Support the Pathetic Annual Telethon

I give up. The previous links didn't work. Please use this button instead.

The Other Kind of Gay Marriage


A Guest post By E. Fink

Cross-posted from my home blog: Finkorswim.com

Last week an orthodox Jewish woman posted the following on Reddit.com:
I am a lesbian marrying a gay man. We are out to each other and our closest friends. We both grew up in religious, traditional communities so we decided this was best for us. We both travel a lot so we are able to "explore" outside of the marriage. Ask away... 
Edit: we are doing this to stay connected to our community and our traditional (Orthodox Jewish) families.
Edit: to be clear, we are both seeing other people outside our relationship. We are out to close friends. I came out to my parents a while ago so technically they know but think that I have "changed".
There are currently over 1100 comments on this post. They are worth seeing.

Just what do those dirty #OWS hippies want anyway?



As reported in the Independant
The directors of Britain's largest companies were last night condemned as "elite greedy pigs" for pocketing a 49 per cent pay rise in the past year, while average workers failed even to keep up with inflation.

Unions exploded with fury after the publication of figures that showed how boardroom pay soared in the last financial year, thanks to rising salaries, bonuses and in particular the swelling value of directors' long-term share plans. The statistics, compiled by Incomes Data Services, provide an annual snapshot of executive remuneration, as reported in companies' most recent reports to shareholders, and show that the chief executives of the FTSE 100 largest companies earned an average of £3,855,172 last year. That is an average 43 per cent rise and, adding in other directors, total earnings rose by an average 49 per cent
If they have any foresight, those richies are investing their obscene profits in guillotines.....

Required reading right here:  http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2011/10/how_ows_confuses_and_ignores_fox_news_and_the_pundit_class_.html



Search for more information about OWS at 4torah.com




Yair Nehorai gets a bum rap from Failed Messiah


"We will know we have become a normal country when Jewish thieves and Jewish prostitutes conduct their business in Hebrew." -- David Ben Gurion

Haredi types love to indict Zionism by pointing to the Hebrew speaking prostitutes of Tel Aviv, but what about the Hebrew speaking gangsters in their own neighborhoods? I speak specifically of the class of criminal defended by Yair Nahorai, of Meah Shearim, the subject of a feature article in today's Haaretz
Of late Nehorai has had his hands full of work in wake of the Jerusalem Police efforts to restrain the Sikarikim, who use threats and violent tactics to "cleanse" Jerusalem. The police have carried out several arrests and are carrying out intensive investigations into violence, tax evasion and extortion or protection money. Many in Mea She'arim have anointed Nehorai with the title "redeemer of prisoners," a status that fills him with pride. In recent years, he says, he has represented at least 300 ultra-Orthodox clients who were arrested in demonstrations against desecration of Shabbat at the Carta parking lot and the Intel plant in Jerusalem, at demonstrations of support of the mother accused of starving her child and in other cases.
My good friend Shamrya, in his post today, strongly criticizes Nahari's general approach to wining many of those acquittals
But to argue that and entire class of criminal should be treated leniently because they are religious zealots, not 'real' criminals, is not only offensive but it is contrary to the legal systems these criminals supposedly live under...civil society should have jailed [the alleged gangster/button man Avraham] Hirschman years ago, but it didn't do so, in part because of Nehorai...People hate lawyers for many good reasons. The disgraceful Yair Nehorai is one of them.
I understand why Shmarya is upset, but he's attacking the wrong person. A lawyer works for his client, not for society. The job of  a criminal attorney like Nahorai is to get his client an acquittal. 

In pursuit of that goal, he has an absolute right to advance any argument he chooses. He can't lie, but he's not allowed to do a half-ass job because he knows his client is guilty. Scumbags are also entitled to vigorous defenses.

Short-sighted people may object that this puts criminals back on the street, but without strong defense lawyers, what protects innocent people from over-zealous prosecutors?  In an adversarial system, the prosecutor, and to a lesser extent the judge, are supposed to be the safeguards against fallacious arguments advanced by the defense. Its not Nehorai's fault his bogus arguments are swaying hearts and minds. He's merely doing his job, and putting his client's interests first, and (dare I say it?)  he's also improving society by forcing prosecutors to do their own jobs honestly and fairly.

The problem isn't Nahorai. The problem is the Israeli prosecutors and judges who are accepting his malarkey, instead of pushing back with crisp, vigorous, counterarguments of their own.


Search for more information about Yari Nahorai  at 4torah.com

How did Chazal know that Noah was raped (or sodomized)


Michelangelo's version; I assume Canaan is the one outside

How did the Sages know what they "knew"? Often via close examination of the text. Here's BT Sanhedrim 70a on the crime committed against Noah:
And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. And Ham the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon their shoulders, and went backward and covered the nakedness of their father, and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. [Until here is a quote from Gen 9 20-24' [With respect to what was done] Rab and Samuel [differ,] one maintaining that he castrated him, whilst the other says that he sexually abused him. He who maintains that he castrated him, [reasons thus;] Since he cursed him by his fourth son, he must have injured him with respect to a fourth son But he who says that he sexually abused him, draws an analogy between 'and he saw' written twice. Here it is written, And Ham the father of Canaan saw the nakedness of his father; whilst elsewhere it is written, And when Shechem the son of Hamor saw her [he took her and lay with her and defiled her].Now, on the view that he emasculated him, it is right that he cursed him by his fourth son; but on the view that he abused him, why did he curse his fourth son; he should have cursed him himself? — Both indignities were perpetrated. [Soncino translation]
To summarize:

Everyone agrees something bad happened, because we're told Noah "knew" what was done to him. This makes it clear that the crime was something other than being gazed upon.

Rav is directed to castration [blue above] because of the Mida Kneged Mida, suggesting that Noah was prevented from having a fourth child so he avenged himself on the perpetrator's fourth child.

Shmuel [red above] thinks rape is more likely because we're told that Ham SAW his father and there are many more places where the victim of a rape or sexual abuse is "seen" prior to the attack. Along with the example given of Shechem seeing Dina, the Sons of God in Genesis 6 see the Daughters of Man; Sara is seen by Pharoh; and Potiphar's wife sees Josef.

Additionally there are at least 5 other clues that the crime was something sexual:

1) It says Vayedah Noach, and Noah knew. All over the bible vayedah is used as a euphamism for sex
2) Quite unecessarily, we are told the brothers carried the blanket on their shoulders, וַיָּשִׂימוּ עַל-שְׁכֶם שְׁנֵיהֶם. The seemingly gratuitous mention of Shchem reminds us of the crime committed their against Dina.
3) Canan is everywhere in Scripture used as a representative for wantan immorality. The fact that he is singled out here suggests that the crime he committed was from that category of offenses.
4)  There are many, many parallels between the story of Lot and the story of Noah.  To make the paralel complete, we must assume that Noah's episode of excessive drinking was followed by an act of immorality, just as Lot's episode of excessive drinking led to an illicit act.
5) Noah was given an express command to procreate. He was also told to leave the ark with his wife (Gen 8:16) but instead leaves with his sons (Gen 8:18) in defiance of the order. Rather than make babies, he made wine, and lounged around in his birthday suit showing open contempt for his obligation. Casteration is the appropriate mida kneged mida,

Word Play, Parallels and Irony in Noach


Regarding Noah, the Bible quotes his father Lemach as saying:
 זֶה יְנַחֲמֵנוּ מִמַּעֲשֵׂנוּ וּמֵעִצְּבוֹן יָדֵינוּ מִן הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר אֵרְרָהּ יְ־הֹוָ־ה: = This one will give us comfort from our work, and from the toil of our hands from the ground that God has cursed.
From this, the Sages guessed that Noah invented the plow, through which the curse of Adam was partially undone. No longer would men have to toil with their hands to grow food. With the plow, the work was made easier. (How his father knew this at the time of his son's naming is not explained.) 

There's some word play later, when speaking of mankind God says:
כִּי נִחַמְתִּי כִּי עֲשִׂיתִם: I regret that I made them
The suggestion seems to be that Noach was meant to be an antidote to God's regret. God regrets  (nahem) that he made man, but the comfort (nehama) is standing by in the person of Noach.

This is born out by an additional example. The verse says
וְנֹחַ מָצָא חֵן בְּעֵינֵי יְ־הֹוָ־ה Noah found favor in Gods eyes.
The word Noah and Chen are a palindrome. The suggestion seems to be that Noah himself is the potential source of favor.

Perhaps Noach is meant to undo the curse of Adam and to become the vehicle through which the shortcomings in the first creation are corrected.

As noted, the Sages say he started this process through his invention of the plow. Additionally some  parallels exist between Noah and Adam.

Both are given a command to populate the world. Both have three sons, one of whom was a black sheep who committed a serious crime. And as per BT Sanhedrin 70a both were undone by wine. Those Sages who imagine the forbidden fruit was a grape criticize Noah for failing to learn  from Adam's mistake.

Ironically, wine is also a source of comfort, and also something that eases a worker's toil. Perhaps what the verses mean is that Noah had the potential to bring great comfort, to correct the world, and cancel Adam's curse. Instead he imitated Adam's error, and  introduced to the world a paler, more destructive form of comfort. When he named his son, Noach's father envisioned great things; what his son delivered was an accurate fulfillment of the father's wish, but not what was specifically intended.


Search for more information about torah true parshanut  at 4torah.com


A Suggested Blessing for Shem (A neat emendation)


The great ParshaBlog suggests a very interesting emendation that no one religious should see or know about. His kfiradika post is here. My summary follows:

After Noach realizes what his sons did to him, he makes a pronouncement that some have interpreted as a blessing (Notably SRH reads it not as a blessing, but a a statement of fact about the individuals themselves)  The passage reads as follows:

וַיֹּאמֶר, אָרוּר כְּנָעַן עֶבֶד עֲבָדִים, יִהְיֶה לְאֶחָיו. :25 And he said: Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
כו וַיֹּאמֶר, בָּרוּךְ ה אֱלֹהֵי שֵׁם; וִיהִי כְנַעַן, עֶבֶד לָמוֹ.26 And he said: Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem; and let Canaan be their servant.
כז יַפְתְּ אֱלֹהִים לְיֶפֶת, וְיִשְׁכֹּן בְּאָהֳלֵי-שֵׁם; וִיהִי כְנַעַן, עֶבֶד לָמוֹ.27 God enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan be their servant.
As you can see, no curse or blessing for Shem (verse 26) is pronounced, and no statement of fact is made about him. At Shem's turn, Noach blesses God instead, and oddly enough refers to YKVK as a Shem's personal deity. It's almost as if no one else in the family recognized Him. Strange, when you consider the flood, and the miracles the family had just experienced.

ParshaBlogs suggestion is that the word אֱלֹהֵי [=God of]  in verse 26 should be אָהֳלֵי [=tent of]. Along with solving all of the problems indicated in the preceding paragraph, this suggestion introduces a very sensible parallel: In verse 26 Noach asks God to bless Shem's tent; in verse 27 the tent of Shem, which has just been blessed,  is mentioned again as a place where Japeth might dwell.


Search for more information about neat emendations at 4torah.com

What was the forbidden fruit?


It grew on a tree in the primordial garden. After the snake tricked Eve into tasting it,  she shared it with the Man. From then its been all downhill. But what was the fruit? There are lots of contenders...

Early Jewish ideas:

Figs
Reason: (a) It puns on to-anah which means "grief" By eating from the teinah [=fig] the first couple introduced suffering, death and the rest into the world  (b) Juxtaposition of verses: After they fruit has been eaten, the pair perceive that they are naked [of mitzvoth] and sew garments for themselves from fig leaves. [Bereishis Rabah 19:6] Also, figs have a phallic shape. On the ceiling of the Sistine Chapal Adam is shown tasting a fig.

Grapes:
Reason: What creates more suffering than the grape? Do you doubt it? Well look what happened to poor Noah. [Bereishis Rabah 15:7; Rabbi Meir on BT Berachos 40a]

Wheat
Reason: Puns on khet, which means sin. By eating from the khitah [=wheat] the first couple introduced sin into the world [Rabbi Yehuda on BT Berachos 40a]

Esrog
Reason: Puns on ragag which means desire. Also, esrogim are shaped like the uterus/cervix.

Carob:
Reason: Puns on churban which means destruction.  By eating from the charuv [=carob] the first couple introduced sin into the world

I'll leave it to you guys to work out how much stock we should put in puns as an exegetical method. 

Later Jewish idea:

Apple
Reason: Song of Songs speaks of apples in an erotic fasion. They're a symbol for female breast, and used in the Song to connote sweetness and desire

Early Christian idea

Apple
Reason: (a) The Vulgate describes the tree of Good and Evil as de ligno autem scientiae boni et mali: "but of the tree (lit. wood) of knowledge of good and evil. Mali is a form of malum which means apple" (b) The evil goddess Eris uses apples to create discord in the famous Greek myths.

Generally, the western Church went with apples, while the Eastern Church used figs. (Muslims tend to identify the fruit as figs or olives)


Casual Antisemitism from Family Guy


Hosanna lmaancha elokeinu hosanna


I like hashana raba. Call me crazy, but I do. I like the semi sacredness of the day. I like the piyutim. I like the going in circles. I like the banging of the hoshana bundles. I even like how some yokel always bangs at the wrong time every year, and gets screamed at by a bunch of other yokels who've just that second finished begging God for mercy and salvation. Treat other people as you would have God treat you. Remember?

I like hoshana raba so much that I refuse to do any research into its origins. If we copied any of it's elements from monks or monkeys or Muslims, I don't want to know about. This is a weird, strange, primitive day full of fabulous prayers and wild rituals and I have no interest in finding out how it got that way.

Let it remain a mystery.


Search for more information about # at 4torah.com

Review of the iPad / iPhone Tikun by Rusty Brick


I recently tested the iPad / iPhone Tikun Korim - תקון קוראים - by  RustyBrick, Inc.. (For those not in the know a Tikun is a study guide used when preparing to chant the Torah reading)

Tikun Korim - תקון קוראים - Practice Your Bar Mitzvah Parsha - RustyBrick, Inc.

Here's my brief review:

Peek a Jew (Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump)



Original article from the Daily Mail: The daughter of businessman Donald Trump stepped out in New York today [October 12] in a white knitted sweater over a black shirt, a grey skirt and a jaunty black hat.Black high heels finished the look as she strolled alongside her husband Jared Kushner and their baby Arabella Rose. Jared, wearing a casual black jacket, pushed little Arabella Rose's pram along the streets on their way to lunch. He also held some flowers in one hand - perhaps a gift for his wife.

Sorry guys: That's a lulav! (Jared Kushner is a born Jew; Ivanka has converted)


On the Samaritan Sukkah, Nehemiah's Sukkah and the "taking" of the arbah minim


Its kind of neat. As you can see in the images that follorw, the Samaritan practice is to create an indoor sukkah, with a roof made from fruit. They have no walls.



You can't see it when looking from below, but above the hanging fruits are bundles of lulavim, aravot and hadassim. Samaritan apply these items to their sukkot because of the command in Leviticus 23

וּלְקַחְתֶּ֨ם לָכֶ֜ם בַּיֹּ֣ום הָרִאשֹׁ֗ון פְּרִ֨י עֵ֤ץ הָדָר֙ כַּפֹּ֣ת תְּמָרִ֔ים וַעֲנַ֥ף עֵץ־ עָבֹ֖ת וְעַרְבֵי־ נָ֑חַל וּשְׂמַחְתֶּ֗ם לִפְנֵ֛י יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵיכֶ֖ם שִׁבְעַ֥ת יָמִֽים׃

40 And ye shall take you on the first day the fruit of goodly trees [DB: Or the foliage of a majestic tree], branches of palm-trees, and boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook, and ye shall rejoice before the LORD your God seven days.
which Samaritans say means that the arba minim are to be used for the purpose of building the sukkah and indeed on BT Sukka 36b we have Rabbi Yehuda saying that a Sukka should be built exclusively from the arba minim. 

The Sages disagreed with Rabbi Yehuda, and on Lev 23:40 Ibn Ezra denounces a Karaite practice which seems to have been similar to the Samaritan approach. The fly in the ointment, however, remains Neh 8-13-18 where the people, having been reminded of the holiday by Ezra, went out and built Sukkot from the arba minim. in short, they saw a verse ordering us to "take" the arbah minim, so take them they did, but for the purpose of building a sukkah, and not for th epurpose of waving them around.

It would seem from this reading of the account in Nehemiah (which by the way is not my reading; Lurker shared it here first) that Jews at one time understood the verse in Leviticus in the same way that Karaites and Samaritans understood it, which, of course, raises all sorts of uncomfortable questions about the origins of Rabininc interpretations, however binding those interpretations might be.

Those who reject this reading of Neh 8-13-18 are, I think, guilty of reading through a pre-existing set of spectacles. Where does Nehemiah mention an esrog they complain?  However, once the spectacles are removed, the answer is plain. Here is the passage from Nehemiah:
On the second day of the month, the heads of all the families, along with the priests and the Levites, gathered around Ezra the teacher to give attention to the words of the Law. 14 They found written in the Law, which the LORD had commanded through Moses, that the Israelites were to live in temporary shelters during the festival of the seventh month 15 and that they should proclaim this word and spread it throughout their towns and in Jerusalem: “Go out into the hill country and bring back branches from olive and wild olive trees, and from myrtles, palms and shade trees, to make temporary shelters”—as it is written. So the people went out and brought back branches and built themselves temporary shelters on their own roofs, in their courtyards, in the courts of the house of God and in the square by the Water Gate and the one by the Gate of Ephraim.
Its all very simple , isn't it? After hearing a verse read, the people go out for the express purpose of fulfilling that verse, collect specific items, and use those items to build their succot. Three of the items correspond directly to the items from the list in Leviticus 23:40  The missing item - the etrog - is not named  in Leviticus. Instead, what we're told to do it take the foliage of a goodly (or majestic, or gorgeous) tree.  In Nehemia these are the olives boughs.

This isn't how we practice, nor is it how our Rabbis read Nehemiah or Leviticus, but does this reading seem unreasonable to you?


Chag Someach




The main characters seem more to me like hyper-emotional children than ever... still a good movie, and a great song.

Sukkos in the New York Times


The evil anti-Semites who run the new York Times went too far last year. If you recall, a few Jews got together to sponsor a Sukkah design competition. The entries had to follow halacha, but otherwise the sky was the limit. (One finalist constructed a sukka from signs he stole or bought from homeless people) For two days, the finalists were on display in Bryant Park; rather than ignoring it, the Jew-hating Times wrote a whole article about it, and published a slide show.  Samples below.

Read the article here.
See the slide show here. 



Netanyahu and Hamas Strike a Deal


God's Sukkos Message to Orthodox Jewry


A guest post by G.A

MEMORANDUM

To: The Orthodox
From: God
Date: Erev Sukkot 5772

Re: Three things you need to know about Halacha

I love you guys, but before things get too far off the rails (Kosher toilet bowl cleaner? Seriously?), there are a few things that you need to know.

I. There is no such thing as a Chumra

At least not the way you understand it.

What you don’t seem to realize is that every Halachic stringency comes paired with a counterbalancing leniency, and acknowledging only the stringent side misses half the picture. In many instances, a Machmir approach vis-à-vis Hilchos Niddah is simultaneously a Meikil approach with respect to the commandment to be fruitful and multiply, as well as the general injunction of Shalom Bayis, to name but two. Every Kashrus Chumra is a Ba’al Tashchis Kula (not to mention a potential Shalom Bayis Kula once again). Moreover, to the extent that the costs of observing and enforcing Kashrus would otherwise be directed elsewhere, there is an Allocation-of-Resources Kula here with respect to any number of other Mitzvos.

On a more macro level, nearly every Chumra, especially when implemented insensitively, has the potential to be a Kula with respect to a Jewish sense of community, a Kula with respect to general anxiety, and frankly a Kula with respect to whether a young Jewish person sticks with the faith or abandons it. Every new microbug that you discover needs to be weighed against not only the prohibition against bug-eating, but also that against intermarriage. Simply put, you need to think of every Chumra as turning a dial on a machine from left to right, but with a mirror image dial painted on the other side.

When you speak of Chumras, all you are really doing is focusing on one isolated aspect of Halacha, and privileging it over all others, whether they be aspects that you would characterize as explicitly Halachic, or those that you would refer to as “extra-Halachic” such as Kavod HaBriyos and the like (before you knock extra-Halachic considerations, try to find the prohibition against cannibalism … I’ll wait). To me, they’re all part of a Halachic life, and the discussion needs to be one that revolves around appropriate balancing, and not simply an ever-tighter ratcheting of Chumras and ever-larger expansion of Shiurim.

II. Change is good

Or at least inevitable.

Let me explain. You get very fussed about trying to maintain the constancy of Halacha and Minhag, which I can understand. Everyone wants to imagine that Moses himself could amble into their Shteeble or sit down and their Shabbos table, and blend in without missing a beat. There’s something romantic about that, I guess.

But what you fail to appreciate is just how much the Halachic ground shifts irrespective of your efforts to preserve it. The bottom line is that the experience of observing Shabbos 3,000 years ago is dramatically different than that of observing Shabbos 300 years ago, or even 30. This is not due to changes in any Halacha per se, but rather due to revolutions in technology, society, and culture. Someone adhering to a particular set of rules a long, long time ago is simply not doing the same thing as someone adhering to the same set of rules today. Trying to latch onto a particular ancient interpretation of a particular rule is like holding your coffee mug in place on your desk during a major earthquake (which are not the gays’ fault, by the way), and trying to pretend that your office looks just like it used to.

For example, while I leave it to you to sort this particular issue out, I hope you understand that forbidding a woman from serving on a Shul board in 2011 is not the same thing as doing so in the year 1011. Sure, the prohibition is technically the same, but so much has changed with respect to women (and Shul boards) that every relevant noun in the prohibition no longer means what it used to, and the sense that you are clinging to the past is illusory. The same goes for something like Kapparos. Trying to be “traditional” by taking a chicken from the farm and swinging it around your head before slaughtering it is in fact NOT being traditional when the meaning of the words “taking,” “farm,” and “slaughtering” is so far removed from that of the past that you seek to preserve.

The sooner you realize this, the sooner you will come to understand that what is important is not superficial adherence to tradition, but rather distilling those timeless elements of tradition, and applying them to current circumstances. I’m not saying that that you should throw out all of the old books, but you do no need to take the time to occasionally distinguish the spirit of the law from its letter, and continue to come up with approaches that combine the two in balanced, meaningful ways.

[P.S. While we’re on the subject of old books, some people seem to have noticed that great Rabbis occasionally got it wrong when it came to the world around them. This is not a big deal, people. One can be a good Jew without believing that Hillel and Shammai stayed up at night debating whether the world was ready for them to unveil the microwave or not, and that they decided not to only because it would be millennia before a decent Chalav Yisrael microwave popcorn would be invented (tick tock, Manischewitz). Scientific knowledge unfolds gradually, and even Rabbis so holy that you know them only as acronyms were not privy to anything more than their secular contemporaries. So what. There are, or course, legitimate questions on what to do with Halacha once its reasoning has been discredited in whole or in part (once again, I take the “Lo BaShamayim Hi” fifth and leave this one to you), but there is really no need to humiliate people by forcing them to publicly pledge allegiance to all sorts of bizarre apologetics. All this does is burden some of your best and brightest with the guilt of apostasy, and shut them out of participating in the community. As we speak, you could be losing your next Rambam because he (or she) can’t believe in good faith that dinosaur bones are forgeries or faith-testing gags. For the record, dinosaurs did indeed walk the earth. And they were AWESOME.]


III. Easy Self-Assessment Tool

Determining whether you are on the right Halachic track is not complicated, and does not require a single Rav, Roov, Rebbe, or Rebbi. Not even a Reb (the sole qualification for which seems to be testicles and a pulse these days).

Firstly, your Jewish experience should, generally, be bringing you comfort and meaning. I’m not saying that that it’s all beer and Skittles (I know, I know—the one candy that hasn’t gone Kosher yet … no promises, but stay tuned in 5752), but if your day is filled with anxiety about doing this wrong, then you’re doing it wrong.

Even more importantly, you need ask yourself whether the people you associate with day-today—and the world at large—look at Orthodox Jews and say, “these are good people that we should learn from in many respects.” It’s that simple. When someone sees a guy in a Kippah giving up his seat on a bus, picking up garbage, or speaking politely, their first thought should be “what else would you expect.” When they do business with you, their guard should come down, not up. And when they see a black hat, the word association should be more than just “Michael Jackson” and “White Collar Crime.”

Spoiler alert for those who have never read past Yehoshua and Shoftim, but the reason that I put you here, and the reason that I haven’t let anyone get rid of you, is so that my 6 billion other human creations (or, as you occasionally refer to them, Shkotzim) can look up at you admiringly. That doesn’t mean that you have to mimic the gentiles for fear of offending them (for My sake, if I hear one more Jewish techno song there WILL be an earthquake), and there is nothing wrong with sticking to your guns in the face of moral adversity, but I need you to keep an eye on the big picture here, and it ain’t bug filtering, or Matza-supervising, or finding America’s Next Top Esrog.



Syncretism



Tempting as it might be to imagine that these tea-lights and yartzeit candles were lit by Jews, I think its more likely that their presence at the Steve Jobs memorials are evidence of syncretism, or the merging of distinct religious traditions.

And in fact, our custom of lighting a yartzeit candle, no matter how deeply ingrained it may have become, is believed to have Christian origins.

Mohammad Ali converts to Judaism




A classic Tonight Show sketch featuring Billy Crystal from 1977


Holy Goodwin's Law Batman


A clarification from Rabbi Malinowitz regarding his Orot emails


A clarification from Rabbi Malinowitz regarding the previous email exchange regarding the petition supporting OROT

(Taken from Rafi's Life in Israel)


In my e-mail exchange with C, I made mention of those who are "joyful" at what is happening at Orot, since it helps them further an anti-Chareidi agenda.(That point was not necessary for me to have made in order to have refused to sign the petition that I was asked to sign,since the reasoning there was  predicated on my opinion that the very demand to sign a petition furthers  and validates the canard --which C indeed explicitely writes--that the Chareidi world is responsible for an avirah in which this can happen)

I did not make clear that that point --the joy, the glee, at being able to score political points--refered only to certain political leaders, not chas veshalom to your average, regular, man-in-the-street, which is BH 98% of the olom protesting what is going on at Orot. I certainly regret that I did not make that clear. I would never say that, nor do I think it is so, about the hamohn ahm.

(In fact, I am fond of saying that there really is tremendous unity and achdus in  k'llal Yisrael---if only the leaders --almost all leaders----would get out of the way! My proof---think back to any story, any chessed opportunity, any caring, any sharing, where no 'leadership' was involved: everybody is pleasantly surprised at the unity shown!)



Search for more information about backtracking  at 4torah.com



Suggested source for the fiery furnace legend


The miraculous deliverance of Abraham from the fiery furnace is recorded in Beraishis Raba and some other sources. It is not in the text of the Torah itself (though a friend of mine once spent an afternoon searching for it).  Berashis Raba is a late work and an anthology of earlier material. What is the origin of the fiery furnace story?

Semantic shifts



It's not all that funny, but the clip does remind us about the subjective nature of interpretation. The background music offers the same lesson. The tune is "Oh, My Darling Clementine" a western ballad from the late 19th century, in which a California gold miner loses the love of his life (Clementine) in a drowning accident, before finding some consolation with her "little sister." In the late 20th century, Uncle Moishy appropriated the melody for his enduring classic "Dip the Apple in the Honey (Make a Brocha Loud and Clear.)"

When its original audience heard the tune that plays behind this 2011 clip, they were reminded of the miner's immoral affection for a minor. Today, among Orthodox Jews at least, the same tune evokes holiday thoughts and nostalgic memories of apple-toting toddlers, splattered with honey.

As always, meaning exists merely in the mind which contemplates it. (David Hume, paraphrased.)

Nu Chevrah, what time did you finish, and what did you read and eat?


Search for more information about torah at 4torah.com

Finished:
At 1:45 on the first day, and at 1:15 on the second.

Quality of the chzzanut:
Solid, but not excellent. Too much of the music they selected was from the last two decades.

Quality of the introspection:
Pretty good, I think.

Quality of the reading material:
Not bad. I do not read in shul but at home I polished off a book of essays by Chief Rabbi Saks and several pages of Pirke de Rabbi Elazer (critical edition). What I liked best was the introduction of the latter book, which included a long review of the various arguments about the book's dating, and a list of the various places its theology is echoed or disputed elsewhere in the rabbinic pseudograpia. Happily, the author reviewed the material without taking sides.

Quality of the food
First rate. We had duck slathered with honey on the first night. (The dish has an official French name that escapes me) Lunch the next afternoon was pot roast, followed that evening by schnitzel. Friday lunch was salmon, sautéed on the spot, and for dinner we had kalichol. Shabbos lunch was at friends. The three soups were leek (one of the auspicious omens), vegetable, and meat. Side dishes were too numerous to list, but the one I liked best was a cucumber and pepper salad; second best was quinoa.

Now its your turn.