Chana Tolchin Asks: If I am at a Shabbat table where there is more than one family (both men and women are present), should I hesitate to sing out during Shir Hamalot/bentching? I've seen women who whisper and women who sing completely normally. Are kol isha issues different when men and women are singing together for the purposes of tefillah?
Great question. Although almost all modern poskim agree that the laws of kol isha still apply today, even though in our culture men are more accustomed to hearing women’s voices, there is controversy about whether this prohibition applies to zemirot, tefillot, and the like.
This debate surfaced in halakhic literature about 100 years ago in Germany. Rav Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg (Shu”t Seridei Esh 2:8) records that on a visit to Germany, he was shocked to find religious men and women singing zemirot together. His immediate reaction was against this practice, but after finding that Rav Azriel Hildesheimer and Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, two major German poskim at this time, approved of this practice, he tried to find a basis for it.
Rav Hildesheimer and Rav Hirsch approved of this practice based on the notion of “trei kalei lo mishtamei,” or, if two voices sing at the same time, it is hard to distinguish each one. Rav Weinberg was unsatisfied with this explanation, and instead cited a different teshuva, of the Sdei Chemed who, in the name of the Divrei Cheifetz, asserts that the prohibition of kol isha does not apply to zemirot because the context is one of kedusha in which men are not thinking about deriving pleasure from the women’s voices. He supports this idea with the story of Devorah the prophetess singing songs of praise to G-d together with Barak, who, at least according to the simplest explanation of the text, was not her husband. This, says Rav Weinberg, is sufficient basis for this practice.
Rav Weinberg then goes on to address the psychological implications of this issue, pointing out that those who sing zemirot have intentions “leshem shamayim” and allowing women to participate will help them cultivate a love for Judaism. He also explores the flipside: not being allowed to participate in oneg Shabbat by singing with the group is insulting to educated women and will cause them to distance themselves from tradition. Thus, he says, even if it is a measure of tzniut to to refrain from singing zemirot, “et laasot laHashem heferu toratecha,” or, sometimes we need to take measures that seem to be against the Torah in order to actually preserve the Torah. Given the times, denying women this religious expression would alienate them, causing more harm than good. Thus, says Rav Wienberg, one can rely on the lenient opinion and allow mixed singing for zemirot. Though he does not address Shir HaMaalot or bentching specifically, these seem to be in the same category as zemirot.
There are many who oppose this leniency (see Rabbi Howard Jachter’s article at http://koltorah.org/ravj/The%20Parameters%20of%20Kol%20Isha.htm for sources of more stringent opinions), and in many communities and instances, women do not sing zemirot aloud out of tzniut considerations. In fact, the Sdei Chemed himself says it is fitting to be strict, even though he supports the lenient approach as halakhically acceptable. But, given that education and religious expression for women is certainly as much, if not more, of a value in our modern communities as it was a century ago in Germany, I would think that women who want to follow the lenient approach certainly have halakhic sources to rely on. I believe that in the Modern Orthodox community, women participating in zemirot on Shabbat can foster an extremely positive environment of religious growth and expression that includes all members of the community.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
If everything is decided on Yom Kippur, why do we daven for things during the rest of the year?
Penina Cohen asks: About tefillah, we always try to daven for cholim and people in problems. If we believe in "u'netaneh tokeph" on Yom Kippur, and we think that everything is decided on yom kippur, including who will live and who will die, then what are we really davening for? If Hashem seals the book on Yom Kippur, then the person who we are davening for is going to die whether or not we pray for them. How can we reconcile our praying for the sick, with the fact that we think that it was all decided at the beginning of the year?
This is a great question. The nature of the judgment that is passed on the Yamim Noraim is difficult to understand, because in fact Tanakh and Torah she’be’al peh are replete with statements that a person can change his fate at any time by turning to Hashem in sincere teshuva and prayer--for example, see Yeshayahu 1:18, Yechezkel 33:11, and basically all the rest of Neviim Acharonim. The Gemara is also full of stories of people whose teshuva and tefilla were accepted at the last moment, and not just on the Yamim Noraim. For example, Berakhot 10a recounts that when Yeshayahu told Chizkiyahu that Hashem had decreed that he would die because he hadn’t fulfilled the mitzva of having children, Chizkiyahu davened for his life. When Yeshayahu told him that it was too late, Chizkiyahu retorted, “Afilu cherev chada munachat al tzavaro shel adam al yimna atzmo min harachamim”—even at the moment that a sword is poised over a man’s neck, he should not despair of Hashem’s mercy (and, of course, Chizkiyahu’s tefilla worked and Hashem revoked His gezeira). In fact, the passage in the davening of Yom Kippur that immediately follows Unetaneh Tokef says, “Until the day of his death You await him; if he repents You will accept him immediately.” How can this statement immediately follow the declaration in Unetaneh Tokef that everyone’s fate is decided on the Yamim Noraim?!
The Rambam explains (Hilkhot Teshuva 2:6) that “even though teshuva and crying out to Hashem are always beneficial, during the ten days between Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur they are even more beneficial and are immediately accepted, as it says, ‘Seek Hashem when He is found; call out to Him when He is near.’” In other words, the way that I understand the nature of Hashem's judgment on Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur is that, while we can alter the course of our destiny at any moment through teshuva, tefilla, and maasim tovim, our teshuva is more likely to work on the Yamim Noraim because the nature of these days gives our teshuva an extra measure of power and efficacy. During the rest of the year, we can still turn to Hashem through prayer, and Hashem hears and responds to our prayers at all times, but on Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur, our tefillot are buoyed by the power and promise of these days.
In general, it is difficult to understand why our tefillot can change the course of our lives, why we have the ability to "change Hashem's mind". The way I like to think about it is that Hashem always gives us what we need, and sometimes this may unfortunately take the form of hardships. However, we can change the reality of who we are and what we need by turning to Hashem in heartfelt tefilla. It’s just that this avoda is so difficult that we are more likely to be successful at it when Hashem gives us an extra measure of closeness to Him on the Yamim Noraim.
This is a great question. The nature of the judgment that is passed on the Yamim Noraim is difficult to understand, because in fact Tanakh and Torah she’be’al peh are replete with statements that a person can change his fate at any time by turning to Hashem in sincere teshuva and prayer--for example, see Yeshayahu 1:18, Yechezkel 33:11, and basically all the rest of Neviim Acharonim. The Gemara is also full of stories of people whose teshuva and tefilla were accepted at the last moment, and not just on the Yamim Noraim. For example, Berakhot 10a recounts that when Yeshayahu told Chizkiyahu that Hashem had decreed that he would die because he hadn’t fulfilled the mitzva of having children, Chizkiyahu davened for his life. When Yeshayahu told him that it was too late, Chizkiyahu retorted, “Afilu cherev chada munachat al tzavaro shel adam al yimna atzmo min harachamim”—even at the moment that a sword is poised over a man’s neck, he should not despair of Hashem’s mercy (and, of course, Chizkiyahu’s tefilla worked and Hashem revoked His gezeira). In fact, the passage in the davening of Yom Kippur that immediately follows Unetaneh Tokef says, “Until the day of his death You await him; if he repents You will accept him immediately.” How can this statement immediately follow the declaration in Unetaneh Tokef that everyone’s fate is decided on the Yamim Noraim?!
The Rambam explains (Hilkhot Teshuva 2:6) that “even though teshuva and crying out to Hashem are always beneficial, during the ten days between Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur they are even more beneficial and are immediately accepted, as it says, ‘Seek Hashem when He is found; call out to Him when He is near.’” In other words, the way that I understand the nature of Hashem's judgment on Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur is that, while we can alter the course of our destiny at any moment through teshuva, tefilla, and maasim tovim, our teshuva is more likely to work on the Yamim Noraim because the nature of these days gives our teshuva an extra measure of power and efficacy. During the rest of the year, we can still turn to Hashem through prayer, and Hashem hears and responds to our prayers at all times, but on Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur, our tefillot are buoyed by the power and promise of these days.
In general, it is difficult to understand why our tefillot can change the course of our lives, why we have the ability to "change Hashem's mind". The way I like to think about it is that Hashem always gives us what we need, and sometimes this may unfortunately take the form of hardships. However, we can change the reality of who we are and what we need by turning to Hashem in heartfelt tefilla. It’s just that this avoda is so difficult that we are more likely to be successful at it when Hashem gives us an extra measure of closeness to Him on the Yamim Noraim.
Response to Mrs. Sinensky's tag ripping challenge question
Rebecca Schenker writes:
Would the problem with ripping the seems in the slit of the skirt on shabbat be like taking off fringes of the garment? The skirt wasn't completed before the slit was ripped, rather after and the slit was made with the intention of being part of the skirt, making ripping the slit makeh b'patish. (according to the shulchan aruch)
Correct!! Yasher koach!! Mrs. Sinensky
Would the problem with ripping the seems in the slit of the skirt on shabbat be like taking off fringes of the garment? The skirt wasn't completed before the slit was ripped, rather after and the slit was made with the intention of being part of the skirt, making ripping the slit makeh b'patish. (according to the shulchan aruch)
Correct!! Yasher koach!! Mrs. Sinensky
Friday, February 6, 2009
Organ Donation and Tehiat Ha-Metim
Rebecca Schenker asks: What is the deal with organ donations for when Mashiach comes? How will those who have donated live if they are missing organs?
Great question! Building off of the points made already by Mrs. Herzog and Rabbi Besser concerning the controversy over donating organs (brain stem death vs heart failure to determine the point of death), there are still many problems people have with organ donation, even if one holds that a person is halakhically dead when their brain stem dies and that taking their organs is permissiable. Aren't we supposed to respect dead bodies, not desecreate them ("nivul hamet"), bury them right away, along with the question of resurrection in the messianic era if they have no organs?
The Halakhic Organ Donation Society deals with this very question of tehiat hameitim on their website, and responds that the belief that one has to be buried "whole" in order to be resurrected has no source in any classical Jewish texts. We don't know how G-d plans on bringing everyone back to life, but one can assume that He can do it, even without organs, especially since ultimately every person buried decomposes - organs and bones alike. Moreover, the vision of Yehezkel in perek 37 of that sefer depicts only dry bones coming back to life (organs not included).
Additionally, the Mishna and Gemara describe how historically when someone died, the family would put the body in a special burial cave until it completely decomposed (including organs), and then a family member would perform "likut atzamot" ("collecting the bones"), where they would collect the bones and place them in ossuaries, a special family chest where the bones would remain (for more info and pictures of ossuaries found in Israel, check out this link on the HODS site: http://www.hods.org/English/h-issues/issues.asp#Resurrection).
The final point on this topic is that all the other issues of desecrating bodies and having to bury people right away - are valid halakhic issues, but can be cancelled out due to the competing factor of Pikuach Nefesh, since through donating your organs you can contibute to saving the lives of up to 7 people (http://www.hods.org/English/activities/donors.asp), a huge and tremendous Mitzvah!!
Halakhic organ donation is an especially crucial issue today in Israel, as due to misinformation, many Jews do not donate their organs, not knowing that they are great Rabbanim who believe it to be halakhically acceptable and even a huge mitzvah! Therefore Israel as a country has developed a reputation in the world as a country that takes organs and does not give organs in return. This has led to many countries in the world calling for Israel's removal from the World Organ Bank, as well as the state receiving a terrible reputation (which is not exactly what we're aiming for with our mission to be an אור לגוים), and with many Israelis dying waiting for transplants as there aren't enough organs to go around.
Check out the HODS site, get informed and read up about this very important and crucial issue -
http://www.hods.org/.
-Ms. Gordon
Great question! Building off of the points made already by Mrs. Herzog and Rabbi Besser concerning the controversy over donating organs (brain stem death vs heart failure to determine the point of death), there are still many problems people have with organ donation, even if one holds that a person is halakhically dead when their brain stem dies and that taking their organs is permissiable. Aren't we supposed to respect dead bodies, not desecreate them ("nivul hamet"), bury them right away, along with the question of resurrection in the messianic era if they have no organs?
The Halakhic Organ Donation Society deals with this very question of tehiat hameitim on their website, and responds that the belief that one has to be buried "whole" in order to be resurrected has no source in any classical Jewish texts. We don't know how G-d plans on bringing everyone back to life, but one can assume that He can do it, even without organs, especially since ultimately every person buried decomposes - organs and bones alike. Moreover, the vision of Yehezkel in perek 37 of that sefer depicts only dry bones coming back to life (organs not included).
Additionally, the Mishna and Gemara describe how historically when someone died, the family would put the body in a special burial cave until it completely decomposed (including organs), and then a family member would perform "likut atzamot" ("collecting the bones"), where they would collect the bones and place them in ossuaries, a special family chest where the bones would remain (for more info and pictures of ossuaries found in Israel, check out this link on the HODS site: http://www.hods.org/English/h-issues/issues.asp#Resurrection).
The final point on this topic is that all the other issues of desecrating bodies and having to bury people right away - are valid halakhic issues, but can be cancelled out due to the competing factor of Pikuach Nefesh, since through donating your organs you can contibute to saving the lives of up to 7 people (http://www.hods.org/English/activities/donors.asp), a huge and tremendous Mitzvah!!
Halakhic organ donation is an especially crucial issue today in Israel, as due to misinformation, many Jews do not donate their organs, not knowing that they are great Rabbanim who believe it to be halakhically acceptable and even a huge mitzvah! Therefore Israel as a country has developed a reputation in the world as a country that takes organs and does not give organs in return. This has led to many countries in the world calling for Israel's removal from the World Organ Bank, as well as the state receiving a terrible reputation (which is not exactly what we're aiming for with our mission to be an אור לגוים), and with many Israelis dying waiting for transplants as there aren't enough organs to go around.
Check out the HODS site, get informed and read up about this very important and crucial issue -
http://www.hods.org/.
-Ms. Gordon
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Hating our Enemies?
During the Israeli war in Gaza, a student asked me how we should feel about our true enemies. One of the primary sources on the subject is a גמרא in סנהדרין דף לט עמוד ב about this week's פרשה which relates the following dialogue:
אמר רבי יונתן: מאי דכתיב [שמות י"ד] 'ולא קרב זה אל זה כל הלילה', באותה שעה בקשו מלאכי השרת לומר שירה לפני הקדוש ברוך הוא, אמר להן הקדוש ברוך הוא: מעשה ידי טובעין בים ואתם אומרים שירה לפני?
The angels requested permission to sing shira to Hashem during קריעת ים סוף, but Hashem refused, rhetorically asking "my creations (the Egyptians) are drowning in the sea, and you wish to sing shira?"
This is actually why we do not say הלל in the 7th day of פסח. Yet, this doesn't end the debate. For an alternate understanding of the גמרא, see Rabbi Meir Soloveichik's controversial article "The Virtue of Hate".
אמר רבי יונתן: מאי דכתיב [שמות י"ד] 'ולא קרב זה אל זה כל הלילה', באותה שעה בקשו מלאכי השרת לומר שירה לפני הקדוש ברוך הוא, אמר להן הקדוש ברוך הוא: מעשה ידי טובעין בים ואתם אומרים שירה לפני?
The angels requested permission to sing shira to Hashem during קריעת ים סוף, but Hashem refused, rhetorically asking "my creations (the Egyptians) are drowning in the sea, and you wish to sing shira?"
This is actually why we do not say הלל in the 7th day of פסח. Yet, this doesn't end the debate. For an alternate understanding of the גמרא, see Rabbi Meir Soloveichik's controversial article "The Virtue of Hate".
more thoughts on humility
I have found a few things to be helpful to me personally in cultivating the trait of humility:
1. Going on a hike, going to the botanical gardens, seeing the ocean, going to the zoo—any experiences in nature—really have the power to show me the greatness of Hashem as Creator, and consequently remind me of my place in the world. Often, these experiences are powerful in the moment and don’t last past a few hours or days, and we forget our place in the world soon after. Hanging up pictures of those sights or looking at your album or pictures periodically can help you “relive” that experience.
2. The Rambam counts as one of the 613 to “cling to Chachamim and their traits.” I don’t think that the Rambam is advocating stalking your teachers or Rabbis, but I think the idea is that we are influenced by the people around us. Surrounding ourselves with people who have the trait of humility can help us develop that trait within ourselves.
3. I find that if I think about the words that I say in davening, i.e. that Hashem, is a Melech, Gibor, Gadol, etc., it is helpful in reminding me of my place in the world. Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur davening are jam-packed with tefillot that discuss these themes, but if we try to stop and focus on our daily davening (definitely a struggle!!), it’s there too.
Finally: Cultivating a character trait is definitely hard work. I think that it is a lifelong endeavor, and there’s no simple “quick fix.” I do, however, believe that a person can make great strides in working on this trait (or any other) and becoming the best that she can be.
1. Going on a hike, going to the botanical gardens, seeing the ocean, going to the zoo—any experiences in nature—really have the power to show me the greatness of Hashem as Creator, and consequently remind me of my place in the world. Often, these experiences are powerful in the moment and don’t last past a few hours or days, and we forget our place in the world soon after. Hanging up pictures of those sights or looking at your album or pictures periodically can help you “relive” that experience.
2. The Rambam counts as one of the 613 to “cling to Chachamim and their traits.” I don’t think that the Rambam is advocating stalking your teachers or Rabbis, but I think the idea is that we are influenced by the people around us. Surrounding ourselves with people who have the trait of humility can help us develop that trait within ourselves.
3. I find that if I think about the words that I say in davening, i.e. that Hashem, is a Melech, Gibor, Gadol, etc., it is helpful in reminding me of my place in the world. Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur davening are jam-packed with tefillot that discuss these themes, but if we try to stop and focus on our daily davening (definitely a struggle!!), it’s there too.
Finally: Cultivating a character trait is definitely hard work. I think that it is a lifelong endeavor, and there’s no simple “quick fix.” I do, however, believe that a person can make great strides in working on this trait (or any other) and becoming the best that she can be.
The Paradox of Humility
A student asks: How does a person become humble? I honestly have no idea!
Mrs. Schapiro replies:
Humility is actually one of the most philosophically difficult character traits, and you ask an excellent question. The Torah definition of a good person is fairly clear - someome who respects Hashem and fulfills His mitzvot, learns Torah and is kind to others. The difficulty about humility is this: If you think you are reasonably accomplished as a good person (even if you recognize that you have more to work on), isn't it ga'avah to think so? But if you don't recogize your own accomplishments, aren't you lying to yourself? The Torah values honesty too!
I once read an article about humility in Tradition: A Journal of Orthodox Jewish Thought (a publication that's often worth reading) in which a rabbi and philosophy professor named George N. Schlesinger addresses this question. It's a paradox that Moshe Rabbeinu, the greatest man who ever lived, was also the most humble. Professor Schlesinger writes that the solution to the paradox is to know yourself honestly, but not to give your good qualities any more importance because you possess them than you would if anyone else possessed them. Don't spend a lot of time thinking about your good qualities just because they're yours. He tells a story of an important European rabbi (whose name I don't recall) who came to an inn and found it all abuzz because a great rav was due to arrive. "Who?" the rabbi wondered. Then he realized it must be himself! But this rav was genuinely modest because though he knew he was an important rav, it wasn't the first thing he thought of all the time. He didn't dwell on it or expect kavod.
Re: Chana's response
That's a great point. Note that when Hashem tells בני ישראל to enter the ים סוף, Rashi quotes from the Mechilta that
אין להם אלא ליסע שאין הים עומד בפניהם, כדאי זכות אבותיהם והם והאמונה שהאמינו בי
ויצאו, לקרוע להם הים
That they should enter, as the sea will not stand in their way because the Zechus Avos and their own merit that they had אמונה is sufficient to split the sea.
Yasher koach.
אין להם אלא ליסע שאין הים עומד בפניהם, כדאי זכות אבותיהם והם והאמונה שהאמינו בי
ויצאו, לקרוע להם הים
That they should enter, as the sea will not stand in their way because the Zechus Avos and their own merit that they had אמונה is sufficient to split the sea.
Yasher koach.
Land for Peace
Question by Penina Cohen:
Should we be giving up land in Biblical Israel, if we know that people will die if we do not? The mitzvah of pikuach nefesh, and lo taamod al dam rayechah are very strong ones, and I was wondering if these could extend to the political issue of giving up land in Israel. If we know that people will die if they continue to live in the land, are we supposed to keep the land or give it up to save a life?
Answer:
This is a great question and hits on an issue that has been the source of much debate and controversy today in the State of Israel. To attempt to give some sort of answer to this very complex question, I'd like to look at this issue in light of three perspectives: halakhic, political and ideological.
1. Halakhic issues:
The first issue is maintaining that there is a Mitzvah to settle the land of Israel, which most Rishonim agree upon (for more info on that you can read this article: http://www.wzo.org.il/en/resources/view.asp?id=1442)
The 2nd issue is that of (וְלֹא תְחָנֵּם (דברים ז:ב, explained by the Gemara in Avodah Zara 20a, that one is not supposed to sell land in Israel to idolators, in order not to give them a place in Israel to reside in (note: this is idolaters only, while non Jews accepting the 7 מצוות בני נח can always live in Israel as גרי תושב).
Now what happens when living in the land of Israel, or holding on to some parts of it will cause the loss of Jewish life. It's an issue of Pikuach Nefesh! And we know from the famous יהרג ועל יעבור Gemara in Sanhedrin 74a-b that one must only give up his or her life for one of the big 3 sins, none of which are settling the land of Israel.
Many poskim among them R' Ovadia Yosef (Rav Ovadia Yosef. "Ceding Territory of the Land of Israel in Order to Save Lives", Tehumim Vol. 10, 1989), Rabbi J. David Bleich of Yeshiva University, (The Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, Number 16, "Of Land, Peace and Divine Command") and others, including some say Rav Soloveichik z"l, use this argument to say that if one could maintain that trading back land for peace will save Israeli lives, then it is permissible. This was what prompted many rabbis (including R' Aharon Lichtenstein and Rav Amital of Yeshivat Har Etzion) to lend their support for the Oslo Accords (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords), which was the first try at peace with the P.L.O. in 1993. (For a thorough discussion of this topic, you can check out an excellent book by R' Amnom Bazak, called '"That You Shall Live By Them", When Values Clash. A Study of the Sanctity of Life and the Integrity of the Land of Israel', which I'm happy to lend to you).
However there is another dissenting view, that would hold that pikuach nefesh would NOT cancel out the mitzvah of conquering the land (כיבוש הארץ). Giving away land would be יהרג ועל יעבור, and one would have to hang on to all conquered Israeli land, even if it would mean Israelis would die. This is based on the Minchat Chinuch (Mitzvah 425) who asks how there could ever be a mitvzah to go to war (which does exist - מלחמת מצוה), when the very nature of going to war involves putting ones life at risk! Therefore pikuach nefesh does NOT cancel out a מלחמת מצוה, part of which would be conquering the land. Rabbis on this side include Rav Avraham Shapiro z"l, the late Rosh Yeshiva of Merkaz HaRav, and many other rabbis in the more right wing settler movement.
(For additional sources on the Halakhic debate, you can also look at 'Rabbi Herschel Schachter, Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, Number 16, "Land for Peace: A Halachic Perspective"' and 'Rabbi Aaron M. Schreiber, The Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, Number 18, "Relinquishing Yehudah and Shomron: A Response to Rabbi Bleich"').
2. The Political Question:
The political question revolves whether trading land for peace will actually result in saving lives. On one hand, before the 1993 Oslo accords, many thought that negotiating with the PLO would result in a final peace treaty, and an end to violence and terrorism. Not to over simplify the Middle East peace process, but this much anticipated result did not occur, culminating in the 2000 Intifada, where acts of terrorism only increased. So the question today is politically, will giving back land result in peace? Many feel that after the failure of the Oslo accords and the start of the Intifada that it will not.
Others view it differently. Take the pull out from Gaza. On one hand, this was an area with a huge majority of Arabs and a tiny group of settlers. Israeli soldiers were dying protecting this small group. Also, terrorism was increasing against Israel and many claimed this would stop if Israel pulled out of Gaza. Many men and women in Israel protested why they had to send their sons to fight for tiny settlements that were so vastly outnumbered and impossible to defend.
On the other hand, although Israeli soldiers no longer have to protect settlements in Gaza after the pullout, terrorists who were shooting rockets at Israel before, can now move up further to the new border with Israel, with (as we saw a few weeks ago) towns such as Sederot, Ashkelon, Yavneh, Be'ersheva...etc, etc, now getting pounded with even more rockets. And Israeli soldiers still had to risk their lives to go back in to fight these terrorists. So politically, it doesn't seem that pulling back will actually result in peace!
The pull out from Gaza in 2005 was very different as this was a unilateral pull out, where Israel pulled out and withdrew without an accompanying peace treaty or any responsibilities undertaken by the Palestinian Authority in return. What is interesting is that Rav Ovadia Yosef, who did support the Oslo accords, was very against the pull out from Gaza, as this did not come with a guarantee of peace from the other side.
Therefore the political question is up to debate, and there are many, many opinions on both sides which all have merit and validity.
(One last thing to thing about is that Israel now is in a very problematic position vis a vis the land that it conquered in 1967. Israel conquered the West Bank, including many cities that are very holy to us: Chevron, Shechem, Shiloh... etc. However, we also are now in control of the lives of thousands and thousands of Palestinians. This is unlike the Palestinians living in the Galil or in East Jerusalem, who Israel granted full citizenship to (Israeli passports, and ability to vote!) after they annexed these areas. So now, in the West Bank, Israel is in control of all these Palestinians who are in this state of limbo. Israel doesn't want to be "ruling" over such a large civilian population. But if Israel grants them citizenship and annexes this land, there will be so many new Israeli Arab citizens, with voting powers, that this could vastly affect the Jewish nature of the State. Meaning, the solution of: "let's not give back any land and just keep it all" will simply not work).
3. The Ideological Issue
I think that a lot of how one views the "land for peace" debate depends on how you ideologically view Medinat Israel today.
There are many religious-Zionist groups in Israel who subscribe to the ideology of ארץ ישראל השלימה - that G-d gave us the land of Israel and because of that, we need to conquer, settle and live in as much of it as possible, with no exceptions. This is the beginning of the Messianic era - ראשית צמיכת גאולתינו, so one could never even consider giving any of this land back!
This point of view espoused by many religious rabbis and Roshei Yeshiva in Israel has led to a tremendous ideological crisis among religious Zionist youth. If you believe that the state of Israel is ראשית צמיכת גאולתינו, and then you give back land, and pull out of Gush Katif, then what does this all mean? Is this no longer the beginning of Geulah? Are we moving backwards??
However there is another more balanced viewpoint which I personally think needs to be spread around a little more. One can view the state of Israel as ראשית צמיכת גאולתינו, but Geulah is a process. It happens slowly but surely. It's not going to happen overnight (there's a beautiful Yerushalmi that describes the process of Geulah as a sunrise, happening slowly but surely, going from darkness to light).
This raises the question of what we need to do to "bring geulah"? Will geulah come just through focusing on the land? Or will geulah come when we work on fixing the sins that got us exiled in the first place? Much of נ"ך focuses on the values of צדק ומשפט, on social justice, and how our goal as an עם הנבחר is to act as a role model to other nations by building the ultimate society of social justice and righteousness here in Israel.
Back in the day, when I was learning in Israel for the year, one of my teachers mentioned how it is ironic that the only areas of Israel that we have complete control over are the areas of Shevet Dan and the coast line (Haifa, Tel Aviv, Herzliah, Rishon Letzion...), which in Tanakh are not really places of much Kedusha. The places which are most holy to us, where most of the "action" happened in Tanakh are Yerushalayim, Chevron, Shechem, Yehuda v'Shomron, Har HaBayit...., which we very much do NOT have control over and are contested places, usually either under Arab control, or surrounded by a large Arab population. This teacher mentioned that perhaps G-d only grants us land on the level of kedusha that we are deserving. G-d gave us the tremendous gift of Medinat Israel, but we are not deserving of certain holy places yet.
So, then, how do we get to that stage of gaining those other holy areas of Eretz Israel? Is it through moving to Chevron and raising one's family in a very dangerous area (not to negate the choice of those who do this), or is it through strengthening the צדק ומשפט of the ares that we do have and making them into the model society, showing G-d that we are willing to fix that which we were exiled for, and that we're not missing the point by focusing on the land to the exclusion of the values that our state is supposed to stand for.
And are we doing this? In Jerusalem a large number of Holocaust survivors live below the poverty line. Children of new immigrants from Ethiopia and Russia go hungry in towns in the North. There is rampart corruption and bribery taking place in all levels of the government. Perhaps it's through volunteering at soup kitchens, organizing social programs that take care of the poor, campaigning for change and the elimination of corruption in the Israeli government... maybe this is the better path to take to bring Geulah.
Again, I'm not trying to bash people who are settling the more contested areas of the land of Israel. There's also the ethical issues of evacuating settlers from their homes, especially if this will not bring peace, and even more so if the government won't take care of the evacuees afterwards! As well there are many settlements in prominently Jewish areas: Gush Etzion, Ma'aleh Adumim, Ariel...., I'm saying that we still need to keep our ideological priorities in order.
Just some thoughts. Feel free to disagree!
-Ms. Gordon
Should we be giving up land in Biblical Israel, if we know that people will die if we do not? The mitzvah of pikuach nefesh, and lo taamod al dam rayechah are very strong ones, and I was wondering if these could extend to the political issue of giving up land in Israel. If we know that people will die if they continue to live in the land, are we supposed to keep the land or give it up to save a life?
Answer:
This is a great question and hits on an issue that has been the source of much debate and controversy today in the State of Israel. To attempt to give some sort of answer to this very complex question, I'd like to look at this issue in light of three perspectives: halakhic, political and ideological.
1. Halakhic issues:
The first issue is maintaining that there is a Mitzvah to settle the land of Israel, which most Rishonim agree upon (for more info on that you can read this article: http://www.wzo.org.il/en/resources/view.asp?id=1442)
The 2nd issue is that of (וְלֹא תְחָנֵּם (דברים ז:ב, explained by the Gemara in Avodah Zara 20a, that one is not supposed to sell land in Israel to idolators, in order not to give them a place in Israel to reside in (note: this is idolaters only, while non Jews accepting the 7 מצוות בני נח can always live in Israel as גרי תושב).
Now what happens when living in the land of Israel, or holding on to some parts of it will cause the loss of Jewish life. It's an issue of Pikuach Nefesh! And we know from the famous יהרג ועל יעבור Gemara in Sanhedrin 74a-b that one must only give up his or her life for one of the big 3 sins, none of which are settling the land of Israel.
Many poskim among them R' Ovadia Yosef (Rav Ovadia Yosef. "Ceding Territory of the Land of Israel in Order to Save Lives", Tehumim Vol. 10, 1989), Rabbi J. David Bleich of Yeshiva University, (The Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, Number 16, "Of Land, Peace and Divine Command") and others, including some say Rav Soloveichik z"l, use this argument to say that if one could maintain that trading back land for peace will save Israeli lives, then it is permissible. This was what prompted many rabbis (including R' Aharon Lichtenstein and Rav Amital of Yeshivat Har Etzion) to lend their support for the Oslo Accords (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords), which was the first try at peace with the P.L.O. in 1993. (For a thorough discussion of this topic, you can check out an excellent book by R' Amnom Bazak, called '"That You Shall Live By Them", When Values Clash. A Study of the Sanctity of Life and the Integrity of the Land of Israel', which I'm happy to lend to you).
However there is another dissenting view, that would hold that pikuach nefesh would NOT cancel out the mitzvah of conquering the land (כיבוש הארץ). Giving away land would be יהרג ועל יעבור, and one would have to hang on to all conquered Israeli land, even if it would mean Israelis would die. This is based on the Minchat Chinuch (Mitzvah 425) who asks how there could ever be a mitvzah to go to war (which does exist - מלחמת מצוה), when the very nature of going to war involves putting ones life at risk! Therefore pikuach nefesh does NOT cancel out a מלחמת מצוה, part of which would be conquering the land. Rabbis on this side include Rav Avraham Shapiro z"l, the late Rosh Yeshiva of Merkaz HaRav, and many other rabbis in the more right wing settler movement.
(For additional sources on the Halakhic debate, you can also look at 'Rabbi Herschel Schachter, Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, Number 16, "Land for Peace: A Halachic Perspective"' and 'Rabbi Aaron M. Schreiber, The Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, Number 18, "Relinquishing Yehudah and Shomron: A Response to Rabbi Bleich"').
2. The Political Question:
The political question revolves whether trading land for peace will actually result in saving lives. On one hand, before the 1993 Oslo accords, many thought that negotiating with the PLO would result in a final peace treaty, and an end to violence and terrorism. Not to over simplify the Middle East peace process, but this much anticipated result did not occur, culminating in the 2000 Intifada, where acts of terrorism only increased. So the question today is politically, will giving back land result in peace? Many feel that after the failure of the Oslo accords and the start of the Intifada that it will not.
Others view it differently. Take the pull out from Gaza. On one hand, this was an area with a huge majority of Arabs and a tiny group of settlers. Israeli soldiers were dying protecting this small group. Also, terrorism was increasing against Israel and many claimed this would stop if Israel pulled out of Gaza. Many men and women in Israel protested why they had to send their sons to fight for tiny settlements that were so vastly outnumbered and impossible to defend.
On the other hand, although Israeli soldiers no longer have to protect settlements in Gaza after the pullout, terrorists who were shooting rockets at Israel before, can now move up further to the new border with Israel, with (as we saw a few weeks ago) towns such as Sederot, Ashkelon, Yavneh, Be'ersheva...etc, etc, now getting pounded with even more rockets. And Israeli soldiers still had to risk their lives to go back in to fight these terrorists. So politically, it doesn't seem that pulling back will actually result in peace!
The pull out from Gaza in 2005 was very different as this was a unilateral pull out, where Israel pulled out and withdrew without an accompanying peace treaty or any responsibilities undertaken by the Palestinian Authority in return. What is interesting is that Rav Ovadia Yosef, who did support the Oslo accords, was very against the pull out from Gaza, as this did not come with a guarantee of peace from the other side.
Therefore the political question is up to debate, and there are many, many opinions on both sides which all have merit and validity.
(One last thing to thing about is that Israel now is in a very problematic position vis a vis the land that it conquered in 1967. Israel conquered the West Bank, including many cities that are very holy to us: Chevron, Shechem, Shiloh... etc. However, we also are now in control of the lives of thousands and thousands of Palestinians. This is unlike the Palestinians living in the Galil or in East Jerusalem, who Israel granted full citizenship to (Israeli passports, and ability to vote!) after they annexed these areas. So now, in the West Bank, Israel is in control of all these Palestinians who are in this state of limbo. Israel doesn't want to be "ruling" over such a large civilian population. But if Israel grants them citizenship and annexes this land, there will be so many new Israeli Arab citizens, with voting powers, that this could vastly affect the Jewish nature of the State. Meaning, the solution of: "let's not give back any land and just keep it all" will simply not work).
3. The Ideological Issue
I think that a lot of how one views the "land for peace" debate depends on how you ideologically view Medinat Israel today.
There are many religious-Zionist groups in Israel who subscribe to the ideology of ארץ ישראל השלימה - that G-d gave us the land of Israel and because of that, we need to conquer, settle and live in as much of it as possible, with no exceptions. This is the beginning of the Messianic era - ראשית צמיכת גאולתינו, so one could never even consider giving any of this land back!
This point of view espoused by many religious rabbis and Roshei Yeshiva in Israel has led to a tremendous ideological crisis among religious Zionist youth. If you believe that the state of Israel is ראשית צמיכת גאולתינו, and then you give back land, and pull out of Gush Katif, then what does this all mean? Is this no longer the beginning of Geulah? Are we moving backwards??
However there is another more balanced viewpoint which I personally think needs to be spread around a little more. One can view the state of Israel as ראשית צמיכת גאולתינו, but Geulah is a process. It happens slowly but surely. It's not going to happen overnight (there's a beautiful Yerushalmi that describes the process of Geulah as a sunrise, happening slowly but surely, going from darkness to light).
This raises the question of what we need to do to "bring geulah"? Will geulah come just through focusing on the land? Or will geulah come when we work on fixing the sins that got us exiled in the first place? Much of נ"ך focuses on the values of צדק ומשפט, on social justice, and how our goal as an עם הנבחר is to act as a role model to other nations by building the ultimate society of social justice and righteousness here in Israel.
Back in the day, when I was learning in Israel for the year, one of my teachers mentioned how it is ironic that the only areas of Israel that we have complete control over are the areas of Shevet Dan and the coast line (Haifa, Tel Aviv, Herzliah, Rishon Letzion...), which in Tanakh are not really places of much Kedusha. The places which are most holy to us, where most of the "action" happened in Tanakh are Yerushalayim, Chevron, Shechem, Yehuda v'Shomron, Har HaBayit...., which we very much do NOT have control over and are contested places, usually either under Arab control, or surrounded by a large Arab population. This teacher mentioned that perhaps G-d only grants us land on the level of kedusha that we are deserving. G-d gave us the tremendous gift of Medinat Israel, but we are not deserving of certain holy places yet.
So, then, how do we get to that stage of gaining those other holy areas of Eretz Israel? Is it through moving to Chevron and raising one's family in a very dangerous area (not to negate the choice of those who do this), or is it through strengthening the צדק ומשפט of the ares that we do have and making them into the model society, showing G-d that we are willing to fix that which we were exiled for, and that we're not missing the point by focusing on the land to the exclusion of the values that our state is supposed to stand for.
And are we doing this? In Jerusalem a large number of Holocaust survivors live below the poverty line. Children of new immigrants from Ethiopia and Russia go hungry in towns in the North. There is rampart corruption and bribery taking place in all levels of the government. Perhaps it's through volunteering at soup kitchens, organizing social programs that take care of the poor, campaigning for change and the elimination of corruption in the Israeli government... maybe this is the better path to take to bring Geulah.
Again, I'm not trying to bash people who are settling the more contested areas of the land of Israel. There's also the ethical issues of evacuating settlers from their homes, especially if this will not bring peace, and even more so if the government won't take care of the evacuees afterwards! As well there are many settlements in prominently Jewish areas: Gush Etzion, Ma'aleh Adumim, Ariel...., I'm saying that we still need to keep our ideological priorities in order.
Just some thoughts. Feel free to disagree!
-Ms. Gordon
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Re: Parsha Observation - From Chana Tolchin
Maybe your parallel could be another indication of the role of zechut avot in the Yetziat Mitzrayim/midbar process. Avraham was thrown into the kivshan haeish immediately after he smashed the idols (publicly demonstrating his belief in Hashem), so when Hashem saved him we could see that as a reward for his emunah. Bnei Yisrael didn't really do anything to merit Kriat Yam Suf, and before Hashem split the sea Bnei Yisrael were even questioning their trust in Hashem and Moshe. Even after Bnei Yisrael doubted Hashem, Hashem gave them a nes anyway – because He wanted to fulfill the brit He made with Avraham. This idea doesn’t really take the details you pointed out into account, but I think the overall connection recalls the fact that zechut avot plays a huge part in the relationship between Hashem and Bnei Yisrael.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Parsha Observation
I just noticed something, but I'm not sure what to do with it - all insights welcome. The mechanics of Kerias Yam Suf seem to follow the כבשן האש story. The hero demonstrates great אמונה entering what should naturally be a suicidal trip into the elements (fire/water) and is miraculously saved. The less worthy follower, assumes the נס will persist, enters, and is dramatically killed. Not sure it means anything though.
Halakha and Minhag
Leah Blum and Aviva Novick ask:
In today's times there seems to be a focus more on minhag haMakom and social Judaism more than halacha. People seem to decide what their minhag is before turning to the sources, and then try to make the sources fit with their shita. Because people make decisions about observance based on social pressures, they often end up stretching halachot. Many people and even poskim seem to have an "agenda" first and then look at the sources. How can halacha work this way?
I think this is a question that both poskim and lay people contend with on a regular basis, and that it's important for us as halakhic Jews to grapple with it. I would just point out that, as I understand it, this is not an issue related exclusively (or even mostly) to "today's times". Both Ashkenazic and Sephardic rabbis have, for many centuries, taken the idea of "ve-hayyitem ba-hem" as an important underpinning of piskei halakha, and this includes looking at minhag ha-makom and deriving certain aspects of halakha from it. In fact, I think that the significance placed on minhag is considered a hallmark of medieval Ashkenazic Jewish culture.
One source for this is the writings of the late, great Jewish historican Jacob Katz (and there are many others). Furthermore, Rav Haym Soloveitchik has a well-known article that discusses the textual focus of piskei halakha, as opposed to looking largely at minhag, as a particularly *modern* phenomenon (see the bibliographic information for his article in my "list" on this blog).
Of course, the ultimate arbiter of which aspects of minhag ha-makom are given the imprimatur of a p'sak, are rejected completely, or are modified to fit in better with the halakha as it exists has always been someone who is widely accepted by the community as a posek. I'm not sure if this answers the question of "how can halakha work this way", but I do think it's important to know that halakha has long worked this way.
Re: Pants
May I say that I feel so validated by what Mrs. Knoll wrote! I always felt the same way, even if I couldn't articulate why I felt that it was right.
Now I have a question, I was told that I could walk around an amusement park in my bathing suit if the only men there were non-Jews? Besides the obvious point that how can one possibly be 100% positive that all males are not Jewish - does tzniut only apply in front of Jewish men?
Re Medical Ethics
I just want to respond to Mrs. Herzog's excellent and insightful post about Rivka's questions. I'll repeat her disclaimer about not being a posek, and add that I also don't really get the science, so please correct me if it's appropriate. Two points: First, I think there is one major issue concerning organ donation that needs to be addressed. As many Juniors learn in Gemara class, after a person dies, his vital organs become useless very quickly. Therefore, most transplants of hearts, lungs etc. are taken from patients who are "brain-dead" - there is no more brain activity, and this is assumed to be irreversible. Much of the secular world has accepted brain death as an indicator of death, despite a functioning and beating heart. This is controversial within the world of halacha, and of course the stakes could not be higher. If brain-death is death, then pikuach nefesh would dictate that it is a great mitzvah to donate organs and for doctors to perform these potentially life saving procedures. If it is not, then donating the organs is a form of suicide, and the doctors removing them are murderers. My (limited) understanding is that there are able, responsible poskim on both sides of the issue (I think that the two poskim Mrs. Herzog mentioned at the end of her post, Rabbi Bleich and Rabbi Tendler, are on opposite sides, and vehemently so).
Donating non-essential organs (eyes, a kidney, blood, bone marrow), pose no such problem though they too are discussed in the context of endangering yourself to save another, and are generally less controversial.
The other answer I want to quickly supplement, is about stem-cell research. The Orthodox community is still in the formative stages of responding to this question. And while I think that the prevailing view is positive, as Mrs. Herzog accurately presented, there are some minority voices. I know that Rabbi Meir Soloveichik (Tradition Edition: Vol. 38 No. 1 - Spring 2004 - available by subscription only) wrote against it, making an extra-halachik argument about the value of life and experimentation.
Medical Ethics
What follows is a series of medical ethics questions submitted by Rivka Herzfeld.
1. Is IVF allowed?
Before I respond to any of this, I would like to this disclaimer to be known: I AM NOT AN HALACHIC AUTHORITY ON THIS TOPIC. I am sharing my knowledge based on research and personal experience.Yes, IVF is permitted by halacha.
a. If IVF is allowed, then is surrogacy allowed, and if so on who’s part? For example:
1. if Betty is a non-Jew, but we (somehow) are best friends and she can’t get pregnant, can she do IVF and I will be the surrogate?
2. If I am a Jew and I can’t get pregnant can I do IVF and she will be the surrogate?
3. If I am a Jew and my sister is a Jew and I can’t get pregnant can I do IVF and she will be the surrogate?
a1. The Jew/non-Jew issue is complex because it involves non-quantifiable parameters such as the kedusha of a neshama and the body in which it is housed. It seems pretty clear that the status of a non-Jew is different from that of a Jew. It also seems pretty clear that the status of a non-Jew is less "kadosh: than that of a Jew. As politically incorrect as that sounds, it is still the case. Therefore, I can imagine that to house a Jewish baby in a non-Jewish mother could be a problem. When a Jew is a surrogate for a non-Jew there may be two issues--that the Jew is housing the neshama of a non-Jew and that perhaps the "status" of that baby may be confusing because it WAS incubated by a Jewish mother.
With regard to the sister, the Jew/non-jew issue is obviously alleviated, but there may be a problem with arayot, as it is assur for a man to be married to two sisters (ever, even after one dies, except for yibum, which is no longer practiced [contrary to Hallmark movies.])
2. Is stem cell research okay with הלכה?
To the best of my knowledge, modern giants in science and halacha, including Rav Moshe David Tendler, have permitted stem cell research. The issue that troubles the "religious right" (by this I mean the Christians) is that these stem cells often come from aborted fetuses. In halacha. these are two separate things. Also, since there is clear puikuach nefesh involved, the research is encouraged. My understanding is that the research can be done and that this does NOT condone the abortion. Also, abortion is permitted under specific circumstances in halacha.
3. Can a Jew be an organ donor?
The issue with organ donation is Kavod HaMeit. The RCA has now issued "halachic organ donor cards" which (in some way, I don't know the details) instruct that the organs can be used, provided that they are 'harvested" in a manner that is in accordance with halacha. Again, the modern poskim hav e talked a great deal about this and the centrist Orthodox position is that, with kavod hameit respected, organ donation is permitted since the pikuach nefesh is also clear. a- Can a Jew be the recipient of an organ? Yes.
4. Can a Jew donate his body to science?
As far as I know, donating one's body to science is not permitted as the "pikuach nefesh " factor is not direct and the chances that the body will be improperly treated is very high.
5. I know that autopsies are not allowed, but why?
Under certain circumstance, autopsies are allowed. The issue. again, is kavod Hameit. Since the body was the "house" for the soul, it is considered sacrosanct and may not be defiled in life or in death. The process of preparing a body for burial (tahara) is very strict. Normal autopsies do not follow those guidelines. However, when there is a halachically acceptable reason for doing an autopsy (including certain criminal investigations and medical reasons) and the autopsy can be performed while adhering to halacha, then it is mutar. The Journal of Contemporary Halacha is a great resource for all of these questions, as is Tradition. Two of the major decisors of our generation is Rabbi Moshe David Tendler and Rabbi J. David Bleich.
Monday, February 2, 2009
עבודה שבלב Tefilla Contest winner!
The winners of our first contest were announced on Thursday - mazal tov to them all, and the many others who participated and received extra credit in Halacha. We are already into our second contest. This month's passage is "קרוב ד' לכל קוראיו לכל אשר יקראוהו באמת." Good luck to all.
Below, I have copied the winning poem, written by Ayala Schnaidman. I will post some other winners over the next few days. They were responding to "מודים אנחנו לך...על ניסך שבכל יום עמנו" Enjoy.
The Inquisitive Child
The inquisitive child,
A question he once asked
“Father,” he said
Why does G-d seem to be masked?
We learned in school
Of the manna the Jews ate
Why does food now
Not fall onto my plate?
And the victory of the Macabees
Who were oh-so small
Why do I see the masses
Rule over us all?
Such miracles as these
Haven’t been shown again
Does G-d not love us now
As he loved the Jews then?”
And the father looked at his son
And took his small hand
“My child,” he said
“Do you not understand?
It’s a miracle that
You can walk and play
G-d gave you muscles
So you can move today
And the fact the your brain
Has the power to learn
And you realized a problem
That gave you concern
So you may not see wonders
As those in the Holy Book
But the miracles are everywhere
If you know how to look
Must I Bless Even If I am Not Blessed?
Rivka Herzfeld asks: Must a blind person recite the beracha of poke’ach ivrim in the morning, thanking Hashem for giving sight to the blind, despite the fact that he cannot see?
Rabbi Prince responds: The Gemara Berachot, 35a, brings a source from the Torah, which obligates a Jew to recite a beracha before deriving hana’a (benefit or pleasure) from any food or other tangible (or sometimes even intangible) item. If he does not, warns the Gemara, he would be in violation of me’ila, unlawfully benefiting from something set aside for use in, or belonging to the Beit Hamikdash. Once one recites a beracha however, he is free to benefit from this otherwise permissible item. As a result of this rule, the Rabbis composed various berachot that are to be recited before different actions are preformed, such as; eating, putting on ones clothes, opening one’s eyes, etc.
The Gemara Berachot, 60b, lists 15 berachot which are to be recited by an individual as he goes about his morning routine. Theses berachot follow the order of events in a normal person’s morning schedule. So for example, when one arises he should recite, "elokei neshama" (thanking Hashem for restoring his soul); when one hears a rooster crowing- signaling the start of day, he should say, "asher noten l’sechvi (rooster) bina;" and when he straightens out his back he recites, "zokef k’fufim," and so on. Although these berachot are still recited nowadays, the custom has arisen to recite them aloud in the Beit Hakneset. This custom was instituted out of concern that one might recite them at home with unclean hands, Shulchan Aruch, 46:2.
While most everyone can find at least one thing in the Gemara’s list of 15 berachot to be thankful for, the question arises for the individual who unfortunately does not directly benefit from one or more of these things. Should a destitute person recite a beracha for the shoes he cannot afford? Can a deaf person really be thankful for the rooster he does not hear? Imagine the pain the blind person must feel every time he thanks Hashem for being a poke’ach ivrim, giving sight to the blind! For this reason, suggests the Tur, Orech Chaim, 46, if one does not have clothing to wear, or a belt or shoes to put on he should not recite the applicable berachot. This statement of the Tur is based on a Rosh, Berachot, 9: 23, which distinguishes between those things which Hashem provides for the benefit of the entire world, such as the crowing of the rooster, which signals the start of day, and those berachot which were composed for the individual to give thanks for what he has, such as his clothes, etc. These berachot, he suggests, should not be said if one does not personally have what to be thankful for. The Rambam, Hil. Tefilla 7:1 takes a similar approach to the Rosh, and did not feel it necessary for one to recite a beracha if he personally does not receive any direct benefit. The Hagahot Meimoniot (ibid.), suggests based on this Rambam that a blind person should therefore not recite the beracha of poke’ach ivrim.
The Kol Bo however, quotes a dissenting opinion of the Geonim who required that all these berachot be recited, even by those individuals who do to personally benefit. The Kol Bo argues, that even this individual must recognize that Hashem in general does provide the world with these gifts even if he personally may not be so lucky. The Ran and the Ramban, at the beginning of their commentaries on Pesachim, paskened along similar lines- obligating all fifteen berachot across the board. They cite the principle of "Minhag shel Yisroel Torah hi", once a custom has been accepted amongst the Jews it becomes as binding upon the individual as the Torah itself. Out of deference for the Rambam, yet acknowledging those Rishonim who disagree with him, the Beit Yosef, 46, recommends that if one does not benefit directly he should say the beracha leaving out the name of Hashem.
The Beit Yosef himself writes in his Shulchan Aruch, 46:8 that one who is not obligated to make a beracha, because he does not personally benefit, should still recite it but without mentioning Hashem’s name. The Rama however follows the opinion of the Ran and Kol Bo and for the same reason as them- out of recognition of Hashem’s kindness in general, even if he personally is not a direct recipient of this kindness. Although the Magen Avraham (ibid.) and others suggest that a blind person follow the Hagahot Meimoniot and not recite poke’ach ivrim, the accepted opinion seems to accord with that of the Rama: everyone, despite their situation, should recite all the birchot ha’shachar with Hashem's name.
Rabbi Prince responds: The Gemara Berachot, 35a, brings a source from the Torah, which obligates a Jew to recite a beracha before deriving hana’a (benefit or pleasure) from any food or other tangible (or sometimes even intangible) item. If he does not, warns the Gemara, he would be in violation of me’ila, unlawfully benefiting from something set aside for use in, or belonging to the Beit Hamikdash. Once one recites a beracha however, he is free to benefit from this otherwise permissible item. As a result of this rule, the Rabbis composed various berachot that are to be recited before different actions are preformed, such as; eating, putting on ones clothes, opening one’s eyes, etc.
The Gemara Berachot, 60b, lists 15 berachot which are to be recited by an individual as he goes about his morning routine. Theses berachot follow the order of events in a normal person’s morning schedule. So for example, when one arises he should recite, "elokei neshama" (thanking Hashem for restoring his soul); when one hears a rooster crowing- signaling the start of day, he should say, "asher noten l’sechvi (rooster) bina;" and when he straightens out his back he recites, "zokef k’fufim," and so on. Although these berachot are still recited nowadays, the custom has arisen to recite them aloud in the Beit Hakneset. This custom was instituted out of concern that one might recite them at home with unclean hands, Shulchan Aruch, 46:2.
While most everyone can find at least one thing in the Gemara’s list of 15 berachot to be thankful for, the question arises for the individual who unfortunately does not directly benefit from one or more of these things. Should a destitute person recite a beracha for the shoes he cannot afford? Can a deaf person really be thankful for the rooster he does not hear? Imagine the pain the blind person must feel every time he thanks Hashem for being a poke’ach ivrim, giving sight to the blind! For this reason, suggests the Tur, Orech Chaim, 46, if one does not have clothing to wear, or a belt or shoes to put on he should not recite the applicable berachot. This statement of the Tur is based on a Rosh, Berachot, 9: 23, which distinguishes between those things which Hashem provides for the benefit of the entire world, such as the crowing of the rooster, which signals the start of day, and those berachot which were composed for the individual to give thanks for what he has, such as his clothes, etc. These berachot, he suggests, should not be said if one does not personally have what to be thankful for. The Rambam, Hil. Tefilla 7:1 takes a similar approach to the Rosh, and did not feel it necessary for one to recite a beracha if he personally does not receive any direct benefit. The Hagahot Meimoniot (ibid.), suggests based on this Rambam that a blind person should therefore not recite the beracha of poke’ach ivrim.
The Kol Bo however, quotes a dissenting opinion of the Geonim who required that all these berachot be recited, even by those individuals who do to personally benefit. The Kol Bo argues, that even this individual must recognize that Hashem in general does provide the world with these gifts even if he personally may not be so lucky. The Ran and the Ramban, at the beginning of their commentaries on Pesachim, paskened along similar lines- obligating all fifteen berachot across the board. They cite the principle of "Minhag shel Yisroel Torah hi", once a custom has been accepted amongst the Jews it becomes as binding upon the individual as the Torah itself. Out of deference for the Rambam, yet acknowledging those Rishonim who disagree with him, the Beit Yosef, 46, recommends that if one does not benefit directly he should say the beracha leaving out the name of Hashem.
The Beit Yosef himself writes in his Shulchan Aruch, 46:8 that one who is not obligated to make a beracha, because he does not personally benefit, should still recite it but without mentioning Hashem’s name. The Rama however follows the opinion of the Ran and Kol Bo and for the same reason as them- out of recognition of Hashem’s kindness in general, even if he personally is not a direct recipient of this kindness. Although the Magen Avraham (ibid.) and others suggest that a blind person follow the Hagahot Meimoniot and not recite poke’ach ivrim, the accepted opinion seems to accord with that of the Rama: everyone, despite their situation, should recite all the birchot ha’shachar with Hashem's name.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Pants
Hi!! This is Daniella Grodko. so i once heard this and I wanted to know its true: If youre somewhere, for example a practice for the skirt league, where its known that only girls can be there, and a man comes in and your wearing sweatpants. Do you have to change and duck for cover or is it ok because he's the one whos 'intruding".
I (Mrs. Knoll) used to experience exactly this question all the time. Until a few months ago, we lived in Riverdale and I would go to women’s basketball night at the RJC (Riverdale Jewish Center, one of the major shuls in Riverdale) whenever I could. (I’m not any good, but it was still fun to play!) It was known that Monday was women’s basketball night, but even so, the shul custodian used to come in every so often, and worse, some of the men would sometimes cut through the gym on their way to Ma’ariv! I did play in sweatpants, and did not “duck for cover” when they came through. This was primarily because it is not clearly assur to wear sweatpants in the first place. There are two halachic issues involved with wearing pants: 1) begged ish and 2) tzniut. According to many authorities, pants are no longer begged ish now that it is clearly accepted for women in general society to wear them, and if the pants are baggy, which sweatpants are, then according to many authorities, they are not a tzniut issue either. I still do not wear pants in general, not even baggy sweatpants because a) I think once one starts wearing only baggy pants, it becomes very difficult to determine exactly what’s considered baggy or not, and one is likely to start wearing non-baggy pants, which are definitely a tzniut problem, and b) I think wearing skirts has become kind of like a woman’s way of showing that she is frum and seriously committed to halacha. However, since it’s not clearly assur to wear baggy pants in general, when a man would happen to come into the gym during women’s basketball, I would just continue playing. That being said, if someone wants to be machmir on herself and be particularly sensitive to these tzniut issues, I think that’s admirable; but she should be aware that it is a chumra and a sensitivity, not a halachic necessity.
Also, I do think the fact that the man is the one “intruding” makes a difference. In the paragraph above, I focused on the fact that wearing sweatpants is not clearly assur, and that’s why I don’t think you need to run for cover at your basketball practices. But let’s change the scenario: Let’s say you’re wearing a bathing suit at an all-women’s beach in Israel, and then a man walks onto the beach. Wearing a bathing suit in front of men is clearly assur. But I think that in this case, HE is the one doing what he’s not supposed to be doing and is where he is not supposed to be; that is his problem, his sin, not yours. Thus, even in this case, I do not think you have to run for cover. However, as above, one’s sensitivity comes into play, and one might want to cover up even if it is not her sin.
Bottom line: In your basketball example, I think there are 2 reasons why you do not have to run for cover: a) Wearing sweatpants in front of men is not clearly assur to begin with, and b) he is the one who should not be there (this assumes it is clearly known that it’s a “girl’s only” time).
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Pondering Yemot Ha-Mashiah
Here's a question from Zahava Rothschild, an an attempt at one way of addressing it:
Nobody really knows what will be in the times of Mashiach, so people have all kinds of dreams of what life will be like when he comes. But if the Rambam is right, and the world stays as it is with just a general knowledge that Gd exists, then isn't that giving false hope to all those people that have incredible dreams of techiat hameitim and flying on eagles wings and gan eden life and everyone being healthy, etc.? It doesn't seem fair to give the Jews false hope after all that they've experienced!
This question is based on the very elemental problem that, at least as I understand our mesorah, it doesn't teach anything definitive - either descriptive, prescriptive, or proscriptive - about the future. Yes, we read the beautiful nevu'ot of Yishayahu etc., and we daven for the geulah, tehiat ha-meitim, shivat tzion, the re-building of the Beit Ha-Miikdash, and the re-institution of korbanot. But the nevu'ot and midrashim about the future, for all their glory, seem rather nebulous, and perhaps allegorical (for example, according to some interpretations of "al kanfei nesharim") -- and so they inspire hope, but they leave open the question of whether things in yemot ha-mashiah will be literally or figuratively according to their contents. Similarly, in our davening, we include bakashot based on the hopes that Tanakh and Hazal have given us, but since the sources are rather vague, so too are our bakashot open to individual interpretation. Finally, I do think it's relevant that, in a religion whose very foundation is a legal system that dictates our behavior in myriad ways, we do not have any halakhot about the undefined future - this, to my mind, underscores the unclear nature of it.
So, in our own lives, what we have to go on is hope, which is a very personal thing, and which is based not only on sources but also on one's theological/emotional bent. I imagine that for Rambam the rationalist, it made the most "sense", based on the sources available, to envision yemot ha-mashiah in natural - rather than supernatrual - terms, whereas the available sources seem to have led the parshanim with more emotive or Kabbalistic tendencies to the conclusion that there would, in fact, be other-worldly elements to yemot ha-mashiah. The reason all of this does not give me, personally, false hope, is twofold: (1) Since we cannot *know* about the future, my hopes, based on one or another interpretation, are valuable in and of themselves, and so they cannot be "false"; they give me inspiration, they remind me to be a better Jew, and there is nothing false about that; (2) Since, according to all understandings, yemot ha-mashiah will B"H be a wonderful time for the world and for Jews, if it turns out that my particular understanding of what it would look like was wrong, I don't think I will have lost anything by imagining it in my own version; it will, G-d willing, be wonderful regardless of the specifics. I know this answer is not satisfying on the level of what we can "know" - but I think that is precisely the point about this future period: we cannot know, and so we dream.
One final note: until very recently in historical terms, no one could have imagined the precise way in which Medinat Yisrael would be established and shivat Tzion, in its incipient form, would begin. People davened for it, probabaly had dreams about it, but surely no one predicted it to be exactly as it ended up occuring. And yet, despite the internal and external struggles in the State, it is a glorious thing, truly a nes galui be-yameinu. Did it happen through a man on a white horse, or literally on the wings of eagles? No, it happened through international negotiations, diplomacy, wars, sweat, and tears - but as religious Zionists, we believe that all that comprises our part, with Hashem's help, in bringing the geulah - and that, to my mind, is no less amazing than anything obviously supernatural that could have happened.
Nobody really knows what will be in the times of Mashiach, so people have all kinds of dreams of what life will be like when he comes. But if the Rambam is right, and the world stays as it is with just a general knowledge that Gd exists, then isn't that giving false hope to all those people that have incredible dreams of techiat hameitim and flying on eagles wings and gan eden life and everyone being healthy, etc.? It doesn't seem fair to give the Jews false hope after all that they've experienced!
This question is based on the very elemental problem that, at least as I understand our mesorah, it doesn't teach anything definitive - either descriptive, prescriptive, or proscriptive - about the future. Yes, we read the beautiful nevu'ot of Yishayahu etc., and we daven for the geulah, tehiat ha-meitim, shivat tzion, the re-building of the Beit Ha-Miikdash, and the re-institution of korbanot. But the nevu'ot and midrashim about the future, for all their glory, seem rather nebulous, and perhaps allegorical (for example, according to some interpretations of "al kanfei nesharim") -- and so they inspire hope, but they leave open the question of whether things in yemot ha-mashiah will be literally or figuratively according to their contents. Similarly, in our davening, we include bakashot based on the hopes that Tanakh and Hazal have given us, but since the sources are rather vague, so too are our bakashot open to individual interpretation. Finally, I do think it's relevant that, in a religion whose very foundation is a legal system that dictates our behavior in myriad ways, we do not have any halakhot about the undefined future - this, to my mind, underscores the unclear nature of it.
So, in our own lives, what we have to go on is hope, which is a very personal thing, and which is based not only on sources but also on one's theological/emotional bent. I imagine that for Rambam the rationalist, it made the most "sense", based on the sources available, to envision yemot ha-mashiah in natural - rather than supernatrual - terms, whereas the available sources seem to have led the parshanim with more emotive or Kabbalistic tendencies to the conclusion that there would, in fact, be other-worldly elements to yemot ha-mashiah. The reason all of this does not give me, personally, false hope, is twofold: (1) Since we cannot *know* about the future, my hopes, based on one or another interpretation, are valuable in and of themselves, and so they cannot be "false"; they give me inspiration, they remind me to be a better Jew, and there is nothing false about that; (2) Since, according to all understandings, yemot ha-mashiah will B"H be a wonderful time for the world and for Jews, if it turns out that my particular understanding of what it would look like was wrong, I don't think I will have lost anything by imagining it in my own version; it will, G-d willing, be wonderful regardless of the specifics. I know this answer is not satisfying on the level of what we can "know" - but I think that is precisely the point about this future period: we cannot know, and so we dream.
One final note: until very recently in historical terms, no one could have imagined the precise way in which Medinat Yisrael would be established and shivat Tzion, in its incipient form, would begin. People davened for it, probabaly had dreams about it, but surely no one predicted it to be exactly as it ended up occuring. And yet, despite the internal and external struggles in the State, it is a glorious thing, truly a nes galui be-yameinu. Did it happen through a man on a white horse, or literally on the wings of eagles? No, it happened through international negotiations, diplomacy, wars, sweat, and tears - but as religious Zionists, we believe that all that comprises our part, with Hashem's help, in bringing the geulah - and that, to my mind, is no less amazing than anything obviously supernatural that could have happened.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Ripping off tags on Shabbat-Daniella Grodko
Can you rip off tags on Shabbos? Thanks!
Daniella Grodko
Response from Mrs. Sinensky:
The potential issue here is makeh b’patish (putting the final touches on an object), as one might view the removal of clothing tags as "finishing" the product.
The Shulchan Aruch paskins that you cannot remove fringes left over from the weaving process because of makeh b'patish. If you think about, though, removing a price tag is different than removing fringes--the price tag is not attached to the garment as part of the manufacturing process and the fringes are. The price tag is actually added AFTER the garmnet is completed! So when you take the fringes off, you are completing the garment. When you take the price tag off, you are taking something off that was added to the garment AFTER it was already completed. Based on this, ripping tags off of clothing on shabbat would not be a violation of makeh b'patish.
What about ripping?
R' Shlomo Zalman Auerbach says that you do not violate ripping on Shabbat because the tag was never intended to be permanently attached to the garment.
So bottom line: One can rip tags off of clothing on Shabbat
Challenge for all you bloggers: Based on what I wrote, why would it be a problem for you to rip the seems in a slit of a skirt on Shabbat?
Daniella Grodko
Response from Mrs. Sinensky:
The potential issue here is makeh b’patish (putting the final touches on an object), as one might view the removal of clothing tags as "finishing" the product.
The Shulchan Aruch paskins that you cannot remove fringes left over from the weaving process because of makeh b'patish. If you think about, though, removing a price tag is different than removing fringes--the price tag is not attached to the garment as part of the manufacturing process and the fringes are. The price tag is actually added AFTER the garmnet is completed! So when you take the fringes off, you are completing the garment. When you take the price tag off, you are taking something off that was added to the garment AFTER it was already completed. Based on this, ripping tags off of clothing on shabbat would not be a violation of makeh b'patish.
What about ripping?
R' Shlomo Zalman Auerbach says that you do not violate ripping on Shabbat because the tag was never intended to be permanently attached to the garment.
So bottom line: One can rip tags off of clothing on Shabbat
Challenge for all you bloggers: Based on what I wrote, why would it be a problem for you to rip the seems in a slit of a skirt on Shabbat?
An inspiring quote from the Rav by Zahava Rothschild
Here's a really interesting exerpt from Abraham's Journey by Rav Joseph Soloveitchik. I find that the way it is written and the thoughts that it provokes are realy inspiring. We don't always think of holiness as the true instigator behind our deeds. I think that these words that the Rav writes subconsciously resonate in every action and thought that the Jews experience."Kedushah fascinates; man in all his aspirations, hopes, visions, dreams and yearning is out to realize the idea of holiness, to find Gd and cling to Him. Kedushah has a strange quality; it frightens people, but it also pulls and attracts them. It is daunting with regard to those who refuse to think, to feel, to delve within themselves, to understand the mystery of man and his strange destiny. However, for those blessed with sweep of imagination, depth of perception, breadth of thought, and boldness of character, kedushah is the most fascinating experience, pulling them unconsciously and instinctually to the Creator. At times, it is hard to protect oneself against the onslaught of kedushah; it is hard to run away from the Creator, who trails behind man and challenges him to come back."
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Brachah on Crispix
Another question from Rivka:
What ברכה do you say on Chex, since the 2 sides are technically 2 different ברכות?
First, I assume you mean Crispix, which is half rice & half corn, please let me know if I'm wrong. Generally for mezonos issues, it's easy. Anything with even a minority of the five major grains gets a mezonos (כל שיש בו...). However, even though we make a mezonos on rice, it is not one of those grains. The next thing we would do in a mixture is to see which is the majority, but over here it is really half & half (see story below), so the common recommendation is to make a mezonos on the rice side, take a bite from there & then make a ha'adama on the corn side.
Rabbi Eliyahu Soloveichik (a Rebbe at Landers College and the son of Rav Aharon Soloveichik)was once researching this question, and called the company and asked for the precise proportion of the two sides of the Crispix. The receptionist to whom he asked the question placed him on hold to go ask her supervisor. After a few moments she returned and said "You should make two blessings".
Student Comment to Women & Mitzvot
I just read Rabbi Rothstein's article about women and mitzvot, and it definitely made me think. This is an issue we've all dealt with, specifically my class, an the twelfth grade as a whole as we learn the issues of women and halacha. I definitely think some parts of the article should be included in the part of the curriculum as another view on women's roles in Judaism. It seems weird to me to say that we can figure it all out based on the reason we're exempted from tefillin and from that to talmud torah, but i guess it's an accepted way to learn that. Also it feels really strange to me to say that women's inherent rejection of defined roles that makes them exempt from certain mitzvot, bcause the point of mitzvot is that we have to do them just because we have to, and even if you're a person who doesn't like being told what to do, well you have to anyway. It seems to me like in Judaism women have had to figure out their own role because their is not defined by the Torah, not the other way around. Also I found the whole discussion of the mitzvah of talmud torah very interesting (and relevant to the issue of bitul torah we were discussing today, rabbi) but in the end I was even more perturbed by the fact that women are excluded from it. If the whole mitzvah is really about transmitting torah to the next generation, that makes me sad that women are not chosen to participate in it or receive it, especially because the one realm everyone agrees women rule in is the "raising children" category, so it's interesting that here specifically they're not obligated. I have to think more about this because there are so many issues involved, but I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed the article and I think more people should read it.Thanks for posting it,
Rachel Weber
Student Questions
One of the main things we hope to accomplish with this blog is to give you all an outlet for the questions many of you have that we unfortunately don't usually have time to discuss in class. By sending them to questions@maayanot.org, we will have the chance to think about, discuss & research the questions & respond either here, through e-mail or in person. We've already gotten some questions, including a bunch from Rivka Herzfeld. We will be addressing them one by one - I'll start here. Rivka asked:
If a כהן marries and has a child with someone who is forbidden to him, why is the child punished? He didn’t do anything wrong, and it seems unfair that someone should be penalized for something his father did.
This is a hard question. We know that Judaism does not believe in vicarious liability ("לא יומתו אבות על בנים...איש בחטאו יומת"). The question can be expanded to anyone with restrictions based on their birth status, for a ממזר to עמלק. The question is also true in the reverse - why should we reap the benefits of the actions of אברהם אבינו, or כהנים be privileged because אהרון earned the כהונה?
Without fully answering the question, I hope to make it a bit easier to deal with and quote an excerpt from an article I wrote a while back for the Purim edition of Ma'ayanei Torah:
Perhaps the key to understanding this issue is the following distinction: Children are not punished for their parents’ actions. This is both intuitively unfair, and refuted by the pasuk cited above. However, no one disputes that the actions of parents can affect the circumstances into which their children are born, and in which they grow up. As an extreme case, a pregnant woman who smokes crack will harm her innocent child. The same with parents who choose to waste all there money on lottery tickets rather than properly feed their children, or who abuse their children. Actions have consequences that extend beyond the actors themselves to the people around them. It's still not "fair", but it at least puts it into a framework that is more recognizable. עמלק's children are condemned through no fault of their own, but that is just an inherited status based on the decisions made by their ancestors, the same way that our status as Jews is based on our parents response of נעשה ונשמע, or Avraham finding Hashem. Your circumstance won't determine whether or not you get to עולם הבא, just the challenges you'll have to face to get there.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
A Letter from Rabbi Zev Reichman to His Congregation
Dear Friends,
I am writing to you at the end of a day that was truly thrilling and
inspiring. On my flight to Israel, I read the edition of Time
Magazine with the picture of the Star of David on the cover. It was
more than merely depressing. The magazine strongly implied it
believed that Israel would not survive. The article claimed that
there was no solution to Israel's problems. Between terrorists like
Hamas who try to attack us wherever we are and the fact that there
are more than five million Arabs in the land between the
Mediterranean and the Jordan, the magazine claimed that Israel cannot
survive as a democracy.
Today I experienced why the article is wrong.
I began the day in Alon Shvut. Rav Rimon and I joined Gabi Nachmani
from Livnot Ulihibanot and we set out to go south to give some love
to our soldiers who are fighting so bravely in Gaza. Rav Rimon has
invested tens of hours in this project. For the last week he has
constantly been on the phone with soldiers to try and determine what
they really need. He has heard from many units that they are cold.
Israel has historically waged its wars in the summer. The last war
in Lebanon was in July. The Six Day War was in June. Even the Yom
Kippur War was in October. Israel is not conditioned to a war during
winter. The soldiers in Gaza are reporting that they are very cold
at night Rav Rimon then found out that pairs of thermal, polartec
gloves and undershirts, as well as thermal neck warmers would really
make a difference for the soldiers. He found the manufacturer and it
turns out that the maker of these products has a son who is serving
in Gaza. This man, Aharon Gantz, was so moved by what we wanted to
do that he provided the products to us at cost. Our shul sponsored
the purchase, and Rav Rimon and I went with Gabi this morning to pick
up 1,000 pairs of thermal gloves, (the army typically only buys these
gloves for the most elite units), 1,000 pairs of thermal neck
warmers, 80 thermal socks, and 80 thermal undershirts. Aharon was
most moved by the fact that a shul in New Jersey would subsidize a
gift of such utility for soldiers. He said to me, "This is the nice
part of our nation. In times of crises we all come together.
Nothing can stand in the way of this unity. This strength is what
will defeat all our enemies."
We then headed down to Gaza. Gabi found a way for us to avoid the
military police and through back roads we arrived at a base about a
kilometer away from Gaza. When we arrived there we found the officer
in charge of logistics and we told him that we had brought gifts for
the soldiers - gloves, neck warmers, special cards with chapters of
Tehillim on them and packages that the children in our shul packed.
He was very happy with the gifts. He told us to follow him and he
actually took us to the staging grounds where the soldiers are
entering and leaving Gaza, about 400 meters from the fence that
Israel has broken through to enter Gaza city. We spent almost 4
hours with the hundreds of soldiers who are entering and leaving Gaza.
As we arrived, a group of thirty soldiers returned from Gaza. They
had been inside for 10 consecutive days. That is ten days with no
showers or changes of clothing. Ten days dodging mortars and
snipers. Ten days conquering territory and avoiding mines. For the
tankists it is ten days of not leaving a tank. Imagine what it would
be like to spend ten days in a row in a car without the ability to
leave it. Now imagine ten days in a tank. These soldiers were dirty
with sweat and mud. Many had battle paint on. The officer gathered
them and Rav Rimon and I spoke to the troops. The Rav gave them
words of encouragement. He pointed out that each of them is engaged
in a mitzvah activity protecting the Jewish people from enemies. He
pointed out how many miracles our nation is receiving. For example
think of the story of the soldier who woke up in the middle of the
night in a school and noticed a chord and saved 150 of his friends
and so many other stories that we must be thankful for. He then
introduced me to the soldiers. He pointed out that I had come from
the US in order to convey our community's love for the troops. I
spoke with the soldiers about the great unity that now fills our
nation. How in Englewood, New Jersey, in our shul our kids gathered
on Shabbat and each child prayed for one soldier. I told the
soldiers how we all bless them and pray that Hashem send his angels
to protect them and lead them to success. I told the soldiers how
God is one and whenever we become one here below we merit feeling the
presence of the One above. Finally we hugged each soldier and
thanked him for protecting all of us through his service. We then
started to hand out all our goodies. The soldiers were ecstatic.
They were so thankful for the gloves and the neck warmers. They
eagerly took our tehillim cards and chocolates, which now helping to
sweeten a very difficult time for thousands who are fighting for our
state. Undoubtedly, the favorite gift of all was the packages from
our kids. The handwritten cards were the most precious item. Each
handwritten letter meant so much. Soldiers told me they treasure
those simple displays of caring. As one told me, "The most wonderful
thing is the handwritten note. When we see that Jews elsewhere in
the world care and are writing to us it warms our hearts. This gives
us the strength and support." We could not leave. We spent hours
with the soldiers talking and davening, learning with them and giving
out thousands of thermal items, but we also were receiving a great
deal, more than words can ever describe.
We then went to Sderot. In Sderot, two officers came to meet us.
These soldiers are with a unit of paratroopers of very young
soldiers. They are still in their first year of army service. They
never expected to be sent into hostile territory. However, they are
deep inside Gaza and this unit of eighty soldiers has already had
five wounded members. One of their members, their commander, was
wounded by a mine. When the others went in to evacuate him, one of
the soldiers was hit with a sniper's bullet from a hamas terrorist.
The bullet penetrated his ceramic bullet proof vest and entered his
chest. They thought they had to do a surgery on him in the field
because they did not think he would survive long enough to arrive at
a hospital. In the end he was airlifted to Tel Hashomer and operated
on there. There was a great miracle. While the bullet broke through
the vest, it ended up flying through his body and missing his heart
and lungs. The bullet left his body and he is recovering nicely.
These boys are very young and are having a difficult time. For them
we got gloves, neck warmers, socks, and undershirts. Since they
still have two years of army service they wil certainly use these
gifts well after this war ends. They repeated their invitation to
Rav Rimon and me. When the war ends they plan to make a large party
of thanks to Hashem. They want us to come and speak at that meal
when the warriors will be honored.
We met with other units and we helped them as well.
Finally we loaded the car with fifty pies of pizza and headed back to
the front. We arrived at a base of paratroopers and tankists who
were returning from Gaza. By now it was dark out. We started to
distribute the pizzas to the soldiers; it became a yom tov. There
was such joy! Soldiers, who are really just kids, they are nineteen
and twenty years old, surrounded us and asked us to sing and dance
with them. They all had tehillim they had taken from Breslov
chassidim and they wanted to dance and declare that "Yisrael betach
bahashem, Israel trust God, ezram umaginam hu, He is their help and
protector, anachnu maaminim bney maaminim, we are believers sons of
believers, viain lanu al mi lihisha'ain elah al avinu shebashmayim,
and we have no one to rely on, we can only rely on our father in
heaven." Rav Rimon then jumped on a van and gave the soldiers a
short talk of encouragement. He then introduced me. I turned to the
soldiers and told them, "Today was Rav Rimon's birthday, he did not
even realize it but when he did, he said to me, `my present was
getting to spend an entire day running from group of soldiers to
group of soldiers to give them gifts and encouragement!'" When the
soldiers heard that they all burst into song. They pulled Rav Rimon
into a circle and from their depths of their being they sang
together, "Yisrael betach behashem ezram umainam hu anachnu maaminim
bney maaminim viain lanu al mi lihisha'ain ela ela al avinu avinu
shebashamayim!"
So let Time Magazine claim that Israel has no future. They have not
experienced Jewish unity. When Am Yisrael is together, when soldiers
are singing and dancing of their faith, we will survive, we certainly
will.
Zev Reichman
Our First Comment!
I posted this under the original post, but by now I wonder if anyone will see it, so I'm putting it here as its own post. Remember, you can comment by e-mailing questions@maayanot.org. Please let us know if we can post it with your name.
A pircha between hillel's situation and modern day America, is that the goal today is to "fix" the American economy, and so the solution needs to address the sources the crisis. Simply “bailing out wall street” can not be the only action taken for a long term solution. Hillel was forced to do what he did - there was no way to really address the root of the problem.
It is interesting that article raises how Hillel's solution and today's bailout are not "ideal" and were only instituted to be pragmatic. This reminds me of the gemara we did in your class, where Rava paskins that a “rodef achar rodef” is patur from paying for anything he might have damaged while chasing the rodef, because if he were to be chayav, people would not want to stop a rodef. I love when the Halacha accomadates for us being human. To me it really shows the greatness of the halachic system.
-Aviva Novick
A pircha between hillel's situation and modern day America, is that the goal today is to "fix" the American economy, and so the solution needs to address the sources the crisis. Simply “bailing out wall street” can not be the only action taken for a long term solution. Hillel was forced to do what he did - there was no way to really address the root of the problem.
It is interesting that article raises how Hillel's solution and today's bailout are not "ideal" and were only instituted to be pragmatic. This reminds me of the gemara we did in your class, where Rava paskins that a “rodef achar rodef” is patur from paying for anything he might have damaged while chasing the rodef, because if he were to be chayav, people would not want to stop a rodef. I love when the Halacha accomadates for us being human. To me it really shows the greatness of the halachic system.
-Aviva Novick
Friday, January 23, 2009
On the Mitzrim, Not the Jews?
I don't have time to get into it in great depth, but just to plant an idea before Shabbos: I think that the first three מכות also targeted the Jews. Ibn Ezra first entertains the idea (he says that straight through, the Jews were spared from the harsher ones, but subject to those not as bad - an opinion I don't really understand). Can you figure out what in the text gives that impression, or think why that might be the case? If it's not true, how else would you explain the answer to the first question?
Have a great Shabbos.
(click the title for an audio bonus)
Have a great Shabbos.
(click the title for an audio bonus)
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Thoughts on the Ballet "Coppelia"
As per Ms. F's suggestion, I went to see "Coppelia" on Motzei Shabbat. It was amazing in many respects--the dancing, the costumes, scenery, music, acting. The second act really impact me. In this act, a toymaker tries to make his toys come alive by "drawing the life" out of a young boy who attempted to sneak into his workship, and uses the boys life-force it to animate a doll. The "doll" (a dancer who does a fantastic job of playing dead) slowly comes to life, little by little. She picks her head up, then it drops down again. She picks it up again. Then she straightens her arms, etc. You see the whole process, until she is dancing around using her entire body and range of motion. While I was watching it, it struck me that this scene depicts exactly what God does for us every morning. He "brings us to life" and is the one responsible for every single part of us working in the complex and amazing way that it's supposed to. Watching this scene refreshed my appreciation of God's role in my daily physical functioning, and re-inspired me to take modeh ani, asher yatzar, elokei neshama, and birchot hashachar more seriously. This trip to the ballet also reminded me that we can gain something from every experience that we have in our lives, even when we enter into that experiences for the sole purpose of taking a break/having a vacation!
Monday, January 19, 2009
ויקם מלך חדש
For many of you, tomorrow will be the most historic day of your conscious lives. How old were you on 9/11/2001? I have to admit that until that day, I hadn't experienced much history either. I remember once, I must have been in college or graduate school, arguing with my friends about the most historic event that we had experienced, and the best we could come up with was the death of Princess Diana. When the Twin Towers were destroyed, I first appreciated what a ברכה it was to have lived in such trivial times.
Tomorrow is the evidence that historic doesn't have to mean tragic. No matter what your thoughts on the election, or even the president-elect, from at least one perspective, Barack Obama's inauguration is a glorious day for this glorious nation. At a Shabbos meal this week, I got into an argument with a virtual stranger. He was telling me how naive I am about America, and that it's just a matter of time before the latent anti-semitism that lurks deep in the hearts of the over-whelming majority of our neighbors reaches the surface. I argued that America is fundamentally different than any other nation in history, and that with the exception of fringes on the extreme, is sincerely accepting of all. As an example, I cited everyone who kept warning before the election that Obama would lose unless he were up by 10-12% due to the "Bradley Effect" - white voters who would not vote for a black man, but feel guilty enough to lie about it to pollsters. Straight through election season I thought that there would be no such effect because today's America had effectively chased racism to the fringe. Contemporary America has turned the page on its most shameful chapter, and can tomorrow celebrate what it has become, no matter what kind of President he turns out to be.
And we get to see it live.
Tomorrow is the evidence that historic doesn't have to mean tragic. No matter what your thoughts on the election, or even the president-elect, from at least one perspective, Barack Obama's inauguration is a glorious day for this glorious nation. At a Shabbos meal this week, I got into an argument with a virtual stranger. He was telling me how naive I am about America, and that it's just a matter of time before the latent anti-semitism that lurks deep in the hearts of the over-whelming majority of our neighbors reaches the surface. I argued that America is fundamentally different than any other nation in history, and that with the exception of fringes on the extreme, is sincerely accepting of all. As an example, I cited everyone who kept warning before the election that Obama would lose unless he were up by 10-12% due to the "Bradley Effect" - white voters who would not vote for a black man, but feel guilty enough to lie about it to pollsters. Straight through election season I thought that there would be no such effect because today's America had effectively chased racism to the fringe. Contemporary America has turned the page on its most shameful chapter, and can tomorrow celebrate what it has become, no matter what kind of President he turns out to be.
And we get to see it live.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Women & Mitzvos
The title is a link to an article that I read and greatly enjoyed over Shabbos. Rabbi Gidon Rothstein gives an entirely different take on the exemption of women from מצוות עשה שהזמן גרמא from those I have seen in the past. In supporting his thesis, he also uses it to explain the ברכה of שלא עשני אשה. His analysis emerges naturally from a close reading of the sources, and manages to be compelling without apologetics. Especially for those of you in my Halacha classes, who know how underwhelmed I am with the explanations we discussed in class, I highly recommend reading this (it reads shorter than it looks). He references other writings on similar topics that I look forward to reading. Faculty & students alike, I'm curious what you think about it.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Mrs. Appel's Reading & Movie List
- Dr. Seuss, Oh, The Places You'll Go
- For an interesting dialog about contemporary (or at least, 1990s) Orthodoxy: Haym Soloveitchik, "Rupture and Recontstruction: The Transformation of Contemporary Orthodoxy", in Tradition 28:4 (1994) -- along with Dr. Isaac Chavel's response and Dr. Soloveitchik's response to Dr. Chavel, the latter two published in Torah U-Madda, January 1, 1997
- Heschel, The Sabbath
- The poetry of Leah Goldberg
- Chaim Potok, The Chosen
- Thornton Wilder, Our Town
- Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird
- David Ben-Gurion's speech declaring Israel's idependence, recording: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJObtrw_E6g&feature=related
Movies:
- Schindler's List
- Life is Beautiful
Mrs. Kraft's Reading List
For thinking about Judaism on a deeper level and to be inspired at the same time:
1. Living Inspired by Rabbi Akiva Tatz
2. World Mask by Rabbi Akiva Tatz
3. The Thinking Jewish Teenager's Guide to Life by Rabbi Akiva Tatz
For the very intellectually sophisticated reader dealing with issues of faith in G-d:
1. Forgive Us, Father-in-Law, for We Know Not What to Think: Letter to a Philosophical Dropout from Orthodoxy by Rabbi Shalom Carmy
2. Faith and Doubt by Rabbi Norman Lamm
On why bad things happen to good people:
Kol Dodi Dofek (Hebrew) or Fate and Destiny (English translation) by Rav Solovetichik
Just good and enjoyable (and secular) reading on having the correct perspective and being productive, etc.:
The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Teens by Sean Covey
For Inspiration:
Just One Word. Amen by Esther Stern
To increase your kavanah in tefila:
Pathway to Prayer by Rabbi Mayer Birnbaum
The Art of Jewish Prayer by Rabbi Yitzchok Kirzner
Rav Schwab on Prayer by Rabbi Shimon Schwab
1. Living Inspired by Rabbi Akiva Tatz
2. World Mask by Rabbi Akiva Tatz
3. The Thinking Jewish Teenager's Guide to Life by Rabbi Akiva Tatz
For the very intellectually sophisticated reader dealing with issues of faith in G-d:
1. Forgive Us, Father-in-Law, for We Know Not What to Think: Letter to a Philosophical Dropout from Orthodoxy by Rabbi Shalom Carmy
2. Faith and Doubt by Rabbi Norman Lamm
On why bad things happen to good people:
Kol Dodi Dofek (Hebrew) or Fate and Destiny (English translation) by Rav Solovetichik
Just good and enjoyable (and secular) reading on having the correct perspective and being productive, etc.:
The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Teens by Sean Covey
For Inspiration:
Just One Word. Amen by Esther Stern
To increase your kavanah in tefila:
Pathway to Prayer by Rabbi Mayer Birnbaum
The Art of Jewish Prayer by Rabbi Yitzchok Kirzner
Rav Schwab on Prayer by Rabbi Shimon Schwab
פרשת שמות
The title is a link to an amazing resource - yutorah's page for the parsha this week. They construct it each week, and have an enormous amount of shiurim, audio and text, on all subjects. In the coming weeks, we plan to construct a list of Torah resources on the web that will remain on the side of the blog.
In the meantime, as there is no Stream this week (I think), I want to share a couple of thoughts about the parsha.
In the meantime, as there is no Stream this week (I think), I want to share a couple of thoughts about the parsha.
- After consistently referring to the baby in the basket (Moshe) as the ילד (child), it says that בת פרעה heard the cries of the נער (youth). Rashi quotes the midrash that Hashem miraculously made Moshe's infant cries sound older. What was the purpose of this נס? Perhaps, we can explain that with the decree that all newborn Jewish boys be drowned in the Nile (and we know there were many newborn Jewish boys), the sounds of crying, drowning infants were almost commonplace at the river; background noise that would not have penetrated even the compassionate בת פרעה. Only the unusual sound of an adolescent cry made her think twice. Looking back, the notion that even the desparate cries of babies could be so routine that they become inaudible seems horrifying, as many barbaric practices in world history do in hindsight. I wonder what future generations will think of us? Who are our world's crying babies? Whose desparate pleas fall on deaf ears today?
- Reviewing the Parsha with my head already on vacation, I was struck by a certain passage. When defending themselves to Paro, the heroic midwives defend themselves with a statement that would serve us well to remember as we head to our various exotic & less exotic destinations: כִּי לא כַנָּשִׁים הַמִּצְרִיּת הָעִבְרִיּת - The Jewish women are not like the Egyptian women. As integrated as we are into our American culture, with all of the benefits - of all types - that we get from it, it's important to keep in mind that we are different, and that should be evident for all to see.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Rabbi Besser's List
I think I'm going to enter my list piecemeal, to allow me to give it some more thought, and talk a bit about why I'm recommending the books that I do, without having a post so long that no one reads it. I'll start with four.
- As a Driven Leaf (Milton Steinberg) - I add my vote to the others but attach a warning: What makes the book so wonderful (in addition to the issues of faith & doubt highlighted by Mrs. Goldberg) is what scares me a bit too. It is the fictionalized story of a real historic figure -Elisha ben Avuyah (Acher) - a Tana who became a heretic. For the first half of the book, the primary characters are Rabbi Akiva, Rabbi Meir, Bruriah, Ben Azzai etc. Many of the Talmudic figures we study every day, and getting to know them in a real-life way is thrilling. And much of the story is based on legitimate sources. The disclaimer is, that it's not real-life. The gaps filled in by the author dwarf the actual historic content, making the finished product truly fictional. That said, the glimpse into their lives, the very readable style, the big issues raised in an intriguing but not ponderous way, and just the wonderful drama make this a book you will love.
- A Return to Modesty (Wendy Shalit) - This is unlike any other "Tzniut" book you'll ever read. Ms. Shalit's story makes the book so unique. She grew up non-observant, and what drew her to Orthodoxy was the appeal of the rules of tzniut. Therefore, with no pre-existing agenda, she lived the secular system, straight through the typical University campus and found it wanting, and found what was missing in classic Judaism's halachik and philosophical view of women. Using all sorts of data (very much including womens' magazines), she makes the case that modern sensibilities about gender relationships are doing major damage to women, and that the formula to repair that damage lies in the roots of our tradition. You can disagree with her at the end, but her perspective is eye-opening. (Disclaimer: I'm not endorsing the cover, which was not chosen by the author, and was removed from my copy).
- Turbulent Souls (Stephen Dubner) - The memoir of a successful journalist, raised as a fervent Christian, who lapsed into a secular adulthood tracing his Jewish roots.
- The Geography of Bliss (Eric Weiner) - I read it on Ms. Socken's advice, and though it took me a bit to get in to, I ended up enjoying it a lot. A reporter for NPR travels to the happiest and least happy countries on Earth to see what lessons about happiness he can learn. The chapters that spoke most to me (though I doubt many of you will choose the same ones) were Iceland (which contains what I consider to be the single most important line of the book - I won't give it away) & Thailand.
I'll give some more a different time, but I have midterms to grade. Please let us know what you think of the blog so far, submit questions you would like to see addressed or helpful suggestions at questions@maayanot.org.
Chazal & the Economic Crisis
Speaking of interesting articles in the Wall Street Journal, while I'm not sure I agree with everything inside, this was a fascinating modern application of an ancient Takana. (The title is a hyperlink to the article.)
Special Guest Submission: Ms. Socken's List!
- (non-fiction) The Geography of Bliss, Eric Weiner
- (non-fiction) Amusing Ourselves to Death, Neil Postman
- (novel) The Alchemist, Paulo Coehlo
- (film) "Amazing Grace" (2006) trailer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6Cv5P9H9qU
- (extremely brilliant "short film") http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42E2fAWM6rA
Ms. Gordon's List
- As a Driven Leaf - Milton Steinberg
- Jewish Matters - Articles by different authors on different topics (God, Faith, Tzniut, Prayer etc.)
- Exodus or Mila 18 - Leon Uris
- O Jerusalem - Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre
- Anything by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (Chief Rabbi of England)
- Anything by Rav Aharon Lichtenstein (Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Har Etzion and Posek of Maayanot)
- Lonely Man of Faith - Rav Yosef Dov Soloveichik
- The Modest Way - Rav Ellensohn's book on Tzniut. Has all opinions and sources with English translations.
- Jewish Literacy - Rabbi Joseph Telushkin
- The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho
- Movie: Hiding & Seeking
Monday, January 12, 2009
Mrs. Knoll's Reading List
- East of Eden - John Steinbeck
- The Chosen - Chaim Potok
- Mrs. Knoll's response to the Frumteens moderator to his attacks on Maayanot teaching Gemara to women:
Mrs. Goldberg' List
- As A Driven Leaf - Milton Steinberg - Questions of Faith
- Books by Daniel Gordis - About Israel
- Song- Unanswered Prayers - Garth Brooks - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDc9qNPD94Q
Rabbi Prince's Reading List
- All books by Rabbi David Aaron
- All Books by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan
- All Books by Nechama Lebowitz
- Discover by Rabbi Dov Moshe Lipman
- By His Light – Essays of Rav Aharon Lichtenstein
- Ner Uziel - By Rabbi Uziel Milevsky
- Off the Derech – by Faranack Margolese
- תורה לדעת – Rabbi Matis Blum
- הררי קדם - "Harerei Kedem I & II" by Michal Zalman Shurkin
- On Repentance: The Thought and Oral Discourses of Rabbi Joseph Dov Soloveitchik
- A Student's Obligation: Advice from the Rebbe of the Warsaw Ghetto
- The Promise – Chaim Potok
Mrs. Sinensky's Reading, Movie, Game & Activity List
- The Matrix (movie)
- Redemption, Prayer, Torah Study in Tradition 17:2, R' Soloveitchik (my favorite Rav Solovetchik article)
- Wit, Margaret Edson (play that's fun to analyze)
- Halachos of Brachos, R' Forst (super-practical, well organized, clear, comprehensive book about Brachot. Great to learn with a friend!)
- Set (the game-great for sharpening your Gemara skills. Someone once told me that it should be renamed the "tzad hashaveh" game!)
- Watch your favorite T.V. show and write down all the "hidden" messages that you can pick up on
- Abraham's Journey, R' Soloveitchik (Essays about the life and character of Avraham Avinue. I read it on Pesach and couldn't put it down!)
- The Sabbath, Heschel (A book that will change your perspective on and appreciation of Shabbat and Chagim)
Mrs. Schapiro's Reading List
- Orthodox Forum Series (several books on timely topics such as feminism, relating to non-Jews, relating to non-traditional Jews, etc. Sometimes the Enlish is difficult but there's always http://www.dictionary.com/)
- Me'am Lo'ez, translated by Aryeh Kaplan (Enlish translation of pesukim and various midrashim on Tanach)
- If You Were God, Aryeh Kaplan
Mrs. Cohen's Reading & Movie List
- Awakenings (inspirational movie)
- My Left Foot (inspirational movie)
- Kol Dodi Dofek, ed. Woolf (one of Rav Soloveitchik's most famous articles--must read!)
Mrs. Bieler's Reading List
- Articles from the Tradition journal
- Articles from the Journal of Halakha & Contemporary Society
- The Phantom Tollbooth, Juster & Feiffer
Ms. Wolf's Reading & Movie List
- Hiding and Seeking (movie)
- The Lonely Man of Faith, R' Soloveitchik
- As A Driven Leaf, Milton Steinberg (historical fiction based on the Gemara)
- Exodus, Leon Uris (historical fiction about Israel)
- Mila 18, Leon Uris
Ms. F's Reading List
- The Source, James Michener (historical fiction about the Crusades)
- Sabbath Shiurim, Rabbi M. Miller
- Shiurei HaRav, Epstein (lectures of Rav Soloveitchik)
- http://www.tanach.org/ (awesome Parsha material from R' Menachem Leibtag)
- http://www.vbm-torah.org/ (more awesome Parsha material from Yershiva Har Etzion a.k.a "Gush")
- A Return to Modesty, Wendy Shalit (discussion of Tzniut from a secular perspective)
- The Magic Touch, Gila Manolson (about negiah)
Mrs. Ausubel's Reading List
- Permission to Believe, Lawrence Kelemen (Approaches to the Existence of God)
- Permission to Receive, Lawrence Kelemen (Approaches to Revelation)
- Lights Along the Way, Twerski (commentary on Mesillat Yesharim-how to work on yourself)
Mrs. Billet's Reading List
- 9 Questions People Ask About Judaism (Telushkin & Prager)
- To Pray As A Jew-selected chapters (Chaim HaLevi Donin)
- Holy Brother (Carleback stories)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
While I can't answer this question from a halachic standpoint, as I do not know the different opinions off-hand, I want to take this opportunity to suggest an opinion that simply has to do with tznius hashkafically.
I feel that the laws of tznius are not just about following the technicalities (is my skirt below my knee, is my shirt to my elbows, or whatever it is, am I wearing a skirt to play basketball, etc). I think that in no small way, the laws of tznius are geared towards helping us as Jews develop an outlook and personality of modesty.
Yes there are hard and fast halachos that we are supposed to follow as best as we can-- and I don't mean to minimize those issues, nor the approach of looking at tznius in only that way. But I do also think it's important not to lose sight of the forest for the trees, and to remember the bigger picture.
That being said, if I may offer my personal opinion, even if it would be technically ok (again, I am not familiar with the halachos so I'm NOT saying that it is ok!) to wear a bathing suit in an amusement park where there are only non-Jewish males (also: while it may technically be ok to appear immodest in front of non-Jewish males) I'm not sure that a decision like that exemplifies the spirit of the laws of modesty.
I do recognize that my statement is perhaps indicative of behavior that is "just" a sensitivity or perhaps a chumra (I don't know the topic well enough to know if that is the case), but I still feel that there is something to be said for giving credence to the spirit of the law.