Making Aliyot II

A couple of weeks ago, we talked about how the עליות for קריאת התורה were divided.  Since then I read this article on the subject which was honestly a lot more interesting than I thought it would be, which is the good news.  Here is his summary of the various considerations that motivated the traditional divisions (as opposed to the Yemenite tradition, which he explains is very different):

1. The divisors sought to achieve a balance between maintaining the integrity of the biblical narrative and having ‘aliyot of relatively even lengths. It is important, however, not to attempt to read too much into the bundling together of seemingly discrete passages into a single ‘aliyah; often, the consideration is no more esoteric than a simple desire to maintain a consistent ‘aliyah length.
2. The divisors sought to amplify the hidden connections between seemingly unrelated passages and thereby tease out homiletical messages.
3. As a consequence of principle 2, the divisors placed only secondary emphasis on concluding each aliyah at the end of a physical paragraph (“parasha”).
4. The divisors endowed the concluding words of aliyot with far greater significance than did the Yemenites. Thus:

• Negative endings containing words dealing with curses, impurity, punishment, destruction and death were avoided if at all possible.

• Similarly, positive endings containing expressions of blessing were targeted.

5. The divisors sought to end aliyot at dramatic junctures in the narrative, rather than encompassing the entire narrative section within a single discrete ‘aliyah. Thereby, they sought to preserve a sense both of narrative suspense and of continuity between adjacent aliyot.

He brings the examples that I mentioned in פרשת וארא as an illustration of #4, confirming the theory of my Baal koreh friend.

The bad news is that he doesn't address Rebecca's question, for what I then realized is an obvious reason.  In that case (starting an עליה right before the final of יעקב's ברכות [Binyamin's] in פרשת ויחי), the עליה follows the division of the Torah into Parshiyot - not the way we use the term, but the physical breaks in the Torah text, represented by פ or ס in our chumashim.  Therefore the question is why that was broken up that way, a decision that goes far further back in our tradition, and requires me to read another article.  I'll update if I find anything out.

Beli Ayin Hara

From Alona Stewart:
I was just wondering-- what's the difference between an ayin hara and superstition? A lot of the things people do to "prevent" an ayin hara seem a lot like superstition to me.

This answer is based on the research done for a shiur that my husband gave several years ago. I tried to get him to write the post, but no dice.

The idea of ayin hara is well-documented in our sources. To choose just one well-known occurrence of very many: Rashi (from Gemara Berachot 20a) on the brachah of “Ha-Malach ha-Go’el” that Yaakov gives to his grandsons (Bereishit 48:16) says the word וידגו is used because Yaakov hopes they will be like fish, which increase and multiply without the ayin hara having dominion over them. (Other sources: Rashi Shemot 30:12 – the story of how Bnei Yisrael were to be counted, and Bemidbar 24:2 – the story of Bil’am) The ayin hara seems to be specifically associated with counting people. The Gemara, however, doesn’t really define exactly what the phenomenon of ayin hara is.

There are at least four ways that later interpreters approach the concept of ayin hara:

1. Medical – Abarbanel, at the beginning of Parshat Ki Tisa, writes, based on Greek science, that there is actually some harm that could be caused by one person looking at another with bad intentions, just as one person hitting another causes harm. Our current science no longer believes in harm caused by looking, which leads to a big question of how to proceed when our science differs from that of earlier poskim. That is a whole other post.
2. Mystical/Metaphysical – counting, or otherwise drawing attention to someone, and can evoke an ayin hara, which is a harmful force in the universe. This is the approach taken by works of Kabbalah such as the Zohar.
3. Psychological/Metaphysical – when one draws attention to oneself (by enumerating how many children one has, for example, or flaunting fancy possessions) it causes the attention of Heaven to be focused on the one who singles himself out. Hashem will re-examine that person’s account book, and since everyone has some sins, this leads to punishment. Rabbenu Bechaye and Seforno, though they do not mention the words “ayin hara” specifically, take this approach in Shemot 30:2 where Hashem commands that Bnei Yisrael not be counted directly, but by the half-shekel method.
4. Ayin hara doesn’t matter – Whenever the Gemara gives “ayin hara” as the reason for a mitzvah, Rambam gives a different reason unrelated to ayin hara when he codifes the mitzvah. This led at least two acharonim, R. Tzvi Hirsch Chajes and R. Matisyahu Strashun, to conclude that according to Rambam, ayin hara should not be taken into consideration when determining our behavior.
All these approaches are valid in the sources, and thus it behooves us to take care in areas specifically mentioned by Chazal, such as counting ourselves directly, whether it is specifically because of ayin hara or for another reason (like Rambam would say). Adding our own strictures (R. Moshe Feinstein gives an example of someone who is afraid to say that she’s expecting a baby), however, is not necessary.

Israel as a Religious State

Michal Fromowitz asks:

Ideally, we would all like Israel to be a Jewish religious country - but will it work practically? Can we force the whole country to keep all the Halakhot and Mitzvot? Who will be in charge- the Hasidim or Modern Orthodox people? Would the Rav HaRashi (Chief Rabbi) be a Hasid/Hareidi or a Modern Orthodox rabbi?

Hi Michal- that is a great question! It seems that we pray three times a day for Israel to redeemed so that we can ultimately set up a Halakhic, religious state. Who wouldn't want a country where all the streets are quiet on Shabbat, all the restaurants are kosher and everyone is keeping the Hagim together... this is part of the amazing atmosphere that many of us experience and are attracted to when spending time in Israel today. But, as you mentioned in your question - the issue is much more complex. What would a religious state be like - and would this be something that we would be comfortable with? There are many secular Jews living in Israel - are we going to force them to keep Halakha? Are we going to start executing people and assigning makkot (lashes) for breaking Shabbat? Currently, the only religious states that exist are Saudia Arabia and Iran (and parts of Taliban controlled Afghanistan), where people are often executed for transgressing Shariah (Islamic) law and modesty squads patrol the streets telling people how to dress and behave.... lehavdil, would this be what a religious Jewish state would be like?! Is there any way to combine both our vision and hope of a religious state with our belief in democracy?

I think that there's a lot to discuss with regard to this question, but to start the conversation, I'll share with you two possible models of government where you could still have a religious Halakhic state but perhaps avoid some of these problems.

I. The "Benevolent Theocracy" ("Friendly Religious" Government) Model:
I recommend reading the book "Murderer in the Mikdash" by Gidon Rothstein, which most 10th grade Tanakh classes read this upcoming semester. In this book, the author describes his vision of life in a religious Jewish state after Mashiach has arrived. Without giving too much away, he describes the society as a "benevolent theocracy", which means a very "friendly religious" government. Here, Halakha is enforced but not through punishments and executions, but through Kohanim trying to inspire and educate the people to want to keep Halakha. If someone openly breaks Halakha, they are given the choice either to leave Israel, or to meet with a Kohen to learn more about Halakha and hopefully decide to hold themselves to keeping it on more complete level. The Kohanim are seen as very approachable teachers/counselors who try to bring people closer to Torah through education and "kiruv", instead of handing down makkot or death sentences every time someone breaks Shabbat. So Halakha is still being enforced... but in a "friendly" way. Whether or not this would actually work practically is unclear.

II. Having both Secular and Religious Branches of Government:
Another option could be to adapt the role of the Melekh (the king) to incorporate some aspects of a civil/secular government. In certain situations, the king is granted the power to act "outside of halakha" (see Rambam, Hilkhot Rotzeakh 2:4, Derashot HaRan 11). For example, a king can execute a known murderer whose trial is thrown out due to a Halakhic technicality (for example: due to a problem with the witnesses). Even though on a purely halakhic basis - the murderer cannot be punished, the king is allowed to act in order to bring him to justice and "fill in" any gaps in the Halakhic system. Some modern scholars argue that this power given to the king could be used to create 2 parallel systems of government in Israel running at the same time- a religious government run by the Sanhedrin (based on Halakha) and a secular government, run by the King, with the power to implement certain "secular" laws over and above Halakha. Here you would be able to have a "halakhic" state, but still have a secular branch of the government functioning as part of it.

What about today?
Today, Israel is a complicated situation, since it considers itself both a Jewish and democratic state. On one hand, there is freedom of religion, but the state does enforce certain religious laws. For example, there is currently no secular marriage in Israel, so everyone must get married though the Rabbanut, forcing secular people to go to the Mikvah and pay to have a rabbi at their ceremony (many secular Jews will leave Israel and go to Cyprus to get civilly married instead). As well, religious institutions get government funding and in many places, you cannot open your store on Shabbat or sell Hametz on Pesach without being fined. On one hand, these laws preserve the religious nature of the state and for marriage/divorce situations, ensure that everyone is getting married Halakhically and that their children are considered Jewish. But, if enforcing these laws (especially in cities with an overwhelming secular population) will only cause tension and ill feelings towards religious Jews and Torah, as well as encroach on the civil rights of a large amount of the population, perhaps it is coming at too high a price... this is one of the major debates taking place in Israel today.

Of Sticks and Stones

A few weeks ago, when my children were explaining to me how the reason that Aharon had to perform the first three Makos is because Moshe needed to display הכרת הטוב to the Nile and ground, both of which saved his life; the Nile as a floating baby, and the earth when he buried the Egyptian whom he had killed (there is an interesting lesson here as well: If the entire debt of gratitude to the earth was for helping him hide the evidence of his crime, and the crime was publicized anyway, we see that our requirement of הכרת הטוב is not contingent on whether the good deed done to us was successful).  It got me thinking about another similar episode.  We know that ultimately, Moshe is punished for hitting the rock in פרשת חקת, and the מפרשים all come up with different explanations as to what exactly his sin was (I have a more serious theory on that, but we'll save for another day).
Maybe, it seemed, an element of his mistake is the fact that a stone too once saved his life.  Remember that when Moshe was going back to מצרים after the episode at the burning bush, he was attacked at a motel by Hashem and was only saved from death when ציפורה took a sharp stone, and circumcised their son.  Perhaps then, he also needed to express gratitude to the stone, and hitting it was inappropriate.
The problem with all of this is in this week's פרשה where following the פרשת המן (magic food, not Purim ), in response to the Jews persistent complaints for water, Moshe cries to Hashem "מה אעשה לעם הזה, עוד מעט וסקלני" - What should I do for this nation, a bit more and they will stone me.  Hashem tells Moshe to take the זקנים and "ומטך אשר הכית בו את היאר" - the staff with which you hit the Nile.  And the He tells him to take that מטה, and hit the rock.  It is obviously difficult to say that Moshe was wrong to hit the rock in חקת, if Hashem told him to do it here in בשלח.  More striking, In שמות, and בשלח, it uses the word צור (or צר) for rock, whereas in חקת, it uses סלע - so the language ties the episode where the stone saved Moshe to the one where Hashem explicitly commands him to hit the stone, and separates the one where he is punished for hitting it without permission!  Finally, it seems odd that Hashem refers to the מטה as the one you used to hit the Nile, when as we know, Moshe never hit the Nile.  The Ramban notices this, and says that it means that Moshe hit the Nile indirectly - by telling Aharon to hit it.  There seems to be something here, but I can't put my finger on it.  If anyone has any insights, generally about trying to put these pieces together or specifically about the difference between the צור and the סלע, please let me know.

Hope everyone is having a great vacation.

Davening Tip

A student writes: I just want to know if the teachers have any tips for preparing to daven and being in the right mindset.

Something that I have found helpful is to think of one or two things that you or someone else needs. For example: think of the people in Haiti, think of someone that is sick, think of a challenge in your life that you need help with. The idea is to make yourself realize your dependence on God--then, davening seems all the more necessary and appealing. You can write back and let other readers know if it helped you!

פותח את ידך Revisited

Almost a year ago, Mrs. Shapiro addressed the following question from Daniella Grodko:

In Ashrei we say, "You open up Your Hand, and satisfy the desire of every living thing." I have learned that this sentence is to be said with much concentration. So much so, that if one does not have Kavanah while saying this sentence, he should repeat it. I don't understand why this line is so focused on. Yes, its a nice idea about G-d but why is it THAT amazing that it should be said again if the first time wasn't so great. I also don't think I can say this sentence truthfully according to the Artscroll's definition. How can I say that G-d satisfies all desires if I don't have everything that I want? 

You can see her response with Rav Hirsch's answer here.   Michal Wiseman recently pointed out that the new Koren siddur ( see another reference to this siddur here) translates the line as follows: "You open Your hand, and satisfy every living thing with Your favor", - with רצון referring to Hashem's desire.  Yasher koach Michal.

And Yasher koach to all of the Why-aanot contributors on reaching our 300th post!

Click HERE for an interesting article on attending "secular" colleges

Kiddush Hashem

I don't usually post e-mail forwards, but this seemed special.  I got this today.

A beautiful thing happened to me yesterday, and I thought I would share it.

Yesterday, after my last class of the day ended at NYU, I stood outside
chatting with one of my classmates on a corner. Another nursing student, a
woman I know by sight but not by name, walked over to me.

"You...you're a Jew, rigtht?" She said to me.

I said yes.

She asked me if I was from Israel, and I said no, though I had lived there
for a short time.

"I just wanted to say to someone from Israel...to any Jew really...thank
you, because Israel, they're the only ones really helping my country."

"Are you from Haiti?" I asked.

"Yes, and the Israelis are the only ones who brought X-Rays!" Here she began
to cry. "America that is so great and big and powerful and only Israel
brought X-Rays and are really helping..."

I asked her if her family was there, and she said they were all still there.
I didn't ask what had happened to them, and she didn't say. I hugged her and
gave her a tissue. She thanked me again. I told her she and her family would
be in my prayers, along with all the people of Haiti.

Every morning we ask Hashem to "crown Israel with splendor." I guess this is
what that means. No one has ever thanked me for being Jewish before! :) I
was so proud of the Jewish people and our capacity for chesed in that
moment, and proud of Israel. I am also grateful to the amazing people who
made that Kiddush Hashem, from Zaka to Hazolah to the decision makers in the
Israeli government. I am especially grateful to Hashem for letting me share
in it. Thought I should pass it on to you.

Lauren Stok

Tying Up Some Loose Ends

A couple of follow up points from the past week or so:

• Thank you to Mrs. Cohen & Rabbi Shapiro for pointing out that Alexander has become a popular Jewish name because of Alexander the great.  The Gemara (Yoma 69a) tells the story of Alexander sparing Yerushalayim after being greeted by the Kohen Gadol.  In response, the Jews decreed that many of the sons born that year be named after him, and the name still survives.
• In case it wasn't clear, my cousin was named after Raoul Wallenberg, the great hero of the Holocaust who saved many Jews from certain death.
• A friend of mine had in the past thought about our question about why a tyrant like Paroh deserved the respect of Moshe and Aharon.  He had the opportunity to discuss the question with a Rav whom we both respect greatly, confirmed what we had thought - that the Torah mandates respect for the position of a leader of state even if the individual occupying the position is not worthy of this respect.  As the Mishna in Avos teaches, הוי מתפלל בשלומה של מלכות, שאלמלא מוראה, איש את רעהו חיים בלעו -
  Pray for the welfare of the government, for were it not for the fear of it, men would swallow one another alive.  The very notion of governmental control, embodied in the head of state is deserving of some degree of respect, at least face to face.  This would seem to apply to all leaders, up to and including Hitler.
  
  

ברכות התורה with a Special Guest Blogger!

As we try to keep improving the blog, our next big project is to try to get Rabbis from our community to address some of these questions as well as our faculty.  Towards that end...

Layla Blenden asks:

Do you need to say birchot hatorah before listening to a song from a pasuk/with words of a pasuk in them?

Does it make a difference whether you're listening to it just because it's a nice song, or if, while listening, you're thinking about the words of that pasuk (as part of the torah)?

Rabbi Kenneth Schiowitz, Rabbi of Congregation Shaarei Tefilla, and Rosh Beit Midrash at Ramaz High School (as well as the husband of Ma'ayanot's own Mrs. Shira Schiowitz) responds:

It most certainly matters whether you are paying attention to the words of the song. If you are not, then you are not learning at all and you do not need to say birchot haTorah. If you are paying attention to the meaning of the words, then you are actually learning and would be getting a mitzvah of talmud Torah. This is similar to reading a sefer or listening to a shiur. Nevertheless, you do not need to say birchot hatorah. The Shulchan Aruch rules (OC 47:4) that one who is merely thinking (meharher) about Torah does not make a bracha; the bracha is reserved for one who expresses his/her learning through speech or writing.

As an aside, the Vilna Gaon argues with the Shulchan Aruch and rules that whenever you learn you must say the bracha, even if done silently.

More on Dreams

This morning on my way in to school, I heard Martin Luther King Jr.'s famous "I have a dream" speech, almost in its entirety.  Aside from how great and powerful a speaker he was, what struck me was that virtually all of his dreams for the future; all of the aspirations for America that he demanded have pretty much been fulfilled, and then some.  All of his fantasies, that at the time must have seemed as absurd as the cell phone or the internet, every last one of them is now so much a part of the American culture, that dissent is (appropriately) not tolerated in polite company.  While bigotry of all kinds (he references Jews and  gentiles joining hands at the end) is not dead in America, I think it is relegated to the fringes of society in a way that would have been virtually unimaginable just a generation ago.

On Rosh Chodesh Iyar, we spoke the idea that I heard from a Rebbe in Israel that אייר stands for אברהם, יצחק, יעקב, רחל, and that while the אבות each have the מידה that they represent, רחל represents the כח החלום.  Today is a day that to continue to learn this lesson of the power of dreams, of seeing slightly beyond what seems realistic.  There is a lesson here for us all when it comes to our own personal growth.  We have spoken before about how we should always try to have personal goals that we strive for.  We can think about these similar to college applications.  First, you want to make sure that you have your "safety school" - so take something that you are currently proud of, and commit yourself to maintaining that level of achievement (I'm davening well, I've been very sensitive to the needs of my friends or family, I have been making strong, mature decisions lately, I learn some Torah lishma, I volunteer my free time to help others etc.).  Next, you have your target schools that you aspire to, here you are looking slightly beyond where you are now, but these are very doable, realistic goals.  This category is the bread and butter of growth, as almost all progress is gradual, and there is nothing to be gained by setting yourself up for failure.  The message that I see in Martin Luther King Day, is to also also have your "reach" school - to set a longer term goal right now seem to be way out of  range, but approach it with a blend of anxious patience.  Both as individuals and societies, people have a tendency to prove predictions wrong, and to be capable of growing far faster than anyone, or almost anyone dreamed we would.

Making Aliyah?

Rebecca Schenker asks:

During kriat hatorah this Shabbas i noticed that shishi starts with the one pasuk about Binyamin from Yaakov's bracha and then continues with "eleh hashvatim..." My question is why isn't that one pasuk about Binyamin put in the end of chamishi after Yaakov's bracha to Yosef and the other brothers?

While I don't yet have an answer to this question, it did get me thinking and inquiring about the עליות.  While the number of קרואים is brought down in the gemara, where they were broken up is a far later institution.  Originally, the Torah was completed in a three year cycle, which of course meant that each week, and each עולה read much less than we do now.  Bavel, and then Eretz Yisrael later shifter to the annual cycle, but the עולים would each read for himself, and seemingly would decide where to stop - with certain restrictions about where you could not stop or start an aliyah.  While I haven't traced it yet precisely, the markers that we now have in our chumashim seems to be a much later innovation.

I noticed that this past week's parsha seemed to have oddly placed aliyah seperations - foregoing the natural paragraph breaks, and stopping sometimes even in the middle of a sentence (see shishi).  The ba'al koreh reminded me that a big factor in the selection of aliyot is that we don't want to start or end with פורעניות - bad news.  Since each of the natural sections ended with Paroh refusing to allow the Jews to go, they had limited options.

Thoughts on The Blind Side

I saw The Blind Side today. I think it has some very thought-provoking and positive messages. One of the questions that it raises is: Is there a such thing as true chesed? When we do kind things for other people, can we make sure that we are doing these things totally for them and not for us at all? Does it matter? Is it OK if we do something nice for someone else when it also benefits us in some way? There are a number of other important themes in the movie as well. So...if you need a break from studying/an idea for vacation and want to do something relaxing and meaningful, seeing The Blind Side is a good choice!

Perhaps...

this can help us understand one of the more troublesome questions that we encounter when learning through the early part of the Torah.  Throughout ספר בראשית, and even into שמות, a consistently find within families that the younger brother outdoes the older one.  With one important exception, we always find the בכור on the scrapheap of history, while the younger brother is the one who shines.  Maybe the lesson to be learned is that although we are Hashem's בכור, that presents a duty, but the privileges that come along with it are merit based, and "birth order" guarantees nothing.  By building His "first-born" nation on the foundation of younger siblings who won out over their own first-born, Hashem communicates to us that the position is a default setting, but that we have to be worthy of that status to earn it.  Maybe we can say something similar (maybe others already do?) about the odd unions that lead to the Jewish leadership - Yaakov & Leah, Yehuda & Tamar, Lot & his daughter, Ruth & Boaz etc.  We know halachikally that a ממזר תלמיד חכם takes precedence over a כהן גדול עם הארץ.  Again, the message seems to be that despite our glorious yichus as the children of the אבות and אמהות, this type of global leadership is distributed based on merit, not legacy.  We should keep it in mind as we head into next week's פרשה with the story of מכת בכורות, and the mitzva of פדיון בכור.

This is not to say that our very chosenness is variable, and subject to exchange or return when the product (us) is defective.  This is a bigger issue that is probably better dealt with within the Jewish Philosophy classes, but that is the message of the ברית בין הבתרים, as those of you who have heard my shiur on the subject no doubt remember. 

Tying it All Together

To follow up on the previous discussion of Paroh's tyrannical rule, which often goes along with megalomania, I noticed the Rashi which quoted that he went to the Nile early in the morning because he held himself out to the people as a deity who didn't need to use the bathroom (he could wear as much hodaya jewelry as he wanted!).  This is consistent with the Midrash that identifies his daughter as Batya - the daughter of God.

It's interesting that that name has been so completely embraced by the Jewish world.  It is a wonderful irony how we twisted Paroh's heretical and egotistical intent into a a beautiful reference to Hashem*.  Judaism doesn't seem to be shy about naming after non-Jewish heroes (though I think there is Midrashic reference to Batya converting), especially women.  According to few opinions Shifra was not Jewish, and according to most, Yael wasn't.  I can't think of any boys names that reference non-Jews, but I have an aunt who gave her son Raoul as a middle name.  This isn't a backwards Hanuka Song - the point is how we view our relationship as Jews to the rest of the world.  Last week we read that Hashem said "בני בכורי ישראל" - Bnei Yisrael are My first-born.  The obvious implication, (that is explicit in Avos 3:17) is that all mankind are His children, but we are the בכור - the ones with the responsibility to set a proper example, and sometimes help the parents out with some of the other kids.  That's the way it's supposed to be most of the time, and is much of the notion of 'קידוש ד.  Often, both in families and metaphorically for the relationship between the Jewish and non-Jewish world, the big brother has much to learn from and admire in the younger siblings.  That's what happened with Batya, Raoul, and in a different way, Mukul, the cabbie in the story below.


*There's another great irony in the Parsha:  Rashi cites the Gemara that after Aharon performed מכת דם, and the Egyptian magicians did the same, Paroh assumed that he too was just doing magic, and said "are you bringing straw to Afarayim (a city famous for its straw)? Meaning, Egypt has plenty of magicians, we don't need two more of you.
The beauty of the story is that to prove his point, he had his magicians turn whatever scarce water they had into blood!  Are you bringing blood into Egypt?

A Lesson for us all

This is an impressive story.

Realpolitik

I was struck by a Rashi in this week's Parsha.  The passuk (6:13) says that Hashem commanded Moshe, but doesn't identify the commandment - וַיְדַבֵּר יְקֹוָק אֶל מֹשֶׁה וְאֶל אַהֲרֹן וַיְצַוֵּם אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶל פַּרְעֹה מֶלֶךְ מִצְרָיִם לְהוֹצִיא אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם: .  Before providing a פשט explanation, Rashi first quotes the midrash that He commanded Moshe & Aharon to give Paroh respect, as מלך מצרים.  I appeal to the students & teachers who are learning Shemot to help out here - is this to be read at face value?  Paroh was a murderous tyrant of the worst kind.  We know the ending, so it's easy for us to imagine a cartoon version of him spitting blood and dodging frogs, but this is a man who not only enslaved (virtually) an entire people, but then mandated infanticide.  He had as much Jewish blood on his hands as almost any villain in our history, and Moshe needed to give him respect?  Would we say the same about a Castro or Ahmadinejad or Stalin?  Does the governmental or military authority alone demand honor and legitimacy?  I'm really not sure, maybe it does.  Maybe it was just advice, that strategically, the way to productively deal with a despot is to play along and treat him like the bog shot he thinks he is.  This seems unlikely, as the point of the conversation was not to have Paroh concede to anything.  Or maybe it was different there because he was a monarch, so by virtue of his birth he was automatically legitimate, but someone who takes power by sheer force would be different.  Or maybe this is not the rule, but Paroh deserved Moshe's respect as his adoptive grandfather - that one is very difficult to read with the language.  The most likely explanation is the first, simple one, but it definitely surprises me.

Can you tell that I have a sky-high stack of midterms to grade?

Let's hear it for the Jews?

Here's another interesting NY Times article to check out. It points out the large amount of contributions Jews have made to the world... despite making up only about 0.2 % of the world's population. Interesting stuff to take into account when thinking about our role as an Or LaGoyim.

Policy for Make-Ups

Tziporah Herzfeld asks:

If someone missed/forgot to say shacharit, is that person supposed to say mincha twice?

Tziporah is referring to the halacha of Tashlumin, which we just touched on in my halacha classes, and dealt with in depth in our Tefilla curriculum.  The short answer is yes, in a rule based on the Gemara at the beginning of the 3rd perek of מסכת ברכות, or at least half true.  If you forgot, or missed it by accident then you say tashlumin, but you may not make it up if you missed it on purpose -you knew you had to daven, that you were going to miss it, and decided not to daven, even though you could have.  Some other rules about this הלכה that is all too relevant, especially in these short days.

• It works not only from שחרית to מנחה, but also from מנחה to מעריב and from מעריב to שחרית.
• מוסף can be said all day, but can't be made up once the day is over.
• The way to do it is the following:  If you are now davening שחרית or מנחה, say אשרי in between the two שמונה עשרהs.  If you are now davening Maariv, wait as long as it takes to walk 4 אמות (about 10-15 seconds?) in between them.  You should be taking the three steps backwards at the end of the first, and forward to begin the second.

This time of year, I sometimes have students who are either sick on the day of their midterm or misread the instructions of the test in a BIG way and come to me in a panic.  I think back to a time in my first semester in law school when on my contracts final, I accidentally misread the test and left out a question that was 25% of my test.  When I realized what I had done, I ran the 15 blocks back to school and a kind administrator sat with me for another 45 minutes and let me complete the test.  I still think of her warmly for this act of mercy that saved my first semester GPA, and not to overstate things, really had long-lasting impact on my life - that grade helped me get my job that I held until I came to teach here.

While most don't feel that same sense of panic when we miss a tefilla (perhaps we should, though perhaps not) it is assuring to know that the Administrator in charge is sympathetic to our excuses, and is willing to give us a second chance when we need it.

Celebrating the Blog's Birthday

We would love to celebrate the blog's birthday by hearing from you about what your favorite blog posts were (and why, if you have time). We will post your responses. As always, you may email us at questions@maayanot.org

Happy Studying and Blogging,
Mrs. Sinensky

We're One!

Happy Birthday to us!
One year ago today (secular calendar), this blog got started for real with a collection of suggested reading lists from faculty and administration for you to explore over your winter vacation.  As we head into that time again, I think it's worthwhile to take another look (or a first one, for the newcomers) at those lists.  So check it out here, and scroll down to the bottom to see them.  I notice that a recurring favorite among the suggestions, As A Driven Leaf, has been incorporated into the Junior Jewish Philosophy curriculum - blog power!  I stand by my cautions about the book, but am happy that more of you will read it.  Take a look at them all - there is something there for all of you, including some gone but not forgotten voices of the Maayanot past.

Last person who hid Anne Frank passes away

Yesterday, one the last surviving people who had hidden Anne Frank, Miep Gies, passed away in Amsterdam. You can read about it in a New York Times article found here. Miep Gies not only hid Anne Frank in her house, but also hid the pages of her diary, giving them to her father when he returned after the war. What's fascinating is that despite risking her life to save Jews, she still did not consider herself to be a hero;
'“I am not a hero,” Mrs. Gies wrote in her memoir... “I stand at the end of the long, long line of good Dutch people who did what I did and more — much more — during those dark and terrible times years ago, but always like yesterday in the heart of those of us who bear witness.”'
This article ties in very well with what the students in my Jewish Philosophy classes have been discussing about righteous Gentiles and why people would risk their lives to save others, despite their religion (as seen in the movie: Hiding and Seeking).

More Thoughts on Boredom

Rabbi Besser and Mrs. Cohen posted some interesting thoughts on boredom. This discussion reminded me of the folllowing:

R' Lichtenstein likes to quote the passuk, "et hakeves haechad taaseh baboker v'et hakeves hasheni taaseh beyn haarbayim"--that we bring the first lamb for the korban tamid in the morning (a source for Shacharit) and we bring the second lamb in the afternoon (a source for Mincha). This passuk is a model for the constancy and consistency of Avodat Hashem--day in and day out, we serve God. Same korban, twice a day, every single day! Sounds kind of boring, but serving God is the most important thing in life! This idea has helped me personally to "keep at" certain mitzvoth that I find boring, monotonous and sometimes meaningless.

Dreaming of an Answer to Our Question

Rachel Friedman incorporates many of our favorite subjects into her suggestion:

I think the shiur Rabbi Adler gave us last shabbos (on torahton) could answer the question about Yosef's dreams not being fulfilled. According to Rabbi Adler, who I believe quoted the Rav, it was in fact not God's or Ya'akovs plan for Yosef's dreams to be fulfilled, as is evident from this weeks parsha, when Ya'akov gives Yehuda, not Yosef ,the bracha of melucha (lo yasur shevet m'yehuda). This could be, as Rabbi Adler presented, because while Yosef was a chassid meula and always acted righteously, Yehuda was a more practical role model in that he made mistakes and was able to admit and learn from them. In any event, Yosef's dreams weren't fulfilled because they weren't supposed to be - while he enjoyed the temporary pleasure of leadership, the melucha ultimately did not go to his shevet.

When you’re davening you’re talking to….

My kids have a CD with a song that goes “When you’re davening you’re talking to Hashem…it’s a very special thing to be talking to a KING….” Sometimes, though, I like to think that when I am davening I am also talking to a FRIEND.

Why do I say this? Because when we think of G-d as a King, although it engenders the appropriate awe and fear in us that should help us focus during davening and should stop us from talking to neighbors, it also makes Hashem seem and feel far away. How often do any of us ever talk to a King?? But the truth is that Hashem is also meant to be thought of as a confidant, someone whom we can tell anything to-big or small-and someone who we can talk to all the time whenever something is on our mind. The Yerushalmi in Brachot 9:1 says "תפילה לעני כי יעטוף [לפני ה' ישפוך שיחו] – כאדם המשיח באוזן חבירו והוא שומע.". When we daven it is as if we are whispering in Hashem’s ear.

We all have different types of friends. There are the friends we talk to a few times a year and then there are the friends we talk to and text multiple times a day. The difference between them is that the friends we talk to a few times a year only get to hear the big things going on in our lives, the things we catch them up on, and similarly they don’t know about or get to be involved in the day to day ups and downs we experience. It would be hard to turn to a friend like this one day and expect them to be involved in all aspects of our life if we had not been including them all along. The relationship is more distant.

But then there are those friends who know every little thing that happens to us each day. We are really, really close and can talk about anything. When we daven, what kind of friend do we want Hashem to be? Is G-d supposed to be different than a friend? Can we and should we expect that we can carry ourselves differently with Him? What do you think? I would love to hear your comments.

Exodus

Sifting through the archives in anticipation of next week's big day, I found an old post of mine on this week's פרשה.  I'm not sure how many of you were reading back then, so here it is:

•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.

Avodah Sheb'lev II

Here's another honorable mention, submitted by our contest's resident fiction star, and former winner, Alona Stewart:

The clock in the kitchen said 6:14, and the sheet of paper stuck to the fridge said Candle lighting: 6:26.  The problem was the proximity of those two times.
Dina was a mess. The chicken was maybe seconds away from burning, the table wasn’t set, and there were four kids screaming from four different directions. She reached up to wipe her forehead but realized just in time that she was already in her good white sweater; she sighed and grabbed a towel instead.
Footsteps clattered downwards, nearly drowning out the sound of the oven timer. “IMA!” Her fourteen-year-old son slid into the room, wearing a t-shirt and with a dress shirt over his arm. “The stain’s not out! You said you’d wash it and get it out and it’s still there, see, and what am I supposed to wear?”
“The chicken’s almost done, you’re going to have to wait!” She turned and jerked open the oven door, gave its contents and appraising look, and shut it again.
He was glaring at her. “Ima, just listen! I don’t know what to wear! My other shirts are in the wash!”
She lunged down to the cabinet that housed the tablecloth. “You’ll have to find something else! It’s too late for me to do another load of laundry now!”
“But—”
“I can’t help you right now!” She straightened up with the tablecloth, checking the oven again as she moved towards the dining room.
His yell chased her there. “If you’d just gotten the stain out in the first place we wouldn’t have this problem!”
She pulled the tablecloth straight (a job for two) and checked on the chicken again. As she took it out she yelled for someone to put out the plates and cutlery and after several minutes of very loud and angry back-and-forth her two middle children agreed.
Dena rubbed her face with the towel again and glanced at the clock. “FIVE MINUTES TO SHABBOS!”
“What?” Her daughter shrieked. “Ima! I didn’t finish my homework! You took away all my time to work on my math worksheet and now I’m going to have to do it on Sunday! It’s not fair!”
“Aviva, how long did it take you to set the table? Three minutes? Just pack up your books, it’s almost Shabbos!”
Aviva gave a little muffled scream and stormed upstairs to her room.
Dina looked around the house, ticking off the checklist in her head. Halfway through, she realized that SpongeBob was still blaring out of the TV and her youngest, Eliana, was staring at the screen, eyes glazed over.
She grabbed the remote and switched it off. The effects were instantaneous. The girl began to scream.
“I WANNA WATCH IT! I WANNA WATCH IT!”
“You have to turn it off, honey, it’s almost Shabbos,” said Dina as kindly as one could to a five-year-old crying over a walking sponge.
“I HATE SHABBOS! IT ALWAYS COMES AND I HAVE TO TURN OFF THE TV AND I HATE IT!!!”
Dina gave her an exasperated look, then realized just how close it was to candle lighting and hurried into the dining room. “I’m lighting!” She yelled as she struck the match.
When she uncovered her eyes Eliana’s screams had faded to sniffles and her son was coming down the steps in a relatively unwrinkled shirt. “Good Shabbos,” she smiled at him, and he smiled back. She went back into the TV room and picked up Eliana. “Good Shabbos! Do you want to play a board game?”
The girl sniffed one last time and nodded, burying her wet face in Dina’s shoulder.
Dina somehow managed to get out “Sorry” with one hand, and set it and Eliana down at the kitchen table. “Guys, we’re playing ‘Sorry’ if you want to!”
They all came, all smiles, and calm descended on the house like the night.

Avodah Sheb'lev Contest - Winners

As we announced last week, the previous installment of the AShb"L Contest has come to a close.  I hope to post the winning submission, from Tzippy Shteingart soon.  Until then, enjoy some of the honorable mentions.  Here is a submission from Marcella Berman.

Reminder, the last contest for the semester (and your last opportunity for Halacha extra credit) is due to your halacha teachers on Thursday, January 14th (during finals).  Please choose a passage from the end of davening - after שמונה עשרה, for the end of the semester.  Good luck.

"Kullah Shopping"

What is the problem "kulah shopping"? It seems that in previous discussions on the blog, the practice of searching for lenient rabbinical opinions, and following them, is frowned upon. But if a respected and reliable rabbi says something (that happens to be lenient), what is the problem with adopting his shitah as your practice?

- Rikki Novetsky

Hi Rikki,
This is a very important question that I think alot of people have, so I'm so glad that you asked it! I will answer your question directly (first two paragraphs) and then add some other thoughts that I have on the topic that readers of the blog might find relevant and interesting. I also just want to add a thank you to my husband for sharing with me his knowledge and insights on this topic :)

The Gemara in Eruvin 6b that says "mekulei Beit Shamai umekulei Beit Hillel--rasha!—that a person who paskins like the leniencies of Beit Shamai AND the leniencies of Beit Hillel is evil. So the answer to "is it OK to shop around?" once you have a posek already seems pretty clear cut. (The gemara also continues to discuss a person who adopts the STRINGENCIES of both Beit Hillel and Beit Shamai and doesn’t have very positive things to say about that individual either!)

I would add that it's important for a person to feel comfortable telling his/her Rav that a certain psak will be very difficult for whatever reasons for him/her to keep. In some areas of halakha, it might not make a difference. In other areas of halakha, it might be that the Rav will decide that there is room to be mekil given this difficulty. But of course, even if you know that there are other opinions, you need to ask in this case and not just issue yourself the kulah!

Some other thoughts on the topic:
A. It seems that one should choose his/her posek based on the following factors:

1. Raw halakhic knowledge (is the person familiar with the bredth of halakha and well-versed in it?)
2. Halakhic analytic abilities (is the person able to weigh all the different factors that need to be considered to answer a more complex she'elah)
3. Yir'at shamayim (is the person intensely committed to abiding by halakha?)
4. Match in hashkafa (do you feel comfortable with this person's general hashaka?)
*This factor may only be relevant for certain types of questions that touch on values issues, but not necessary for Hilkhot Shabbat type questions.*
5. Someone who is accessible (not to be underestimated! It is difficult to have a Rav in Israel paskin time-sensitive halakhic issues such as Tefillah questions or Niddah questions given a 6 or 7 hour time gap!)

B. Another issue that comes up is whether a person can have multiple Rabbis that he or she consults.

1. Rav Lichtenstein is known to say that a person can have a different posek for different areas of halakha if he or she deems that there is a reason to have it set up this way. For example, if there is someone who is known to be an expert on Hilkhot Shabbat but doesn’t have as much expertise in Hilkhot Niddah, then it would be appropriate to have two different poskim for these 2 different areas.

2. I would also add that it is a good idea for one to have 1 or 2 "backup" people that he or she can call in situations where the person cannot reach his or her "preferred posek." For example: if you know that there are 2 or 3 Rebbeim that paskin like a certain greater Rabbi in a given area of halakha, or that these Rebbeim generally have the same approach toward psak in a given areas, it's fine to ask the other 2 if you cannot reach your "preferred posek." And obviously, if you get stuck, asking any yirei Shamayim is better than just paskining for yourself and not asking at all!

C. I do think that it is OK and even a good idea for one to ask his/her Rav (obviously in a respectful and in an "I want to understand" way) why he chooses to paskin one way as opposed to another. I think this is helpful for the following reasons:

1. It provides the questioner with the information that he or she might be able to use in the future if this or a very similar question comes up (I do think that you should ask your Rabbi: If the same question comes up again, do I need to ask again or can I rely on this psak in the future?)

2. It often helps you to continue to develop your respect for the halakhic system when you understand what's behind it more (this is what we try to do in Ma'ayanot!)

In short: shopping around just to make your life easier? Not OK. But shopping around for a posek who meets the 5 qualifications that we delineated? A necessity in enabling you to lead the most halakhic life that you can!

The Gift of Boredom

Rabbi Besser’s post, “Over-stimulation is the enemy of imagination – we should give our children the gift of boredom”, and the article it was linked to were interesting food for thought. I certainly see the difference between the way my kids spend their free time and the way I spent mine with my siblings when I was a child. Although we had many toys, we spent more time playing imaginative games, both indoors and out of doors. My kids spend much more time watching TV and playing on the computer or video games. Their hand-eye coordination is probably better than mine was, but they don’t use their imaginations as much, and I am sorry about it.

As for the last part, “…we should give our children the gift of boredom”, well, I’ll let you know how that goes – it so happens that I just unplugged the two TV’s in our house three days ago. It was for a variety of reasons, and something that I have thought about for years, and finally decided to do. Will they think of it as a gift? Only time will tell, but my 10 year old announced at supper tonight that she likes this new policy, because she now spends more time talking to us.

One More on Dreams

I had never realized that at the end of the story, even Yosef's dream, that his father and brothers would bow down to him; the one that he went through such extraordinary measures to bring about, is never fulfilled.  At the beginning of this week's Parsha, Yaakov alone bows down to Yosef, but it is many years later and you wonder if that "counts".

Do Not Place a Pedestrian before a Driver on Shabbat

As my family and I were walking in Israel a question came up concerning driving on shabbas. Is driving one melacha that a driver would be violating or every time the driver presses on the gas or break is its own separate melacha that is being violated?If it is more than one melacha-meaning each time the driver has to stop and start again they are doing a violaton- then in a place like Israel where many of the people who may be driving on shabbas are Jewish (maybe not observant), is it a problem for observant Jews to be crossing the street against the light if it causes them to have to stop or slow down for us, causing them to violate the melacha another time?-Rebecca Schenker

It's important first to articulate the assumption behind your question - that it is wrong to cause another Jew to sin. This is in fact true, and it is based on Chazal's interpretation of "lifnei iver lo titen michshol [do not place a stumbling block before the blind]" (Vayikra 19:14), which is understood to forbid (among other things) causing someone else to commit a sin (the classic example is: giving wine to a nazir). So if starting and stopping a car is indeed melacha, it would be prohibited to cause another Jew to engage in it.

According to Rabbi Dovid Ribiat in his sefer The 39 Melochos (pages 1216-1218), one violates the melacha of mavier (lighting a fire) thousands of times a minute when one drives, because one cylinder of the engine turns approximately 1000 times per minute when the car is idling (=motor running but the car not moving), and each turn is caused by a separate spark. Engines can have 4, 6 or 8 cylinders. When the car drives at a higher speed the engine turns faster, thus increasing the number of sparks released. (Rabbi Ribiat has a fascinating - to this automotive ignoramus, anyway - diagram explaining how a car engine works.) So causing someone to slow down and speed up changes the number of sparks released and would indeed be causing melacha to be done.

And as I'm thinking about your question, it may not be a problem only in Israel. The New York area in general is populated with many Jews, most of whom are not observant, and perhaps even when we cross streets in our own neighborhoods, we should try to avoid forcing cars to stop for us.

An Interesting Article

This was linked on a Jewish Education board this morning -

Over-stimulation is the enemy of imagination – we should give our children the gift of boredom 

 What do you think?

Adoption and פרו ורבו

Tamar Novetsky writes:

If you have children and immediately give them up for adoption, have you done the mitzvah of puru urevu? 

A couple of points about פרו ורבו before I try to answer that question.  First, remember (as you learned last year) that it is a מצוה from which women are exempt, so we're only talking about the father.  The topic that is more often discussed is whether you fulfill the mitzvah with adoption.  There are opinions that you do, based on the maamar chazal that "hamegadel adam betoch beyso kieylo yilado" that someone who raises another child in his home is considered as if he fathered him.  I assume that this is not to the exclusion of the biological father, but in addition to him.  I think that once you have children (a boy and a girl in accordance with the opinion of Beis Hillel), you are yotzei whether or not you actually raise them.

Shabbos on the Boardwalk

A question from Mrs. Sinensky's 10th grade Gemara class:

Is it OK to play monopoly on Shabbos (b/c you are playing with "money," you're sort of doing business)?

The Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (as quoted in the שמירת שבת כהלכתה) allows it.  Rabbi Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg does agrees that it is technically permitted, but adds that "playing a business-oriented game on Shabbat is not conducive to a proper attitude about Shabbat."

Have you been ever been stuck driving close to Shabbos? Read Further!!

Here is a straightforward overview written by Rabbi Donneal Epstein, author of "Halachos for the Traveler" which details what you should do! The summary originally appeared in the OU's Jewish Action, and can be here.

Dreams

With all of our attention on Chanuka, it's important to give some thought to פרשת מקץ as well.  To skip ahead to next week for a moment, Chazal say that the famine ended after only 2 years because Yaakov came to Mitzrayim.  I always thought that this meant that in the merit of his entry to the country, the רעב was somehow inappropriate, and therefore it stopped.  This might be true, but it seems a bit odd considering that according to the simple reading of the pesukim, he was hit by the hunger in כנען.  Maybe the reason that the hunger stopped was because Yaakov came to מצרים; meaning, the only reason that there was a famine to begin with was in order to get Yaakov and his other sons down to Mitzrayim.  This could have taken 2 years, 4 years or 7 years, but once they were there, there was no purpose in Hashem withholding food from the people. 

We see that the dreams in this story don't actually happen as foreseen - after all, Yosef predicted 7 years of hunger, 5 of which never materialized (if we were evaluating him as a נביא, would he pass?).  Similarly, the most dramatic part of פרעה's dreams was the skinny cows eating the fat cows.  Yosef interpreted this to mean that the famine would be so bad that the years of plenty would be forgotten.  In reality, due to Yosef's
plan, the opposite occurred.  The years of plenty were well remembered during the hunger years, because the people had the food left over.  The dream doesn't accurately predict the future, only the default future - what will happen if you don't alter reality, because clearly it is subject to change based on people's actions.

If so, maybe we can better understand a famous but puzzling Ramban.  He says that the reason that Yosef didn't tell his father or brothers who he was, and why he acted the way that he did is because he was trying to ensure that the dreams came to fruition.  Why?  Did he have a מצות עשה to do Hashem's bidding?  Perhaps he did he because he wanted the dreams to come true.  He knew that the fact that he dreamt them did not guarantee that the scenario will play out, but it was a result that he wanted, so he worked to make sure that it happened just as he had seen it.

(Disclaimer: Ramban uses this theory to defend Yosef for putting his father through this ordeal, so I'm not sure that this approach would work within his opinion.)

more on boy-girl friendships

Two thoughts I wanted to add to the boy-girl discussion from 2 weeks ago:

a) The questioners wrote that one of the benefits of guy friends is that they add less drama. Maybe your experience is different than mine, but I know that when I was around your age, boys were the CAUSE of all the drama. Without boys around, there wouldn’t have been much drama between the girls.

Which is why I would say that having nothing to do with Judaism or halacha, it’s important to be honest about the fact that there are emotional pitfalls to friendships with guys in high school. No matter how much one thinks that a certain friendship is purely platonic, it happens extremely often that either the girl or the guy end up developing feelings for the other that are not always reciprocated, and this usually leads to much emotional pain, confusion, and heartache. Or two girls who have been best friends since birth develop a crush on the same guy friend, and then what happens to the girls’ friendship? I just think it’s important to think about whether the upsides of the guys being part of your life exceed the downsides from a purely emotional point of view, before even getting into any potential halachic issues.

b) On a different note, I thought you might be interested to realize that the issue of the appropriateness of male-female friendships is something that is not just a high-school issue; it is a question that we, your teachers, grapple with in our own lives as well. In fact, just a few days before the question was posted on the blog, I was at my parents’ house for Thanksgiving dinner together with some extended family and close friends, and a heated debate enlivened the meal about exactly this topic, just of course related to a life stage a few (or many) years ahead of where you are now. The specific question we were all debating was the appropriateness of married couples (even with their kids) going on vacation together since the families will then obviously be spending a lot of time together and it can potentially create a certain level of closeness between the various husbands and wives. My point is this: Friendships between members of the opposite sex, even married members of the opposite sex, are never 100% platonic. God created us in such a way that we are always aware of the other person being the opposite gender, with whatever that entails. That is just the given reality. The question is how we are supposed to navigate this reality. Does it mean that one should never interact at all with members of the opposite gender? Much of the charedi world advocates exactly this type of complete separation of the genders, and I completely understand where this approach is coming from; our Orthodox community is unfortunately not immune to extra-marital affairs or teenagers engaging in pre-marital sex or (less egregious but way more common and still assur) not observing the laws of shomer negiah. However, I personally do not live my life by the complete separation approach (at least I don’t now, though I pretty much did in high school due to how much I disliked all the drama the boys caused at the end of elementary school, as I mentioned above), and that’s generally not the approach of modern Orthodoxy. But what then is the approach? Obviously, it is an absolute given that all of the halachot set up to prevent problematic relationships must be adhered to, such as negiah, yichud, etc. If not, then by definition, the relationship is a halachically problematic one. But once all of the halachot are being kept, then what? Honestly, it’s not entirely clear. I think it’s important to keep in mind the two opposing sides: on the one hand, the value inherent in the other 50% of the human population from whom we can hopefully learn and enrich our lives (and them from us), but on the other hand, the serious danger, both emotional and halachic, inherent in such friendships. Thus, my ultimate advice, both to myself and to others, is to proceed with caution; know yourself and what boundaries you need to make sure that you are living a halachic, Torah-true, emotionally healthy life.

A New Kind of Menorah?

Here's a link to an article about a couple of YU students who invented a new Eco-friendly Menorah. A pretty cool invention, plus a great example of Torah U'Maddah in action. Chag Sameach!

The Brush Off

Tziporah Herzfeld asks:

Is it assur to use a lint roller on Shabbos? On the one hand, you're supposed to look put together and presentable for shul, but on the other hand, would it be considered borer because you're taking something unwanted from something wanted?

Good, important, practical question.  While I reiterate the disclaimer that this blog is not meant (and should not be used) to establish psak,  I think the problem would be melaben.  The prohibition against cleaning would apply to any dirt or dust embedded in a garment, unless it is totally on the surface - exactly what the lint brush targets.  While you should double check your Rabbi, I wouldn't use it until you get an answer from him.

As for your other point, I think it is important to remember that while there are many ideals that are important on Shabbos (enjoying yourself, relaxing, looking nice, being comfortable etc.), with very limited exceptions, these will not permit something that is otherwise prohibited.  Always check with a posek, or at least a user-friendly sefer like Rabbi Ribiat's 39 melachos before making a calculus such as this by yourself.

A Look Back, A Look Ahead

No rest for the weary.  As we all bask in the glow of another incredible Mishmover - the biggest one ever!- we have but a few "waking" hours until Shabbos and Chanuka begin.  Yasher koach to Mrs. Kahan for her amazing shiur which had everyone captivated; Ms. Gordon for her awesome Batman session which had everybody talking long after it was done - and for sleeping over - thanks to Ms. Beiler too; the seniors for their chaburas which displayed the diverse talents of our student leaders, and provided a wonderful example for the rest of the school to learn from; Ms. F for her famous midnight shiur which I heard was huge hit as always (I had to go home at some point); the faculty who came & pitched in with sessions and "hang out" time (Ms. Wolf, Mrs. Cohen, Mrs. Feldman, Mrs. Knoll, Rabbi Prince & our annual midnight guest - Dr. Yaish); Mrs. Nadler for setting up the movie; the Torah Committee (Racheli, Daniella, Michelle, Allison, & Tamar) for making the whole thing happen; the Chessed Committee led by Mrs. Kraft for the awesome chessed project; and of course to the 100+ students whose inspiring commitment to Torah and fun brought about an unforgetable evening of learning and good times.

Going forward, after the ימים נוראים I raved here about YU's "To Go" publications.  The Chanuka To Go is available here on-line.  For those of you who have less time (or paper), this edition is once again highlighted by an article by our own Mrs. Knoll, that I can't wait to read.  She also delivered the most recent shiur at Midreshet Yom Rishon, which is available as well.  For those of you who want to brush up on the halachot of Chanuka, here is a good one.  And don't forget about Parshas Vayeshev.  Have a great shabbos and a wonderful Chanuka.

A Jewish Perspective on the Human Body

If your body is just a kli that holds your neshama, then when the neshama leaves, why is it so crucial to give so much respect for the kli that is now just ordinary because it is empty from spirit?
-Daniella Ginsberg

Guest Response from Rabbi Norman Lamm:

The halakhic view is that whatever comes in contact with kedusha and then ceases its contact, loses its original degree of holiness but does retain some element of holiness because of this original association.


Example: “sefer torah she-balah” (a sefer torah that became worn and unusable) must be treated with respect even though it is no longer at the peak of kedusha. Similarly a shul or tefillin, etc. Therefore the same mechanism applies to human beings: when alive, a person attains a certain degree of kedushah thanks to the neshama that is intimately tied up with his body. The body, after death, retains halakhic “protection” which demands that we not offend it, even though the neshama has left it.

On the Other Hand...

This entire conversation about copying music has carried the disclaimer that most of the halachik literature on the subject was written about older technology, but if the current means of distributing (and copying) music in any meaningful way, it is not reflected in the discussion.  Mrs. Rosenbaum contributes the following:

I have been reading the posts regarding copying files from iTunes and I have a few comments.


I am not versed enough to comment on the halachic issues regarding transferring music to several iPods, but I do know a few things about iTunes.

When iTunes was created, problems such as ripping off a song were issues that needed to be addressed by their own legal teams. Based on recommendations from their suppliers (the people who own the music), certain technological restrictions were placed on the music. Music bought from iTunes has a special encryption which prevents the downloaded music from being stored on more than 5 computers. They did not place restriction on the number of iPods that can download the song from any of those computers or how many times it can be burned onto a CD. The reason for this, I assume, is that the people who own the music decided that it would be fruitless to try to completely control thier music since people have been copying music illegally since records and tape recorders (if you know what those are). They decided to control the music in a limited sense, but allow users who bought the music to share it with others. They make their money with the inital purchase and the appeal of using iTunes encourages more people to buy music, even if some of the music they get for free from friends or family who purchased the music. Lately many of these restrictions have been removed. It seems that the music companies are not looking to completely control their music. For those that still control their music with sharing restrictions, it would be illegal to use programs to remove the encryption. In either case it would be illegal to make a profit from your purchase by reselling the file or a CD of the music.
Whether the intentions of the music companies helps us figure out the halachos regarding file sharing on iPods is up for debate.
I do agree that removing encryptions or burning CDs that explicitly say not to is halachicly and legally prohibited. But CDs and music without these restrictions and encryptions might not fall under that same halachic and legal status since the companies are giving you the option to share (but not sell for profit!)

More on Copying Music

Penina Cohen writes:

I have a couple of things to add to what Ms. F and Rabbi Besser said about downloading a song off of someone else's iTunes. As a Jewish music fanatic, I have seen a fair amount of CD's in my day. On most Jewish CDs it writes clearly on the front of the CD, "All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication or broadcast is against Halacha and applicable laws." This means that any time someone makes a copy of any part of this Cd without the permission of the production agnecy, they are breaking Halacha. It is like the domino affect: imagine if only one person bought a certain CD, and put it on their iTunes. Her friends then come over and put the CD on their iPods. If one of these friends has software that can transfer songs from her iPod to her iTunes, then her other firends can come to her house and download the CD. Hundreds of people can end up having this CD on their iPods, and the group only got paid for one copy of the CD. Is that really fair to them? And this is without the argument that it is against American law to duplicate a product without permission from the artist. This extends to books, inventions, and music If a group owns a copyright for their product, and someone subsequently copied that product without permission from the original group, they are stealing according to American law. In Judaism, we have the concept of dina d'malchuta dina. This means that the law of the land in which the Jews are living is the law. Even if you figure out a way to say that halachikly you are not stealing, which is hard to do, we still must obey American law as well.

As you can probably tell, I am very passionate about this subject. To me, it is the same thing as a farmer who grows apples for a living. His only way to make any money after his finding a field, planting the tress, watering them, growing them, harvesting the apples and preparing them is by selling his apples, and his assumption that people will buy them. If someone decided that they do not need to pay for the apples, and to take them without payment, everyone would agree that he is stealing. Downloading music is no different. You are taking these musiciands "apples" and they are making no money from it. I think that even with Halacha and American law aside, it is a logical, moral argument that downloading music is taking something that you have to pay for without paying, thereby stealing from these musicians.

Yasher koach for your spirited and thoughtful post, and perhaps even more impressively, for using apples as your example for our conversation about iTunes - well done. 
I think that the objections that you articulated are among the very reasons why most poskim (led by Rav Moshe) agree with you - see the articles by Rabbi Belsky and Rabbi Jachter cited previously.  However, the latter article does bring some authorities who are lenient.  If it is not assur (though again, it probably is), then there is nothing hat the record companies can write on the label that will change that.

Shabbat & High Heels

Daniella Ginsberg writes:
Is it muktza to walk on the grass on shabbos in high heels if it makes holes in the ground? And if so, what malacha is it?
Thanks,
Daniella

The melacha that wearing high heels on grass, dirt, or sand might violate is choresh-plowing. Rabbi Ribiat, in his encyclopedic work, The 39 Melachot (which is an excellent resource for Hilchot Shabbat questions!) writes that there is firm basis to allow wearing high heels even when making holes and kicking up dirt or sand is inevitable. He does quote some in the footnotes who say that it might be preferable to walk slowly if you are wearing heels in this situation, as then penetrating the soil and kicking up soil might not be inevitable.

More on Copying Music

Yasher koach Ms. F, for tackling the question that many people don't want to talk about.  Rav Moshe's opinion (as explained here) is pretty absolute, as Ms. F said. It should be noted that he, of course, was addressing dubbing tapes rather than illegal downloads, and I don't know if there is any reason to distinguish between the two.  I think this is pretty mainstream, but I thought I remembered other opinions.  In a pretty comprehensive article, Rabbi Jachter brings down some opinions that if you would not have bought it anyway.  I can't find a record of it, but I think I remember Rabbi J. David Bleich that it was permitted because the seller has no halachik means to prohibit it.  Once the consumer buys the product, it is his in total, and the seller can't retain any rights.  Jewish record companies have argued that they sell the music on condition that it is not copied, but the absurd conclusion of that would be that if copied, the sale is nullified, and the consumer can return it for the purchase price.  See the Rabbi Jachter article for his analysis of the dina d'malchusa dina issue.

A quick reminder, that the fact that we can identify authorities that permit copying music in limited circumstances, does not give us the license to follow those opinions just because they exist and we like their rules.  As always, everyone should seek the ruling of her Rabbi before doind something that is halachically controversial.

Pure Chesed

Over Thanksgiving break, my husband (a rabbi, but not of a shul) was asked to perform a funeral that Friday for the 104-year-old mother of a woman in my hometown. Normally my hometown rabbi would have done the funeral, but since he was going away for Thanksgiving, and since the service and burial were to be in New Jersey, my hometown rabbi asked my husband to fill in. Some background: In order to show kavod ha-met, it is proper to have a minyan at the cemetary so the family can say kaddish, and also to have Jews do the actual physical labor of burying the dead. The woman who passed away didn't have so many relatives, and many of the male relatives were kohanim. Not so many people would be at this funeral, and those who would were either quite elderly themselves, or kohanim who could not come into the cemetary. In short, my husband needed some able-bodied men to help him, both with the minyan and with digging. Thursday, he posted a request on "Teaneck shuls," the message board for Orthodox north Bergenites. I was sure no one would respond. Who would want to give up a Friday vacation day (a gift given to spend sleeping, with family, shopping or even learning) to come to stand in a cemetary in the rain, hear speeches about a woman they didn't know, and dig dirt? But my husband was confident - and he was right! Eight people - strangers to him - emailed to offer to help! He needed 4 people in the end, and he got them. These people did not know the woman who passed away, anyone in her family, or even my husband. They weren't doing it as a favor to any person at all - just pure chesed. I couldn't believe it, but my husband said "That's what Yidden do."

Entering a Church

Rikki Novetsky asks: At the Ma'ayanot community service fair, I signed up to be a part of the Bergen County Youth Council for the Homeless -- basically a youth group that comes together around once a month to create fundraisers and food/clothing drives for the homeless people of Bergen County (apparently there's a lot of them, although coming from my Jewish bubble, I never knew). I found this group to be quite intriguing, since I've always found appeal in helping out the people closest to home. The only problem is, the first meeting is at the Central Unitarian Church in Paramus, New Jersey. Can I go to the meeting? I highly doubt it would take place in the actual chapel area, and the meeting would be to benefit the disadvantaged. I am also aware of, however, the prohibition of entering a church.

Hi Rikki, great question! The issue of entering a church depends on whether Christianity today is considered Avodah Zarah and if a church would be considered a בית עבודה זרה that one would be forbidden to enter. There is a מחלוקת over whether or not Christianity is considered idolatry forbidden for non-Jews (due to their belief in the trinity), or just for Jews. The Rambam (Hilkhot A"K 9:4) says it is, while the Rama (YD 141:1) says it is not, since Christians combine their belief in G-d with another power, something called שיתוף, which while forbidden to Jews, may be permitted to non-Jews. The Meiri has a radically different opinion, stating that when the Gemara uses the term "idolaters", it is referring to "lawless nations". Therefore, Christians today, if they follow a moral and ethical code, would not be part of this category at all.

With regard to entering a Church for non-worship purposes, I can't comment about your specific case (you should probably consult your local posek), but Rav Moshe Feinstein (YD 3:129) forbid entering a church even just to look at paintings or architecture (a question that comes up a lot when people travel to Rome). For more on his position and that of Rav Soloveichik, you can click here.

Your question reminded me of an interesting debate that came up when Rabbi Haskel Lookstein participated at a prayer service at the National Cathedral in honor of President Obama taking office. The Rabbinical Council of America criticized Rabbi Lookstein for entering a church under these circumstances. There is an interesting exchange found here and here, and also here, defending/criticizing Rabbi Lookstein's decision. Rabbi Lookstein's rationale for why he decided to participate is found here.

Copying Music that Someone Else Bought on iTunes

Question:

Dear Why-anot!
If person A bought cds or music from itunes and then person B copies that music to her computer or ipod - is transfering music halachically allowed or not?

From,
The 11th Grade Technology Class

Answer:
According to Rav Moshe Feinstein, you are not allowed to copy music that someone else bought on itunes. When you copy the song, instead of buying it yourself, you are taking money away from itunes which takes away money from the song's creator. Basically, it is stealing.

Student Reaction to Mrs. Sinensky's Post

Not the last one.

I don't think I fully understand Mrs. Sinensky's blog post. If friendships with boys are problematic because of what they may lead to, I can understand that logic (personally, I think halacha itself provides enough boundries from inappropriate activities, and drawing the line at friendship might be putting an unnecessary chumrah on ourselves. Why not say that boys and girls should never talk or see each other because we're scared of what it might lead to?)
But I'm confused about the second reason, that boy-girl friendships are bittul Torah. What's the source of the concept of bittul Torah, and where do we draw the line? If you want to say that non- Torah activities can be outside the realm of bittul Torah as long as they in some way compliment your Jewish life and your identity as an oved-Hashem (I don't know if that's a real answer), than I would think that(assuming they're appropriate), boy-girl friendships have as much potential as single sex friendships to fall into that category of non-bittul Torah things. What are the boundaries of bittul Torah?

-Rachel Friedman

Click HERE for an interesting article

Boy-Girl Friendships in High School

Question:
Some people say that from a girl’s perspective, it is in no way bad and may even be momentous for us to have a few good guy friends. When you need a friend to talk to and you know that a girl will only add more drama, its good to have a guy friend that you know will be chilled and much less likely to evoke drama on the matter. (assuming of course that the friendship remains appropriate and permissible according to halacha). While all that makes sense from our (a girl’s) perspective...we don't really then understand the mishna in Pirkei Avot which says something along the lines of a guy not being allowed to talk to a girl. Touching and other prohibitions between girls and boys are comprehensible, but talking?! Isn't that a little extreme..??
Thanks !
-Shira Westrich and Hanna Erdfarb

Response:
The Mishna in Pirkei Avot that you are referring to is:

משנה מסכת אבות פרק א משנה ה [ה] יוסי בן יוחנן איש ירושלים אומר יהי ביתך פתוח לרוחה ויהיו עניים בני ביתך ואל תרבה שיחה עם האשה באשתו אמרו קל וחומר באשת חברו מכאן אמרו חכמים כל זמן שאדם מרבה שיחה עם האשה גורם רעה לעצמו ובוטל מדברי תורה וסופו יורש גיהנום:

A few comments: It is important to note that Pirkei Avot is not saying that it is prohibited (in the sense of mutar/assur); it is recommending that one not do so. In general, Pirkei Avot is a book of sagely advice, not a book of issur and heter. That being said, of course we should not dismiss lightly the wisdom of Chazal!! The question that we need to address, then, is what Chazal mean exactly by this recommendation. There are different interpretations of this Mishna. In surveying the opinions of Rashi, Rambam, Rabbeinu Yonah, R’Ovadiah M’Bartenura, and Tosfot Yom Tov, there are two general ways to interpret Chazal’s recommendation in this Mishna. The first is that discussions with women may lead to bittul Torah. The second is that discussions with women may cause a man to have halakhically problematic thoughts, which is an issur in its own right, and worse, may lead to halakhically problematic behavior. (Another detail of the Mishna that is debated is whether the “isha” here refers to a single woman or a married woman. According to those who think that it refers to a married woman, there is further debate regarding if the woman is a Niddah or not.)

In addressing the question about how having relationships with guys fits with this Mishna, I think it is important to consider what type of relationship we’re talking about. If it is a relationship which is built upon shared values and ideals and the pursuit of religious growth, then I think there are definitely positives to the relationship. At the same time, the consideration of bittul Torah for the man (since he has a chiyuv) is a consideration, and that needs to be worked into the equation. And even though women do not have a technical chiyuv in Talmud Torah, she also has an obligation as an eved Hashem to fill her time with meaningful and wholesome activities as well. In addition, the possibility of a relationship leading to inappropriate thoughts and actions is always a real one, even for a relationship that is centered upon the best values and ideals. We don’t know ourselves as well as we think we do, and never truly know how we will deal with situations that test our self restraint.

In short—I certainly don’t think that having relationships with guys is necessarily prohibited, yet it is clearly not looked upon by Chazal as recommended. There are definite benefits to friendships between boys and gils in high school, but whether or not to enter into these relationships is a decision that I think should be made with serious consideration of the above factors.

All-Time Monthly Blog Post High

I just wanted to announce that due to our thoughtful student body and dedicated faculty, we have reached our all-time monthly blog post high of 40 posts!! Yasher koach!