise men, and leaders, or at least two of these, or one of these. In each and every generation consecutively, there will never be any generation which will not have shepherds."

Shaarei Teshuva V

2006-08-07T23:36:00.000-07:00

...ולנוס מפח פשעיהם, לחשוך נפשם מני שחת ולהשיב מעליהם אפו

"... to escape the snare of their sins, to spare their souls from the Depths, (yeah, that place) and to turn away His wrath from them"

Here Rabbeinu Yonah tells us about the phenomenal טובה that Teshuva is. By right, a person who sins should in the Presence of the A-mighty should be punished on the spot. And certainly, there doesn't seem to be any logical way to explain how a person can undo a misdeed.

The Mesillas Yesharim (at the end of the fourth Perek) writes:

"Based on the actual letter of the law, it would have been proper for a sinner to be punished for his sin immediately with no delay at all, and that punishment itself should have been delivered with a fury, as is befitting one who disobeys the word of the Creator, and that there should be no rectification of that sin at all. Because, behold, the truth is, how can a person rectify that which he has distorted and the sin that he has already performed? If a person murders another, or if he commits adultery, how can he rectify such a thing? Can he delete the action which was done from reality?

However, the Attribute of Mercy is what dictates the antitheses of the three items we mentioned, namely: that time be given the sinner and he not be wiped off the earth as soon as he sins, and that the punishment itself is not to the point of destruction, and that (the opportunity for) Teshuvah be given to the sinners..."

This piece from the Mesillas Yesharim echoes what Rabbeinu Yonah is telling us here. Teshuva is not only a device which removes the punishment which awaits us had we not not repented, but it completely removes the anger and disappointment which result from the misdeed, to the point where the relationship has been repaired.

We know, in our interpersonal relationships, and even with our own children, they can occasionally do something which is deserving of retribution, perhaps say something which is deeply hurtful to us. If they express remorse, we can find it within our capabilities to not punish them. But repairing the relationship can take alot of time, effort, open communication, and patience.

Here, it is the Melech HaOlam who accords us that opportunity.

Shaarei Teshuva IV

2006-08-07T09:23:00.000-07:00

מן הטובות אשר היטיב השי"ת עם ברואיו כי הכין להם הדרך לעלות מתוך פחת מעשיהם ולנוס מפח פשעיהם

"... the way to climb up from the pit of their deeds and to escape from the snare of their sins"

Rabbeinu Yonah here gives two metaphors for the predicament of someone who has sinned:

1) Falling into a pit

2) Ensnared in a trap

Rabbeinu Yonah is telling us that there are two primary ways that a person falls into sin:

1) How does one fall into a pit? By not paying attention to where he is walking. He is engrossed in his own thoughts, in his own world, and does not look at the ground to make sure that he is not about to fall into a pit. This is how we are. We just walk through life, not paying attention to the path we are treading, to make sure that we do not fall into the pitfalls that the Yetzer digs for us. These types of sins are referred to by Rabbeinu Yonah as "Maaseihem", "their deeds". These are missteps, that had we paid more attention, we would have avoided them. Inadvertently hurting someone else, not being meticulous enough about Hilchos Shabbos, usually falls into this category.

It is for this type of sin that Chazal instituted, or a person may sometimes impose on himself, "Gedarim", "fences". They are what keeps a person at a safe distance from the potential pitfalls which life has in store.

2) How does one get caught in a snare? By being attracted to the bait. Sometimes the lure of the sin is too great for us to overcome - though we know intellectually that HaKadosh Baruch Hu does not tempt us with more than we can handle - and he gives us these tests in order to refine ourselves - we still sometimes feel so overwhelmed by all of the temptations that the world has to offer, and find it difficult to resist. We knowingly violate things like Lashon Hara, or other temptations that we may consider "minor", because we are ensnared. Of course, we'll rationalize it away - but it is still what Rabbeinu refers to here as "Pisheihem" - "their criminal acts", because here the violation is done with some level of cognizance that it is wrong.

Shaarei Teshuva III

2006-08-06T14:46:00.000-07:00

מן הטובות אשר היטיב השי"ת עם ברואיו כי הכין להם הדרך לעלות מתוך פחת מעשיהם ולנוס מפח פשעיהם

"... that he prepared for them the way to climb up..."

Two comments on this phrase:

1) Rabbeinu Yonah does not say that He "paved" the way or "created the way" to Teshuva. He says "Heichin". I translated this as "prepared", but this is really somewhat inaccurate. This phrase is borrowed from the Passuk (Devarim 19:3) regarding the cities of refuge, the Arei Miklat. The Passuk says "תכין לך הדרך" - "You shall establish the road for yourself." According to the Mishnah in Makkos (9b), this means that we must have roads leading from one city of refuge to another, to enable one who committed unintentional murder to easily reach one of the cities. The Rambam (Hil. Rotze'ach 8:5) adds:

וחייבין בית דין לכוון הדרכים לערי מקלט, ולתקן אותם ולהרחיבן; ומסירין מהן כל מכשול וכל תקלה, ואין מניחין בדרך לא תל,ולא גיא ולא נהר אלא עושין עליו גשר כדי שלא לעכב את הבורח לשם: שנאמר תכין לך הדרך

"Beis Din is obligated to guide the paths to the cities of refuge, and to mend them and widen them; And they remove all obstacles and stumbling blocks, and they do not leave a hillock in the road, nor a valley, nor a river, rather they make a bridge over it, so as not to hinder the one escaping there, as it says "Tachin L'cha HaDerech".

This means, then, that Hashem has smoothed out the path to Teshuva for us. It does require effort, certainly, but since every little bit of Teshuva does have an effect, and HaKadosh Baruch Hu does have an immense desire to have His children return to him, it is a process with less hindrances than we may think. (Rabbi Frand spoke about this at some length on one of the Chofetz Chaim Heritage Foundation Elul videos, post 9/11). As the Passuk writes (Devarim 30:14) - כי קרוב אליך הדבר מאוד, בפיך ובלבבך לעשותו - "For it is exceedingly close to you, in your mouth and in your heart, to do." According to the Ramban (brother-in-law of Rabbeinu Yonah) there, this is a reference to the Mitzvah of Teshuva.

In addition, the Gemara in Makkos (10b) says (and Rashi to the Passuk of "Tachin L'cha" quotes this is the simple explanation) -

מקלט היה כתוב על פרשת דרכים, כדי שיכיר הרוצח ויפנה לשם. אמר רב כהנא מאי קרא? תכין לך הדרך, עשה לך הכנה לדרך

"It would say "Miklat" at the crossroads, so that the murderer will recognize and turn to there. Rav Cahana said, what is the Passuk (for this)? "Tachin L'cha HaDerech" - make for youself a "preparation" for the road.

This means, transferring this idea to what Rabbeinu Yonah is saying here, that not only did Hashem give us the opportunity to do Teshuva, He also gave us a roadmap of how to go about it. In all of the twenty components of Teshuva which Rabbeinu Yonah delineates, he invariably quotes a Passuk as support for the idea that it is one which is mentioned by the Torah or the Neviim. Hashem did not let us grope blindly for ways to reapproach Him - He told us exactly how to do it. Indeed, a great טובה.

2) Rabbeinu Yonah says that Hashem prepared הדרך - not "a" way but "the" way - to climb up etc. and remove His anger.

Sometimes we think that all we need is to do more Mitzvos, and then we can somehow tilt the scales in our favor. While that may be true (though during the Aseres Y'mei Teshuva this is not be the case. Teshuva is needed to tip the scales then), the only way to eradiacte the effect of those Aveiros is by Teshuva. The Heavenly Cheshbon is not like a bank account, where, as long as the deposits outweigh the withdrawals, we're fine with the manager. There is reward for the positive and retribution for the negative. The only way to erase the negative is by Teshuva.

Elul draws closer, and as the casualties in Eretz Yisrael mount, Hashem Yerachem, we can use every little bit of Teshuva we can get to protect Klal Yisrael. May our efforts be accepted B'Ratzon.

Shaarei Teshuva II

2006-08-05T21:31:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, we focused on the first part of the phrase:

"Min HaTovos Asher Heitiv Hashem Yisbarach Im Beru'av Ki Heichin Lahem HaDerech La'Alos Mitoch Pachas Ma'aseihem V'Lanus MiPach Pisheiheim".

Let's take a look at the next part: "עם ברואיו" - "With his creations".

Rabbeinu Yonah does not say "עם ישראל" - "With his Nation". Teshuva is effective for the Nations of the world as well. We see this from the story of Ninveh in Sefer Yonah, and this is also evidenced by the Rambam (Hilchos Teshuva 6) stating that Par'oh, due to his excessive sinning, lost his chance to do Teshuva - implying that generally non-Jews do have that avenue available.

However, in the Sefer "Beis Elokim" (Shaar HaTeshuva 13-14), after demonstrating that Teshuva is primarily for the Jewish Nation, the Mabi"t delineates 3 major differences between the effect of Teshuva for Bnei Yisrael vs. Teshuva for non-Jews:

a) Repentance done by Jews helps them in both this world and in the World to Come, whereas Teshuva done by the non-Jews helps them eschew punishment in this world, but does not accord them the same status as a חסיד אומות העולם who never trangressed any of the Seven Noahide Laws.

This is due to the relative ease of refraining from transgression of their seven commandments, as opposed to the myriad Mitzvos which we have, which afford a myriad of opportunities to blunder. In addition, the Beis Elokim points out that the entire concept of Teshuva is one of Divine Chessed, as the Rabbeinu Yonah stated at the outset, and He chose to give this kindness, at this level, to the children of the Avos who accepted the full gamut of Taryag Mitzvos.

It seems, however, that this is only true (for the non-Jews) of a Teshuva which stems from fear of punishment. However, a wholehearted complete Teshuva which emanates from a deep recognition of the worthiness of serving Hashem and performing His will, may very well accord even the non-Jew a clean slate and an opportunity to gain Olam Haba.

[I wonder if a non-Jew who does not feel up to this task would be better off converting, accepting the yoke of all the Mitzvos, and gaining the opportunity to start anew. Just a thought.]

b) The Gemara tells us (Yoma 86) that Teshuva done out of love for the A-mighty turns זדונות into זכויות - turns intentional transgression into merit. This power of Teshuvah is granted only to the Jewish people.

c) The Jewish Nation has a special power, in that the Teshuva of the רבים can be effective in "covering" for the individuals who do not do Teshuva - similar to the well-known concept of binding the tasteless and odorless ערבה together with the rest of the species - יבואו אלו ויכפרו על אלו - "let these come and provide atonement for the others. This is not true for the non-Jews. In the city of Ninveh, a central part of the Teshuvah campaign was to ensure that every single individual afflicted himself and repented.

While the task is daunting, let us be בשמחה over this opportunity accorded to us, just as a patient who was ill would be happy at the discovery of a cure to his ailment, even if he knew that the road to recovery was a difficult one. (R' Mattisyahu Salomon)

Shavua Tov.

The Shaarei Teshuva Series I

2006-08-04T12:17:00.000-07:00

I will begin posting, B'li Neder, a daily short piece from the Shaarei Teshuva of Rabbeinu Yonah, with some comments.

We should bear in mind that Shaarei Teshuvah was written by a Rishon, and as such, attention must be paid to nuance and structure as well.

The Sefer begins:

"Min HaTovos Asher Heitiv Hashem Yisbarach Im Beru'av Ki Heichin Lahem HaDerech La'Alos Mitoch Pachas Ma'aseihem V'Lanus MiPach Pisheiheim".

"Among the good things which Hashem Yisbarach bestowed upon his creations is that he prepared the way for them to climb up out of the pit of their deeds and to escape from the snare of their sins".

Rabbeinu Yonah begins his Sefer with an underscore of the need to recognize the gift that Teshuvah is. We will see, IY"H, that the capacity of Teshuva to restore a person to being exactly as he was before he sinned is a truly wondrous thing.

This opening statement of the Sefer is meant to arouse a sense of:

a) Hakaras HaTov for this gift, as all gifts should be recognized. This is one of the most basic elements of Avodas Hashem - gratitude. It forms the basis of the Chovos HaLevavos' rationale for why we serve Hashem - because we owe it to him due to the unending kindnesses he bestows upon us. R' Wolbe writes that this is the difference between a person who is "Dati" (his word) and one who is not - is his sense of Hakaras HaTov developed!

b) A sense of urgency that this gift be used. I recall, when I gave someone a gift certificate which would cover a meal for two at a fancy restaurant, as a token of gratitude for giving me a ride home from Yeshiva every day, I would ask him every so often if he had used it. Not just to satisfy my curiosity, though that was part of it, but it was sort of a gauge for me to see if I had given a gift that had "hit the spot", that was appreciated. If too long a time had gone by and that gift had gone unutilized, I guess I would have felt that it was a bit of a waste to give that gift.

(As an aside, I've heard of a fellow who gave his wife, as an anniversary gift, a burial plot right next to his. The next year, their anniversary came and went, and no gift was forthcoming. When she asked him whether he had forgotten that it was their anniversary, he deadpanned, "No, but you didn't use last year's gift yet!")

Hashem is waiting for us to use His gift of Teshuvah, which is a tool which enables us to grow closer in our relationship with Him. Delaying its use, as Rabbeinu Yonah will point out in the next paragraph, bears with it an apparent lack of gratitude that is displayed by an inalacritous implementation of it.

Let us start with some baby steps toward that goal today.

Good Shabbos.

Why the Europeans Hate Israel - A Theory

2006-07-30T16:24:00.000-07:00

It is obvious that the visceral attitude of all the European countries, in varying degrees, to Israel, is one of disdain. Israel is never given the wherewithal to win her battles, cease-fires must be implemented "immediately", and any "peace efforts" are heavily in favor of the Arabs, leaving Israel with indefensible borders. The tint level of the ideological blinders which these nations wear in terms of their ability to correctly identify the aggressor is astounding.

While Esav Sonei L'Yaakov certainly has something to do with it, and, undoubtedly, fear of their ever-increasing Muslim populace plays a role in their political calculus, I think there is something else that lurks in the dark corners of the European psyche when it comes to Israel.

It seems to me that the perception of the Europeans is that Israel, essentially, has no right to exist. But, it is a necessary concession to the Jewish People in the aftermath of the Holocaust. The Europeans must be ravaged by guilt at the wanton mega-pogrom of their Jewish population, and a Jewish homeland was the only way to 'reparate'. As a result, Israel serves as a constant reminder to them of their heinous track record with the Jews, and they hate her. It is like constantly looking at a wagging finger of rebuke for their horrors. And, they can't bear it.

So, they deal with it in the following way - yes, Israel, on the books, "has a right to exist", because of the Holocaust. But she must do everything she can to make sure that the 'rights' of the 'indigenous Palestinians' are not compromised in any way, because the world community, in the eyes of the Europeans, essentially stole Arab land to give it to the Jews to assuage their guilty conscience. And, here's the kicker - this is even at the expense of her own security.

Because Europeans feel better if they can accuse the Jews of aggression against their neighbors, because it makes the Holocaust, and their innate distaste for Jews, as far as that goes, a bit more palatable when they can perceive and portray the Jews as evil. ("See? They are bad types. Hitler had something there.").

And if Israel were to get wiped off the map, the Europeans wouldn't be too upset about getting rid of that annoying wagging finger.

UPDATE: And this just floored me. Iran is a STABILIZING force in the Middle East?

I don't know how the Baalei Tosfos put up with these disgusting excuses for decent human beings for so long.

Please daven for an alumnus

2006-07-30T13:26:00.000-07:00

An alumnus of the school where I teach has been called upon for imminent active combat duty in Lebanon.

Please say a quick Tefilla for the safe return of Noach ben Yasmin.

Thank you.

R' Yaakov on "sick" "frum" murderers

2006-07-30T10:58:00.000-07:00

From Emes L'Yaakov on Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim Simman 116:1) note 145

Question: Should one daven in Refaenu for a person who is in prison for the crime of murder, since Lich'orah he is sick?

Answer: Certainly not, because he is not sick rather he is a criminal.

And we must fight against this attitude that all sins of a person are because of sickness, rather it all stems from a lack of Yir'as Shamayim, and the proof is that in front of people he would not do what he did, he just has no fear of the Ribbono Shel Olam.

[And perhaps one should daven for him in Hashivenu...]

[Hattip: EW]

Some More Carnivorous (A)Musing

2006-07-24T11:56:00.000-07:00

A letter to the editor I saw this week:

BEARS AND ELEPHANTS

Poschim b'chvod achsanyah. My family loves reading this wonderful newspaper, as it is the only newspaper that truly belongs in a Torah home.

I would like to share with you an experience which I recently had, one that I found very disturbing. I opened up a box of heimishe-brand animal crackers and was terribly dismayed to see that a whole array of non-kosher animals are featured! What are we teaching our children, to eat treife animals?! Are we chas v'shalom teaching our children to eat bears and elephants?

Wishing to hear a response,

I remain,

End quote.

I kid you not.

And what's worse, we are teaching our kids to eat unslaugtered cows, Chelev, the Gid HaNasheh, and if we chas v'sholom dip the animal cracker in milk, we are teaching them to eat Basar B'Chalav!

We really have run out of things to work on, haven't we.

Vacation Musings of a Carnivore

2006-07-20T11:31:00.000-07:00

Last night I returned from a three day vacation up at Big Bear Lake, a resort town about 2 hours northeast of Los Angeles. One of the attractions for the kids was a trout pond, where you're pretty much assured of catching a fish - even the little kids can do it with a bit of help. They then gut and clean the fish for you.

At any rate, my brother-in-law (he's 14 years old) caught a huge trout, and they gutted it right in front of him. While the fish was jerking and flaying, the fellow sliced open the fish, took out the beating heart, and emptied the guts. It was still jumping all over. My brother-in-law was grossed out - but we had a great dinner.

I figured I'd post something from Rav Yaakov Kamenetzky's Chiddushim on Chullin which related to the Torah's perspective on killing animals. I'm no liberal, but his approach on the following issue will resonate well with those who are of the liberal mindset.

The Gemara in Chullin 16b brings down the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael that in the Midbar the Jews were forbidden to eat "B'sar Ta'avah" - 'meat of desire' - meaning animals not brought as Korbanos.

Rashi explains the source for this is the Passuk (Vayikra 17) that if one slaughters an animal and does not bring it to the Tent - "It shall be considered as bloodshed for that man, he has shed blood, and that man shall be cut off from the midst of his people" (I.e. he gets Kares).

Tosfos asks, that this Passuk is talking about Shechutei Chutz - slaughtering a Korban outside of the Mishkan, not just an animal that was not slaughtered there!

R' Yaakov in his Chiddushim to Chullin explains that according to Rashi, the prohibition of Shechutei Chutz and the accompanying Kares penalty is not, as Tosfos would seem to hold, due to any kind of Bizayon to the Beis HaMikdash, which would then have nothing to do with B'sar Taavah, rather it is for the act of slaughtering an animal in a purposeless fashion - for slaughtering it in a way that will preclude you from eating it. (This fits very well into the Passuk quoted earlier - "it shall be considered bloodshed"). So the prohibition, according to Rashi, extends beyond the parameters of not bringing the Korban to the Beis HaMikdash, and includes, according to Rabbi Yishmael, even slaughtering just to satisfy your carnivorous palate, without the elevating aspect of bringing it as a Korban.

Rav Yaakov adds, and notes at the end of the piece that a similar idea is found in the Ramban to Parshas Noach, that after Hakadosh Baruch Hu allows Noach to partake of animals, which is, in a sense, a removal of one aspect of the prohibition to murder, the Torah is quick to add that murder of human beings is prohibited.

Says the Ramban: "Because of the permission to slaughter, He had to say that I have allowed you to spill the blood of all living things except your own, which is (still) prohibited for you..."

Well, I'm happy that we have Hashem's sanction to eat animals these days.

Pat's restaurant in Los Angeles makes a mean rib-eye.

The Ralbag on how to treat enemy captives

2006-07-13T23:35:00.000-07:00

רלב"ג מלכים א פרק כב, התועלת הל"ד

"הוא להודיע שראוי לאדם כשיפול בידו במלחמה מי שהוא תמיד לו ולעמו לקוץ מכאיב, שלא יחמול עליו, אך יבער אותו מן הארץ, פן ימצא לו מקום אחר זה, אם ימלט, להשחית הוא ועמו לפי היכולת. ולזאת הסיבה תמצא שצותה התורה להכות את המדינים מפני מה שנתבאר שהם צוררים לישראל בנכליהם, וצותה גם כן למחות את זכר עמלק לזאת הסיבה. ולזה סיפר כי מפני ששלח מלך ישראל בן הדד, אשר שמהו השם יתברך בחרמו וברשתו ובמכמרתו, כעס השם יתברך עליו, ואמר שכבר יהיה נפשו תחת נפשו ועמו תחת עמו

"This is to inform us that it is proper for a person, when one who is a constant painful thorn to himself and to his nation falls into his hand in war, that he should not have mercy toward him, rather he should wipe him off the earth, lest he will find a place afterward, should he escape (Transl. note: or be swapped in a hostage deal), to destroy him (the "merciful" captor) and his nation as much as he could. And for this reason you will find that the Torah commands us to smite the Midianim, since it is explained that they are enemies to the Jews with their plotting, and also commands us to wipe out the rememberance of Amalek for this reason.

And therefore (the Navi) tells us that since the King of Israel sent Ben Haddad (the king of Aram) away, after Hashem had placed him in his net, Hashem was mad at him, and he said that it will be his (the king of Israel's) soul (taken) in place of that of Ben Haddad, and his nation in lieu of his nation. "

The Need of the Hour - Bitachon

2006-07-13T10:31:00.000-07:00

As the citizens of Israel, especially along the northern and south-western borders, suffer anxiety and casualies, Lo Aleinu, and as the soldiers of the State of Israel engage the mortal enemies of Klal Yisrael and Hashem, may Hashem keep them all safe and return them unharmed to their families, we must bear in mind the words of the Chovos HaLevavos, in his preface to Shaar HaBitachon:

"U'Mi SheBoteach B'Zulas Hashem, Meisir HaElokim Hashgachaso Me'Alav U'Maniach Oso B'Yad Mi SheBatach Alav"

"And one who places his trust in anyone or anything but Hashem, Hashem removes His Providence from him and places him in the hand of he in whom he has placed his trust."

Of course, we need the Hishtadlus of the army to defeat our enemies, but we do not trust in the might of the IDF, nor in the support of the Americans, nor of the world community. For we do not wish to be truly dependent on them. They have all proven to be unreliable support at various junctures in history.

We trust in Hashem to guide the leaders of the State on the proper path to take to defeat our enemies, and in His help that we win this war, waged to protect the lives of his beloved children who dwell in the Land which is under Hashem's direct guidance, the "Eretz Asher Tamid Einei Hashem Elokecha Bah".

Jak Black on Tznius

2006-07-11T10:32:00.000-07:00

Link to Jak Black's blog, where he has an interesting post about what Tznius really means:

Here

Stuck In Illusions

2006-06-24T22:57:00.000-07:00

In the recent (summer) edition of Jewish Action, there was an article written by Yaakov Eisen, a Merkaz HaRav attendee who was severely traumatized by the expulsion of Jews from Gush Katif. R' Yaakov lashes out in many directions - at the secular government, at the media,and at the judicial system in Israel.

"Considered together, the media, the judiciary and the armed forces provide the government with a system so rotten that it has successfully eliminated even the most basic potential checks and balances of its own corruption.

Given this reality, we had better reevaluate our strategy of blithely striving to integrate into the system and change it from within. This approach stems from an especially malignant form of blissfully ignorant optimism that obsesses upon such irrelevant statistics as the number of kippah-wearing officers. No religious sensitivity interfered with such officers obeying and enforcing not only the orders of expulsion but also those that deliberately mandated violating Shabbat to ready the infrastructure for the destruction - a "nationalistic mission" after all - in advance (as the IDF flagrantly did Shabbat Chazon of last year, on the eve of Tishah B'Av and the expulsion). "

Well said!

And, so, R' Yaakov states what conclusions he draws:

"The reality is that non-observant Israelis may loathe what they perceive as black-coated, isolationist Agudah Jews, but they do not fear them. After all, the stereotypical ultra-Orthodox community keeps to itself, and the establishment believes that the ultra-Orthodox community will be satisfied and cooperative as long as the State bankrolls its institutions and refrains from drafting its sons.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. The seculars are not afraid of the Shas party??? They're in complete terror at the prospect of the ever-increasing number of Jews who are returning to their roots through the Shas network, not to mention all of the other Kiruv organizations and outlets, such as Arachim, which are heavily dominated by the Charedim. The parents of children who have been Chozer B'Teshuvah in Israel are humiliated and abashed at their sons and daughters who have left the fold.

Our community - especially the youth - represents the ultimate and most terrifying challenge to the secularist ruling class: We unabashedly proclaim our intention to take over. We do not conceal our desire and intent eventually to wrest control of the government, the judiciary, the armed forces, the media - all the focal points of power, whcih are all currently left-wing fiefdoms. Many of us have only lately come to the realization that our only leverage is through determined activism. The establishment never did and never will befriend us. It is time to recognize that all of our overtures of affection will inevitably fall on deaf ears and lead us nowhere.

Actualizing our ultimate goals will not come easily. The optimistic dreams of a straightforward demographic takeover - through the higher birthrate of the religious community and secular Yeridah - will remain only dreams. Demography alone, if anything, in the long term favors the Arabs and the Bedouins. The leftists, in any case, are openly discussing instituting absentee balloting for Israeli elections, as it exists in the United States and elsewhere, for the express purpose of enfranchising the legions of like-minded Yordim who live abroad. The ruling oligarchy will never willingly relinquish the reins of power.

This mindset bears within it the seeds of catastrophe. Viewing Medinat Yisrael, established by the left-wing Torah haters, as rightfully belonging to the religious Jews, due to its religious/Messianic meaning, and hence giving up on peaceful means, of birthrates and Kiruv, of taking over power, is the harbinger of all-out civil war between the seculars and the religious, with the balance of might clearly being in favor of the seculars, who have shown their willingness to bloody heads, and are certainly capable of much worse.

It is time to wake up and realize that this is NOT your State. This is the State of the left-wing oligarchs. Yes, as a Jew, you have rights, namely, to citizenship immediately upon arrival, and some benefits as an Oleh Chadash. But, other than that, you have obligations -the obligation to serve in an army that has proven far more adept at expulsion of Jews than fighting terror, and where your life is truly worth less than that of the son of a Hamas terrorist; the obligation to pay taxes which will go to sponsor gay parades; the obligation to succumb to a judicial system which is an ongoing Chillul Hashem of epic proportions in the abrogation of Torah Law as the sole governing set of laws that the Jewish nation is bound by. Even Yeravam ben Nevat never dreamed of inventing an entire new legal system which had no basis in Torah Law - he just broke Torah Law when he felt the urge.

So, don't think in terms of wresting control anymore than you would of wresting control from the Ottomans - no Rabbinic leaders advocated using force to throw them out.

What I found particularly striking in his litany was what he comes away with - how he envisions the future:

"Yet, paradoxically, if any ray of optimism is to be found, it is in my frustrated generation. This strip of land, soaked with the blood, sweat and tears of our people, remains the one G-d gave us. Our presence here, in Eretz Yisrael - as opposed to anywhere else in the world - remains the most meaningful commitment to, and investment in, the future of the Jewish people. And we are not running away. Thus, ironically, this wonderful youth, brimming with dedication and idealism - battered by the police, imprisoned by the courts, expelled by the army, harassed by the government, vilified by the media and silenced by the supposed Religious Zionist leadership - is the nation's only hope. We are impervious to threats that unless we "behave" the army will not accept us, because the army and its various cohorts no longer inspire our admiration. We went to jail in high spirits, singing in the prisons and in the courthouses, because of our faith in something immeasurably more sublime and enduring than all the institutions of the State, which we no longer revere. This unflappable youth that cannot be cowed and will not be silenced, free of illusions and fearsm heralds a new future. If teh old guard of Religious Zionism continues to marginalize us or lull us with platitudes, at best it will sunder and shatter our community, with potentially tragic consequences of historic proportions. However, if, G-d willing, our generation wrests the reins of power from both the secularist oligarchy and our own detached and antiquated leadership, I can truly see a bright future ahead. May we live to see it, speedily, in our days."

So you fully acknowledge that you will not be able to wrest the reins of power peacefully, yet insist on this being your goal. So, inescapably, you are willing to take them by force. Based on a conviction, which is FAR from a consensus amongst the religious leadership, that the State is a G-d given right at this juncture in history, irrespective of merit, there just has to be some way to take over.

You are a serious threat to the safety of Jews throughout Israel.

It is time to go back to our roots and examine the true cause and effect of our suffering: ומפני חטאינו גלינו מארצנו. We must instill within ourselves, and through outreach to others, that only through sincere Teshuvah and recommitment to the eternal ideals of Torah and Mitzvos will we be able to bring about a Divine Will that we have a State which is truly a light unto the Nations.

Twentieth of Sivan

2006-06-16T15:52:00.000-07:00

{No, I'm not picking up as if my decision was nothing. This is just a good venue for me to type up my Torah thoughts. Feel free to comment.}

You can follow the link here to some background about the fast day of כ' סיון

Both of the historical events portrayed in the link are horrific.

What's interesting is that this day, designated as a day of fasting and Teshuvah, is exactly 100 days before the Yom HaDin - Rosh HaShanah.

Two things strike me as important links between this day and Rosh HaShanah.

First of all, we have to really be grateful to the Ribbono Shel Olam for living in a society where we are not subject to this kind of wanton persecution of the Jewish faith and the Jewish religion which was so rampant in Europe throughout the Middle Ages all the way up to the Shoah. And translate that gratitude into some recommitment to His Service. The last 100 days of the year are upon us! We have to start taking stock of our year - even start "cramming" a little bit to try to attain some goals, remind ourselves of our resolutions, and reaffirm our acceptance of עול מלכות שמים.

On the other hand, as with almost every good thing, there's a price to pay. We, living in democratic societies, very much unlike the monarchies in existence at the time of the tragedies associated with the twentieth of Sivan, don't really appreciate the meaning of the word מלכנו - Our King. We appoint our own leaders, and criticize them, harshly, with no fear of consequence. We don't have a concept of true awe and trembling before a King who, with one word, can determine life and death, with no one who can overrule him. Don't curtsy properly, miss protocol as he passes by, fail to honor him sufficiently - you can bid farewell to your family. We lose out on that unmitigated FEAR that comes from being in the presence of an absolute monarch.

Not that I'd have it any other way.

Baruch Hashem, I have the opportunity to worship Hashem with no fear of consequence either.

Let's make the most of it.

I've Made My Decision

2006-06-13T20:16:00.000-07:00

I think it's time to call it quits.

I have enjoyed the opportunity to share my thoughts and musings, and feel I have provided a valuable service to those who appreciated what I had to say, but, ultimately, it is too distracting for me. I hope to make a greater contribution to Klal Yisrael through focusing on expansion of my own Torah knowledge and on Chinuch of our precious youth.

School is ending this week, and I would like to try to accomplish some Torah goals I have set for myself over the summer.

I appreciate your support and your readership, and daven that we all continue to grow in our commitment and devotion to HaKadosh Baruch Hu and the Eternal Truths of his Torah.

B'Chibah Aza,

Bari

P.S. I can't commit to posting Torah thoughts either, at this point. I don't think that my particular insights are more worthy than other things you'll find out there.

Yichus of a commentor...

2006-06-13T13:43:00.000-07:00

Anonymous just emailed me that he's a direct descendant of the שיטה לא נודע למי.

Why do they have the tots sing שמע בני in kindergarten?

2006-06-12T23:06:00.000-07:00

I haven't said the Passuk of שמע בני as part of my davening for a VERY long time. But my kids in nursery or kindergarten have always had that Passuk incorporated into their liturgy. Why are the Moros having them say that Passuk?

It's probably based on an Or Zarua (Hilchos Succah 314):

"יודע לדבר אביו מלמדו תורה ושמע. תורה זה פסוק תורה צוה לנו משה. ושמע שמע בני מוסר אביך וי"א שמע ישראל פסוק ראשון דקריאת שמע"

[This is also brought down by the Raavya Succah 699]

We Have Gedolim But Fail To Appreciate Them

2006-06-11T20:19:00.000-07:00

Every once in a (short) while, there are claims from the peanut gallery of the blogosphere that we are a generation with a dearth of Gedolei Torah. I don't accept that for a moment. I fully believe in the words of Chazal that HaKadosh Baruch Hu provides each and every generation with top-caliber Torah leadership.

People say, "There's nobody like Rav Moshe Feinstein or Rav Yaakov Kamenetzky today." I can't gauge or measure anyone's Torah acumen. But let me just quote what Rav Shlomo Fisher Shlit"a of Yerushalayim (an amazing Baki and a Lamdan in his own right) said about Rav Chaim Kanievsky Shlit"a: "Had R' Chaim been alive in the generation of the Rashba, they would carry him around on their bare hands!" ("Hayu Nos'im Oto Al Kapayim")

The person who had asked me the question I posed on the blog regarding redemption of a S'dei Achuzah, went to the East Coast this weekend and started asking Talmidei Chachamim this question. Nobody really knew. One of them finally called him back and said that Rav Chaim Kanievsky, in his Sefer Derech Emunah, has 8 Mar'eh Mekomos that the relative relinquishes the field to the owner immediately, and 25 Mar'eh Mekomos that he keeps it until Yovel. And I assure you Rav Chaim didn't put a search through the Bar Ilan CD.

Rav Chaim's every action is put under scrutiny, both his own and by others who watch his every move, whether or not it is in conformity with Halachah.

And there are other giants too.

But I don't want to get into listing names. I want to talk about why some people (mistakenly) think there are no Gedolim today.

a) Devaluation of Torah Scholarship

The explosion of Torah study in our Dor is a tremendous blessing. Never since the time of Chizkiyahu HaMelech have there been such great numbers of our people involved in Torah study. It's a wondrous thing. But there's a price to pay - everyone who has spent some time learning halt zich (holds himself) to be a Gaon of stature. People who have been at the upper crust of their Yeshivos, or if they have some rabbinic position which pays well, think that they ought to have the right to an opinion about everything, and even know better than others far more qualified than them.

Rav Meir Chodosh came to Slabodka at a tender age, and he was considered among the upper echelon of students there even when he was quite young. He would hide in a side room, listening to the Alter's Shmuessen meant for the much older and more accomplished students. Once, the Alter asked him to repeat what was said at the Shmuess. He was caught, and he knew it. But he repeated what he was told. From then on he was invited to attend, and he would occasionaly be asked to repeat the Shmuessen back to the Alter.

Once, he repeated a Shmuess and added a bit of a summary at the end which the Alter had not said. The Alter was visibly upset, and he said: "Did I say that!? What, you think you are already another 'Chatzkel'?" [A reference to Rav Yechezkel Sarna, and Rav Yechezkel Burstein (the Divrei Yechezkel) who were recognized as lions of Slabodka.] The Alter did not allow Rav Meir Chodosh to come to his Shmuessen after that. (He was eventually let back in).

(Nowadays, people would say that the Alter was not a Gadol in Mussar - he could have stunted Rav Meir Chodosh's creativity...)

We see, for example, fine Rabbanim who are featured in an ad in Jewish Action magazine for 'HODS' - the Halachic Organ Donor Society. This is a Shaala which relates to one of the most difficult areas of Halachah - the definition of death. A question which Rav Soloveitchik wondered if even the Vilna Gaon had the shoulders to determine. But the overwhelming majority of these Rabbanim feel that they have a right to an opinion, when they are eminently unqualified to render one. They may have learned the Sugyos and responsa involved, but - if you haven't learned through all of Shas with Rishonim, Shulchan Aruch and Nosei Keilim, you're not a 'player'. Sorry to disappoint you.

Torah has become a popular pasttime, and unfortunately it is treated as such. Not as the Holy Immutable Word of the Living G-d. So the Gedolei HaTorah of today are not the Chachmei HaMesorah, they are exhibits in the Cooperstown of the Talmud.

Hand-in-hand with this, is the overinflation of applause for achievements of inferior value. Chas VeSholom that anyone should feel bad about themselves. So, a Semicha is celebrated as some kind of monumental milestone, and people actually take themselves pretty seriously after learning 35 Simmanim in Yoreh Deah. A veritable license to be Mattir Agunos and decide on Chamuros.

The Gemara says, in its discussion of the merits of Sinai (vast breadth of knowledge) vs. Oker Harim (analytic acumen) that הכל צריכין למרי חטיא - everyone needs the 'master of wheat' - the Baki. But now, anyone has access to a Shu"t Bar Ilan CD and an indexed Mishnah Berurah - and they're ready to roll. The immense toil and effort it takes to master, collate, and assimilate all that material, not to mention the Siyata DiShmaya needed, are just not appreciated enough in this generation.

b) The Dying Throes of Mussar

A Gadol is not just a person who knows alot of Torah. It is person whose every action is done as an expression of Ratzon Hashem, as the Gadol understands it.

How many of the people today, who claim that there are no Gedolim, are actually involved in Avodah Mussaris - in a constant struggle of self-refinement, dedicated to the complete eradication of Gaavah and Taavah? How many have spent 5 minutes this week trying to focus on Ahavas Hashem? Yet, they feel that somehow there is a correlation between their appreciation for what Torah means to a Jew, and to the Jewish Nation, and that of those towering men of stature who live among us today. These men have climbed many, many rungs up the ladder of greatness, and their achievements should shine as glowing examples of where we ought to be headed in our own Avodah Hashem. And there is SO MUCH to learn from these people! Only, people aren't looking to these great men for guidance on how to get close to the Ribbono Shel Olam, because their own efforts are not sufficiently focused on this primary purpose of our all-too-short time spent on this earth.

c) Focus on Areas of Disagreement

Anyone in his right mind understands that the Satmar Rebbe was a Gadol Olam. Whenever people list Gedolim of the previous generation, his name will come up.

Now, there are areas in which he was definitely very vehement in his positions, such as toward Rav Kook, or regarding Rav Moshe Feinstein's Teshuvah vis-a-vis artificial insemination. But he was a Kadosh Elyon whom Klal Yisrael revered.

There is zero doubt in my mind that had he been alive today, he would have been in favor of the recently bitterly debated bans. And the respect for him would not have been diminished - it would have been well understood that from his perspective, this was Amitah Shel Torah, and no person, or committee, or J-Blog, would have caused him to budge one iota. He was a defender of the Torah as he understood it, as he felt it was handed down from Sinai, and that's that.

But nowadays, if people feel offended by a certain decision by Gedolim, they somehow lose that status in the eyes of the offended populace. If I feel offended, there must be something wrong with how that Gadol relates to human beings. He's callous, unyielding.

Ridiculous.

He is as 100% Leshem Shamayim as Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach was in castigating Rav Goren, or as Rav Moshe Feinstein was in banning Touro College in Israel, or as Rav Yaakov Kamenetzky was for refusing to attend a dinner where a Rabbi with a questionable Mechitza was to be honored, or as Rav Shach was opposed to the State of Israel.

A person can choose to follow those Gedolei Torah he feels comfortable following, but to assert that those with whom a person is less comfortable are somehow less scholarly, or less Baalei Mussar and Chessed, because of their stances, taken based on their pure-hearted understanding of Hashem's Torah and their Messorah of Klal leadership as received from their illustrious Rabbeim, is the root of the Apikorsus of Bizayon Talmidei Chachamim.

We will undoubtedly cry bitter tears if and when this great generation of Torah scholars, may they merit to greet Mashiach in our days, leaves us bereft of their unswerving devotion to the upholding of the Torah as they see it.

May we merit to bask in the light of the venerable Gedolei Torah of our generation for many years to come, עד ביאת גואל צדק בב"א.

With the Satmar Rav in Bergen Belsen (1944)

2006-06-11T11:29:00.000-07:00

This article about Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum of Satmar [1887-1979] was printed in 1959 in the Yiddish publication Das Vort by a Hungarian intellectual, Dr. Ferenz Kennedy, who was together with the rabbi on the famous train of 1,700 Hungarian Jewish personalities. By virtue of Dr. Rudolf Kastner's negotiations and bribery, they were taken to an internment camp in Bergen-Belsen, and later were saved by entering Switzerland. Dr. Kennedy was together with the Rabbi in Bergen-Belsen as well, and published this article in the Hungarian newspaper Oj Kelet when the Rabbi was visiting Eretz Yisrael. It was written by an estranged Jew whose intellectual circles were often antagonistic to Judaism, and is of particular interest.

"I should start by noting that I am not one of Rabbi Teitelbaum's followers, but perhaps I can contribute to portraying this wondrous person by describing my experiences with him over a period of several months in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, when we were confined in a place which revealed every person's true personality.

I first met the Satmar Rebbe fifiteen years ago, on July 2, 1944, at the Hungarian-Slovakian border in Madiarovar, where our train was stopped for two days. Someone in our group heard from the conductor that his directive was to travel to Auschwitz. You can imagine just how desperate we were when we found out about this.

Alongside the tracks we noticed a Jew with a nearly grey beard whose face made an enormous impression on me. [It's known that he had a beautiful, pure face.] He was murmuring his prayers or melodies, deep in thought, and pacing back and forth with his head bowed like a wounded lion. I do not know whether he was reciting psalms or was simply deeply worried about our terrible fate. When I asked someone who is this rare man, I was told immediately, "Why, that is the Satmar Rebbe, Rabbi Teitelbaum, and whoever is with him is quite confident that nothing will happen to him either."

Now, I had never heard of such a Rabbi, and the world of the Orthodox Jews was totally foreign to me. Therefore as a skeptic I couldn't imagine how people could be so sure that because the rabbi was with us, we had every hope of surviving our Hell. However, I later came to realize that those hopes were distinctly justified, and then those words rang true indeed.

[The train was sent to "Auschpitz" instead.] I lived with the Satmar Rebbe for five months in Men's Block E in Bergen-Belsen. I do not know how this happened, but it is a fact that the Germans themselves permitted him to keep his beard, which the Rebbe concealed with a kerchief around his face, as if he had a toothache.

The Rebbe did not eat the camp food. He lived on water and cooked potatoes. As far as I know he fasted two or three days a week. Yet you could hear his soft voice in the barracks almost all day long. It was not talking we heard, but his prayers and constant Torah study. He had a special mournful tune which I could hear in my mind for many years after the war as a sad reminder of those tragic times. There were some living in the barracks who became saddened because of this mournful tune, but not me. I felt that the Rebbe was using this melody to pray to G-d for mercy, to fight against the decree and bring about our rescue.

Even in the filthy, dirty barracks, the Satmar Rebbe was somehow crystal clean. Dirt and vermin had no power over him. His wife and his attendant, a young thin man [R' Yosef Ashkenazi d. 2002], devoted themselves to him, and helped him so he could continue his study and prayers.

The majestic radiance of his face and his wondrous appearance fascinated all of us. I will readily admit that I too was affected by his influence and inspiring impression. There, amidst the barbed wire, the shadow of the Angel of Death seemed greatly weakened, and I began believing for the first time in heavenly forces. After a while, I often noticed that whenever the Rebbe was praying to G-d or even when he simply sang his soft wordless tune, almost all of our eyes filled with heartfelt tears.

I later became very close to the Satmar Rebbe, and this happened as follows: [Dr. Kennedy was receiving newspapaers, through which they learned of the invasion of Normandy and the attempted assassination of Hitler, etc. The Rebbe sent his attendant to ask if he could brief him on the news.]

On Yom Kippur several barracks held prayer services, and in our barrack the Satmar Rebbe led the Mussaf service. Bela Zholt and Aladar Komlosh (two famous Jewish Hungarian novelists) passed by outside. I invited them in to listen to the prayers of Rabbi Teitelbaum. It was a deeply moving experience to see the Rebbe wrapped in his Tallis, swaying with devotion and pouring out his soul to his creator. As the SS Nazis outside guarded the camp, inside we could hear the heartbreaking and prayerful voice of the Satmar Rebbe. It reminded us of the crying voices of praying Jews throughout the generations, who all shared these same ancient prayers.

When we left the barracks, the cynical and assimilated Bela Zholt, who despite being assimilated had tears welling in his eyes, said to me, "This is quite traditional, but it's very nice!" Aladar Komlosh said that if the power of prayer really existed, it was this true service of the Satmar Rebbe. We all felt that we had heard true holy Jewish prayer, and we could not remain indifferent to it.

At the end of November we got ready to pack our bags and waited for liberation. On that very day, full of physical and emotional stress, the rebbe's attendant approached and asked whether I still wanted the Rebbe's autograph (which Dr. Kennedy had asked for five months earlier). I had already forgotten about the whole subject. (!) But to my deep surprise, the Rebbe had not forgotten, and as soon as it became "appropriate" he fulfilled my request.

Later, in Switzerland, on a cold December night, we marched along St. Galen Street to a place which had been prepared for us. We were met by fellow Jews who were unable to come close to us, but they tossed apples and sweets our way, which we caught with both hands. However, those Jews who threw gifts had only one question: "Where is the Rebbe?" Bela Zholt, the novelist and poet, was greatly upset, and said, "You see, Ferenz, I am nothing! No one knows or cares about me, even though hundreds of thousands have read my novels and poetry. No one is waiting for me; they're all waiting only for the Satmar Rebbe!"

Our group included many famous personalities from the Hungarian Jewsih community. The great majority were of course assimilated, modernized Jews. there were very few Orthodox Jews. The Satmar Rebbe did not fit at all among the countless professors, artists, community activists and leaders of the Hungarian Zionist movement and their families. These distinguished leaders and intellectuals expected to be greeted with great honor and fanfare, but in the end were bitterly disappointed. In Switzerland, almost no one paid any attention to them. Everyone was interested only in the personality known as the Satmar Rebbe, Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum. Everyone wanted to know how he was feeling. Everyone had only one question: "Where is the Rebbe?" This had a deep impact on us. Only then did we all realize that it was not the professionals and academics who were indispensable, but rather the quiet and humble spiritual man.

In Switzerland we all parted ways, but for many years subsequently until this very day, I think very often of the heart-capturing and unforgettable personality of the Satmar Rebbe. Very frequently, the following philosophical idea reverberates like an echo in my mind:

"When we consider the significance of religious devotion, and the undeniable fact that only Torah and belief have kept the Jewish people in existence throughout two thousand years of exile, then we must realize and admit that the Satmar Rebbe is without a doubt one of the holiest people produced by the Jewish people, and he, more than anyone else, is the loyal guardian to ensure that the Torah of Moses is not forgotten or falsified.

It may be that in our eyes he is too meticulous and too stubborn about following every point of the Torah, but without any doubt it is he who is the loyal and devoted defender of the Torah, and the true, inspiring leader of the Jewish people".

שבת, Focus Shifts, And This Blog

2006-06-10T23:07:00.000-07:00

שבת is a time for reevaluation. Getting away from the regular hustle and bustle of life, you have time to think things through, deeply. I think this may even explain why Shabbos is called שבת - A person may have taken a certain path in life, from א to ש, almost to the end of the road, but he must think: Perhaps I need to go all the way back to ב to get to the correct ת. (I think that א represents the unchangeable core of an individual's particular being - that's just the raw material. In line with this vort, we can explain homiletically the severity of לא תבערו אש בכל מושבותיכם ביום השבת - it's a crime to let Shabbos go by, just remaining with the same old א to ש path, without spending some time rethinking where you are headed and how you intend to get there)

Having gone through a wonderful Shabbos, (Friday night behavior of the offspring notwithstanding), :) I want to express some musings about the blog and its direction.

My initial purpose in creating this blog was to create a forum in which people could view and comment on some (hopefully) well-articulated positions of the right wing segment of Orthodoxy, or at least, my perspectives on some of the issues which that segment stands for. I would occasionally comment on these issues on other blogs, but I felt that I needed an arena where a reader would accord my thoughts a bit longer of an attention span than that of a comment on another blog.

Many of the things that I have on my mind have already been set forth here. I do have some more things to say, particularly about why I chose this path in life, which may entail some pointed criticism of Modern Orthodoxy. But I do not know whether it is worth the effort. Is anyone at all interested, having read some of my posts and seeing something about who I am and what I stand for, in these thoughts? Or feel that they may even be attuned to rethinking who they are and what they stand for? Have their own personal שבת?

If not, we'll just leave the blog up, and every once in a while (maybe twice a week or so) we'll B'li Neder post a Torah thought, could be in Halachah, or Gemara, or Hashkafa/Mussar, or some inspiring story, and that'll be that.

Awaiting your feedback (even those who don't normally comment - and I know you're out there, and I thank you - here's your chance to set the course for this ship).

Shavua Tov.

Three levels of Ahavah

2006-06-09T14:43:00.000-07:00

Just a link to a Dvar Torah on the Parshah, which I posted last week in honor of those who dwell in Eretz Yisrael and heard Parshas Naso last week.

Have a great Shabbos!

More Precious Than Gold

2006-06-08T18:49:00.000-07:00

During Rav Shteinman's recent visit to the US, at a small gathering for Mechanchim, he said the following sobering Dvar Torah:

The Gemara in Bava Kamma (62a) says that if a woman receives a gold coin to watch, told it was silver, and she was subsequently negligent with it, she only has to pay back the silver, because she can say:

נטירותא דכספא קבילי עלי נטירותא דדהבא לא קבילי עלי

"I accepted upon myself to guard silver, not gold" (Meaning, had I known it was gold, I would have put in that much more effort in preserving that coin)

Rav Shteinman said that as a Mechanech, you have to be ever-conscious of the fact that you're not charged with vigilance toward silver, or gold, or even diamonds. You're charged with vigilance toward a priceless Jewish Neshama.

It's too bad they don't sell malpractice insurance for my Din VeCheshbon in Shamayim...

Closed Mindedness From Unexpected Quarters

2006-06-07T17:05:00.000-07:00

On a comment thread on Harry's blo g, I got into a pretty heated discussion about NCSY, wherein I contended that very many FFBs go on regional Shabbatonim for the purpose of intermingling and highly inappropriate behavior with the opposite sex. You can see the thread there regarding Lubavitch, Aish, and NCSY.

Very quickly, that went to some 'ad hominem' attacks on me - I'm a Charedi! What's worse - I went to Kerem B'Yavneh and subscribe to Charedi viewpoints! Reformed Charedi - they're the worst. The stridency, the shrillness, the closed-mindedness! That can be the only source for anyone having any sort of criticism against NCSY.

Of course, then we got into my questioning Rav Hershel Schachter Shlit"a's analysis of Reishit Tzemichat Geulateinu. Flows from one to the other like the river into the sea. First the claim is the manner in which I did it. How did I do it? I called him HaRav Schachter Shlit"a, said his analysis is brilliant, and said that as a student asking a question on his Rebbe, if I'm even worthy of that, I want to explore if there are alternative areas of analysis.

Chutzpah!

So where was the critique of the 'manner'? Apparently, eminently respectful criticism of a Torah piece of Rav Schachter is a poor 'manner'. I can't even begin to imagine where the problem was to begin with, other than a deep-seated resentment of any questioning as having some kind of personal bashing agenda.

Then, there's the problem that I quoted the Satmar Rebbe Zt"l from VaYoel Moshe. For shame! Quoting him, and you don't reject it with a flick of the hand? Pah!

You need to get out a bit more from monolithic J-blogland. Really.

And then, if you walk away from any of the RZ Hashkafos, after being exposed to them, it must mean that you haven't lerned enough of (the Rav's) Tayreh. Lern more - you'll see. It's all Pashut UBarur to anyone with an eighth of a brain that Rav Soloveitchik was 100% right.

Irony anyone?

The intellectual snobbiness, the veritable certainty that anyone exposed to the blinding brilliance of Modern Orthodox Hashkafos must perforce accept them and realize that the Charedi viewpoint is bankrupt in toto, is closed-minded fanaticism, no less.

And this is my very first post in which I express any direct criticism of Modern Orthodoxy! But, I just must have serious personal animosity against all Modern Orthodox adherents, because I just have to fit in to the mold of the reformed Charedi!

I expected better.

Blind Stupidity

2006-06-07T09:26:00.000-07:00

I posted recently about Gen. Giora Eiland's problems with the convergence plan, and his proposed solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:

"My proposal from 2004, which I put forth to Sharon, calls for a regional solution. Adding 600 square kilometers to Gaza in northern Sinai, to allow for the construction of an international port and airport, and a city in which millions of Palestinians can live. Granting 600 square kilometers to Israel in the West Bank in order to guarantee defensible borders. Compensate Egypt with 150 square kilometers in the southern Negev, and compensation in the form of international economic aid and a tunnel connecting Egypt with Jordan, north of Eilat. The transfer of about 100 square kilometers on the east bank of the river to the Palestinians, granting them 105 percent of the territory they are asking today."

Uzzi Benziman in HaAretz today has this to say in response:

"The weakness of this solution lies in counting chickens before they have hatched: Neither Egypt nor Jordan have expressed agreement."

Granted.

" Furthermore, Eiland (and Ya'alon as well) in effect reject the possibility of Israel and a Palestinian state existing within the 1967 borders. They assume that demographic, economic and geographic factors do not enable a Palestinian state comprised of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank to be viable, and such a solution would therefore also not provide security for Israel. This is a morbid outlook that questions Israel's ability to live side by side with its neighbors and ignores the existence of peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan. "

So let's see:

Eiland's plan is weak because the Egyptians and Jordanians, with whom we do have peace treaties, haven't expressed interest.

But the convergence plan is brilliant, because:

a) It is morbid to think otherwise.

b) The Palestinians, who seek to kill us every minute of every day, let alone expressing agreement, will definitely be willing to sign a peace accord, as evidenced by the one signed with Egypt and Jordan.

Does one laugh or cry at this idiocy?

Zionism and the Shoah - Part III

2006-06-06T12:52:00.000-07:00

Continued from Parts I and II

Activities of Labor Zionists during the Shoah:

The Charge - The Europa Plan

( Quotes from Ben Gurion and the Holocaust, Shabtai Teveth, pp. 3-5):

[Teveth writes in his preface: "This work is another pro-Ben-Gurion voice in the politicized debate on Jewish rescue efforts during the Holocaust". So at least he is straightforward on his mission here]

"... In July 1942 Weissmandel conceived a rescue plan that came to be known as the Slovakia plan (or, in Palestine, the Rabbis' Plan): In return for $50,000 in bribes paid to SS officer Count Dieter Wisliceny, then in charge of Jewish affairs in Slovakia, and through him to his SS superiors, transports of Slovak Jews to Auschwitz would come to a stop. And in fact in October 1942, after 60,000 of Slovakia's Jews had been shipped to Auschwitz, the transports did stop. It seemed that Weissmandel and his group could give themselves credit for the rescue of the rest, generally put at 25-30,000.

Emboldened by this assumed success, Weissmandel went a quantum step further, incorporating the Slovakia Plan in the far bolder Europa Plan: In return for more bribes, to be paid to the same Wisliceny, all transports, to all death camps, would come to a halt. Not losing a moment, the working group started negotiations with Wisliceny that same November. By March 1943, according to Weissmandel, an agreement was reached: in return for $2-3 million, negotiations would be held on stopping the entire mass murder of the Jews, thus saving about 2.5 million from cruel and certain death. Wisliceny's one condition for putting this program in to action was a down payment of $200,000 cash, in U.S. dollars, to be paid to him by that August.

In Weissmandel's book Min Hametzar... he lays out a detailed charge that his Europa Plan was deliberately shot down by the Zionists...

According to Weissmandel, [Nathan] Schwalb [the delegate of the Zionist Pioneer Movement to Geneva] put pressure on the Joint, the World Jewish Congress, and the Jewish Agency Executive (JAE) not to send the down-payment money to the [Weissmandel's] working group and thereby destroyed the plan.

In his book, Weissmandel supports this factitious accusation by quoting from a letter he claims Schwalb wrote that came to his notice. He admits that he quotes this letter from memory, in New York after the war: "The letter was written to Schwalb's cronies in Pressburg [Bratislava in German]... and it stands before my eyes as if I had read it over a hundred and one times". It had the following to say: Using the opportunity of a messenger, Schwalb writes to his Zionist crowd that they "must bear in mind at all minds the most vital and essential, what must always be our beacon, that in the end the Allies are bound to win the war. They will establish a new world order, as they did after the first world war". No price was too great to pay, Schwalb supposedly wrote, in order that "The Land of Israel [Palestine] should turn into the State of Israel... and if we don't make sacrifices, by what right shall we sit at the table [of the postwar peace conference]? If this is so, it is folly, even arrogance, on our part to ask the Gentiles [the Allies] who spill their blood [in the war against Hitler] to allow the bringing in... of money to the country of their enemies to protect our blood, because we shall have the country [Palestine] only thanks to blood. As for you, my pals, atem taylu, for which purpose I provide you, by means of this same messenger, with black [smuggled] money."

Weissmandel confesses that the meaning of the Hebrew atem tayelu [you take a walk] escaped him, and it was "days and weeks" before its true meaning dawned on him: "For the Zionists a 'walk' means rescue; in other words, you, the [Zionist] crowd, fifteen or twenty strong, take a walk outside Slovakia and save your souls; as for the rest, their blood - the blood of all the women, all the old and all the babies... - will buy us our land [i.e. state]. Therefore, to save the people's lives it is a crime to bring money into enemy territory, but to save you, beloved and friends, here I am, providing you with black money". In short, Europe's Jewry "is the blood, the sacrifice, that will make Palestine the patrimony of Zionism".

The Defense:

(Teveth, pp. 7-9)

"In fact, however, the Schwalb letter is entirely a figment of Weissmandel's imagination. (!) Schwalb's letters from this period in Geneva are extant. They demonstrate that, despite his doubts about the practicability of Weissmandel's rescue plans, he presented them to the JAE, exhibiting the utmost trust and confidence in Weissmandel. As early as December 4, 1942, in a letter to the JAE, he recommended Weissmandel's Europa Plan in the following terms: "There is a possibility of rendering void, annulling or... minimizing the persecutory expulsion in all of [occupied] Europe... [from] Poland to France and to Greece" through Wisliceny, "who has already shown his competence" in Slovakia. Weissmandel and his colleagues "inform [us] he is due to be promoted" to be in charge "of all [transports from] southern-eastern Europe" to Auschwitz, and "will be in very close contact with the chief officer [Himmler]." Weissmandel and his colleagues "also add" that Wisliceny "was as good as his word [in the past], fulfilling his commitments down to the last iota."

If Schwalb had initially doubted "whether to open negotiations" with the SS, "and whether here was reason to believe [the SS's] promises etc.", he wrote the JAE. all these doubts were now dispelled. In presenting the Europa Plan, he emphasized "that the deal in Slovakia proved" that Wisliceny and his superiors "are nonetheless trustworthy." Schwalb ended his letter by urging Jerusalem to state its position, concluding, "needless to tell you with what anxiety I await your opinion."

In March 1943 Weissmandel broke the news of his "arrangement" with Wisliceny to Schwalb in a letter that Schwalb described as "hysterical, written half in Rabbinical Hebrew, half in Yiddish." Informing him of Wisliceny's stipulation that without a down payment of $200,000 by August, he would renew the transports and the Europa Plan would be cancelled, the Bratislava group beseeched the JAE, the American Jewish Congress, and the Joint to rush them the ransom money, particularly the down payment.

On March 10 Schwalb wrote the JAE in Jerusalem: "Had we been then [December 1942] able" to pay the money demanded, "perhaps we would have been able to lessen the catastrophe" in Poland as well as in other countries. "We must therefore concentrate on the major issue [Europa Plan] and do our utmost on its behalf, for if it comes through we will save so many lives, and if, Heaven forbid, it fails, primarily because of lack of means, then we will lose all... I have the utmost faith that the Yishuv, its ruling bodies, and American Jewry (despite all) will, at least now, after three years of silence, turn to action. This is the main thing." [All quotes are based on two letters of Schwalb: Dec. 4, '42 to JAE rescue committee in Jerusalem, and Mar. 10, '43 to Kaplan and Dobkin of the JAE]

Schwalb says that he also sent Weissmandel's March letter "as an SOS to Moshe Sharett". A week later Sharett phoned Schwalb in Geneva to ask: "Nathan, did you understand his [Weissmandel's] Hebrew? I have to say I didn't. However, I can say that I well understood its contents and I well understood his use of horrible words, for horrible it is going to be if we don't promptly come to his help." [Based on an archived interview with Schwalb]

Quite contrary to Weissmandel's accusations, then, Schwalb had become Weissmandel's... enthusiastic champion. He was in fact trying to get the bribe money, and he was tireless and unrelenting both in carrying out aid and rescue work himself and in prompting others to do it, including Saly Mayer (the Swiss representative of the Joint), whom he pressured to send the bribe money to Bratislava. [Source cited - Schwalb interviews.]

My reactions:

Teveth's counterclaims are easily dismissed:

1) This is almost too easy: Schwalb may have supported the rescue work initially, but was then informed that the party line of the JAE was as outlined by the letter Weissmandel quotes. Weissmandel does not give a date for the letter he quotes. It may have been penned by Schwalb to his cronies in Pressburg after a "nay" from the JAE on precisely the grounds that Schwalb delineates in his quoted letter.

2) What Schwalb claimed in interviews is far more suspect, in my view, than the claims of the pious Rav Weissmandel. In the book "Perfidy", Ben Hecht lays some very serious blame on Sharett for the incarceration of, and the hindrance of negotiations on behalf of Hungarian Jewry by, Joel Brand. What Schwalb claims on his behalf is completely contradicted by Joel Brand's counter testimony in the Kastner trial.

Schwalb's claims of soliciting Saly Mayer are also, seemingly, undocumented, except from the mouth of Schwalb.

3) Rav Weissmandel, a known illuy who possessed a phenomenal memory, quotes verbatim text, with a phrase he claims he toiled over for weeks on end trying to decipher. The detailed account of the contents of the letter does not sound contrived at all.

4) After this very weak defense of the JAE's reaction to the Europa Plan, Teveth, quite audaciously, purports to interpret the mindset and motives of Rav Weissmandel:

"Weissmadel's invention of the letter can be understood on religious grounds: A pious believer like him is unable to shake his fist at heaven but finds it easy to blame heretic Jews, his long-standing enemies. But there is perhaps a psychological explanation as well. Weissmandel must have carried to his grave a measure of mental torment and feelings of guilt, for he himself had been rescued from a train to Auschwitz, leaving his wife and five children to meet their deaths in the gas chambers."

More likely, Teveth's desire to clear the name of Ben Gurion and the JAE, and his view of himself as one member of a group of long-standing enemies of Rav Weissmandel, leave him with no qualms about impugning the integrity of, and piling a guilt trip on, the great Rav of Nitra, Rav Weissmandel.

The Absolutely Marvelous Disorder Machine

2006-06-05T15:50:00.000-07:00

Any of you who have kids age 3 and up probably have Abie Rottenberg's "Middos Machine" tapes. You know, with Dr. Middos, Shnooky, Dr. Doomstein, and the rest of the gang.

Well, it seems the time has come where we must discard these tapes and their message. The National Institute of Mental Health has conducted a survey, wherein it has been determined that "road rage" is generally not a Middos problem, it is a 'disorder': "Intermittent Explosive Disorder". Heck, it even explains some cases of spousal abuse.

"People think it's bad behavior and that you just need an attitude adjustment, but what they don't know ... is that there's a biology and cognitive science to this," said Dr. Emil Coccaro, chairman of psychiatry at the University of Chicago's medical school.

Mmhmm. Yes, I'm sure that there's a biology and cognitive science to spending too much time on blogs, not getting up for Shacharis, and not saying thank you after getting your oil checked.

(I guess those would be, respectively, Uptodate's, Toolate's, and Toogreat's syndrome. Closely related to Tourette's Syndrome, which is when you get verbally abusive to Shadchanim who won't get off your case.)

America, stop making excuses. You have problematic Middos, work on it. Don't make every character flaw that needs fixing something generated by the "Absolutely Marvelous Disorder Machine", that great exemptor from personal responsibility.

[Hattip to Jak Black for calling my attention to the CNN article]

Yehareg V'Al Yaavor regarding heresy

2006-06-05T14:45:00.000-07:00

From the Sefer BeChol Nafshecha (by R' Yitzchak Isaac Weinberg, a comprehensive work regarding the parameters of Yehareg V'Al Yaavor), Simman 2:3 -:

"Not only on Avodah Zarah per se is there a Din of Yehareg V'Al Yaavor, but also on Minus and Kefirah there is a Din of YV"Y, even though he is not worshipping any Avodah Zarah.

Included in Kefirah is to deny, Chas Veshalom, the oneness/uniqueness of Hashem 1, and so too any one of the Ikarei Emunah, or the holy Torah and even one Din in the Torah.2

[And it is also possible that this is the Din even if he is being coerced to admit that one letter of the Torah is not true, whether in Torah SheBichsav or Torah SheB'al Peh or the words of Chaza"l] 3

And if a person is being coerced to state that he denies one of these things, or else he will be put to death, he must die and not transgress.

Similarly, it is a serious transgression to read works of Minus and Kefirah 4 even though he does not believe in them, lest he be drawn after their stupidity. [And there are those who hold 5 that if someone is a Chacham in Torah, it is permitted for him to read a little bit of works of heresy inorder to know what to respond to the heretics on their claims].

And the Acharonim6 have Paskened that studying works of heresy is included in Avizrayhu (accessories) of Avodah Zarah, even though he is only doing so for the sake of Parnassah, and it is prohibited even in a circumstance of Pikuach Nefesh.

1 Chinuch Mitzvah 417, 25. And see Iggeres HaShmad of the Rambam who writes that Minus is worse than Avodah Zarah, and we also see this from that which we ascertain that a person must give up his life rather than state about himself that he is a Goy, even though there is no actual violation of Avodah Zarah, since the implication is one of Kefirah.

2 This is clear from that which the Rishonim (Ritva Pesachim 25, Teshuvos Radvaz 4:92) write that over the Islamic faith, even though it is not Avodah Zarah, since they deny the Torah it is included in Avodah Zarah, and it is YV"Y, and, also explained in the Radvaz, is that since they say that their Meshuga was greater than Moshe Rabbeinu, it is included in YV"Y. And they also write that even if he is being coerced to admit that even one Din in the Torah is not true and that Hashem did not command it, it is YV"Y.

3 See Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah 3:8; and Migdal Oz (R' Yaakov Emden, Even Bochan Pinah 1:35) - "And the same also applies if someone is being coerced to deny the words of Chazal and to say that the Oral Law is a sham Chas VeShalom, it has the same Din as denying the written law, for it and its interpretation are one and the same, and it seems that this is certainly worse than that which it is forbidden for a Jew to say that he is a Goy.

4 Mishnah Perek Chelek, Rambam Hilchos Aku"m 2:2, Teshuvos Rivash 45.

5 Tiferes Yisrael to Mishnayos Chelek, 8; Rivash ibid., though it seems from his words that it is improper ("Ain Raui") to do so.

6 Bircas Shmuel Kiddushin 27 who heard so from R' Chaim Ozer Grodzensky who testfied that he heard so from R' Chaim Soloveitchik;R' Elchonon Wasserman Kovetz Shiurim vol. 2, Simman 47; Karyana DeIggarta (vol. 1, 110 and 112)

Photos of Rav Chaim Yaakov Goldvicht in his youth

2006-06-05T13:21:00.000-07:00

Rav Chaim Yaakov Goldvicht zt"l, adopted son of R' Isaac Sher, protege of the Chazon Ish and the Brisker Rav, and Rosh Yeshiva of Kerem B'Yavneh, was once asked if the photo on page 326 in "A Tzaddik in Our Time", which depicts a group of Talmidim learning in an advanced Gemara Shiur under the tutelage of R' Aryeh Levin, includes him. (The suspect is the boy with glasses, right in the center of the photo). Apparently he smiled, but declined to answer straight out.

(Rav Goldvicht would usually act in a very regal manner, and it would fit his personality not to answer if in the presence of more than one or two Talmidim. In less formal settings he could exude a lot of warmth)

I was pretty sure it was him, but I was never certain.

In the recently published ArtScroll biography - HaMashgiach - about HaRav Meir Chodosh zt"l, on page 308, there is a photo of Rav Goldvicht at his vort (sitting between Rav Meir Chodosh and Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz). The similarity to the photo of a few years earlier, in Yeshivas Etz Chaim under Rav Aryeh Levin, leaves me with no doubt.

Rav Goldvicht it is.

Why the convergence plan will inevitably fail

2006-06-04T19:46:00.000-07:00

A must read interview with outgoing Israeli National Security Council chief - Gen. Giora Eiland.

(FYI: The link is to HaAretz newspaper. There are occasionally ads displayed on their site which are improper.)

Excerpt:

"The move along a unilateral path leads us to the classic solution of two states for two peoples, and I think this is an impossible solution."

Explain it to me.

"When we talk of a solution of two states for two peoples we make two assumptions: that it is possible to solve the conflict in the area between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, and that the reference for a border between the two states are the 1967 lines with minor changes. I reject these two assumptions. I think that between the sea and the river there is not enough area to contain two states, and I think that in order to maintain a defensible border, Israel needs at least 12 percent of the West Bank. The 1967 lines, even the Clinton Plan, do not give Israel defensible borders."

And a Palestinian state in only 88 percent of the West Bank territory is a viable state?

"That is the second mistake. I argue that even a Palestinian state with 100 percent of the Gaza Strip and 97 percent of the West Bank is not viable. Such a country will be poor, radical, restive, where the demographic pressures will be unbearable. In 2020 there will be 2.5 million people in the Gaza Strip, in area of 365 square kilometers. This will inevitably lead to pressure against the fences."

Do you have an alternative proposal?

"My proposal from 2004, which I put forth to Sharon, calls for a regional solution. Adding 600 square kilometers to Gaza in northern Sinai, to allow for the construction of an international port and airport, and a city in which millions of Palestinians can live. Granting 600 square kilometers to Israel in the West Bank in order to guarantee defensible borders. Compensate Egypt with 150 square kilometers in the southern Negev, and compensation in the form of international economic aid and a tunnel connecting Egypt with Jordan, north of Eilat. The transfer of about 100 square kilometers on the east bank of the river to the Palestinians, granting them 105 percent of the territory they are asking today."

Intriguing...

A knee-slapping side-splitter from ArtScroll

2006-06-03T22:49:00.000-07:00

A good line in an ArtScroll book will usually be cause for a little chuckle. But a real good laugh is hard to come by.

I don't know the age-group of most of the readers of this blog, but I would imagine that some of the readers have families with a bunch of small to mid-size kids, boys and girls, Ken Yirbu. You'll probably appreciate this post.

From the introduction of The Shabbos Home (vol. 1 pg. xxvii):

The Family

Friday night. Peace. In every Jewish home the kiddush and the Seudah are about to begin. The family, their faces serene with joy, stand as one around the Shabbos table. The beautifully bedecked challos and the stately decanter of wine, accompanied by silverware and china - all carefully placed on brilliant white linen - accentuate the sublime majesty of the day reflected in tall beaming candles set upon enchanting candlesticks which proudly proclaim, "We are to honor Shabbos, to delight in Shabbos, and to dwell with the Shechinah revealed in Shalom Bayis". (Shalom is one of Hashem's Names.)

This the first scene to enter a Jew's mind, his first association, when he hears the word "Shabbos".

[end quote]

My wife could hardly catch her breath reading that.

The Shabbos Home, Take #2:

The Family:

Friday night. Chaos. The kiddush and the seudah won't be starting for a while. The family, their faces a motley of sly grins, tear-streaked cheeks, and googly eyes, couldn't stand still if their Shabbos treat depended on it. The requests to sit in a 'big chair', the continuation of the pillow fight that broke out while the father was in shul, and the cajoling/pleading/insistent demands to come to the Shabbos table, met with varying degrees of compliance, permeate the atmosphere, lending an almost surreal ambience to the arrival of the Mal'achim...

Two questions I was asked over Shavuos

2006-06-03T22:44:00.000-07:00

If anyone has a source to answer these, I'd appreciate it:

a) If a person redeems a S'deh Achuzah of his relative, does the original owner get it back from the relative who redeemed it immediately, or only at Yovel?

b) If an Eved Ivri wants to stay past his six years until Yovel, but the master has no desire to keep him, can the master say no?

Eruv Tavshilin

2006-06-01T11:45:00.000-07:00

Don't Forget!!!

Have an uplifting and meaningful Yom Tov of Kabbalas HaTorah, out of a sense of Ahavas HaKadosh Baruch Hu, Ahavas Toraso HaKedoshah VeHaMeromemes, and Ahavas Yisrael, Am Kerovo.

A 'Lo S'chanem' Dilemma

2006-06-01T11:29:00.000-07:00

I often wonder what the settlers in Yehudah and Shomron would do if there were two candidates for Prime Minister.

Candidate #1: A Jew, like Ehud Olmert, who was planning to carry out a disengagement plan, which, in the view of many Halachic authorities, is a violation of the prohibition of handing over parts of Eretz Yisrael to non-Jewish control.

Candidate #2: A non-Jew who felt that handing over land to the Palestinians has been a dismal failure, is a fatally flawed concept, and who was essentially a hawk on security issues.

James Woolsey, former CIA chief, writes an interesting column wherein he calls the disengagement plan one of 'folly', and a 'reinforcement of failure'. But, of course, a vote for Mr. Woolsey means the man who calls the shots, assuming he had enough political clout, would be a non-Jew, which would also be a violation of handing over land to non-Jewish sovereignty. It's also a bit unsettling (no pun intended) to vote for a non-Jewish figure as the numero uno political figure in the Jewish State.

On the other hand, the Jews who live in Yehudah and Shomron get to stay.

Which would you choose?

Entitled to Success

2006-05-31T13:57:00.000-07:00

The faces of the staff and students tell the same story. June is beginning to shed its first rays of summer sunshine, and everyone is working on fumes. Let's get through Shavuos, review week, finals, liberty.

Of course, before skipping town, we have to give grades. As a Limmudei Kodesh Rebbe, grades are about much more than plain stats on tests and quizzes. It's even more than factoring in effort, participation, attitude, Midos. It's about entitlement.

A quick perusal of the GPAs of the seniors at the Senior Awards Commitee meeting revealed an unsettling, if unsurprising, story. The upper crust of the students have great grades in the classes both before and after lunch break. As you go further down the achievement levels, though, the gaps start to widen. A third of a point, a half point, sometimes even a full GPA point spread between the Limudei Kodesh and Limudei Chol. Hmph.

"Do you ever give 'D's?"

"Er, no. We couldn't. The kid might get turned off and lose interest in going to Eretz Yisrael. Do you?"

"Yep. An 'F' is rare. But 'D's? Sure."

Grade inflation. And it's not just at the low end of the spectrum that it's done. There was one kid who got an expected A-, and the Rebbe slogged it out with the parent for hours on end. I highly doubt that would happen with the English teacher.

Why? Because. "I send my kid to your school to get a good education that will help him get in to the best college he can. Of course, I want him to have a good Torah education, too. But a man has to make a living, you know. And if his Limmudei Kodesh grades bring down his GPA, what did I throw out all that money for?"

Yeah. You want him to be a good Jew. But, that's not measurable in grades. So the grades are just a nuisance. Just do it. Your range is A to A, for the kid getting 'B's in the afternoon, A-/B+ for the C student, etc. So they don't work half as hard in Torah studies.

But it's not just in grade land that guys feel they can pluck cherries, it's in the curriculum itself. First of all, the morning half of the brain has atrophied, because a decent grade is in the bag. So the classes and tests have to be easier. And now that we've set the bar of success lower, so you get used to working even less.

And, if it's a bit hard - Gemara is too hard. It's boring. I'm not going to Israel. So, we'll make it painless for you. Yep, sadly, Limudei Kodesh is not the arena where you will taste the savory flavor of success. You will be applauded for achievements we both know are fairly pathetic. Run along, dear.

At the beginning of the school year, I showed some of my Talmidim the following quote from Rabbi Yonason Goldson, from Jewish Action(summer 2000):

"Unfortunately, as a teacher, I come head-to-head every day with this generation's aversion to struggle. It's easy to understand why. Today's children have instant food, oven-ready and microwave prepared; they have pre-digested information on the Internet and from English seforim; and they have multi-media entertainment (video games) that the mind absorbs with as little effort as a lifeless body sustained by intravenous drip. Many of them aren't expected to throw away their own trash, or clean up their own messes.

So little is demanded of this generation that they demand next-to-nothing from themselves. IN school, they are often taught to merely regurgitate information without thinking or processing, and the inflated grades they receive confirm their impression that mental effort is a waste of time and energy. They have rarely been called upon to challenge themselves, and tragically, have never tasted the sweet flavor of success.

By living as models of Torah values, by teaching our children through example how to reject quick fixes and convenient rationalizations, we bequeath to them the only enduring pleasure this world has to offer: the satisfaction that comes from working hard and doing well. In this way we can hope to raise children from whom both we and Hashem will have Nachas. What's more, our children will have Nachas from themselves, from their own effort, their own struggle, and their own success."

The effect was: YEAH, he's RIGHT! Of course, the effect lasted until the sub-85 grade on the first Gemara test. That grade is broken, man. Get a new one. It's the cost of a phone call - from the parent. Sigh.

One of my Rabbeim in Israel would say: "Yesh Lachatz SheYotzei Mitz, VeYesh Lachatz SheYotzei Kvetch." ("There's pressure that yields juice, and there's pressure that yields mush")

No pressure yields a rotten fruit.

I'm pretty demanding as a Rebbe. And I've seen kids really latch on to the opportunity to prove themselves in a difficult arena, and I honestly believe that is one of the best fortifications I can give them for life as an accomplished frum Jew.

But there's a deep pang of regret for those who haven't taken the ball and run with it. My Talmid, my son, you should know: I care deeply, and I can give you opportunity, give you encouragement, and cheer from the sidelines. But success must be solely of your own making.

In honor of those who live in Eretz Yisrael...

2006-05-30T22:28:00.000-07:00

This week, those of us still living in Chutz LaAretz are going to have a second day Yom Tov, whereas in Eretz Yisrael, there will be a "regular" Shabbos leining of Parshas Naso.

So in honor of those living in Eretz Yisrael, I'll say over a little Machashavah of mine on the Parshah:

In Revi'i (which is one of the longest Aliyos out there; I've been teaching a Bar Mitzvah boy this Parshah, and wow did he have it rough with that Aliyah!), we read three seemingly disparate sections: Sotah, Nazir, and Bircas Cohanim. What do they have to do with each other?

We're familiar with "HaRo'eh Sotah B'Kilkulah Yazir Atzmo Min HaYayin" (One who sees a Sotah in her degradation should abstain from wine) but how does Bircas Cohanim fit in here?

Perhaps the Torah lists these three things, one after the other, as a way of contrasting three Madreigos of Ahavah.

In the Parshah of Sotah, the Torah is telling us what a completely misguided and perverted Ahavah can look like. Here are two people who think that they are experiencing Ahavah, when it is really nothing but the opposite. HaRav Dessler famously explains that Ahavah comes from the word "Hav", to "give". An adulterous relationship is a "Meila", an embezzlement, selfish taking. This is what popular culture may call Ahavah, and people can be fooled into thinking that it is, but it is nothing of the sort.

The Nazir is in a rehabilitative stage of Ahavah in terms of his relationship with Hashem. Here is a person who feels he needs shoring up of his Ahavas Hashem, and the method chosen is one of Perishus. If we can imagine a person who wants to develop a relationship, he would do well to avoid topics of conversation that can easily shift into areas that the other side would find offensive. The abstention from wine, and from cutting hair, shift the focus away from oneself and toward Hashem, He whom the Nazir is trying to rehabilitate his relationship of Ahavah with.

The next Parshah is that of Bircas Cohanim. The ultimate in Ahavah. They bentch the Jewish people, as they were commanded, B'Ahavah. There are no ulterior motives, no need for holding back on anything. We are at ease with each other, B'Kol Ram, Panim Mul Panim, an outpouring of Ahavah and blessing for the best in Ruchniyus and Gashmiyus.

That is what true Ahavah is.

Halevai, we will merit VeSamu Es Shemi Al Bnei Yisrael, V'Ani Avorachem.

Do Chazal get to decide who gets into Olam HaBa?

2006-05-30T12:45:00.000-07:00

There was some heated discussion (see point #6 in the post linked) about this topic recently.

I think it is a clear-cut Gemara in Sanhedrin 104b:

אמר רב יהודה אמר רב בקשו עוד למנות אחד באה דמות דיוקנו של אביו ונשטחה לפניהם ולא השגיחו עליה באה אש מן השמים ולחכה אש בספסליהם ולא השגיחו עליה יצאה בת קול ואמרה להם (משלי כב) חזית איש מהיר במלאכתו לפני מלכים יתיצב בל יתיצב לפני חשוכים מי שהקדים ביתי לביתו ולא עוד אלא שביתי בנה בשבע שנים וביתו בנה בשלש עשרה שנה לפני מלכים יתיצב [בל יתיצב] לפני חשוכים ולא השגיח עליה יצאה בת קול ואמרה (איוב לד) המעמך ישלמנה כי מאסת כי אתה תבחר ולא אני וגו

"Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: 'They sought to enumerate one more (king- Shlomo, as one who does not merit Olam HaBa). At that moment the image of his father (David) came and prostrated itself in supplication before (the Anshei Knesses HaGedolah - begging them not to include Shlomo on the list), but they did not pay attention to it. A fire came down from Heaven and the fire licked at their benches, and they paid no attention to it. A Heavenly Voice came out and said to them - 'Do you see a man diligent in his work? He shall stand before kings, he shall not stand before darkened ones'. He who built My House before his own house (as Shlomo did), and not only that, but My house he built in seven years, while his house he built in thirteen years, he shall stand before (righteous) kings, he shall not stand before darkened (wicked) ones. And they still paid no attention. A Heavenly Voice came out and said: 'Is it from you that (punishment) is meted out, that you despise (him)? Shall you choose and not I?'"

Says the ArtScroll Gemara, note #40 there, in the name of R' Avigdor Miller (a similar idea is brought in the Sefer Bircas Avraham by R' Avraham Erlanger from Yeshivas Kol Torah) :

"As a general principle, G-d accords with the decisions of the great Torah sages in each generation. Accordingly, David feared that if Shlomo were included in the Mishnah's list, he would indeed lose his share in Olam HaBa. Moreover, following the principle that the final say in Torah matters was left to the considered opinion of the Sages, the Anshei Knesses HaGedolah ignored David's entreaties, the supernatural fire, and even the first Heavenly Voice.

Only when the second voice informed them that the matter was beyond their jurisdiction did they desist."

So, it's ultimately up to Hashem. But, He'll definitely take the opinion of Chazal into account, which is what David was afraid of. So, it probably isn't wise to roll the dice on G-d deciding in your favor against Chazal and the Rambam's considered opinion that you shall have none.

Is Zionism antithetical to authentic Jewish identity?

2006-05-29T20:25:00.000-07:00

In an op-ed piece, Shahar Ilan of Haaretz newspaper sets forth the "Who Is a Jew" problem in all of its magnitude. Here is the opening paragraph of his piece:

"Can a person who does not believe in God, does not observe the Sabbath, does not send his children to religious schools and does not put on tefillin (phylacteries) be a good Jew? Certainly. Even an excellent Jew. It is reasonable to assume that most of the Jewish state's most prominent leaders fit this definition. Can such a person become a Jew? Not from the perspective of the rabbinical courts, to whom the state has given the keys to joining the Jewish people."

One can hardly blame a secular Jew for believing that being a good Jew has nothing to do with believing in G-d or Mitzvah observance, when his paragons of Jewish virtue, in service of their people, are far from paradigms of traditional Tzidkus. An excellent Jew can be a violator of Yom Kippur and Bris Millah, as long as he has contributed to the State of Israel. Do you have to be a Jew to be an excellent Jew? Well, sorta, according to R' Shahar. You'll have to undergo some kind of conversion process. What does it entail?

"The main condition for secular conversion should be proof of a genuine and sincere desire to join the Jewish people. The following should be taken into account: immigration to Israel, service in the Israel Defense Forces, contribution to the Jewish state, fluency in Hebrew and integration into Jewish society, community and culture. The accepted argument against this list of criteria is that these are characteristics of Israeliness, not of Jewishness. That is not precise. These are characteristics of Jewish Israeliness."

Yes, the twisting gyrations of utter confusion as to what the Jewish identity of a secular Israeli entails, beyond just being an Israeli, are painful to behold.

More from R' Shahar:

"This need has become more intense as a result of the rabbinical establishment's total failure to cope with the conversion challenge posed by immigration from the former Soviet Union. Some 300,000 non-Jewish immigrants have moved to Israel in the last 15 years. It is reasonable to assume that most of them were prepared to convert to Judaism when they arrived. Some are still ready to do so. However, the rabbinate converted only a few thousand. The immigrants, most of whom are totally secular, are an inseparable part of Jewish society. The time has come for the secular majority to allow them to join the Jewish people as well, and to do so in its own way."

"Leaders of the Orthodox denomination argue that their control over conversion is crucial for national unity. This argument has long been irrelevant. The ultra-Orthodox are not prepared to let their children marry the children of secular people, while the secular willingly accept the children of non-Jewish immigrants."

Oh, L-rd! The secular willingly accept the children of the non-Jewish immigrants! What kind of monstrous perversion has been created here! Perhaps the primary benefit of a Jewish State was the prevention of intermarriage, and now that's going down the tubes too! And, since these are the plain and simple facts, why not just jettison the Orthodox hegemony and "convert" these people into Israelis? The dream of the Zionist elders, of reshaping the identity of a Jew as an inhabitant of, and a socio-cultural participant in, Medinat Yisrael, has found a home.

"When the secular allow the rabbis to control conversion, it is as though they are acknowledging that the rabbis really do know better than they do who is a Jew. This is an unreasonable situation, especially for the fair number of secular people convinced that their Jewishness, and not the extremism of the ultra-Orthodox or the Zionist ultra-Orthodox ("hardal"), is the real, true, up-to-date and relevant continuation of Judaism. If secular people are the real continuation of the continuum of Jewish existence, then they have a responsibility toward those who are knocking on the door of their nation. They must not forfeit conversion."

In the 58 years since the establishment of Medinat Yisrael, this is an issue that has never been resolved.And these suggestions, while radical, would seem to make sense in the context of the determination of a collective identity for the Israeli Nation.

Anyone want to attempt a response to R' Shahar, to explain why his identity as a Jew should be defined by anything other than his Israeliness?

The tragic breakdown in cognizance of what being Jewish means, has been, and, in the age of "Judicial Activism" under Aharon Barak, looms even larger as, a giant shadow of doubt cast on the viability of the experiment of an inherently paradoxical secular Jewish State.

A Conversation I Heard Yesterday

2006-05-29T12:37:00.000-07:00

Jew: "Do you believe that G-d gave the Torah to the Jews assembled at Mount Sinai some 3300 years ago?"

Non-Jew: "I do."

Jew: "Do you believe that G-d gave both a Written and Oral Law?"

Non-Jew: "I do."

Jew: "Is there anything in the Written or Oral Law, or among the Rabbinic enactments, or among the customs the Jewish People have adopted over the past thousands of years, that you feel you are unwilling or unable to keep?"

Non-Jew: "No."

Jew: "Whenever you're ready."

(pause)

New-Jew: "Baruch Ata Hashem, Elokainu Melech HaOlam, Asher Kideshanu BeMitzvosav VeTzivanu Al HaTevilah"

Three Jews: "Mazel Tov!"

Yes, I was on a Beis Din for Giyur yesterday.

Highly recommended Chizuk exercise before Shavuos - the Yom Tov of Kabbalas HaTorah.

Abomination in Yerushalayim

2006-05-29T11:35:00.000-07:00

The secular courts have, once again, ruled against the Jerusalem municipality, and forced it to host and fund a Gay and Lesbian parade in the streets of the Holy City.

Yes, all ye Jerusalem property tax payers , here's where $80,000 dollars worth of your hard-earned money is going:

"Jerusalem District Court Judge Yehudit Tzur ruled that the city had set discriminatory standards in its cultural funding practices, thus enabling itself to avoid giving money to the Jerusalem Open House for Pride and Tolerance. Judge Tzur ordered the municipality to pay 350,000 shekels (close to $80,000) to cover its lack of payments for the years 2003-2005."

Now THERE'S something to get out and block the streets for. Burning trash as they go marching by might even make sense - if the marchers have to cough from the smoke and be unable to chant their disgusting slogans.

This march is an open statement of rebellion against Hashem. Of all places in the world to march - Yerushalayim is the place to go? And to pour salt on this open wound - the Jewish sovereign court system forces the municipality to PAY for their march!

Anyone who thinks that burning trash in Ashdod by a few Charedim is a "terrible" Chillul Hashem, should save his superlatives for things like this. In the capital of the Jewish State, identified by the world over as representative of the Jewish People, the messengers of Hashem to the world, we have a city-funded gay parade. A celebration of abomination. It's not כמעט כסדום היינו, we're there. In YERUSHALAYIM!

And then some horribly misguided people wonder - who needs all these people in Yeshiva learning? Oh, no. We'll win wars by merit of gay parades down Ben-Yehuda, surely. G-d has promised no third Churban, we are invincible. Let them all go to the army to protect the fabulous legal system that forces my parents and parents-in-law, who live in Yerushalayim, to fund this תועבה.

And what does this breed? Blogs by ostensibly frum Jews questioning if the Rabbis got their interpretation of the Torah right when they outlawed this abomination! Just like "an eye for an eye" isn't literal, so G-d didn't really mean it when he called it an abomination, or says you have to stone the participants. It's a Moshol of some sort. Because people have to cozy up to every kind of sickness that gains legitimacy. Our Torah can't possibly be so offensive as to exclude the gays from acting upon their natural instincts. How could G-d be so cruel? And so on and so forth.

Well, I say NO! Get help. If you can't, I feel as sorry for you as I do for the single people who aren't married and know they never will get married. Which is sad. But DON'T COME TO MY HOLY CITY AND LEGITIMIZE HOMOSEXUALITY!

And to the Israeli court system which allows this and enforces it, I say:
Shame on you! You can't defend the basic humanitarian rights of those expelled from Gush Katif, who have lost everything by an act of fiat by a government that treated them with less than basic decency, threw them on to the street like canines, but this you can find the wherewithal to do?

So, for all those who say - "Come live in Eretz Yisrael, so you can do something about it", I'll ask - "You already live in Eretz Yisrael, what are you doing about it?"

Burning Trash in Halachah

2006-05-29T09:33:00.000-07:00

(Please read this whole post if you're going to read any of it.)

A reaction to this and this.
Namely, trash burning riots by some members of the Charedi community in Eretz Yisrael, in reaction to DNA testing a body of a one-year-old baby.

First, to get my initial need to find the Halachic angle of everything off my chest:
1) If there is a "Prili" yogurt container and some leftover chulent in the same trashbin, and you set it on fire, are you violating Bishul Basar BeChalav?

2) Does every kid get to stoke the flames a bit, or once you are under a certain age you get under a spread-out hefty bag for Kol HaNearim?

3) If a newspaper publicizes the trash burning, are they transgressing Gilui HaRiot?

3a) And if I talk about it, is that Avizrayhu of Gilui HaRiot?

4) Does a Bechor get a double portion of trash to burn?

5) If the trash in Yerushalayim is left for more than two days with a night in between, is there a Gezeira that it must be burnt so as to remember to do this for Nosar when we will merit to bring Korbanos?

6) Is the ash Muttar BeHanaah?

Seriously, has anyone ever heard of the Gedolim put out a Kol Koreh to participate in a trash burning!? Protests are fine, massive demonstrations are great, and putting some political pressure on is fantastic. But what's up with trash burning? It doesn't accomplish anything at all, other than make us look like violent jokesters with too much time on our hands.

To be fair, it is important that this paragraph gets underscored:
"Members of Ashdod's ultra-Orthodox community are assisting police in their investigation. They claim they had no knowledge that a plot to abduct the body was being prepared while they negotiated with police to resolve the crisis."

I daven that one day there will be a sufficient level of trust between the authorities and the Charedi community that these crises get resolved without having to resort to any kind of unpleasantness. I have my doubts as to whether that will happen in my lifetime.

Barry Bonds hits no. 715, passes Babe Ruth!

2006-05-28T19:24:00.000-07:00

How appropriate that all the hoopla is on #715.

The same Gimatriya as שטות
Now #716, that would be a פרפורמנס!

(That was just for kicks, don't worry, we're not turning into a sports blog)

Is Medinat Yisrael Reishit Tzemichat Geulateinu - Part III

2006-05-28T09:26:00.000-07:00

Continued from Parts I and II

Be'Ikvei HaTzon (pg. 215):
"...Churban of the Land", in its Halachic sense, is connected to its desolation in the physical sense, as is stated in the Torah in Parshas Bechukosai (26:32) "And I will make the Land desolate, and your enemies who dwell therein will be astonished at it". Meaning, that as long as Eretz Yisrael is not in Jewish hands, it will be in a state of physical desolation. And in the prophecy of Yechezkel (36:8-12) [Note: I'm quoting the whole section of the Navi here, although in the original it is parsed] - 'But you, mountains of Yisrael, you shall shoot forth your branches, and yield your fruit to my people of Yisrael ; for they will soon be coming. For, behold, I am for you , and I will turn to you, and you shall be tilled and sown. And I will multiply men upon you, all the house of Israel, all of it, and the cities shall be inhabited, and the waste places rebuilt. And I will multiply upon you man and beast, and they shall increase and bring fruit, and I will cause you to be inhabited as in your former times, and I will do better to you than at your beginnings, and you shall know that I am Hashem. And I will cause men to walk among you, my people Yisrael, and they shall possess you, and you shall be their inheritance, and you shall no longer bereave them of children.'"

"And it says in Sanhedrin (98a) regarding this Passuk - "There is no clearer indication of the "End" than this". Meaning, that when the Land will no longer be desolate in a physical sense, and the mountains of Yisrael will yield their branches and fruit to the Jewish Nation, this in and of itself is the greatest sign that the Land will be under Jewish sovereignty and have the Halachic status of "Bevinyanah", and then the promise of all the Neviim will apply - "and you will no longer bereave them of children - that there will never again be a destruction of the Land."

"And in Megillah (17b) it says, "And why did they see fit to recite (the Berachah of) the ingathering of exiles (in Shemoneh Esrei) after Birchas HaShanim? As it states: 'And you mountains of Yisrael, you will give your branches and bear you fruit for my Nation of Israel for they will soon be coming etc.' Meaning, that initially the desolation which permeated the Land throughout all the years of Exile will end, and only afterwards will there be a process of ingathering of Exiles, as our eyes behold all this unfold before us in the last 50 years [Note: the article was written in 1988], and regarding this historical process the Navi promised (Amos 9:15) - 'And they will no longer be plucked up out of their Land'. And so, based on the promise of the Neviim, combined with the aforementioned Beraisa from Massechta Sanhedrin, we must determine that the establishment of the State in 5708 is indeed the Atchalta DeGeulah, as explained."

[ End quote from Be'Ikvei HaTzon ]

At the outset, let me say that there seems to be some blurring of the lines in this analysis between Jewish settlement and Jewish sovereignty. But let us take this Nevu'ah of Yechezkel and see how, or whether, it necessarily applies to the present situation:

Passuk 8: 'But you, mountains of Yisrael, you shall shoot forth your branches, and yield your fruit to my people of Yisrael; for they will soon be coming.'

And as stated earlier, the Gemara in Sanhedrin says that there is no more open "End" than this.

a) What kind of produce yield is the Passuk referring to?
There are two explanations in the Maharsha to Sanhedrin there:
1) "Because as long as the Jews are not on their Land, the Land does not yield its fruit as normal, but when it will return to giving her fruit, this is an open "End", that the time for Geulah is close at hand, when the Jews will return to their Land."
2) We can also explain based on what is said in Perek BaMeh Madlikin, that in the future trees will be yielding fruit every day... and so too we can explain this Passuk - just as there is a branch each day, so too there will be fruit borne for the Jews every day, and this will be at a time when the Geulah is imminent. And this is a miraculous occurence, certainly an open "End".

So, according to the second explanation of the Maharsha, this Passuk has not yet been fulfilled.

In addition, in VaYoel Moshe (Maamar Shalosh Shevuos, 66), the Satmar Rebbe zt"l states the following:
"Those who follow the Zionists say... that the fact that many people come to Eretz Yisrael and deal with planting and the fruit multiplies, it is on this that the Gemara in Sanhedrin 98 says that there is no more open "End" than this... And this is insanity and complete nonsense ("Shtus VaHevel Gamur"), certainly according to the second explanation of the Maharsha, but even according to the first explanation, it is at least as explained in the Gemara in Kesuvos (112) that R' Yehoshua ben Levi saw (gigantic) clusters (of grapes in the vineyard) that were positioned (in a way that from afar they looked) like calves. He remarked - 'There are calves among the grapevines." [Note: See Gemara there, that this was when the Arabs had risen upon the Jews], and they say there that the land of Egypt is of higher quality than all the Lands in the world, and Tzo'an is the choicest part of the Land of Egypt, and Chevron, which is the most inferior part of Eretz Yisrael, is seven times better than Tzo'an of Mitzrayim, and a Beis Se'ah (an area of 50x50 cubits) yields 70 Kur. There are a number of other things that the Gemara mentions that the produce of Eretz Yisrael was different than that of the rest of the world in a wondrous way... And if all this will return as before, as the Rambam writes at the end of Hilchos Melachin that in the days of the Moshiach, all delicacies will be available like dust, that is a harbinger of Geulah, but that which is natural in the whole world, that based on the amount you plant, so too the yield increases, this is no sign of the Geulah..."

So, we see that using this Passuk in Yechezkel and the Gemara in Sanhedrin as proof positive that this is RTG is questionable.

Even if we were to accept that the present situation is a fulfillment of 'no more open "End" than this', there are still two major problems with terming the Medinah RTG:
a) We should term the Aliyah of the students of the GRA and the Baal Shem Tov as such, not the State.
b) [On a much more basic level] - The Gemara does not say that this is the Geulah or the beginning of the Geulah. It says that it is a harbinger of Geulah.
Let us see the very next statement of the Gemara (Sanhedrin ibid.) for the purpose of illustration:

"R' Elazar says: There is also no clearer indication of the end than this (the following), as it is stated: "For before those days, there was no wage for man and no wage for animals, and to him that leaves and enters there was no peace from the adversary" (Zecharia 8:10)

Rashi explains that this Passuk is talking of times in which economic conditions are so severe that people cannot find jobs, animals are not being leased for work on the land, and it is unsafe to travel from one town to another. When such conditions prevail, one can expect the Moshiach's imminent arrival.

So, should we suggest the Great Depression should be celebrated as Atchalta DeGeulah?

The Chafetz Chaim (Likkutei Halachos, Introduction, pg. 3) states: "We see (the fulfillment of the above Gemara) with our own eyes, that because of the increase of trains and cars [Note: we might add PCs], there is not such a need for workers and animals, and they walk around idly."

Should we celebrate Henry Ford or Bill Gates as those who usher in Moshiach?

It seems that all the Gemara means is that it is a sign that the Geulah, or the ultimate Kibbutz Galuyos, is imminent, not that it is a part of the Geulah itself. It is actually in the Passuk itself - "For they will soon be coming".

HaRav Schachter Shlit"a, later on in his piece (pg. 217) suggests that perhaps the definition of the Land "BeVinyanah" is different: "...unless we will claim and say that as long as most of the Jews are not yet on the Land, meaning, there has not yet been a fulfillment of Kibbutz Galuyos, the land is still considered "BeChurbanah". But this requires delving into ("VeTzarich Iyun"), as this is not the implication of the aforementioned Gemara in Sanhedrin etc."

Based on what we have just set forth, there is no contradiction at all between the produce being the harbinger of the true Kibbutz Galuyos, not part of the "Ketz" itself, and determining "Binyan HaAretz" as most of the Jewish People dwelling in the Land. [Even if we were to accept that today's agricultural situation is a fulfillment of this prophecy, which, as I said before, is questionable]

However, I think we might, perhaps, go one step further than HaRav Schachter in defining positively what irrevocable Kibbutz Galuyos means in the context of the Geulah:

Yechezkel, ibid., Passuk 10: "And I will multiply men upon you, all the house of Israel, all of it, and the cities shall be inhabited."

The Ramban in Parshas Bechukosai says the following: "... And (the Torah) promises (Devarim 30:5): 'And He will do good to you, and multiply you more than your fathers', which is a promise to all the tribes of Israel, not a sixth of the Nation." (As was during the time of Ezra, where only the Tribes of Yehudah and Binyamin came back).

The Rambam (Hilchos Terumos 1:26) says:

התרומה בזמן הזה, ואפילו במקום שהחזיקו עולי בבל, ואפילו בימי עזרא--אינה מן התורה, אלא מדבריהם: שאין לך תרומה של תורה אלא בארץ ישראל, ובזמן שיהיו כל ישראל שם, שנאמר "כי תבואו" (ויקרא כה,ב), ביאת כולכם כשהיו בירושה ראשונה וכמו שהן עתידין לחזור בירושה שלישית

It may be that "Yerushah Shelishis" is only such when it is as promised by the Neviim, that all Jews are there.

Perhaps, only after the fulfillment of Passuk 11: "and I will cause you to be inhabited as in your former times, and I will do better to you than at your beginnings", will the promise of Passuk 12 - "and they shall possess you, and you shall be their inheritance, and you shall no longer bereave them of" be irrevocably fulfilled.

Similarly, the Pessukim in Amos 9:13-15 are left ambiguous, at best:

"Behold, days are coming, says Hashem, when the ploughman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him who sows seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt. And (only after this amazing phenomenon, which we have yet to witness), I will bring back (or, perhaps "come back with", as in the dwelling of the Shechinah in the Beis HaMikdash?) the captivity of (all?) of my people of Yisrael, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them, and they shall plant vineyards and drink their wine, and they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them. And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no longer be plucked up out of their land which I have given them, says Hashem your G-d".

In summary:

I humbly submit that there are insufficient grounds to assert that Medinat Yisrael is irreversibly a step in the direction of the building of the Beis HaMikdash, and that judgement in this matter should be reserved.

May the Beis HaMikdash be rebuilt and the Moshiach's Shofar be blown speedily in our days, Amen.

Is Medinat Yisrael Reishit Tzemichat Geulateinu? - Part II

2006-05-27T22:07:00.000-07:00

Continued from here

Be'Ikvei HaTzon (pg. 215):

"And if we will hold that Medinat Yisrael is now considered "BeVinyanah", then we are assured that there will not be a third "Churban", and if so we can conclude that the establishment of the Medinah was a form of "Atchalta DeGeulah". And it seems, that determination of this point - when Eretz Yisrael is considered "BeChurbanah", and when it is considered "BeVinyanah", is clearly defined in the words of the Poskim - regarding the obligation to do Keri'ah on the cities of Yehudah when they are "BeChurbanan", wherein the Magen Avraham writes (in the beginning of Siman 561) that one who sees the cities of Yehudah in a state of Churban must perform Keri'ah, even though Jews are dwelling there, since the Nations are ruling over them, this is called Churban. So we see that the definition of "the cities of Yehudah Bevinyanan" is - at the time that they are under Jewish sovereignty. [Or else, when we have both components, when Jews dwell in them, and they are also under Jewish sovereignty]."

It would be of interest whether during the reign of Antiochus, the Jews tore Keri'ah over the cities of Yehudah or over Yerushalayim. If they did, then this would certainly be considered a "Churban", according to Rav Schachter's definition, and the rule of the Romans a "Churban Shelishi", which is an impossibility.

But if they did not, then this would mean one of two things:

a) They did not hold that Keriah on the cities of Yehudah/Yerushalayim depended on sovereignty, but rather on the existence of a Beis HaMikdash [see Be'Ikvei HaTzon pg. 105-108 for a discussion of this issue, wherein the Halachah is decided that regarding the cities of Yehudah, sovereignty is the key issue, (Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igros Moshe Orach Chaim IV:70:(11)) held that nowadays, while we have not yet been redeemed,* there is no Halachah of rending garments over the cities of Yehudah, since they are under Jewish sovereignty. Things may have changed in some cities since that Teshuvah was written in 5739) whereas regarding Yerushalayim, there is considerable debate, with Rav Soloveitchik of the opinion that it depends on having a Beis HaMikdash, whereas Rav Moshe Feinstein in the above Teshuvah places Yerushalayim in the same category as other cities of Yehudah. As an aside, R' Shlomo Zalman Auerbach felt that since there are still structures of Avodah Zarah in Yerushalayim, Keriah is still warranted.]

b) They did not feel that there was a loss of sovereignty. However, this is very difficult to reconcile with the language of the Rambam in the beginning of Hilchos Chanukah:

א. בבית שני כשמלכו יון גזרו גזרות על ישראל ובטלו דתם ולא הניחו אותם לעסוק בתורה ובמצות. ופשטו ידם בממונם ובבנותיהם ונכנסו להיכל ופרצו בו פרצות וטמאו הטהרות. וצר להם לישראל מאד מפניהם ולחצום לחץ גדול עד שריחם עליהם אלהי אבותינו והושיעם מידם והצילם וגברו בני חשמונאי הכהנים הגדולים והרגום והושיעו ישראל מידם והעמידו מלך מן הכהנים וחזרה מלכות לישראל יתר על מאתים שנים עד החורבן השני

(This is the version of the Frankel Rambam. According to this version, it is explicit that there was Greek sovereignty over Eretz Yisrael at the time. Some others have "K'SheMalchei Yavan" in the first line. However, even if we were to accept this version, from the end of the Ramban it seems clear that prior to those "more than two hundred years", there was no Jewish sovereignty.)

[Another option, according to this version, is that the Rambam is speaking specifically about Malchus, "monarchy", not "sovereignty". However, one of the building blocks of Rav Schachter's analysis, as mentioned in Part I, is not to distinguish, from a sovereignty perspective, between the two.]

It is also worth noting that, at the end of that Halachah, the Rambam refers to the Roman conquest as "Churban HaSheini", despite his shifting of sovereignty from the Greeks to the Chashmonaim to the Romans.

It is possible that, according to the Rambam, there was no "Binyan" until the Chashmonaim, although this would be against the Ramban in Parshas BeChukosai, cited in Part I (which forms the basis of Rav Schachter's idea that "Churban" means loss of sovereignty) that the "Geulah" of this period occurred during the time of Ezra.

More likely, the term "Churban" in the Rambam here means the Churban of the Beis HaMikdash (as the "more than 200 years", or 206 to be precise, is the number given in Masseches Avodah Zarah 9a from the beginning of the rule of the Chashmonaim until the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash, and that Gemara seems to be the source for this line in the Rambam). This is meant to be taken as the benchmark for the generic use of the term "Churban", as in the context of Galus and Geulah, not loss of sovereignty.

To be continued...

*One is tempted to speculate that Rav Moshe goes out of his way to include this in his Teshuva to Rabbi Ephraim Greenblatt, who certainly was aware that the Moshiach had not arrived by 5739, as an explicit statement of disassociation between this Halachah and any component of the Geulah.

Is Medinat Yisrael Reishit Tzemichat Geulateinu? - Part I

2006-05-25T18:56:00.000-07:00

In a recent comment thread on Hirhurim, some of the commenters brought up HaRav Hershel Schachter Shlit"a's position that Medinat Yisrael should be considered Reishit Tzemichat Geulateinu (RTG).

The analysis which HaRav Schachter uses in this regard, brought in his Sefer B'Ikvei HaTzon (Simman 32), is brilliant.

The structure of his view is, roughly, as follows:

I. Geulah = the building of the Beis HaMikdash, as evidenced by the Ramban in his preface to Sefer Shemos.
Atchalta DeGeulah - a fulfillment of the Mitzvos which must precede the building of the Beis HaMikdash, namely, to appoint a king and destroy the seed of Amalek.

HaRav Schachter is of the opinion that a Jewish sovereign State is a fulfillment of the Mitzvah to appoint a king. Hence, the Jewish State is a fulfillment of RTG or Atchalta DeGeulah.

[ Destruction of Amalek - destruction of the enemies of the Jews who seek their annihilation as a nation. And since we are still at war with nations who seek to annihilate us, there is as of yet no obligation to build the Beis HaMikdash. ]

II. However, continues Rav Schachter, this is only truly RTG if this State indeed an inexorable, irreversible step toward the building of the Beis HaMikdash. What is the guarantee that we will not have to relinquish the entire State to foreign sovereignty, and only later will we reconquer the Land and build the Beis HaMikdash?

His answer is, since we are promised that there will be no third Churban, which means, in HaRav Schachter's view, not even a loss of Jewish sovereignty, we can rest assured that the Medinah is irreversible.

However, I have to admit that I feel uncomfortable accepting his approach lock, stock and barrel, for two reasons:

a) There are major luminaries who denied terming the Medinah as such. Not just the Satmar Rebbe, but also the Chazon Ish (as quoted in Pe'er HaDor vol. 4, that "this is not the beginning of the Geulah but rather the end of the Galus" - meaning it has no Geulah component), the Steipler Gaon (who writes, as brought in Karyana D'Iggarta, that "this is not the Geulah nor the beginning of the Geulah, but rather a transition from Galus to a more bitter Galus, the Galus of the 'Yevsektzia'"), HaRav Shach, and others.

b) I feel it is imprudent to mortgage, and potentially endanger, the Emunah of throngs of Jews on a particular interpretation of the sources, which may or may not be true.

So, KeTalmid HaDan Bifnei Rabbo, (and I doubt I am worthy of even being called that), let us attempt to see if there is room for alternative analysis of the sources HaRav Schachter brings to bear. I will focus on Part II of his analysis.

(Be'Ikvei HaTzon, pg. 214) :

"It would seem (as follows): the words of the Ramban in Sefer HaGeulah are well known, that the two Tochachos in Parshas Bechukosai and Parshas Ki Savo parallel the two destructions, and that there will not be a third. And, B'Peshuto, it would seem that he means to say that not only will there not be another Churban Beis HaMikdash, but that there will not even be another Churban of the Medinah. And this is clearly set forth in the Ramban in his commentary on the Torah to Parshas Bechukosai (Bamidbar 26:16), where he shows that the Tochacha in Parshas Ki Savo is talking about the destruction of the Second Bayis, "in that there is no mention of the Beis HaMikdash and 'the pleasant odor' (of the Korbanos being consumed) as is mentioned here (in Parshas Bechukosai), since there was no fire coming down amd consuming the Korbanos in the second Beis HaMikdash, as they testified in Massechet Yoma..." . We see that the Ramban comments that in second Tochacha there is no mention of the Churban HaBayis at all, [since even when it was built, it was not so much in its glory, and there were no sacrifices to provide a pleasant odor], rather only the destruction of the Medinah is mentioned there, and so we find, based on this, that the promise of the Torah and the Neviim was, that there will only be two destructions of the Medinah, and the Medinah will not be destroyed again, Chalilah".

Let us quote the Ramban on the Torah there:

שכן היה בבית שני, כמו שאמרו שבית ראשון מפני מה חרב, מפני עבודת כוכבים וגילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים, בית שני שאנו בקיאים בהם שהיו עוסקין בתורה ובגמילות חסדים מפני מה חרב, מפני שנאת חנם שהיתה ביניהם ולא הזכיר שם המקדש וריח ניחוח כאשר הזכיר כאן, שלא היתה האש יורדת ואוכלת הקרבנות בבית שני

The Ramban is bothered by the fact that the Gemara explicitly mentions that the second Beis HaMikdash was destroyed because of Sin'as Chinam, yet the Torah makes no mention of that in Parshas Ki Savo? The Ramban answers that it is not mentioned because the Beis HaMikdash was not in its full glory.
This can be interpreted in one of two ways:
a) As Rav Schachter Shlit"a does, that the destruction of the (less-than-full-glory) Beis HaMikdash is not a critical component of Churban.
b) The destruction of the second Beis HaMikdash is a critical component of Churban, but is not emphasized in the Tochacha of Ki Tavo due to its deficient glory.

According to this second reading, we have no proof that Churban is anything less than the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash, as is the simple Pshat in the Gemara in Yoma 9 - "Bayis Sheini Al Mah Charav", not "Memshala Sheniyah..."

Additionally, even if we accept the reading of HaRav Schachter, it may be that "Churban" is a flexible term, which means a reversal of the maximum potential achieved. Meaning, that in the context of Bayis Sheni, which was deficient, or, perhaps, for the sake of this discussion, as if there was no Mikdash at all, a loss of sovereignty would be considered "Churban". But in the context of the Geulah Asidah, which clearly includes building of the third Beis HaMikdash in full glory, anything less than the full Geulah of the Beis HaMikdash is not immune to reversal, as it is not considered Churban in the context of the final, full-blown, Geulah.

Next paragraph in Be'Ikvei HaTzon:
"And even though Bar Kochva established a Jewish government in the Land and even minted coins [which is impossible to do - Al Pi Din - unless there is a Halachic status of a government, with practical ramifications regarding redemption of Maaser Sheni, and also regarding the laws of interest], and in the end his government was negated, there is no contradiction from this to the promise of the Neviim [that there will be no third Churban in the Medinah], since history has already ruled on Bar Kochva that his government did not really have the status of a "Memshala", rather he tried to stage a "rebellion" against the Romans, and he failed in his rebellion. As opposed to the government of Medinat Yisrael in our times, (which) is certainly a "Memshala" which is recognized by the UN, and it has the status of all the other governments in the world. And this is how all the Gedolim of our times held, that one can redeem Maaser Sheni in Eretz Yisrael with the coins of the Medinah, and this matter is simple and clear as the sun in midday."

A number of questions:
1) Were the coins of Bar Kochva used for redemption of Maaser Sheni? We find nothing which says that in the period of Bar Kochva they were limited exclusively to the Roman minted coins. [UPDATE: See comment section regarding Bava Kamma 97b] Did R' Akiva support Bar Kochva as a potential Moshiach, yet decline to use his coins for fear of his rebellion failing? Bar Kochva, as far as I know, did achieve sovereignty for a short while. [UPDATE: See Sanhedrin 97b, where the two-and-a-half year Malchus (that is the term used there) of Bar Koziva is placed on par with the highest level of complete and total independence of that of the Chashmonaim (70 of the 103 years of the Chashmonaim) and Herod (52 of his 103 years). In light of this it seems very difficult to assert that it should not count as a Malchus]

But this is conjecture alone. There is a much more fundamental point:
2) The Ramban in his commentary to that Passuk discusses the first Galus and Geulah as well. It is clear as day that he refers to the return of Ezra and the exile of Bavel as Geulah. According to Rav Schachter, prima facie, this must mean one of two things:

a) Whatever autonomy the Jews had at the time counts as sovereignty for Geulah. [UPDATE: See Rashi to Sanhedrin 97b s.v. Od Achas, where Rashi refers to the time of Ezra as one of "limited glory"]
Hence, according to Rav Schachter, any reversal of this status would be termed Churban.

b) The building of the Beis HaMikdash. If this is the case, then it would seem that the reversal of that, namely, the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash, is considered Churban. Not lack of sovereignty, for this is not what was achieved by Ezra in the first place!

We are familiar with the words of the Rambam in the beginning of Hilchos Chanukah, that the Greeks ruled over the Jews, and issued harsh decrees, and then, under the Chashmonaim, sovereignty returned to Jewish hands.

If we accept interpretation a) of Ezra's Geula - autonomy - then this was surely eradicated at the time of the Greeks, and should be termed Churban. Sovereignty then came back under the Chashmonaim, and was lost again when the Romans took over. According to Rav Schachter, this should be termed Churban Shelishi, which is against all the promises of the Neviim.

We must therefore, it seems, accept interpretation b) of Ezra's Geula, namely, the building of the Beis HaMikdash, and its destruction, Churban. This lends much weight to the alternate reading of the Ramban I suggested in the previous segment - that the destruction of Mikdash Ezra is what is termed Churban, and the promise of the Neviim is only that there will be no third Churban Beis HaMikdash.

HaRav Shach's Hakaras HaTov

2006-05-24T18:55:00.000-07:00

HaRav Shach zt"l's son-in-law, HaRav Meir Tzvi Bergman, related the following about HaRav Shach in a Hesped he delivered during the Shiva:

When R' Isser Zalman Meltzer zt"l passed away and was buried on Har HaMenuchos, that section where the Gedolim are buried was still empty. R' Isser Zalman was among the first to buried there, and HaRav Shach, whose soul clung to that of R' Isser Zalman, expressed a desire to be buried there, not far from his Rebbe (and uncle), and he went ahead and bought a plot near R' Isser Zalman's.

Some years later, R' Yitzchak Epstein zt"l passed away when he was still young. He was a Dayyan on the Tel Aviv Beis Din and had a close relationship with R' Isser Zalman. At that time there was no longer an open plot in that section. HaRav Shach felt a sense of gratitude toward R' Yitzchak Epstein, because when HaRav Shach came to Eretz Yisrael (8 Teves, 5701), R' Yitzchak came, sent by R' Isser Zalman, to pick him up from Rosh HaNikra (on the northern border with Lebanon) to bring him to Yerushalayim. HaRav Shach gave up the plot near R' Isser Zalman, which he had purchased, and said that R' Yitzchak should be buried there.

Wow.

Next time someone picks me up from the airport, I'll try to keep that in mind.

The J-blogosphere - capital of the validation seekers

2006-05-23T20:23:00.000-07:00

The New Colossus

Not like the brazen giant of Talmudic fame,
with conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
a mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame,
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
with silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Welcome to the new world.
The melting pot.
Democracy.
Civil War.

As for me,
G-d bless ancient lands.
My home sweet home.

When "better late than never" just ain't the case

2006-05-23T20:05:00.000-07:00

Speaking at a joint press conference following their first meeting, US President George W. Bush promised Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that America will respond if Israel is attacked by Iran.

Paintball in Halachah

2006-05-23T12:08:00.000-07:00

Is it OK for a group of nice Jewish boys to go paintballing?

The answer would seem to depend on how to understand a Rambam (Hilchos Chovel u'Mazik 5:1) -

א אסור לאדם לחבול, בין בעצמו בין בחברו. ולא החובל בלבד, אלא כל המכה אדם כשר מישראל--בין קטן בין גדול, בין איש בין אישה, דרך ניציון--הרי זה עובר בלא תעשה,

"It is forbidden to injure (i.e. inflict a wound), whether himself of his friend. And not only one who injures, but anyone who hits a fellow observant Jew - whether an adult or a minor, man or woman, in a (belligerent? quarrelsome?) manner - has violated a negative commandment"

( Most manuscripts of the Rambam have this version. The Sefer Mitzvos Gadol (Asin, 70) has it as "Derech Bizayon" or "in a degrading manner")

There are a number of interpretations as to what this phrase in the Rambam means:

a) The Shu"t Maharalbac"h (Kuntress HaSemichah, Kuntress 1 s.v. "V'Od Ani Omer") understands the Rambam to be excluding a circumstance where the person upon whom the blow is being inflicted has agreed to it.

Other Acharonim also agree with the position that there is no violation of this Aveira if the victim is Mochel (Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 48, Turei Even to Megilla 28a).

b) However, Rav Yerucham Fishel Perlau in his comments on the Sefer HaMitzvos of Rav Saadya Gaon, in a lengthy refutation, does not accept this reading of the Rambam. He understands the Rambam to be excluding situations where there is explicit sanction of hitting, such as a father to a son, a Rebbe to a Talmid, or in order to heal the person. He does not accept the permissibility of inflicting a wound or hitting where the victim consents.

Concurring with the prohibition being in force, even in this circumstance of Mechilla, are:

Shu"t Chavos Ya'ir (163), Shulchan Aruch HaRav (Hilchos Nizkei Guf VaNefesh 4), Chazon Ish (Choshen Mishpat 19:5) and Igros Moshe (Orach Chaim III:78).

It would seem to follow that the permissibilty of paintball playing should depend on this Machlokes Acharonim whether Mechilla works to obviate the prohibition of hitting another person. Considering that this is a Torah prohibition, presumably one would have to be stringent in this matter. Additionally, this may not be a clear-cut Mechilla. No one goes out there wanting to get hit in the chest with a pellet. While there is an understanding that this may very well happen, I am not certain that putting yourself in a situation where you know you may get hit is analogous to telling someone it is OK to hit you.

c) Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igros Moshe Choshen Mishpat II:66) has a responsa regarding the permissibilty of a girl undergoing plastic surgery in order to enhance her appearance. In that Teshuva, Rav Moshe seems to have a third approach to the defintion of "Derech Nitzayon UBizayon". Rav Moshe allows the girl to undergo this surgery, since the purpose of the surgery does not have any belligerent overtones. On the contrary, it is meant to enhance her appearance.

Rav Moshe proves this from the behavior or Rav Chisda, brought in Bava Kama 91, that when he would go among thorns he would lift up his cloak and allow the thorns to scratch his legs, saying that his body would heal, whereas his clothing would not. Since, presumably, Rav Chisda's walking among the thorns was for some constructive need, that removes the "Derech Nitzayon Ubizayon" element of the prohibition of injuring oneself (or others).

While Tosafos to Bava Kama 91b (s.v. Ella) prohibit injuring oneself even "Letzorech", Rav Moshe avers that this is only in regard to things that are done with the intent of self-inflicted pain, ( similar to tearing garments over a deceased relative, where the purpose is to cause yourself to suffer more over the loss), not where the wound is knowingly inflicted, but the person would prefer that there be no pain at all, as with Rav Chisda.

It is not clear to me whether shooting paint pellets at another person, in the context of a paintball game, would fall under Derech Nitzayon Ubizayon according to Rav Moshe:
a) Is this a "Tzorech", or at least a defintion of purpose other than wound infliction, which renders it non-belligerent but "all in fun"?
b) Is the game in and of itself of a belligerent nature?
c) Is there a bit more "geshmak" to the game if there is some pain inflicted - rendering the shooting Assur even if we were to consider it a Tzorech?

Share your thoughts!

This post is food for thought - not LeMaase!

Guidelines for bloggers who feel they have to criticize the Gedolim

2006-05-21T14:25:00.000-07:00

Here's my comment over at Harry for those who meet the description of the title of this post:

Guideline:

When criticizing, your level of rhetoric and of public expression can only be at the level of your Rebbe's, assuming he is worthy to be considered a Bar Pelugta (an adversary of equal stature) of those Gedolim subject to the criticism.

Meaning, don't use words like "cantankerous" or "small-minded", Chas VeShalom, if your Rebbe, who is a Gadol, has not, and don't publicly criticize where your Rebbe has not.

And if you're not LeShem Shamayim, be quiet.

Should cut down the amount of comments on some of the blogs by a good 50%.

Do you really think they would care?

2006-05-21T10:29:00.000-07:00

In an Arutz 7 interview, Rabbi Ratzon Arusi, a well-known member of the Chief Rabbinic Council in Israel has stated that certain "red lines" must be demarcated in the battle with the Israeli Supreme Court over various aspects of Israeli society.

Rabbi Arusi is of the opinion that, "we have reached a point at which we must set a red line, and say that if the State of Israel crosses it, the entire religious community will resign from the Knesset. This will truly shake the foundations, even of secular society."

What has yanked Rabbi Arusi's chain?

"The rabbi says that of late there have been several instances that are bringing the said "red line" closer. He named the following:

The Disengagement Plan - which "passed in the Knesset by a formal majority which merely masked the deception on which it was based."

The objections to the Tal Law, which regulates the army exemptions of yeshiva students, but which is still being challenged in the courts and facing public attack. "The secular public doesn't realize that this law deals with a gradual process; they want 'now.' This causes tensions, and could lead to an explosion. Instead of allowing the process to take its course and enable yeshiva students to find their place in society, they push and push, causing the hareidi-religious world's antagonism to increase."

The collapse of official religious institutions. "They did away with the Ministry of Religious Affairs, and didn't establish an alternative. The mikvaot [ritual baths], kashrut, and yeshivot are in mortal danger."'

I certainly understand his frustration, but it seems to me that an act of mass resignation of all the religious MKs would be a declaration that the religious parties have come to the realization that there is no chance of them having any significant effect on Israeli society. It would not "truly shake the foundations", but merely verify an opinion that I have held for a long time. Namely, that it is an axiomatic building block of Medinat Yisrael that the religious sector have no say in what goes on in Israel on a national level.

Many times people call for massive Aliyah of the religious from the West so as to affect change in Israel. While I do think that, since moving to Eretz Yisrael is a Mitzvah, it should be encouraged where feasible, I absolutely do not buy the above rationale for doing so. I truly believe that the Israeli establishment would rather hand over the reigns of power to a moderate Arab than a religious Jew. If there would be a massive wave of religious Aliyah, which actually threatened the secular hegemony, one of two things would happen:

a) The Supreme Court would find some grounds for disqualification of the religious parties, as being theocratic or some other trumped-up allegation.

b) The government would import another few hundred thousand Russian immigrants, or grant citizenship to foreign workers, or some other demographic reshifting to tip the scales in their favor.

In fact, the Israeli media would make merry, and the oligarchs would orgy, as the need to contend with the number one competing vision for the national identity would all but vanish, by the religious parties exiting the Knesset stage left.

Better to be a thorn in their side than a rose on your own grave.

An Open Letter to the Predator

2006-05-19T15:52:00.000-07:00

Anger.

Plain and simple fiery rage.

Nothing else, not yet. It'll have to wait.

Destruction of a child's purity, his innocence, his aidelkeit.

He looks to you, Rebbe, as a model of trust.

Not, O ill one, for a coddle of lust.

Have you forgotten your charge, your mission?

What do you think gives you the right, the permission?

The pain, the hurt, the shame, the fear.

Could they have possibly been any more clear?

The Chillul Hashem. Ashen-faced Rabbanim.

Rebbe, Lo Sikach Ha'Eim Al HaBanim.

Bein Adam LaMakom

2006-05-19T12:00:00.000-07:00

Rashi on Parshas Bechukosai, on the Passuk of וְשִׁלַּחְתִּי דֶבֶר בְּתוֹכְכֶם, וְנִתַּתֶּם בְּיַד-אוֹיֵב quotes the Toras Kohanim that there is a cause-effect relationship between the two halves of this phrase.

Since there would be pestilence, and the Halachah (Bava Kama 82b) is that one may not leave a corpse unburied overnight at all in Yerushalayim*, the pallbearers carrying the deceased out of the besieged city would be attacked by the enemy.

[See Chiddushei R' Meir Simcha M'Dvinsk to Bava Kama there who understands that this Halachah must be kept even at some risk of life. R' Yechiel Michel Tuckachinsky in Ir HaKodesh VeHaMikdash vol. III Perek 11, while not relating directly to the words of RM"S, has serious doubts about that]

The question is - we are talking about terrible sinners, who have committed the most serious Aveiros. And this particular Halachah they keep? [See Sifsei Chachamim to Rashi here]

Some suggestions:

a) It is reminiscent of what a certain Gadol said about the situation of Yahadus in recent times: "Many people think that lighting a Yahrzeit candle is a Mitzvah De'Oraysa and everything else is a Minhag Tov". When it comes to a Meis - people want to keep all the customs. [Interestingly, the Gemara in Bava Kamma says that this Halachah is a "Gemara", which Rashi there explains as "a tradition which has no reason". Apparently, when it comes to the Meis,even sinners will be Makpid on the minutae which have no reason, but when it comes to everything else, they say they need to know the reason.]

b) [And here's the reason for the title of the post]:

It is possible to get so caught up in the maintenance of the Kedushas HaMakom of Yerushalayim, that that becomes the focus of one's Avodah, while forgetting all other avenues of Avodas Hashem. Instead of there being a commitment to "Bain Adam LaMakom", there is a singular emphasis on "Bain Adam La(physical)Makom".

Perhaps it is Min HaShamayim that we generally read this Parashah before Yom Yerushalayim, as a reminder - yes, we have been Zocheh to be able to go to the Kosel, to the Old City of Yerushalayim. But there is a danger of getting engrossed in this holy Makom, and forgetting about the Mekomo Shel Olam. We should continue to bear in mind the unfortunate reality of Galus HaShechinah, and do what we can to allow Hashem to return to Tzion.

Speedily. We could sure use it.

"Yerushalayim Orah Shel Olam, U'mi Orah Shel Yerushalayim, HaKadosh Baruch Hu."

Good Shabbos.

*There is some discussion how this differs from the regular Halachah of not leaving a deceased unburied overnight, which applies universally. One approach is that in Yerushalayim it is prohibited even Lichvodo (to accord honor to the Meis). [Shitta Mekubetzes Bava Kamma there, and Radva"z to Rambam Beis HaBechira 7:14]. There are others.

Which Gemara does this remind you of?

2006-05-18T22:36:00.000-07:00

Taken from Fox News report regarding Iran's nuclear program:

European nations have weighed adding a light-water reactor to a package of incentives meant to persuade Tehran to permanently give up enrichment — or face the threat of U.N. Security Council sanctions.

But in a nationally televised speech before thousands of people in central Iran, Ahmadinejad cast scorn on the proposal.

--> "Do you think you are dealing with a 4-year-old child to whom you can give some walnuts and chocolates and get gold from him?" he said.

(I don't mean to take the Iran situation lightly. Frankly, it scares me. This might be my way of dealing with it.)

Zionism and the Shoah - Part II

2006-05-17T19:03:00.000-07:00

Continued from here

Criticisms of the Labor Zionists activities immediately prior to the Shoah

a) Morris Ernst (1888-1976), a human rights activist with close ties to President Roosevelt, reported the following remarks from the President:
"Well, they're right from their point of view. The Zionist movement knows that Palestine is, and will be for some time, a remittance society. They know that they can raise vast sums for Palestine by saying to donors 'there is no other place this poor Jew can go'". "But", said Roosevelt, "if there's a world political asylum for all people irrespective of race, creed or color, they can't raise their money. Because the people who don't want to give the money will have an excuse and say, 'what do you mean there's no place they can go but Palestine?' They are the preferred wards of the world".

Mr. Ernst set out to test the veracity of what he had heard and informed his Zionist friends of the White House initiative. "I assure you that I was thrown out of parlors of friends of mine. And they said very frankly, and they were right from their point of view. 'Morris', they would say, 'this is treason - you're undermining the Zionist movement.' I'd say, 'Yes, maybe I am. But I am much more interested in a haven for half a million or a million people - oppressed throughout the world." The New York Times editorialist went on to comment: "Why in G-d's name, should the fate of all those unhappy people be subordinated to a single cry of Statehood?" [Elmer Berger (no Zionist sympathizer to be sure) quoted by Rabkin, pg. 180]

b) In July 1938 President Roosevelt convened the Evian Conference to consider the problem of Jewish refugees. At that time a German offer was made to release Jews at $250 per person. The Jewish Agency, headed by Golda Meir, decided to ignore the offer.At this conference, the delegation from the Jewish Agency made no effort to influence the United States or any of the 32 other participating nations to open their gates to admit German Jews. (Rabbi Avigdor Miller, Awake My Glory)

c) Here is an excerpt from a 1938 speech of Haim Weizmann:
"Palestine cannot absorb the Jews of Europe. We want only the best of Jewish youth to come to us. We want only the educated to enter Palestine for the purpose of increasing its culture. The other Jews will have to stay where they are and face whatever fate awaits them. These millions of Jews are dust on the wheels of history and they may have to be blown away. We don't want them pouring into Palestine. We don't want Tel Aviv to become another low-grade ghetto."

{So, I, great-grandson of victims such as these at Auschwitz-Birkenau, must interject and ask:

Who dares ask of me to celebrate the day of the establishment of the State of Israel, with Weizmann as its first President, its face and 'model citizen'?

And who has the unmitigated gall to judge my loyalty to the Jewish people by whether I recite Tachanun on this day or not?

Dost thou perhaps begin to understand the Chazon Ish's statement "Shema Raui Haya LeKov'o Yom Taanis" (Perhaps it would have been more appropriate to establish it (the fifth of Iyyar) as a fast day)?

I would expect that at the very least you respect the genuine feelings of those who cannot wipe away the memory of the ignominious nascent stages of the State-to-be.}

A year earlier, Weizmann had used similar terms: "The elderly will disappear, their fate awaits them. They have no significance, either economic or moral. The elderly must reconcile themselves to their fate."

And human rights advocate Leonard R. Sussman, in The Christian Century publication, April 3 1963, states the unstatable: "Who can tell how many Jewish lives might have been saved from Hitler's claws if these anti-Jewish pressures exerted by Jews had not been effected?" [Rabkin, 181]

UPDATE: These posts make no attempt at dealing with the other side of the argument regarding the attitudes of those mentioned, because I am not aware of what proponents for the other side have to say in their defense, other than, "Yes, this was their position and they were correct in their assessment of the greater good." Or, "We cannot judge that period of history from today's vantage point".

I accept neither of these as valid. The first is terribly immoral, and the second is sickeningly amoral, in the face of evil.

If there are other avenues of defense, I look forward to hearing them.

To be continued...

Shabbos Leniencies of the Chazon Ish II

2006-05-17T12:51:00.000-07:00

Continued from here:

O) The Chazon Ish would go outside on Shabbos with his coat draped around his shoulders, without inserting his arms in the sleeves.

P) The Mishnah Berurah (308:63) writes that clothing which were wet during Bein Hashemashos may not be moved for the duration of Shabbos since we apply the rule of "Miggo De'Iskatzai L'Bain HaShemashos Iskatza'i Lekulei Yoma" (Since it was Muktza during Bein Hashemashos it is Muktza for the entire day) [Note: wet clothes may not be moved because of a Gezeirah Shema Yischot - he may come to squeeze out some of the water].

The Chazon Ish held that laundry which was hanging on a clothesline, even if it was wet, during Bein HaShemashos, may be taken down off of the clothesline (Bari - once they are dry, I assume) if there is a need. Not only for the purpose of wearing the clothes, but even if the clothes were hanging in strong sunlight and getting ruined - one may take them down.

The Chazon Ish also felt that if the situation is that if he would leave the clothing hanging, they would be wet by Motzaei Shabbos, that is considered a legitimate need and one may remove those clothes on Shabbos.

Q) The Mishnah Berurah (318: 113) writes that one should be stringent in not removing food from a cooked dish which is on the fire even if it is completely cooked.

The Chazon Ish writes (Orach Chaim 37:15) that if the pot is on a stovetop which is uncovered, such that if he takes it off of the fire he will not be able to return it (due to the prohibition of Hachazarah on to an uncovered flame), and he wishes to remove some food from the pot while leaving it on the fire - his only option being taking food out while it is still on the fire, one can be lenient and remove food from the pot while it is still on the fire. (Assuming the food is fully cooked).

The reason why the Chazon Ish is lenient in this matter is, since:
1) There is a dispute among the Rishonim whether there is any prohibition at all of Hagassah (stirring) by a fully cooked dish.
2) This is not bona fide stirring, since no mixing is taking place, rather removing food from the pot.

[ The Chazon Ish felt that it was better to do the above than rely on a metal blech as a sufficient cover to allow Hachazarah ]

R) Rabbi Adlerstein reports (on the previous section of this, in the comments) that while the Mishnah Berurah is stringent in placing almost anything into a Keli Sheni, the Chazon Ish allowed placing lemon into a Kli Sheni tea.

S) The Chazon Ish allowed making ice on Shabbos.

T) The Chazon Ish allowed liquid soap, even if viscous, to be used on Shabbos, and there is no prohibition of Memachek.

U) The Mishnah Berurah (326:19) allows the placement of a hot bottle of water on the stomach on Shabbos only in a case of great necessity.

The Chazon Ish held that placing it on one's feet in order to warm up was permitted.

V) The Mishnah Berurah (340: 27) brings the opinion of the Korban Nesanel that one may not attach a safety pin to a garment.

The Chazon Ish questions the Korban Nesanel's view and holds that if in the manner the safety pin is placed it is clear that the attachment is only temporary, with the intent to remove it, there is no prohibition, since it is not considered Tofer.

Based on the Chazon Ish, it is permitted to use a safety pin to attach a pacifier to a young child's garment, if it is done in a temporary fashion.

Rav Lau for President?

2006-05-16T14:30:00.000-07:00

Harry posts today about PM Olmert perhaps backing Rav Yisrael Meir Lau, the highly respected Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv, as his choice candidate for President of Israel.

Harry says that this indicates that the claims of PM Olmert being anti-Torah are thus dispelled.

I tend to disagree.

Call me cynical, but I see it as nothing more than a brilliant tactical move. Get a well-respected consensus Rabbi to calm the people down with soothing Achdus talk when Olmert carries out his disengagement plan which primarily targets the religious Zionists - the circle where Rav Lau is most respected. The President can do nothing but promote unity and tone down any threats of violence or a second Amona. It will go down as smoothly as PM Olmert can hope for, with Rav Lau condemning the violence in no uncertain terms. He will have no choice, as the "Mamlachtiut" of the position demands no less.

I would strongly urge the aristocratic Rav Lau to turn down the unenviable job of having to rubber stamp an action which may turn out to be a great Bechiya L'Dorot, especially in light of the grave, unresolved, humanitarian injustices committed against those who were expelled from Gush Katif.

Where is there an allusion to electronically delivered Divrei Torah?

2006-05-16T14:18:00.000-07:00

This week's Torah reading!

"Im Bechukosai Teileichu"

Zogt Rashi:

"Shetihyu e-mailim BaTorah"

Artscroll Gemaras and the Holy Grail

2006-05-16T13:21:00.000-07:00

This past Shabbos, someone asked me if there is a problem using a Kiddush cup with Hashem's Name engraved on it. (I'm not a Posek, but occasionally people ask me questions just on a preliminary basis, before they ask a Rav. I guess I look Rabbinic.)

At first thought, I wasn't sure if there would be any problem.

Here's where the ArtScroll Gemara project comes in. I teach Gemara Beki'us to twelfth graders for night Seder. The guys tend to use the Artscroll Gemaras as a bit of a crutch, so I wanted to teach a Massechta that had not yet been elucidated by ArtScroll. Massechet Arachin, being one of the last to come out, had not yet been published in the beginning of that year, so Arachin it was. The guys were a bit shocked that we were going to learn a Massechta from Seder Kodashim, but it's short enough to easily cover in a year, and it has some important Sugyas such as regarding Chinuch, Lashon Hara, Tochacha, Shira in the Beis HaMikdash, and others. It also goes a very long way in getting a good understanding of this week's Behar- Bechukosai Torah reading.

[Of course, they had the galleys from the publishing house by the time January rolled around. Some boys had an 'in' with one of the ArtScroll board members. I was a bit upset, but at least I got four months of non-crutch Gemara in. ]

So the Gemara on Arachin 6a, taught due to it being at the end of the Schottenstein Talmud project, flashed through my head. The Gemara says that if there is a Shem Hashem written on a handle of a vessel or the legs of a bed, one should remove that section with the Shem and bury it, and then one may use the rest of the vessel.

The Rambam (Yesodei HaTorah 6:6) and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 276:13) decide the Halachah as follows:
"A vessel which has a Name of Hashem on it - one should cut off the section which has the Shem and bury that section".

[The Rambam adds that one should also excise the part of a metal vessel which has the Shem engraved upon it].

The Pischei Teshuvah (Yoreh Deah 276:(25)) brings a responsa from his grandfather, the Panim Me'iros:

An undertaker society (Chevra Kadisha, I'm assuming) had glass cups which were used for drinking, upon which were engraved some Pessukim with the Shem Havay"a as it is spelled, and one Rav prohibited them from drinking from it, as explicit in Shulchan Aruch.

He (the Panim Me'iros) discusses this point. In truth the language of the Gemara is "on handles of vessels". One could claim that (the problem is) specifically on the handles, which is a Makom Bizayon, since they are constantly being handled, and it may come to be erased, and so too on the legs of a bed (is a Makom Bizayon), but on a respectable vessel one can say that it is permissible to use since a Shem when not in its place (such as in a Sefer Torah or Tefillin) does not consecrate the entire vessel, and there is only a prohibition of using it because of Bizayon of the Shem, but where there is no concern of Bizayon of the Shem it is permissible to make use of the vessel.

If so there is a difficulty as to why the Rambam and the Mechaber write a vessel which has (a Shem) written upon it.

At any rate, the Panim Me'iros concludes that one should not be lenient in drinking from those vessels, and he leans toward the solution of wrapping gold or silk bands around the area which has the Shem, and then one may use these vessels with no need for concern.

Seemingly the same should apply to the Kiddush cup I was asked about.

If anyone out there has other information about this - share it!

[DO NOT RELY ON ANYTHING YOU SEE HERE LEHALACHAH. ASK YOUR RAV!]

Is "Hotmail" Muttar?

2006-05-15T11:36:00.000-07:00

I have a hotmail email account, which I am switching away from. I don't know if it's like this in all locales, but I get popup ads just alongside my inbox that are unsavory.

It would seem that if there is another option for web-based email, it should be used, in line with the Gemara that states that one should not go by the women doing laundry in the river when there is another option, even if he does not gaze at the women.

That's why I switched my email account on this blog to gmail, which is Kosher (and much better anyway).

I have two gmail invites left. If anyone wants one to switch away from hotmail, or some other problematic one, email me.

Zionism and the Shoah - Part I

2006-05-14T14:53:00.000-07:00

Caveats:

a) The Shoah is a highly emotionally charged subject. The criticisms laid out here may be painful to those who have been scarred, either directly or as descendants of survivors, by this most traumatic event, who find solace in the existence of a Medinah that they can call home, and that gives them a sense of Jewish pride. If you feel that criticism in this realm is painful, please accept my profuse apologies in advance, as I beg you to understand that this is not, in the slightest, my motivation for putting forth this post.

b) This post is not at all any kind of mitigation of the blood-guilt of the accursed Nazis and their collaborators, Yemach Shemam. We still await G-d's vengance upon the evildoers.

c) This is not a "Bari" post. It is a "Shema". Meaning, that the angle presented here is not one which can be empirically proven. It is an approach that some theologians and historians have taken as highly plausible, and should be part of any debate, without it being subject to summary dismissal as 'idiocy'.

d) It is important to point out that the State of Israel, until the rise to power of Menachem Begin in 1977, was run with a heavy hand in terms of which materials were permitted to be read. One could not purchase a copy of "Perfidy", by Ben Hecht, which delineates the severe actions of some of the Labor Zionist leaders in the hindrance of rescue efforts during the Shoah. The public agenda was set, firmly, by the Bolshevik Labor Zionists. Therefore, an entire generation of Jews were raised on the cause-effect relationship spin most desirable to the Zionists. Namely, that the Shoah was an inevitable outcome of the lack of a National Homeland, and that the National Homeland is the best guarantee of "Never Again". This point is abetted by some, such as Rav Herzog, claiming that this is the Third Commonwealth, which is guaranteed by the Neviim never to be destroyed. However, it is clear that there are those who debate both this cause-effect relationship, and the veracity of the 'invincibility' claim. Many luminaries, from Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch down to HaRav Shach, deny the claim that the present Yishuv in Eretz Yisrael was, in the 1930s, or is, at present, immune to catastrophe, irrespective of the depths of sin we may sink to.

e) I do not wish to get into the theological placing of blame for the Shoah on the Zionist movement and the massive inroads they made into the hearts and minds of our Nation, leading them down the destructive path of Kefirah, Kochi Ve'Otzem Yadi, socialism, nationalism, and other idolatries. It does bear remembering, though, that there were great leaders of our nation who felt this way, and it is worthwhile reminding ourselves of the stinging words of Rav Elchanan Wasserman in Be'Ikvesa DeMeshichah:

"Nowadays, the Jews have chosen two "idols" upon which they offer up their sacrifices. They are Socialism and Nationalism... These two forms of idol-worship have poisoned the minds and the hearts of Hebrew Youth. Each one has its tribe of false prophets in the shape of writers and speakers, who do their work to perfection. A miracle has happened: in Heaven these two idolatries have been merged into one - National-Socialism. There has been formed from them a fearful rod of wrath which hits at the Jews in all corners of the globe. The abominations to which we have bowed down strike back at us."

What is 100% clear, in my view, is that this irrational, bloodthirsty, sick, vengeful, sadistic murderous Europe-wide mega-pogrom was not due to the political and military powerlessness of the Jews, but due to the severity of the Aveiros committed by Jews. To suggest otherwise borders on heresy.

Singling out which particular iniquities brought this about is where we lack clarity, and I bring up R' Elchonon's view merely as one striking vantage-point where the Middah Kenegged Middah fairly stares one in the face. I acknowledge that there are others.

Criticisms of Zionist activities prior to the Shoah:

a) Theodore Herzl and Max Nordau were actively propogating the idea, among European leaders, that "the Jews constitute a foreign, destructive element for the countries in which they live". A minister in the government of the Emperor Franz-Joseph is quoted as follows: "If the malicious propaganda that would cast Jews as a danger to the world and as revolutionaries continues, instead of establishing a Jewish State the Zionists will bring about the destruction of the Jews of Europe". [Prof. Yakov Rabkin, A Threat From Within, pg. 174]

b) Prior to the war, in Ze'ev Jabotinsky's broadcasts over the official polish radio and in articles published in the press in several countries, he lashed out at Germany. Nazi leaders mentioned his articles published and speeches as those of someone who had quite openly "revealed the plans of his race" and who, "to the horror of the other Elders of Zion, spoke more plainly than they would have liked" (Schechtman, Fighter and Prophet; quoted by Rabkin, 176)

c) "At that time these unthinking (the Jewish “leaders”) rose up in their places of security in the free lands and they cast ridicule upon Hitler and enraged him by their irresponsible demonstrations and speeches…and they kindled his wrath by the reckless boycott. All this was in the year 5693 (1933) when the nations were still at peace with this evil one (Hitler) and there was no way other than humility and negotiation by persuasion. But these self-ordained leaders acted according to the opposite of wisdom and the opposite of the oath imposed by G-d (not to arouse the nations by open opposition), and they had a great share in arousing the frenzy of the mad dog to the highest degree” (Min Hametzar, Rabbi M. D. Weismandl).

[I should note that this is hard to comprehend due to our sensibilities being offended by being "led as sheep to the slaughter". But we may want to consider viewing this period of time (1933) as a lone sheep biting one of the rabid, slumbering wolves ready to pounce on her]

d) Several influential Rabbis, including Rav Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg, who taught at the time at the prestigious Berlin Rabbinerseminar, opposed the boycott and the anti-German propaganda that accompanied it, both of which they saw as dangerous and irresponsible. The American historian Marc Shapiro writes that a considerable number of rabbinic authorities, including Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzensky, Rav Elchanan, and the Satmar Rebbe, rejected the boycott as an attitude contrary to Jewish tradition. [Rabkin, 176]

e) Rabbi Yosef Zvi Duschinsky, representing the traditional Ashkenazi community before the UN in 1947, declared that Zionism had been the root cause of violence and friction with the [local - my own (Bari's) addition, as per testimony of Jewish inhabitants of Chevron] Arabs , which forced the British government to limit Jewish immigration to Palestine from 1930 on. Zionism is thus presented as an obstacle to the salvation of millions of Jews from the Shoah:

"the colossal massacre of millions of of our brethren at the hands of Nazism during the second world war might have been averted to a very substantial degree for many of them might have been able to live peacefully in the Holy Land as there would not have been the slightest justification for the limitations of Jewish immigration as have in fact been enforced during the last decade." (Rabbi Duschinsky's statement at the UN, as quoted by Rabkin, 174).

To be continued...

Rabbeinu Yonah on Darfur

2006-05-12T11:25:00.000-07:00

Rabbeinu Yonah, Commentary to Pirkei Avos, Chapter 3 Mishnah 2:

"Rabbi Chaninah Segan HaKohanim says, pray for the welfare of the monarchy, for were it not for trepidation of it, a man would swallow his fellow alive."

'This statement is meant to express the idea that a person should daven for peace in the entire world and to feel pain when others suffer; and this is the way of the Tzaddikim, as David Alav HaShalom, said (Tehillim 35:13) "And I, when they take ill, my clothes are sackcloth, I afflict my soul with fasting".

For a person should not make his supplications and requests solely for his own needs, rather he should daven for all human beings that they be in a peaceful environment, and when there is peace of the monarchy, there is peace in the world.'

Amen Kein Yehi Ratzon.

Good Shabbos.

The Problematic Legacy of Rav Soloveitchik

2006-05-11T12:40:00.000-07:00

The orange embers of a thirteen year old controversy have been fanned. The echoes of the '93 Jewish Observer obituary of 'Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik Zichrono Livracha' have reverberated once again, for those with an ear to the J-Blog world to hear, with the aid of some amplification by those most offended by the obituary, or others who would speak in their name.

At the outset I want to express my opinion that the timing for such an obituary, which undeniably contains many points which are 'not-so-subtle' digs, as R' Gil calls them, was unfortunate and insensitive.

However, since thirteen years have passed since then, let us examine a sore point in the legacy of this great Rosh Yeshiva, and see if we can understand some of the frustration of those who mis-utilized the occasion of his passing to paint a less-than-perfect picture of the man so many thousands refer to as their Rav.

Yes, many thousands. And among them, people who feel they have absorbed the core elements of Rav Soloveitchik's philosophy in regard to Orthodoxy's role in the modern world. People who, in the view of the overwhelming majority of the Roshei Yeshiva who sat at his feet and toiled over his Torah thoughts, have distorted what 'the Rav' stood for both beyond recognition, and beyond the pale of Torah-true Orthodoxy.

"Edah Conference Claims Legacy of Rav Soloveitchik" blared a February of '99 headline of the Forward newspaper. Edah, guilty, in the view of five of the most prominent Roshei Yeshiva at RIETS, of Ziyuf HaTorah, breaches of Tzenius, and a haughty accusatory finger pointed at Rov Minyan Ubinyan of Shomrei Torah UMitzvos as somehow lacking sensitivity to the need for additional avenues of 'spirtiual expression and equality' for the women who feel 'unfulfilled' in their traditional, box-seat-in-Olam-Haba-earning, role.

Advocates who rush to the defense of Rav Soloveitchik will be quick to point out that many other Roshei Yeshiva have had Talmidim espouse philosophies incongruous with that of their mentors. They will point to such figures as Philip Berg of the Kabbalah Center, attendee of Torah VaDaas; a long list of Conservative Rabbis hailing from the hoary Torah institutions of America; and perhaps even hark back to the pre-War era of Europe, citing name after name of students of Volozhin, Slabodka, the Mirrer Yeshiva, and other citadels of Torah who were decidedly not representative of what those Roshei Yeshiva stood for.

These advocates would be missing the point entirely. Of course many Talmidim of the greatest Roshei Yeshiva in history have fallen into philosophies antithetical to, or distorting of, that of the Torah. But not one of them would lay claim to being the true bearers of the legacy of those Torah leaders. Bialik would never claim to be the true banner bearer for the Netziv, nor Berg for Rav Gedaliah Schorr, nor any Conservative Rabbi alumnus of Chaim Berlin for Rav Hutner.

Saul Berman and his group unabashedly lay claim to being the true Torah heirs to Rav Soloveitchik's weltanschaung.

The ability of MeZayefei Torah to lay claim to being his legatees, leaving the right wing segment of his Talmidim unable to categorically refute this claim as illegitimate, is testimony to the veracity of the assertion that Rav Soloveitchik did not do enough to cement his legacy as an unyielding defender of the Messorah.

Let us closely examine one element of Rabbi Moshe Tendler's indignant refutation of the 'digs' at Rav Soloveitchik sprinkled throughout this obituary:

"g) Wolpin cites the Jewish Week -an anti-Torah, Orthodox-bashing publication - to denigrate the Rav as one who vacillated on major issues confronting the Jewish community. In his zeal to belittle the Torah and its learners, he is prepared to accept the Jewish Week as a source of truth. How cheap can you get!?"

I understand this. But, where is the refutation of the substance of this claim? Wolpin is quoting the Jewish Week as an apt expression of his own feelings, not as a source for factual information. Why was the assertion not disproved in toto, instead of questioning the use of this publication as the source for it?

Apparently, there is some difficulty in expressing a categorical denial of the seeming lack of zeal on the part of this Marbitz Torah par excellence (no cynicism intended at all) to discredit all illegitmate pretenders to the mantle of leadership of the Modern Orthodox world.

Unfortunately, it seems that the wild-growing weeds not tended to by this masterful gardener of the 'vineyard of Yavneh', will mar the beauty of the Orthodox landscape for the foreseeable future.

Jak Black is back! (For a guest post, that is)

2006-05-11T09:24:00.000-07:00

On Burke and Barak - The Tal Law

In his breathtaking Reflections on the Revolution in France, Rabbi Edmund Burke writes:

When men are encouraged to go into a certain mode of life by the existing laws, and protected in that mode as in a lawful occupation – when they have accommodated all their ideas and all their habits to it – when the law had long made their adherence to its rules a ground of reputation, and their departure from them a ground of disgrace and even of penalty – I am sure it is unjust in legislature, by an arbitrary act, to offer a sudden violence to their minds and their feelings; forcibly to degrade them from their state and condition, and to stigmatize with shame and infamy that character, and those customs, which before had been made the measure of their happiness and honor. If to this be added an expulsion from their habitations, and a confiscation of all their goods, I am not sagacious enough to discover how this despotic sport, made of the feelings, consciences, prejudices and properties of men, can be discriminated from the rankest tyranny.

Well said!

It isn’t often that I’m pleasantly surprised by the Supreme Court of Justice Aharon Barak. After all, he was the one who wrote, “The autonomy of the individual…exists because it is recognized by law (!!). The moment that a certain realm is not justiciable [sic] the wielder of power does whatever he wants. [The judge] must sometimes depart from the confines of his legal system and channel into it fundamental values not yet found in it. The world is filled with law.”

Nevertheless, I was somewhat surprised to find that the Court ruled today that the Tal Law, which regulates military conscription for Yeshiva students, will stand. Of course, there is no question that the Court acted out of practical considerations. The dictates of their activist judicial mentality would certainly have been to rule the law “illegal;” the ruling itself adds the breathless caveat that the Law “causes serious harm to the human dignity of the majority who are obligated to do national service.” Nevertheless, the fact that the court was pragmatic enough to see the implausibility of drafting thousands of Yeshiva guys to the army (as well as the IDF’s well-publicized stance that they are simply not equipped to deal with them) is a tiny step in the right direction.

I want to make clear, by the way, that this post does not deal with the question of the intrinsic rightness of the Tal Law, or the question of a society that is having difficulty supporting itself. It is my opinion that even those who disagree with some aspects of Chareidi society should be pleased by the ruling of the court. A cancellation of the Tal Law would, at this point, only generate more entrenchment on the part of a society that already feels under siege. Why trifle with things when (natural) forces are already moving them in the right direction?

And certainly it is a great day for those who wish to be (civilly) governed by the rule of law rather than demented judicial activists.

Shabbos Leniencies Of the Chazon Ish I

2006-05-10T07:21:00.000-07:00

The general perception of the Chazon Ish is that he was a major Machmir in a lot of areas of Halachah. A more famous example is his prohibition of using a blech as a valid covering for the stove on Shabbos. There are many, many others.

But there are some interesting Kullos that the Chazon Ish has as well.

These are excerpted from a Sefer called "Daas HaChazon Ish".

(Please consult your Rav before relying on any of this)

A) Kavod Shabbos:

The Chazon Ish held that where there is no Oneg Shabbos, there is no Kavod Shabbos. Therefore, if someone wears a garment in honor of Shabbos but it is difficult for him to wear due to the heat, there is no Kavod Shabbos.

(Rav Nissim Karelitz elucidated this. This does not mean that if he has no Oneg Shabbos in wearing the garment, he will have no fulfillment of Kavod Shabbos. Rather, if he does wear it, he is fulfilling Kavod Shabbos. What the Chazon Ish means is if he takes off the garment, it is not considered doing something in violation of Kavod Shabbos.)

[Note: Compare MiPeninei HaRav by Rav Hershel Schachter (pg. 68), that Rav Soloveitchik once chastised an attendee of a Shiur of his in Boston for not wearing a suit jacket on a particularly hot day when going to Shul. [The fellow had left his jacket in Shul after Shacharis and intended to put it on for Minchah. Rav Soloveitchik felt this improper, even on a hot day])

B) Hatmana of one k'li in another:

The Mishnah Berurah (258:2) writes, quoting the Acharonim, that it is prohibited to place a vessel with a liquid or a food into another vessel which has hot water, where the vessel containing the liquid or food is completely submerged, because of the prohibition of Hatmanah. The Chazon Ish (O.C. 37:32) held that it is not Derech Hatmanah to immerse one Kli in another.

Based on this, according to the Chazon Ish there is no problem to insert a food wrapped in plastic or paper into a pot with food, whether placed into the food or on top of the food. However, when the food is wrapped in aluminum foil, there is some doubt that this may be considered Hatmanah (when placed into the pot or on top of the pot cover), since aluminum foil may be considered a Davar HaMatmin.

Cutting Nails (Erev Shabbos)

C) One need not cut his toenails out of order. The laws as brought down in Orach Chaim 260 apply only to the fingernails. [Rav Chaim Kanievsky explained that this is because the Avudraham, who is the source for this practice, only mentions the hands]

D) The Chazon Ish is quoted as saying that one who removes one fingernail with his teeth does not need to wash his hands. Rav Chaim Kanievsky was unsure whether this was because it was one fingernail or because it was done with the teeth. Rav Seraya Deblitzky felt that in all probability it was because it was done with the teeth, since this is not the normal way to remove nails.

Shabbos Night davening:

E) On Friday night the Chazon Ish would daven Shemoneh Esrei with the Tzibbur and would recite Kerias Shema afterward. The reason for this was that the Chazon Ish spent a long time reciting Shema and he did not want the Tzibbur to have to wait for him.

F) The Mishnah Berurah (268:19) writes that one should be meticulous to recite Vayechulu with the Tzibbur, because this recital is a testimony on the creation of heaven and earth. At the very least, it should be recited with one other person, not alone. The Chazon Ish held that one davening alone need not be Mehader to recite it along with someone else.

Kiddush:

G) One who did not hear the Nun of the word HaGefen has nevertheless been Yotzei since he heard the general topic of the Beracha.

[The Chazon Ish did not lift the cup of Kiddush. He was too weak to do so. (!)]

H) The Chazon Ish told an individual who was informed by his doctors that his diet was restricted to vegetables alone, that regarding Kiddush Bemakom Se'udah, the vegetables that he would eat count as a Seudah. Rav Chaim Kanievsky brought support for this position from the Passuk in Parshas Beshalach (Shemos 16:4) - "Behold I am raining down 'bread' from the heavens", and there the Bnei Yisrael had Man, not bread, and yet the Torah refers to it as bread. Since that was the food they had, it counted as bread. In Massechta Shabbos the Gemara derives from this Passuk that one must eat 3 meals on Shabbos. Hence, since this was their food it was considered a Seudah just like bread.

I) Reading the Haftarah:

The Mishnah Berurah (284:1) writes that when there is no parchment Sefer to read the Haftarah from, the opinion of the Magen Avraham and the Eliya Rabba is to read from a printed Sefer which has the entire book of that particular Navi one is reading from (e.g. the entire Sefer Yeshayahu), and not from a Chumash which has only the segment which is being read.

The Chazon Ish held that when there is no parchment Sefer there is no difference at all between reading from a printed Navi which has the entire Sefer or a Chumash which contains the Haftarah segment. In the Shul where the Chazon Ish davened, if there was no parchment they read from a Chumash.

J) Shnayim Mikra

The Shulchan Aruch (285:2) writes that there is a Mitzvah Min HaMuvchar to complete Shnayim Mikra prior to the meal on Shabbos. The Mishnah Berurah(ibid.,9) writes that the reason is based on the Medrash, where Rebbi tells his sons not to eat bread on Shabbos before completing the Parshah.

The Chazon Ish felt that this Medrash means that Seudah Shelishis should not be eaten prior to completing the Parshah, and the Chazon Ish himself was Machmir to be done before the second meal.

K) Kiddush during the day:

The Chazon Ish would say only the Beracha of Borei Peri HaGefen, with no preamble of Veshamru or Zachor. This was also the custom of the GRA.

L) On Rosh Chodesh and the like, where if one forgets Yaaleh VeYavo, he must repeat Shemoneh Esrei, nevertheless the Shemoneh Esrei in which Yaaleh VeYavo was omitted counts toward the fulfillment of 100 daily Berachos. (See Kehillos Yaakov, Steipler, Berachos Simman 16)

M) The Chazon Ish did not cover the Challos for Seudah Shelishis, as he held this Din applies only to the first two meals.

N) The Chazon Ish held that there is no need to be Machmir like Rabbeinu Tam in terms of the Zman of Motzaei Shabbos. He held one may perform even Melachos De'Oraysa prior to Rabbeinu Tam's Zman.

One whose family custom was to keep the Zman of Rabbeinu Tam was told that he did not even require Hattaras Nedarim to stop keeping this Zman. It seems the Chazon Ish held the GRA's proofs in this matter to be conclusive.

Why the right wing Chinuch system is the best option

2006-05-09T09:19:00.000-07:00

Every once in a while, when R' Gil has some gripe about the Charedi state of affairs vis-a-vis Chinuch, (for him, that's once every short while) a few commenters start sounding off like yentas, albeit without all of the inflection: "Nuuuuu, Gil, so ven are you going to send your kids to the MO school?"

Occasionally he responds. Usually he ignores the rant. Like he says, he doesn't feel the need to always have the last word. Good on ya, R' Gil.

Here's why the school system that I send my kids to, is the Charedi one.

Surprisingly, perhaps, I'm going to quote from Memories of a Giant - Eulogies in Memory of Rabbi Dr. Joseph B. Soloveichik zt"l.

In the introduction to that book, Rabbi Reuven Ziegler is quoted as follows:

"I believe that the Rav's primary reason for not writing about these subjects (i.e. intellectual challenges to Judaism, such as Biblical criticism, evolution, etc.) was that he simply did not regard them as the most important issues or the main problems facing Judaism in the modern world. The main arena of combat, in his opinion, was the soul, not the mind. We saw that the Rav believed that the G-d-experience lies at the core of faith, and the role of the intellect is only a posteriori - it is both ancillary and subsequent to the faith-experience. Therefore, there is no point in addressing questions of the intellect before one establishes within himself an experiential basis of faith."

I accept his viewpoint unreservedly. There are indeed questions that may niggle at our minds and challenge our belief system. What I need for my kids at their developmental stages, far more than their ability to tackle thse questions (which even people who have ostensibly learned the tools of the "Da Mah SheTashiv" trade have a hard time doing), is to develop a sense of conviction that there are answers.

When I called Rav Shmuel Kamenetzky Shlit"a regarding what he thought I should tell my students regarding Torah and Science issues, the first words out of his mouth were "Mir hobben nisht kein kashyes" ("We don't have any questions"). Cynics may say that this means that questions are off limits. They'd be wrong. What it means is that the resevoirs of Emunah in the veracity of the Torah are so deep, as a result of decades of sensing the harmony between the body and soul, the mundane and Divine, the congruence of a Torah lifestyle with our cognizance of our core being, that they drown the potential destruction of Emunah any particular question may bring to bear.

There really is no point in discussing how Judaism responds to these challenges, without developing an emotional bond with Hashem and His Torah. Because the answers to these questions will, at most, be satisfactory. Not uber-inspiring illuminating flashes of truth. So, "fun der Kashya shtarbt men nisht, obber fun der Teirutz lebt men nisht!" ("From the question one won't die, but from the answer one won't live!")

That elusive eureka will, far more likely, come from the soul, not the mind. There will be, every so often, a skipped heartbeat of ecstatic revelation, of sublime bliss, of sense of mission, when the soul's thirst for a particular hue of spiritual accomplishment has been slaked.

I do not mean to suggest that this sense of spiritual thrill is the be-all and end-all of one's Ruchniyus quest. If to the best of one's intellectual capacity, after painstakingly exploring a particular question, alone and with others who command expertise in that area of concern, the questioner is left with answers that are not merely implausible, but factually impossible, he must live his life assuming that the impossible is indeed impossible. But I know of no such question. I have never heard or seen a question which falsifies Yahadus to the point of impossibilty.

What I have seen are questions for which the answers which we can provide are, perhaps, less plausible than the alternative, in the absence of other evidence. Reading, for example, The Camel, the Hare and the Hyrax, leaves one with the sense that there is some need for reinterpretation of certain sources to arrive at an intellectually satisfying solution. My willingness to accept this, and not even consider 'chucking' Yahadus, will be determined primarily by the depth of Emunah I possess. If I had none, I would opt for what may seem, prima facie, the most plausible suggestion. Maybe the Torah is deficient, G-d forbid. But the level of my experiential conviction in the veracity of G-d existence and the truth of His Torah, due to years of study of Gemara, Mussar, meaningful davening, a sense of becoming a more complete, high-caliber, individual is high enough, Baruch Hashem, that the seemingly, perhaps, less plausible becomes the truth.

So when choosing a school to send my children too, the absolutely critically important issue to ascertain is: "Where will my child be best instilled with the 'Lev HaTorah', with wellsprings of faith that will not dry up in the face of surmountable challenges?" And not only that, these wellsprings will propel him to better meet his spiritual potential. After all, Rachmana Libba Ba'i.

My answer is the Charedi school system. With all of its problems, the Mesorah of the Hergeshim of Yiddishkeit, the holiness of a young Tinok Shel Beis Rabban, the instilling of the sense of invincibility of the truth of Torah and her Chachamim, dwells in the Charedi school system.

I do not know of the Modern Orthodox equivalent of "Zogt der heilige Rashi".

Mixed Seating Saved My Life

2006-05-08T14:54:00.000-07:00

Literally.

As in, my G-d-breath would have blown her goodbye kisses and bid her farewells to the lunk of flesh that had housed her, with inconsistent nourishment provided, for 23 years, had I not sat next to a woman.

OK, my wife. But this is a right-wing Charedi blog, so for mixed seating purposes, she's a woman.

It was the first Pesach after our marriage. My wife was 4 months pregnant with our first kid. Life as a young Kollel couple living in a 'Dirah' in Kerem B'Yavneh was about what you'd expect - small Kollel stipend, mid-size [ he might read this ] check from the shver, pinching Agorot. (When we returned home after that Pesach, we found that the cockroaches that would occasionally drop in had starved to death. Should give you an idea.)

We were in Yerushalayim for Pesach, and we decided to take one of the many busses leaving on Chol HaMoed down to Me'aras HaMachpelah. These were specially organized tour busses that were to carry all stripes of long-Peyosed people to the Me'ara. I wasn't one of those types, but I suspect most of the people on the bus knew that I wasn't the one who normally gets the stares.

Pleasant enough ride.

(I won't describe the looks some of the Hamas'nik Arabs lining the shops on either side of the street gave us as we walked down from the bus stop to the Me'ara. The blend of malice and lust in their eyes is too stomach-churning to do justice to.)

It was enthralling to see the throngs of Yidden davening at Kivrei Avos that Pesach, and we davened that our future son, BeSha'ah Tovah, follow in the footsteps of the Bechir HaAvos, Yaakov, whom we knew was going to be his namesake.

For the journey back, we decided to get on a chartered bus that was carrying Chassidish families back to Bnei Berak. A few other people, who seriously stuck out in that crowd, were going to get off in Kiryat Arba, and my wife and I (who semi-stuck out in some non-descript-far-from-Bnei Berakish outfit, and a black velvet yarmulke with a short-jacket-suit and-tie, respectively) were going to alight just outside of Efrat, where my in-laws resided at the time.

You realize that this bus ride predates the Charedi counterpart of Rosa Parks (she's probably out there somewhere, getting some kind of Heter Horaah by some name or another, and she'll have her own blog soon too), and the men were sitting in the front, women in the back. The oysvurfs from Kiryat Arba could sit mixed in the middle of the bus until they got off.

It turned out that I had a spot with the men, but from the middle to the back was packed solid by the time we got on. So chivalrous Bari sat in the front, having gone through a fatigue-inducing day in the scorching heat of the Chevron sun, while pregnant Bariette stood. It was only a few short minutes ride to Kiryat Arba anyhow.

When the oysvurfs got off, I was faced with a dilemma. My wife came to the front (GASP!) and motioned to me that there were some seats available in the oysvurf section. Just in front of the rear doors. I'm sitting at a window seat, where I can rest my weary head, next to a nice Chassidishe middle-aged guy, and I hesitate. Should I align myself with the Srugies who sit mixed, and get the stares and glares, or gently tell my wife I'm staying put with the homeys, and she can sit by herself in the row right in front of the women only section, which, B'Dieved, is the women only section.

This being Shanah Rishonah, and feeling bad that my starting-to-show wife was standing for a bit, I went for the stares. Anyhow, I wasn't sure I'd get the stares, but I was sure my wife would prefer that I sat with her. Bari VeShema, Bari Adif.

"Slichah, Ani Rotzeh LaAvor Achorah".

Eyebrows raised a bit, but that's all.

Nu,nu. I'm Passul Le'Eidus by the Eidah Charedis. Could be worse.

Much worse.

As we rounded a bend on the road, passing by Beit Ummar (due north of Chevron), an explosion, and a wall of fire rose in the fourth row of the bus. Screams and pandemonium reigned supreme.

NAHAG, TIFTACH ET HADELET!!!

This was the first Intifada period, and busses were getting blown up at a sickening clip. Everyone on the bus thought that this was it. My wife tells me I let out a primal scream and turned, quicker than Bryant around his man, to get to the back doors (which were right behind me) and out of that inferno of a bus. My jacket got caught on a pole there - and I was very stuck. I thought I might get trampled.

All this took place in the first 7 tenths of a second after the explosion. After that, the driver realized that this was a Molotov cocktail that had smashed the window and landed on the lap of one of the Chassidishe teenagers in front. The kid's father smothered the flames quickly with his beketche, but he was still hurt pretty badly. Two other people were lightly injured.

The driver thought fast and did not stop nor open the doors, because who knew what kind of ambush, if any, the Yishmaelim had in store. He drove quicker than blazes to the next army checkpost. One very frightened teenaged girl forced the back doors open and jumped out, breaking her leg. The army picked her up,Baruch Hashem. That could have been a disaster for her.

Once we reached the checkpost, the driver let everyone off to catch their breath, and to let those in need of medical attention receive it. I gave my wife a big hug, and we looked at the bus to see what exactly had happened.

It turns out that the Molotov cocktail had gone through the window right where I had been sitting!

Meaning, where I was going to rest my head.

It would have hit my head, gashed it open, and exploded. Prognosis - poor. Very.

Which reminds me of what my great-uncle Rav Ahron Soloveitchik would say when asked what he thought of mixed seating at weddings:

"How do you tink I met Ella?"

(Being that this is a right-wing blog, you can figure out the caveat for yourself).

Israel in the crosshairs

2006-05-08T13:01:00.000-07:00

A must-read opinion piece by Charles Krauthammer (link)

Excerpt:

The establishment of Israel was a Jewish declaration to a world that had allowed the Holocaust to happen -- after Hitler had made his intentions perfectly clear -- that the Jews would henceforth resort to self-protection and self-reliance. And so they have, building a Jewish army, the first in 2,000 years, that prevailed in three great wars of survival (1948-49, 1967 and 1973).
But, in a cruel historical irony, doing so required concentration -- putting all the eggs back in one basket, a tiny territory hard by the Mediterranean, eight miles wide at its waist. A tempting target for those who would finish Hitler's work.

A three course meal gathered from the Goren

2006-05-08T08:56:00.000-07:00

The appetizer - served by the Chazon Ish:

"This fellow does not know how to learn, and we will yet suffer Tzaros from him" [Chazon Ish]

The main course - served by the Steipler Gaon:

"In the elections in a city in Poland, most of the delegates elected were irreligious, as was the Rosh HaKahal. One of the clerks of the community approached them and told them: 'The Rabbis make Halachic decisions based on the Shulchan Aruch, without taking the opinion of the delegates and the Rosh HaKahal into account at all, and yet you keep silent. Select me, and I will arrange Piskei Halachah in accordance with your wishes. And the matter was good in the eyes of the Rosh HaKahal and the delegates and "they made the tree".

No more than a few days passed, and the new official received an order that on the morrow there will be a court case against Ploni ben Ploni with forged papers and false witnesses. The official was to make certain, at all costs, that all of the contracts and documents that were to be presented before him by the prosecutor be validated. The Rabbi responded: "Do not worry, I am at your disposal".

And on the morrow, the "Rabbi" took his two youths, the bearers of his weapons, and he clothed them in the garb of Dayyanim and he went to the community gathering place to adjudicate, as per his orders. The prosecutor came before him and he presented his claims against PB"P, and he presented papers and documents as evidence. The defendant said that all this never happened, I never had any business with the claimant and it is all a lie and a forgery. And the Rabbi stated: "We have the documents before us! How dare you lie before the Great Beis Din!"

PB"P looked at the documents and he saw that the witnesses who had signed upon these documents were famous Ganavim from the underworld. And he said to the "Rabbi": 'These are false witnesses, famous Ganavim, and no Beis Din ever accepts their words, and every infant knows that for a few pennies they sign anything they are asked to sign, and they are complete Reshaim!"

And the "Rabbi" responded - how dare you spread malicious lies on Kosher Jews, and how did you dare suggest that I disqualify them based on what infants say! Chas VeSholom! Go and bring witnesses that they are Passul for testimony!"

So the defendant PB"P went and brought many witnesses that they consistently eat in non-Kosher restaurants of Goyim, where they serve Neveilos and Tereifos. And this "Rabbi" of ours responded: "Chas VeSholom! I say that the Goy who owns the restaurant certainly buys Kosher meat by Jewish butchers so as not to cause his Jewish customers to transgress.

PB"P saw what kind of "Rabbi" he is dealing with, and he went and found witnesses who saw with their own eyes that the non-Jewish proprietor of the restaurant killed a Davar Acher (pig) and from that defiled carcass those witnesses who signed the documents had partaken.

And the Rabbi responded: "How do you know that it is Davar Acher, I say that it was a "Koy". Can you testify that it was not a "Koy"? After all, you have never seen a "Koy" in your lives!"

One of the Dayyanim asked his colleague, in a whisper: "What is a Koy?" And the other responded, in a whisper: "So should I know from all the Tzaros in the world like I know what a Koy is". Our "Rabbi" heard their conversation, and he wanted to show them that he was a Lamdan, so he told them: "A Koy is a male goat that mates with a chicken and their offspring is some sort of Mamzer".

PB"P saw what kind of "Rabbi" he is dealing with, so he went and got many people who saw these witnesses eating, on Yom Kippur night, after Maariv, two kg. of bread and five bottles of shnapps.

Our "Rabbi" said: "I think there must be some mistake, the story was not on Yom Kippur night but on the first night of Pesach after the Seder, for how can it be that Kosher Jews would eat on Yom Kippur night".

And the "Rabbi" added, that even if it was on Yom Kippur, it is still not clear that they are disqualified, for perhaps they ate less than the Shiur. "Does anyone here know what the Shiur for eating on Yom Kippur which will make one liable for Kares is?". One of the people there answered that the Shiur is a Kakosseves Hagassah (a large date)".

Said our "Rabbi": "That's what I meant! Who knows how large "Gassah" is? I say that it is a very very large date, as we say, "Beheimah Gassah" (A large animal). And if you will ask, what is the connection between a Kosseves HaGassah and a Behemah Gassah, I have a proof from a Yerushalmi (which I found in Encyclopedia Talmudis) that we learn the laws of Succah from the laws of "pourable mud".

PB"P wanted to bring more witnesses to testify about these other witnesses that they are completely Passul. Said the Rabbi: "I am closing the discussion, for the matter has gone on for too long". And he wrote and signed with his own handwriting, that after delving into the matter and hearing all the testimony it has become clear to him that the document is Kosher even for the Mehadrin Min HaMehadrin". [Karyana De'Iggarata, the Steipler Gaon, vol. 1 , Simman 248]

(Who says the Steipler didn't have a sense of humor?)

Dessert - served by the Tchebiner Rav:

He is a Baki in all parts of the Shulchan Aruch:

In Orach Chaim, he knows that if you make a Shehakol on anything you are Yotzei.

In Yoreh Deah, he knows about Bittul BeShishim.

In Even HaEzer, he knows about Afkeinhu Rabbanan LeKidushei Minei.

In Choshen Mishpat, he knows about Hefker Beis Din Hefker.

If G-d Hath a Will, G-d Hath-a-way

2006-05-07T18:43:00.000-07:00

Warren Buffett, chairman of Berkshire Hathaway Co., is about to sink $4,000,000,000 dollars into an Israeli metalworking company. The tax revenue from that transaction alone is about 2.5% of the entire annual tax revenue of the Israeli government, or, in real terms, a cool billion dollars. There is talk that an investment of such magnitude, by such a high profile enterpreneur, will spur considerable expansion of foreign investment in the Israeli economy.

So now PM Olmert has, in one fell swoop, after less than a week in office, raised 10% of what he estimates he'll need to implement his "convergence plan".

Yad Hashem or Maase Satan?

Ad Me'ah V'Esrim?

2006-05-07T11:06:00.000-07:00

Rav Yaakov Kamenetzky (1891-1984) lived a long and fruitful life. And he wanted that life extended as long as possible. When someone would wish him the traditional blessing "Ad Me'ah V'Esrim", he would answer - "Today we have inflation. It's not enough". ["Rav Yaakov", ArtScroll Mesorah pg. 237]*

Maybe it's time to take his request a bit more seriously.

* Definitely one of the best ArtScroll biographies in terms of authenticity, and emphasis of those elements of his life we can reasonably hope to emulate.

Taking the Yomim Tovim with you

2006-05-05T10:39:00.000-07:00

Since we are pretty much smack in the middle between Pesach and Shavuos, I figured I'd talk about how to take the spiritual acheivements of Yom Tov and stay on a little bit of a "Yom Tov high" even after these days of closeness to Hashem have passed us by.

A while back, I was contemplating how to do this. What crossed my mind was that since these hergeshim are obviously more in the heart than in the brain, they must be expressed in the Avodah ShebaLev Zo Hi Tefillah. The daily Shemone Esrei must contain some way to reconnect to the Yomim Tovim and their spiritual charge.

So, I discovered that it does.

Pesach - Avodah

What are the feelings that we should exit Pesach with?

No question :
a) We are the Nation of Avdei Hashem (See end of Kerias Shema), and we long to serve Him.
b) Yearning for the Geula Sheleima.

Where is that? The Beracha of Avodah/Retze.

"Be favorable, Hashem our G-d, toward your people Israel and their prayer, and restore the service to the Holy of Holies of Your Temple. The fire-offerings of Israel and their prayer accept with love and favor, and may the service of Your people Israel always be favorable to You.

May our eyes behold Your return to Zion in compassion."

Succos - Hodaah

As the waning moments of Succos tick away, we are awash with a sense of gratitude to the Ribbono Shel Olam. We have gathered in our harvest, we have recalled the Ananei HaKavod protecting us.

What were the Ananei HaKavod?

To better answer this question, we'll ask another.

What is the point of mentioning all the journeys of Bnei Yisrael in the desert in Parshas Masei? (It's not even used as another list for elementary school kids to memorize)

Rav Avigdor Miller explains, that they are listed to underscore an amazing miracle. They travelled from, say, Miskah to Chashmona - and nothing happened! They are in the desert - snakes, scorpions, heat, cold, death. And none of this fazes Bnei Yisrael in the least. Why? Because they have the protective blanket of the Ananei HaKavod.

So on Succos, we reflect on how, Baruch Hashem, not too much happened, relatively speaking. We travelled from last Succos to this one - and we are alive! That's a miracle in and of itself. And if there's more to be thankful for - like still having your job, your children, your parents, your home, your spouse, everything you have - thank Hashem for it! Don't take it for granted!

Modim: "We gratefully thank You... Shield of our salvation from generation to generation. We shall thank You and relate Your praise - for our lives... for Your miracles which are with us every day; and for Your wonders and favors in every season... The Beneficient One, for Your compassions were never exhausted, and the Compassionate One, for Your kindnesses have never ended."

Shavuos - Sholom

By Sholom, I mean what we call Achdus.

"Vayichan Sham Yisrael Neged HaHar - Ke'Ish Echad BeLev Echad".

Or as Rav Saadya Gaon put it - "Our Nation is a Nation only by virtue of its Torah". What unites us a Nation is not Land, or genes, or culture. It is only under the banner of the Torah that we find true and ultimate Achdus.

Having sat through the night in the Beis Medrash with our fellow Jews, toiling over Gemara or hearing a Shiur, we feel like this is the elixir of life of our Nation - Torah.

Our pride, our depth, our wisdom, our heritage - Torah.

Sim Sholom: "Establish peace, goodness, blessing, graciousness, kindness, and compassion upon us and upon all of Your people Israel. Bless us, our Father, all of us as one, with the light of Your countenance, for with the light of Your countenance You gave us, Hashem, our G-d, the Torah of life..."

Focusing on these thoughts in our daily Tefillos after the Yomim Tovim, is, I feel, the ticket to enabling these profound building blocks of our identity as Jews permeate our Neshamos and dictate our daily lives.

Good Shabbos.

* All translations are from the ArtScroll Siddur.

(Tip: You can save this Dvar Torah for next week, Parshas Emor, which relates to the Yomim Tovim.)

So what does 'blog' really mean?

2006-05-04T21:18:00.000-07:00

R' Gil wants to know what to add to his outline for his presentation to the RCA about blogs.

This could be a separate section - Blog hazards:

Batala
Leitzanus/Lashon Hara
Overuse (addiction)
Going off the Derech (you know what I'm talkin' about, Willis).

UPDATE: Come to think about it, it's not only humorous, but pretty important for Rabbis to know this stuff about blogs.

Rav Meir Shapiro and Sefiras HaOmer in pre-War America

2006-05-04T13:36:00.000-07:00

Rabbi (Yehudah) Meir Shapiro (1887-1934), in my mind's eye, stands tall as a great spokesman for our people. An innovator, a Polish parliament member, a gifted orator, and a massive Talmid Chacham. He strikes me as the modern-day Rabbi Abahu of the Gemara, an extraordinarily handsome man (Massechet Bava Metzia) , a master of Aggadeta (Massechet Sotah), and brimming with charisma. If I had a choice of any one Gadol from pre-War Europe with whom I could spend an hour, I think I would choose Rav Meir Shapiro.

His two major innovations were the Daf Yomi, and Yeshivas Chachmei Lublin. His concept of a Yeshiva as a place offering more than adequate Gashmiyus accomodations to go along with a rigorous learning program, was a novelty. [Of course, getting in to that Yeshiva wasn't easy at all. You had to know a few hundred blatt Gemara Be'Al Peh].

When Rav Meir returned from a fundraising effort in America, he recounted that the President of a certain Shul had wished to impress Rav Meir with his piety. The fellow said: "I recognize that Sefiras HaOmer is meant to be a period in which we prepare for Shavuos. Since there is a widespread custom of eating milchig on Shavuos, on each day of the Omer I eat the number of
blintzes corresponding to that day of the Omer."

Rav Meir asked the pious Jew: "And what do you do if you miss a day?"

"Rebbe, Poshut! The next day I eat them without a Beracha!"

Sephardic Rabbis and Zionism

2006-05-04T12:40:00.001-07:00

Apparently, a new book has come out regarding the attitude of the Gedolim of Ashkenaz and Sefarad to the State of Israel. I have not seen this book, but those who have commented seem to indicate that there is an attempt to portray the general attitude toward the Medinah as positive.

This post is not meant to depict the total picture of the attitude of the Sephardic Gedolim. It is meant to point out that some of the greatest luminaries of recent Sephardic lore were decidedly opposed to some major elements of Religious Zionism, especially, but not exclusively, the Messianist side of things.

The Ben Ish Chai:

Hakham Yosef Chaim of Baghdad, considered to this day a major authority whose rulings are followed by many Sephardic Jews, makes an elaborate commentary on the fate of the tribe of Ephraim, which, in a Medrash on the story of exodus, brought disaster upon itself by attempting to hasten the redemption (Yedei Chayim, pg. 47). In passing, he refers to the three oaths that forbid such activism. ("A Threat From Within", Rabkin, pg. 47)

In addition, at the beginning of the First Zionist Congress, convened by Herzl in 1897, Rav Yosef Chaim began to explain the Jewish approach to Moshiach and the geula. In his letter, Ben Yehoyada, he spoke against those seeking to bring the geula through mortal means. He also attacked the religious Zionist rabbis, such as Rabbi Kalisher, writing to him: "What kevodo thinks is a big mitzvah, I regard as not so small a sin."

Hakham Alfandari:

Hakham Salomon Eliezer Alfandari, "Sabba ha-kadosh, the Holy Grandfather" of Istanbul (c. 1826-1930) was the living embodiment of the Sephardic opposition. He forbade all contact with Zionists and inspired other Jewish scholars to attack them publicly. He found few differences between the Mizrahi and Agudat Israel, which had originally been established to oppose the Mizrahi: "The Mizrahi and the Aguda differ in name alone; what binds them all together is money and power rather than [concern for] the honor of heaven" (Messianism, Zionism, and Jewish Religious Radicalism, Aviezer Ravitzky, pg. 57) [Rabkin, pg. 141]

Hakham Jacob Meir:

Another Sephardic luminary, Hakham Jacob Meir (1856-1939), leader of the Sephardic communities in Palestine, publicly attacked Zionism in 1928, at the departure ceremony for Sir Herbert Plumer, the British High Commisioner. When the master of ceremonies presented Hakham Meir along with dignitaries associated with the Zionist apparatus, the rabbi protested vigorously and declared that he neither recognized nor belonged to that community. Moreover, he announced that all pious Jews must separate themsleves from it. Along with [Rav] Sonnenfeld, he drafted a letter to Plumer in which he condemned the Zionists and called upon the British authorities to free the traditional Jews from Zionist control. [Rabkin, pg. 141]

Baba Sali:

Rabbi Israel Abuhatsera, better known as Baba Sali, (1889-1984), a Moroccan mystic revered by many Sephardim and quite a few Ashkenazim, praised Rabbi Teitelbaum's anti-Zionist activities and particularly his book, Va-Yoel Moshe. He had studied the book alone for several days, he said. When he had completed his reading, he organized a festive meal similar to those that mark the conclusion of a study of a Talmudic tractate. "This book is a great and important tractate for our generation, and Rabbi Yoel [Teitelbaum] is a pillar of light whose radiance should lead us all to the arrival of the Messiah." During the festive meal, Baba Sali recited several passages from the book, pointing out that Rabbi Teitelbaum had answered all his questions about Zionism "truthfully, without compromise." And on learning of Rabbi Teitelbaum's death, Baba Sali remarked that "the world had become empty" [Rabkin, pg. 159]

It seems impossible to portray the Sephardic tradition as having any kind of pro-Zionist consensus in light of this impressive list of its (more vociferous) opponents.

Hakaras HaTov to the defenders of the Medinah

2006-05-02T13:03:00.000-07:00

Talmud Yerushalmi Chagiga 1:7

תני ר"ש בן יוחי אם ראית עיירות שנתלשו ממקומן בארץ ישראל דע שלא החזיקו בשכר סופרים ומשנים מה טעמא (ירמיהו ט) על מה אבדה הארץ נצתה כמדבר מבלי עבר ויאמר ה' על עזבם את תורתי רבי יודן נשייא שלח לרבי חייה ולר' אסי ולר' אמי למיעבור בקירייתא דארעא דישראל למתקנה לון ספרין ומתניינין עלין לחד אתר ולא אשכחון לא ספר ולא מתניין אמרין לון אייתון לן נטורי קרתא אייתון לון סנטורי
קרתא אמרון לון אילין אינון נטורי קרתא לית אילין אלא חרובי קרתא אמרין לין ומאן אינון נטורי קרתא אמר לון ספרייא ומתנייניא הדא היא דכתיב (תהילים קכז) אם ה' לא יבנה בית וגו'

Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai taught: If you see cities that have been uprooted from their places in Eretz Yisrael, you should know that they did not maintain the wages of the teachers of Mikra and Mishnah. What is the reason (source)? (Yirmiyahu 9) "Why was the land lost, scorched like the desert with no passersby? And Hashem said, for they have forsaken my Torah".

Rabbi Yudan the Nassi sent Rabbi Chiya, Rabbi Assi and Rabbi Ami to pass through the cities of the Land of Israel, to establish teachers of Mikra and Mishna. They went to one place and they had no teachers of Mikra or Mishnah. They said (to the inhabitants): "Bring us the guardians of the city!". They brought them the watchmen of the city. They said to them: "These are the guardians of the city? These are the destroyers of the city!" They said (to the Rabbis): "And who are the guardians of the city?" They replied: "The teachers of Mikra and Mishnah". As it states (Tehillim 127): "...If Hashem will not guard a city, in vain does the watchman keep his vigil".

So this Yom HaAtzmaut, let us show our Hakaras Hatov to the guardians of the State.

Give the Rabbeim a nice raise.

Amos has his limits too

2006-05-02T08:56:00.000-07:00

godolhador recently had this to say:
"What’s far more troubling is the behavior of some of the extremist right wing settlers and their supporters. If it turns out that we don’t have a God given right to posses all of Eretz Yisrael now, either because the kofrim are correct, or because Satmar are correct, or just because we stam don’t have that God given right, then they are gonna be in huge trouble for causing so much pain and misery to so many people. "

And he goes on to quote Amos' exhortation to be moral and ethical.

Now, I'm not going to relate to this from a theological viewpoint, because for all I know Satmar might be right. And it may be, as Rav Wolbe said, that the Medinah was created too soon in history, and we haven't earned the right to the whole Land, based on our dearth of merit. (Actually, I'm pretty darn sure we don't have the merit to be sovereign over the whole Land, since we're not).

But from a security standpoint, there's a great quote (I forget whose it is) which pretty much sums up the predicament the settlers find themselves in, and explains why Amos has his limits:

"If we act 10% more ethical than the rest of the world, we'll be a 'light unto the Nations'

If we act 25% more ethical, we'll bring the Messiah.

If we act 50% more ethical, we'll be dead."

And as the Arabs are emboldened and indoctrinated to hate and murder, the percentages drop radically.

But let me ask the settler crowd something.With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, would you have been in favor of a negotiated permanent agreement with the Palestinians right after the '67 war giving them some land and a State, from a position of strength, or would you choose the past 40 odd years of our tortured administration of Yehudah, Shomron and Gaza, with us in the sad predicament we are in today?

If we accept the analysis of Rav Hershel Schachter Shlit"a regarding when it is permissible to hand over territory, namely, when Klal Yisrael feels that holding on to the territory is a losing cause, I think I would have to opt for the former. It has just been too costly.

Of course, now, handing over territory is in my view a terrible display of weakness and a humanitarian immorality, and should be off the table. If and when the Israelis manage to crush the Hamas, B'Ezras Hashem, we'll have to look at the situation anew.

Mekadesh Yisrael VeYom HaZikaron

2006-05-01T13:03:00.000-07:00

Harry posts today about the Charedi attitude toward Yom Hazikaron, Israel's memorial day for its fallen soldiers.

There are three points of criticism which Harry directs toward the Charedim:
a) Those who do not stop for the sirens.
b) A separate ceremony.
c) Emphasis of Charedi suicide victims.

Well, first things first. I believe that in virtually all of the mainstream Charedi Yeshivos, the students are told that if they are in public, they should stop, and perhaps silently recite a chapter of Tehillim or a Mishnah in the memory of the fallen. This is so as not to offend those who commemorate the fallen at this time.

In private, there is indeed a debate as to whether a moment of silence is an appropriate Jewish way to commemorate the fallen. We have no such concept in Judaism. No Yizkor service has a segment which is a moment of silence to remember those relatives who are no longer with us. Our commemoration is always attached to accomplishment - Tzedakah in their merit, learning, davening. Not silence.

I once heard a fantastic 'vort' in the name Rabbi Yaakov Krause in Los Angeles as to why we place stones on the Matzeva of a Kever we have visited. It is to show that the deceased accomplishments, as symbolized by his Matzevah, carry on vicariously, such as through his children or other people he has positively influenced. Just as we continue to 'construct' his Matzevah, we continue to add on to this person's accomplishments. So if we emphasize that the fallen soldier or terror victim has spurred us on to greater accomplishment, as we recognize their contribution, or the fragile nature of our own existence, that is the best conceivable memorial.

Which brings us to the second point.

(As an aside, the HaAretz article points out that the ceremony will be attended by "about 3,000 participants... mostly from the ultra-Orthodox and national religious communities. So the criticism as focused on the Charedi populace is unwarranted. )

It may be that there has been something of a paradigm shift in the thinking of the religious community in Israel, that there is no reason to follow the dictates of the seculars as to how to best commemorate Yom HaZikaron. Ultimately, it is our fervent wish that the public agenda be set by Shomrei Torah U'Mitzvos. So while the ceremony does not begin until half an hour after the siren, so as not to be hurtful, it is appropriate that the religious community show what an optimal Jewish memorial service is.

And if there are family members of Charedi victims of terror who feel that the government organized memorial services do not do justice to their loved ones, which may very well be the case, (how many of the slides depicting the fallen during these ceremonies display Charedi faces?) I do not think it is our place to criticize their need for a ceremony which gives them the respect they deserve.

It is important to show our Hakaras HaTov to those soldiers who gave up their lives to defend Jews. At the same time, it is commendable that there is a service which underscores that Hashem is Mekadesh Yisrael, and through our Kedushah, we instill "Kedushah", or more aptly, religious significance, into Yom HaZikaron.

Yom HaAtzmaut celebrations in the US

2006-04-30T12:40:00.000-07:00

The fifth of Iyyar has got to be the most divisive day on the Hebrew calendar. What other day has Orthodox Jews running the full gamut of Hallel with a Beracha to donning sackcloth? [ I have heard of some people actually saying both Hallel and Selichos, when Yom HaAtzmaut falls on Baha"b (the Monday-Thursday-Monday series of fast days after Rosh Chodesh Iyyar and Cheshvan).]

This post is addressed to the Religious Zionists of America.

I can definitely understand you. You feel that there is what to celebrate on Yom HaAtzmaut. There have been some very impressive victories on the battlefield, where the commanders of the IDF have witnessed the Yad Hashem, and the strides Israel has made from an economic standpoint have been quite staggering, such as in the realm of technology. The desert has bloomed for her returning sons and daughters, and holocaust survivors take solace in the existence of a place they can call home.

On the other hand, there is great anguish involved in the fact that those who have been, and still are, at the helm of this return to Eretz Yisrael have been people who are anti-Torah. The establishment of the State by Jews who were alienated from G-d and sought to alienate others as a matter of principle is enough to rip your heart out. The Israeli movie industry is notoriously pornographic, there are gay parades, and other abominations. And we cannot simply ignore this, as the media and the Israeli establishment continue to malign those Jews who are faithful to their Father in Heaven. Hashem has allowed his children to return to His palace, and there are some sons who are so blinded that they spread the spiritual equivalent of trash in His Holy Land, which was the source of our forced departure from the Land to begin with.

Considering that this is the case, I cannot comprehend why so many of the Yom HaAtzmaut celebrations organized by religious Jews, especially in the Diaspora, seem to place so much emphasis on Israeli culture. There may be some Israeli folk dancing, singing of "Shirei Eretz Yisrael" composed by some of the more virulent Torah haters in Israel, eating Israeli ethnic foods such as falafel or mangal (barbecuing - a widespread "Minhag" of Yom HaAtzmaut), flag dances and singing of HaTikvah, and the like. It seems to me that this is a celebration of the secular elements of the State, which are a source of tremendous pain!

Wouldn't it be so much more, well, Jewish, if this Israeli Independence Day were commemorated by organizing Shiurim which relate to the Hashkafic and Halachic elements of Eretz Yisrael, and perhaps inviting a religious IDF officer to relate his sense of awe in feeling the Yad Hashem guiding the wars of the State, instead of celebrating those elements of the Medinah which were meant to supplant our true source of unity - our beloved Torah? As Rav Saadya Gaon states - "Our Nation is not a Nation except by virtue of its Torah".

Please, make these celebrations a Kiddush Hashem by investing them with a deep sense of gratitude to Hashem for the ability to serve Him in His holy palace, not for the ability to eat falafel or sing an anthem which makes no mention of Him.

Unprecedented defection?

2006-04-30T08:55:00.000-07:00

In a recent post on Hirhurim, R' Gil correctly challenges the notion that the extent of the phenomenon of defection from the ranks of Torah-true Judaism is unprecedented.

Since the advent of the Emancipation, going off the Derech had become an option, and in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in Europe, the problem was rampant. To illustrate the extent of the phenomenon, let's tell over what Rav Shach's grandson, R' Asher Bergman, relates in the recently published "Maran HaRav Shach":

When Rav Shach was about seventeen years old, he was learning in the Yeshiva in Slutzk under Rav Isser Zalman Meltzer. After a while, R' Isser Zalman became aware of the truly destitute situation of HaRav Shach, who was literally penniless. (He had had his suitcase stolen from him on the way to Slutzk). R' Isser Zalman gave HaRav Shach the responsibility to learn with some of the younger Bochurim. One of these young charges was HaRav Yechiel Michel Feinstein, a nephew of Rav Moshe and future son-in-law of the Brisker Rav.

HaRav Shach related that while R' Yechiel Michel was in his charge he would constantly attempt to convince R' Yechiel Michel to stop smoking. Not for health reasons, which were hardly a consideration at the turn of the century. The reason was this: HaRav Shach knew that Slutzk was rife with Maskilim , and that they had the most talented boys in their crosshairs as the best candidates for their ranks. HaRav Shach thought: "At least if R' Michel doesn't smoke, he won't light up on Shabbos!"

"Happens to the best boys, and in the best families" is nothing new.

Lubavitcher Rebbe and Rav Shach agreed!

2006-04-29T22:04:00.000-07:00

Excerpted from the recently published (in English) "A Threat From Within - A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism", by Prof. Yakov M. Rabkin (pg. 198):

"For all of their differences, the last Lubavitch Rebbe and Rabbi Schach, the leader of the "Lithuanian" Haredim, agreed on the place of Israel in Jewish continuity. For Rabbi Schach, before the arrival of the Messiah, the Jewish people remain in exile wherever they may find themselves, including in Israel proper. In the view of his contemporary, Rabbi Menahem Mendel Schneerson, who over time had become more open to the nationalists, "the aliya of numerous Jews to the Holy Land does not constitute a gathering of the exiled" as it is presented in the prophetic scriptures. (Ravitzky: Messianism, Zionism, and Jewish Religious Radicalism, pg.147). For him, the State of Israel has complicated redemption and sowed confusion among the Jews: "The false redemption does not allow the true redemption to be revealed, for those who think that they are already living in the redemption do not perform the [religious] actions required for the going forth from exile and the revealing of the true redemption; they cause the prolongation of the Exile, the exile of the individual, the exile of the community, the exile of all Israel, and the exile of the Shekhina [divine presence]" (Ravitzky).

Opposition to competing visions of the Geulah makes strange bedfellows indeed.