Re Ve-lamalshinim

Just to add to Ms. Appel's response, here is part of the footnote to the ברכה from Rabbi Jonathan Sacks' commentary (this is from the new Koren Siddur, translated and annotated by Rabbi Sacks. I'm still getting started on it, but it seems awesome! I hope to post about it some more in the future). I had heard this insight before, but never in Rav Kook's name.

The Talmud (Berakhot 28b) says that to formulate this prayer, Rabban Gamliel turned to Shmuel HaKatan. Rabbi Kook pointed out that Shmuel HaKatan was
known for his attachment to the principle, "Do not rejoice when your enemy
fails." (Avot 4:19). Only a person who deeply loved his fellow human
beings could be entrusted with the task of constructing this prayer, which must
be free of animosity and schadenfraude.

פרשת קרח

Though I am nervous to comment in front of so many of you who learned and taught this in depth, a few quick thoughts (2 thoughts & 1 question) on the last Parsha:

• There is a puzzling passage right after sheini. Moshe calls for Dasan and Aviram to come to him, but they refuse, saying "לא נעלה". They continue to complain that הַמְעַט, כִּי הֶעֱלִיתָנוּ מֵאֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ, לַהֲמִיתֵנוּ, בַּמִּדְבָּר: כִּי-תִשְׂתָּרֵר עָלֵינוּ, גַּם-הִשְׂתָּרֵר. יד אַף לֹא אֶל-אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ, הֲבִיאֹתָנוּ, וַתִּתֶּן-לָנוּ, נַחֲלַת שָׂדֶה וָכָרֶם; הַעֵינֵי הָאֲנָשִׁים הָהֵם, תְּנַקֵּר--לֹא נַעֲלֶה - 13 is it a small thing that thou hast brought us up out of a land flowing with milk and honey, to kill us in the wilderness, but thou must needs make thyself also a prince over us? 14 Moreover thou hast not brought us into a land flowing with milk and honey, nor given us inheritance of fields and vineyards; wilt thou put out the eyes of these men? we will not come up.'

The מפרשים come up with a couple of ways to explain the bolded portion, which on it's face makes no sense. Who are "these men", why would Moshe gouge out their eyes, and what does it have to do with anything? Rashi says that they are referring to themselves, but didn't want to say so (like ברכת ד' or שונאי ישראל). If so, their message was, no matter what you do to us, we aren't coming. Others give variations of the idea that there is nothing you can do to hide your deficiencies as a leader from either the people in general or Korach's group in particular.

Perhaps more simply, לא נעלה doesn't mean what it meant a few pesukim ago, but must be read in the context of the intervening text as we will not go up - to Eretz Yisrael! If so, the eye-gouging is a clear reference to the צרעה the supernatural hornets that Hashem promises to send ahead of Bnei Yisrael to gouge out the eyes of the enemies they encounter when conquering the land (see שמות כג:כח and דברים ז:כ). The message then is very pointed - the Meraglim rejected the land because they felt it would be impossible to conquer. דתן & אבירם go a big step further. Even if we are miraculously able to conquer the land, we still don't want it.

• Immediately after this, Moshe asks Hashem not to respond to the קטרת offerings of the rebels. This is very strange. Why would Hashem, knowing that this is the test to determine who he had chosen as the Kohen Gadol respond to those who are rebelling against his choice? Maybe we can explain this in light of what occurred earlier in פרשת בהעלותך. After the people sin and are punished again, Moshe complains that he can not bear the weight of the nation alone, and in response Hashem has him form the 70 elders to share some of his leadership role. Later, Yehoshua finds Eldad and Medad prophesysing and wants Moshe to defend his honor and destroy them. Moshe responds, wishing - מי יתן כל עם ד' נביאים - that the entire nation would be prophets. This is remarkably similar to קרח's argument that כל העדה כולם קדושים. Maybe the whole story of Korach is not just the story of a troublemaker and his attempted mutiny, but Hashem telling Moshe to be careful what he wishes for, and punishing him for doubting His methods. If so, Moshe's plea makes perfect sense. He asks Hashem not to answer Korach to teach him a lesson.

• Finally, Over these few parshiyot there is an odd recurrence of a חמור - donkey. From the mitzva of פטר חמור, where it is the only non-kosher animal that is subject to the laws of פדיון בכור to Moshe's insistence to Hashem when defending his reign that he didn't even take a single חמור to next week's story with the miraculously talkative חמור of בלעם (was there one more). I know that it often symbolizes חומר - materialism, but I can't figure out the message. All insights on this, and the previous points as well are of course welcome from anyone (faculty, students, parents, strangers etc.).

Ve-la-malshinim

Summer break provides some catch-up time for blog questions, and so... Ma’ayanot alumna (!!!) Gabrielle Hiller asked:

I have always learned that when you're davening you are not supposed to pray for bad things to happen to people. For example, if there's a baseball game between the Yankees and the Red Sox and you support the Yankees, then you are allowed to pray for the Yankees to win, but you are NOT allowed to ask that the Red Sox should lose. How then can we say V'Lamalshinim in Shemoneh Esrei if it is clearly a negative tefillah? How can we pray for something bad to happen to people?thanks, Gabrielle Hiller

Perhaps a little bit of historical context for this berakha can help us understand why Hazal found it appropriate for inclusion in the Amidah.

Originally, the berakha began not with “And to the informers” (ve-la-malshinim) but rather with “And to the sectarians and heretics” (la-minim ve-la-meshumadim) – and hence it is called birkat ha-minim. The likelihood, based on its discussion in Masekhet Berakhot and corroborated by some Christian reports, is that it was introduced during the first century of Christianity. Its specific purpose was to prompt Christians – who had developed their own particular rituals but had not yet established their own distinct liturgy and houses of worship – to remove themselves and their apostasy from the synagogues. Over the centuries, it became clear that for the purposes of maintaining (or creating) civil relationships with their Christian neighbors, Jews needed to alter the text of this berakha, and so it evolved (actually over the course of various versions) into being aimed at Jews who informed against their fellow Jews to non-Jewish authorities.

Hazal implicitly acknowledged the point you bring up in your question – that this berakha unusually asks Hashem to bring about people’s downfall – in Midrash Tanhuma. There (in writing about the original incarnation of the berakha) they indicate that while in general a shaliah tzibbur who made mistakes while reciting hazarat ha-sha”tz would not have to go back and correct the relevant words, one who erred in reciting birkat ha-minim was forced to make the correction or leave. This was because if one were a “Jewish Christian”, then reciting this berakha would be tantamount to cursing oneself, and so the unwillingness to say it with precision would indicate that one was, indeed such a sectarian.

I write all this not as an apologist for asking (as you put it) for bad things happen to people. Rather, I think that the historical context can shed light on the uniqueness of Ve-la-malshinim. Written at one of the most difficult junctures in Jewish history, it reflects a community’s sense of crisis in witnessing the growing fissures in Rabbinic Judaism and its feeling of helplessness in watching its own members join a heretical sect of Judaism. Thus, I view its original intent as one of entreaty, of desperation. Furthermore, its newer version reflects one of the results, a relatively short while later, of this fissure: once the erstwhile sect became a powerful new religion, its impact on internal Jewish social and political dynamics was intense and, likewise, provoked a sense of desperation within the community.

It may be useful to consider one other phrase in the Shemoneh Esrei that invokes God’s power against people. In Elokai Netzor at the end of the silent Amidah, we mention those who think badly of us (implying, if I understand correctly, that they might also consider acting badly against us) and ask of Hashem: hafer atzatam ve-kalkel mahashavtam – essentially to undermine their intentions and destroy their negative thoughts.

Taken together, the assorted versions of Ve-la-malshinim as well as the line in Elokai Netzor (in addition to some other phrases throughout the tefillah) may suggest a category in which it is considered appropriate to pray for people’s downfall: when those people aim to harm individuals or rend the Jewish community. In those circumstances, we see recourse in Hashem.

I want to conclude by stating emphatically that although Ve-la-malshinim originated in opposition to Christianity, I do not believe it is appropriate to have such kavvanah when we recite the berakha today. While Jews have had a complex and often difficult history with the Church, I do not feel the current state of Jewish-Christian relations warrants a hearkening back to the origins of this berakha. Indeed, I think we should be grateful for the freedom we have here in the United States to observe Yahadut with hardly a threat, and that we should reserve our kavvanot in this tefilla for those who might truly seek to destroy us.

More on Sign Language and Hamotzi

When this question came in, I asked one of the resident experts on sign language - Nikki Press, who took an elective in the subject this year. This was her response:

We asked Mrs. Landau about signing between washing and eating bread, and she answered that people don't sign after washing, just like they wouldn't speak, as a matter of respect for the bracha. If it's necessary, for instance to ask someone to pass the salt, one should gesture and not sign. Rebecca Birnbaum added that when her brother asked a Rabbi about signing after washing, he said that it is not allowed- because it's a form of communication just like speech.

Interruptions between Netilat Yadayim and ha-Motzi

Rebecca Schenker asked about interruptions, both verbal and non-verbal, between netilat yadayim and ha-motzi. Even though I am not a posek, with the help of Rabbi Binyamin Forst's sefer The Laws of B'rachos, I can safely say that the following halachot apply: One may not be mafsik (interrupt) between a berachah and its subject. But the eating of bread is not the subject of netilat yadayim - the mitzvah of washing hands is the subject of the berachah. Thus interrupting between netilat yadayim and ha-motzi is less problematic than interrupting between (for example) he-eitz and eating the fruit. Nevertheless, it is preferable not to interrupt.
If it's a request necessary for the meal (for example, someone forgot to bring the knife to cut the challah), however, it is completely permitted to interrupt - to speak - and ask for the knife. Sounds like "shhh" and "nu" are equivalent to any other words: preferable not to say them, but permitted if necessary for the meal. Gestures are less problematic than speaking, but still not ideal. Regarding sign language - which are gestures that are also communicating - a real posek should be asked whether it's equivalent to words (more chamor) or to gestures (less chamor).

Avodah Sheb'lev Contest Winner #2

Also, as we have just received the final submissions from the final round of this years contest, it is time to post the other winner for last month - Esther and Chana Garbow.

מן המיצר קראתי י-ה, ענני במרחב י-ה.ה’ לי, לא אירא מה יעשה לי אדם.ה’ לי בעוזריי, ואני אראה בשונאיי

“From distress I called to G-d; with abounding relief, G-d answered me. The Lord is with me, I do not fear- what can man do to me? The Lord is with me among my helpers, I will see the downfall of my enemies.”

This quote from Hallel is very inspiring to people who are going through difficult times, but they know G-d will help get them through it. And through believing in G-d you will see your problems disappear.

I feel like there’s no way out
No way to get away
But I know I can look to G-d and say
That I need help to go about
And he will answer me
And help me with my pain
I know that G-d can see
What to do to help
And when someone is trying
To be harmful to me
I have no fear of him
For Hashem is helping
Me, and bring the downfall
To my enemy.

The belief in G-d during the 6 Day War led them to victory and the Kotel.

פרשת נשא

As Finals has us all busy and out of class, we don't have our usual forum for Divrei Torah on the Parsha. First, it's Naso, (longest one in the Torah, so get some sleep Friday night). Below I reprint a beautiful idea that a neighbor of mine, Rabbi Daniel Lifschitz circulated.

Parshat Naso concludes with a long and repetitive section detailing the donations that the prices of the Twelve Tribes made to the Tabernacle upon its completion. Each of the prices brought the exact same collection of utensils, incense, animals, etc. Instead of consolidating the description somewhat, the Torah spells it out at maximum length -Prince A brought X, Y and Z; Prince B brought X, Y and Z; Prince C....Why so much repetition?

Rabbi Frand suggests that there is an important lesson that the Torah is trying to underscore by the repetition. On the first day, the prince of the tribe of Yehudah brought his donation. On the second day, the prince of Yissachar was up. The typical person would try to think of something bigger, better, or at the least different than what his colleague had brought in order to make his own gift stand out too.Bringing the same thing as the other prince would show a lack of imagination and would hardly be socially acceptable. But Netanel ben Tzuar, the prince of Yissachar, instead brought the same gift that the prince of Yehudah did. He realized that if he brought something new anddifferent, then prince #3 would have to do the same, as would prince #4,and he would have started an endless chain of one-upsmanship. By bringing the same boring gift, Netanel prevented a cycle of social competition. (Perhaps this special distinction of Netanel is why the passage describing his gift is worded slightly differently than the passages describing the donations of the other princes.) Unfortunately,this type of cycle is all too prevalent in our society, with a number of corrosive effects I need not go into. How many of us have the courage of Netanel to risk our status and reputation by refusing to compete? Shabbat Shalom.

Avodah Sheb'lev Winners

This past month, the assignment was choose a passage from Hallel. Here is one of the winning submissions, by Zahava Rothschild. The other co-winner to follow soon.

כי חילצת נפשי ממות, את עיני מן דמעה, את רגלי מדחי - For Thou hast delivered my soul from death, mine eyes from tears, and my feet from stumbling.

It was Yom Hashoah, and all of the students flocked into the auditorium. There was large chatter and small thoughts, all enjoying a peaceful day filled with the average tribulations of an average school day. Nobody shifted significantly when the teacher called for silence in order to begin the program. The lights were shut and the projector was uncovered. Nobody expected their peace to be shattered by the same pictures they have seen annually. Though the silence in the room shown thick, it was empty all the same. The solemn music caused everyone to jump a bit, but the sequence was the same nonetheless. Some squinted or turned away, some blinded their eyes, and some stared, whether with sympathy or apathy. I watched the screen trying to notice something, anything exceptional, about the photographs to cause me to feel something different, something more significant, about this specific commemoration of the Shoah. The pictures of empty children, the shots of naked dreams, they seemed so apart from me. Then, there was this one picture that seemed extremely odd. There were people in bunkers, stripped of their life and possessions, carrying striped shirts in their hands. Something seemed very strange about it. I continued to watch the next few slides, and I still could not conjure the difference that had existed in that picture. The lights flipped on, and before I knew it, the program had ended.
I kept the still-frame inside my vision and studied it for as long as it took. I noticed that picture had a spark, unlike the others. I had never seen color in black and white, until I realized in that specific picture, one man, that had been stripped of anyone he had ever been, was smiling.
It had been a miraculous gesture, an inward hope that maybe, somebody would realize that there was life in death’s camp, there was color in the darkness, and there was a future of students to look after.

Memorial Day

Given that hakarat hatov is definitely a universal value that Judaism upholds, I think that it is important to take a moment to think about and thank the people who gave their lives so that we can live safely in America. Have a meaningful and enjoyable day!

Yom Yerushalayim

In the spirit of Yom Yerushalayim, I wanted to share with you the link (and transcript) of the broadcast of the paratroopers as they first reached the Kotel and Har HaBayit in 1967, forty-two years ago today. It's really an incredible broadcast to listen to, if your Hebrew is up to it, otherwise, the English translation is found below. You can hear the paratroopers' reactions at first seeing the Kotel, Rav Goren blowing the Shofar and leading everyone in the Brakha of Shehekheiyanu, followed by the singing of Hatikva. You can also watch it on the video posted below.

The link can be found by clicking here. Another good site with some reflections of paratroopers at that moment can be found by clicking here.



If you think about it, since Churban Beit Hamikdash, for most of Jewish History, Yerushalayim has lain in ruins. Even when we established the State of Israel in 1948, we lost the Old City, the Kotel and Har Habayit to the Jordanians, who destroyed many of the batei knesset and holy sites during their reign over the Old City from 1948-1967. Today, walking around the Old City, it is amazing to see the many Jewish homes, the Yeshivot and Midrashot filled with men and women learning Torah and destroyed batei knesset (like the Churvah) being rebuilt. One can see the nevuot of Zekharia (8:4-5) of עוד ישבו זקנים וזקנות ברחבות ירושלים... ילדים וילדות משחקים ברחבותיה coming true in front of our eyes! These tremendous opportunities all started in 1967, and that is what we are saying Hallel for on Yom Yerushalayim. Chag Sameach!!

Finals L'shmah?

Talia Stern asks the perfect question for the season of finals and Z'man Matan Torateinu:

In Birchat HaTorah, in the brachah of "hamelamed Torah l'amo Yisrael", we make a plea to G-d of "may we and our offspring...all of us...study Your Torah for its own sake" (V'Lomdei Toratecha L'shmah). We see very clearly here that we have the responsibility to learn just to learn. Don't we (in general) violate this when tests are given in the subjects of Tanach, Gemara, and Halacha?

Since I'm really busy writing my finals, I can't give a comprehensive essay-like answer to this important question, so here are just a few points to ponder.

1) "Torah L'Shmah" is a very complex concept. Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm, Chancellor of YU, has a whole book called Torah lishmah : Torah for Torah's sake in the works of Rabbi Hayyim of Volozhin and his contemporaries, which is dedicated to exploring its meaning. Chassidim interpreted "l'shmah" as "l'shem deveikut," for the sake of getting closer to God. Mitnagdim (like R. Hayyim of Volozhin) interpreted it as "l'shem Torah" - Torah for its own sake. But "Torah l'shmah" is not so simple to define.

2) As crazy as it sounds, a test can also be l'shmah. L'shmah does not mean "with no review or accountability." It's a question of every student's attitude. When you are in class or reviewing for a test, are you interested in the ideas for their own sake, or just for the grade? L'shmah is something everyone can create for herself, whether there is an externally imposed test or not. Each student can make her school learning l'shmah with her own approach: does she ever ask a question or explore an issue that's not covered? Does she say - "I'm going to study this and throw out the notebook the minute the final is finished," or does she say "I'm going to keep this notebook in case I want to review or ever have a shailah that we discussed in halacha class"?

3) The brachah may be saying that a school student has the responsibility to learn on her own - for example on Shabbat afternoon, with a friend or a parent, in addition to the learning she does for school.

4) The day will come when you will not be students anymore, but responsible for your own religious growth. The foundation you receive here (including tests which mandate review and allow both teacher and student to assess how well the student has learned) will allow you to maximize your learning when you are responsible for doing it on your own - when it's l'shmah.

Seudah Sh'lishit

Hi all, welcome back. Before addressing the question at hand, just a quick note about our unfortunate and unscheduled vacation. As you all begin to feel the pressures of the year end, we teachers feel it too (those exams don't just write themselves...) and the blog has suffered, both in terms of a lack of fresh material and a back log of unanswered questions. To try and address both problems, while keeping the schedules of us bloggers in mind, we're going to (B"N) be doing a bit less of "original reporting" (I feel like the editor of Newsweek), and will sometimes link you to a different source that already addressed your issue on-line is a way that we think is accurate and comprehensive.

Toward that end, Daniella Grodko asked:

Hi! I was wondering, do you have to have shalashutis (the third meal that you eat on Shabbat) on other holidays like Pesach and Succot? If not, why do we apply other shabbat halachot to these holidays and not this one?

While it doesn't address your question directly, here is a nice summary of the laws of Seudah Shlishit. It begins:

"One of the elements of ONEG SHABBAT is to have (and enjoy) three meals on Shabbat. This idea is linked to the pasuk from this week's sedra (16:25): "And Moshe said: Eat it (the Manna) today, for today is Shabbat to G-d; today you will not find it in the field." The threefold use of the word HAYOM (today) in reference to eating the Manna is considered an ASMACHTA for the Rabbinic rule requiring three meals on Shabbat."

This source is specific to Shabbos, and therefore there is no obligation to eat it on Yom Tov.

Yasher koach for the question and the excuse to discuss an often neglected mitzvah.

Dress for Davening

I heard that when you're davening, you should wear clothing that you wouldn't mind wearing in public. If you are davening at home, would you have to make sure you are as presentable as if you were going out in public too (i.e-brushing your hair, etc.)? - Layla Blenden

The Aruch HaShulchan Orach Chaim 98:5 writes:

Prayer is in place of sacrifices. And it is appropriate for one to have nice clothing for prayer like the clothing of the Kohen, however not everyone is able to afford it. Whowever can afford it and is wealthy should definitely do so. Nonetheless, one should have special pants for Tefillah because of cleanliness, as well as clean shoes that are appropriate for davening, and prepare yourself for the God of Israel.

The idea that Aruch haShulchan expresses is that davening, no matter where it takes place, is an event that we should dress up for. After all, we are meeting God! Even though the Aruch haShulchan does not specifically address the issues of brushing hair, etc., it seems that he would also think that it is appropriate that all aspects of how we dress be geared toward meeting "the God of Israel."

The Jewish Jordan

Here is a great clip by NBC Sports on "Where is the Jewish Jordan Now", about Tamir Goodman, the guy who spoke to all of us at Ma'ayanot on Chanukah. A great message about the potential to make a Kiddush Hashem in everything you do.

Deep Thoughts from Patch Adams

What follows is a quote from Patch Adams. It's a great movie with a great message, for those of you who have not seen it.

The context of this quote: Patch Adams is talking to a Corrine, a beautiful woman whom he loves. She has been playing "hard to get" and finally opens up to him regarding why she is so afraid to enter into a relationship with him. She discusses how difficult it was to be "that beautiful girl that all the guys always looked at."

She says:
"When I was a girl I would look out my bedroom window at the caterpillars; I envied them so much. No matter what they were before, no matter what happened to them, they could just hide away and turn into these beautiful creatures that could fly away completely untouched."

This is not to say that beauty is a bad thing--the opposite--it is a gift from God that one can and should be thankful for! The idea that I took away from it is that acting and dressing in a modest "caterpillar" way is a means for us to protect ourselves from the difficulties of being "that girl"--from being taken advantage of by guys who are not looking at who we are inside, but just at our external beauty.

Is something good just because God commanded it, or is there an independant notion of "good?"

This is a classic philosophical issue that is discussed most famously by Plato in the Euthyphro. Here is a link to a quote from Jonathan Sacks' book where he discusses this topic. Interesting food for thought...

http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2009/05/euthyphros-false-dilemma.html

Bitachon

How do you balance being afraid of something versus knowing that you should have emunah that everything will be ok?
Gabrielle Hiller


Hi Gabrielle,

I'm so glad you asked this question because it gives me the opportunity to share with you an idea of the Chazon Ish that changed my life. In a book called Emunah v'Bitachon, published by his students after his death in 1953, R' Avraham Yeshayahu Karelitz wrote the following:

"There is an old misconception rooted in the hearts of many when it comes to the concept of trust in Hashem. This term, bitachon, used by the righteous to name a celebrated and central character trait, has undergone a change, and has mistakenly become a term to describe the obligation to believe in any situation a person finds himself in where he faces an undecided future with two ways apparent - one good and the other not - that surely the good outcome will be the one to occur; if one is doubtful and fears the possibility of the opposite of good occurring, he is lacking in trust in Hashem. This understanding of trust is not correct, for as long as the future has not been revealed through prophecy, the future is not decided, for who knows Hashem's judgements and rewards? No - trusting in Hashem is not that, but rather the belief that nothing happens by chance, and that everything that occurs under the sun is the result of a decree in the Almighty."

The Chazon Ish goes on to write that when you find yourself in a scary situation it is natural to fear the ways of the world. But if you can internalize the known truth that this is not a chance of misfortune but rather it is all from Hashem. If you allow your faith to alleviate your fear and give you the courage to believe in the possibility of salvation; that you get yourself to understand that nothing you are facing necessarily tends more toward a bad outcome, then you have achieved the trait of bitachon in Hashem.

I found these intense words of the Chazon Ish to be insightful and they gave me clarity about what bitachon in Hashem means. It is by no means an easy thing to internalize, it takes hard work and effort but it can really transform your life and relationship with Hashem.

The sefer has recently come out in English, titled "Faith and Trust" and I recommend it as a challenging but highly rewarding work. If you would like to discuss this further in person, let me know!

"Hashem Elokeichem Emet"

Why do we add on the word "emet" at the end of Kri'at Shema if it's really part of the next paragraph?
Does this in any way violate bal tosif?
~Tamar Novetsky~

According to Brachot 14a, we don't want a hefsek / break between the third paragraph (VaYomer) and the following paragraph (V'Yatziv v'nachon.) So we connect the first word of the last paragraph to the previous one, we connect "Emet" to "Hashem Elokeichem." The reason is because of the pasuk in Sefer Yirmiyahu, 10:10, where Yirmiyahu declares "Hashem Elokim Emet." Just as Yirmiyahu connected the two words, so must we and not have a pause between the two paragraphs.

It is not an issue of Bal Tosif. Based on the Sifrei (Re'eh 82), one violates Bal Tosif for words when completely new words are added to a pre-existing text. The example that the Sifrei gives is that it would be assur for one to add a bracha like the one Moshe gave Bn"y in the beginning of Sefer Devaim, "Hashem Elokei Elokeicheim yosef aleichem kachem elef pa'amim..." to Birchat Kohanim, a pre-existing text from BeMidbar 6:24-26 .

I hope this answers your question and helps you find even more meaning in your davening!

Ms. F

Body Piercing & Tattoos

A number of students have asked related questions, so I’m just going to respond in one post. First, Penina Cohen asked about whether it is permitted to pierce your ears. Leora Kook expanded the question to nose rings, and also asks about tattoos. Chana Ben-Zecharia asked if it’s true that someone who has a tattoo can not be buried is a Jewish cemetery.

The idea that getting a tattoo would preclude someone from being buried in a Jewish cemetery is a myth. The only people who might be excluded from having a Jewish burial are those who commit suicide. Still, there is a big halachik difference between tattoos and piercings. It is strictly and clearly prohibited to get a tattoo - it’s an explicit pasuk (Vayikra 19:28). While body piercing presents some halachik issues, it is not nearly as clear as that. (When I was researching a paper on this subject in law school, I noticed a responsa from a Conservative Rabbi which also prohibited tattoos and cautioned against some of the more exotic piercings for tznius reasons.)

The biggest issue with piercing (as many of you learned in Bava Kama) is chovel b’atzmo – injuring yourself. Judaism believes that we do not have full ownership over even our own bodies, and prohibits suicide, and to a lesser extent injuring oneself. Now this issur is not absolute. No one would argue that someone in need of surgery or even amputation of a limb may not have it because he is cutting his body. If the injury is for a purpose that is productive, it is permitted. On this basis, many poskim (including Rav Ovadiah Yosef) have allowed even cosmetic surgery, arguing that the benefit of the procedure outweighs the pain and damage done by the surgery. Some poskim disagree – I have been told that Rav Aharon Soloveitchik ruled that cosmetic surgery, allowing a nose job only if the surgery was otherwise needed for medical reasons, like a deviated septum. (He also did not allow his daughters to pierce their ears.) What emerges on the issue is a kind of halachik sliding scale, on which we need to balance the pleasure/benefit of the procedure against the pain/damage. Piercing one’s ears scores pretty low on both ends, and reasonable halachik authorities can come out in both directions.

Rav Aharon Lichtenstein told a story in his eulogy for Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach about when his daughter wanted to pierce her ears, but he thought that it was assur. They agreed to ask Rav Shlomo Zalman, who after engaging the young girl and ignoring her learned father ruled that it is permissible. A similar story happened with Rabbi Willig and Rabbi Schachter.

As you get away from the ears, to other parts of the body – nose, lip, belly button etc. - I think that the benefit of the jewelry diminishes, and I know that the pain and damage are significantly worse. Additionally, there might be some real chukkas hagoyim issues as well, that go beyond the scope of this post.

Yasher koach to all three of you for the questions.

Avoda Sheb'lev Contest - Deadline

A quick reminder that tomorrow, Rosh Chodesh Iyar is the final day to submit entries for this months Avoda Sheb'lev contest. For this month you are to choose your own passage from Hallel. Just to get you excited about it, here is last months runner-up, by Chaya Kanerfogel.

Is Hashem ‘So Far Away’?
Learning tanach every day in school, we are bound to come across perushim that discuss G-d’s presence in our lives, or hashkacha pratis. I can recall more than one class in which my fellow classmates and myself have tried to grasp different opinions of scholars. Some argue that G-d is a major force that directly can alter our fate and controls every seemingly insignificant detail of this world, while others think of Hashem as an over-encompassing power who simply supervises the laws of nature.
Moreover, it is personally difficult to think of Hashem as being unaffiliated with my life and me personally, since I know that there was once a time that Hashem’s presence in an individual’s life was blatantly conceivable, namely up until the destruction of the second Beit Hamikdash. I think it is also harder to have a personal connection with Hashem through tefilah if we believe that we are only davening as an exercise purely for self-reflection because of the notion that Hashem doesn’t listen to our tefilot as He is a transcendent presence.
The line of “Karov Hashem” from Ashrei gave me some convincing proof that Hashem can truly have a personal connection to us and at times be our own personal G-d.
When you call out to someone, it means that you believe that they are there to hear you. Although the person I call out to might choose not to answer my call, I still know that they will at least hear what I am saying. They are a presence that I know is close enough to hear my call.
What I think this line of Ashrei is saying is that once I acknowledge Hashem’s direct presence is in my life by calling out to Him, He will always be there to listen to me. The verse in Ashrei adds that the person who Hashem is close to must call out to Him truthfully. While I may call out to someone, my cries may be said in vain, meaning I know that truthfully, the thing or person I call out to does not really exist. I can call out to Hashem, but deep down I may not truly believe that His presence exists in my life. Perhaps, then, this verse contains one of the many intrinsic tenets of Judaism. As Jews, our faith in Hashem’s ability to hear our prayers and perform miracles for us is the underlying foundation that keeps us connected to Him. Even though Judaism is a logical and understandable religion, there are certain aspects of it and our faith in Hashem being somewhat involved in our lives that affirm our belief in Torah uMitzvot.
So in conclusion, this short verse sums up an important facet of Jewish faith. It also gives us the promise that once we believe that Hashem is there to listen to us, He will truly be there. It is our choice to believe whether or not Hashem is a transcendental or imminent G-d, but I think this verse affirms that our beliefs can become reality.