[An extension of a discussion on Avodah]
Just a few blocks from each other a mini Kulturkampf exists between the Breuer community and the YU community.
The issue TIDE vs. TuM
Or Torah I'm Derech Eretz vs. Torah uMada.
The Hirschians assert that TIDE means absorbing Torah and wordliness BUT that Torah is the only valid prism by means which one sees the world
Thus Torah is supreme - Torah uber alles. Yet Torah can be applied to engineering or medicine the way one applies it to a "Blatt G'mara"
Furthermore Hirschians allege that TuM means seeing science w/o Torah as valid - and further as an equal to Torah may (or will) dillute it or corrupt it. And that this is unacceptable.
TuM devotees would demur that this is not quite the goal of Torah uMada. As Dr. Belkin might have said, One Studies pure Torah and then one studies pure "liberal arts" and goes home and makes his own synsthesis. Thus any potential "corruption" is not in the Torah classroom (the Blatt shiur) but in the individual.
But even this sells TuM Short. Ideally a purebred Torah devotee absorbs science not to modify, dillute., or corrupt Torah, rather to expand, enlighten, and to clarify Torah.
Example - Tanninim Gedolim means one thing to people unfamiliar with science. But a TuM student can easily see that science posits dinosaurs, and now the torah text can be better understood (not revised or compromised!) By adding this piece of information to one's tool-chest! Peshat can be clearer and enhanced by adding Mada to the mix!
However, the danger lurks, nevertheless, that Madda may lead one off the correct path. However, Madda should never be the sole prism by means with which one views Torah. Rather, Torah is learned on its own and Madda shouls merely enhance that View.
Part II
The Danger of the Isms
Kt
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Tuesday, 28 July 2009
Monday, 27 July 2009
Sinat Chinum - Purposeless Hatred
The term sinat chinum is usually translated as baseless hatred, yet what does that term even mean? Is hatred ever baseless? While we can argue that a reason for the hatred is problematic, foolish, even unjustifiable, can we truly apply the word "baseless"? There always is a reason, even if we think the reason is wrong. Furthermore, can one really state that the hatred that emerges in the famous story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza is baseless? I think that, while I may strongly disagree with,how the person dealt with his negative emotions, there was reason for why they developed.
For all these reasons and more, I have chosen to translate sinat chinum as purposeless hatred, in other words hatred that is not acted upon correctly. We all develop negative emotions; the question is how we respond to these emotions. The response to hatred may not be to simply declare that it should not exist but to respond to the hatred correctly. To make this emotion, in the end, serve a postive purpose. Sinat Chinum is when we just allow it to exist and not strive to serve this purpose.
I invite you to read more about this in my two part essay Defining Sinat Chinum at
http://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/insight5757-22.htm
and
http://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/insight5757-23.htm
Rabbi Ben Hecht
For all these reasons and more, I have chosen to translate sinat chinum as purposeless hatred, in other words hatred that is not acted upon correctly. We all develop negative emotions; the question is how we respond to these emotions. The response to hatred may not be to simply declare that it should not exist but to respond to the hatred correctly. To make this emotion, in the end, serve a postive purpose. Sinat Chinum is when we just allow it to exist and not strive to serve this purpose.
I invite you to read more about this in my two part essay Defining Sinat Chinum at
http://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/insight5757-22.htm
and
http://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/insight5757-23.htm
Rabbi Ben Hecht
Parsha: How did Hatzi Shevet Menashe Get There?
"Bnai Gad and Reuven approach Moshe about staying in East Jordan.
Question - how did the "half-tribe of Menashe get into the picture?
And why Menashe over another tribe?
I have a surprise answer"
OK clear your minds.
I taught a parsha class for many years @ Cong Mt Sinai in Wash Heights
I found that much of the tribal dynamics had to do with the Matriarchs - viz. Jacob's 4 wives.
I don't have the time or space now but use that as a prism for viewing inter-tribal dynamics...
Now apply that here:
Reuven - Leah
Gad - one of the 2 maidservants (Zilpah)
Q; Whose missing?
A: Rachel
Now proportion:
Leah has 6 sons of
But Levi gets no land leaving 5
So Reuven is about 20% of Leah
Gad is about 25% of the maidservants
Needed? 20-25% of Rachel
Half Menasseh - about 12.5 to 20% depending on how you compute. (Menasseh is MUCH larger than either Ephraim or Benjamin)
So Moses' agenda was to conform East-Jordan to a matriarchical balance. Half (or part of) Menasseh did the trick
Proof?
None
Hint?
Look at the configuration of the tribes in pasrshiyot Bamidbar and Beha'alotecha. They march by matriarch -
Except forGad who gets promoted to replace Levi with Reuven and Shim'on.
This model "suggests" the Torah had a matriarchical proportion re: tribe vs tribe
Since Half-menasseh jumps out of the clear blue sky, I simply plugged them in and voila! It conformed to a an existing model.
KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Question - how did the "half-tribe of Menashe get into the picture?
And why Menashe over another tribe?
I have a surprise answer"
OK clear your minds.
I taught a parsha class for many years @ Cong Mt Sinai in Wash Heights
I found that much of the tribal dynamics had to do with the Matriarchs - viz. Jacob's 4 wives.
I don't have the time or space now but use that as a prism for viewing inter-tribal dynamics...
Now apply that here:
Reuven - Leah
Gad - one of the 2 maidservants (Zilpah)
Q; Whose missing?
A: Rachel
Now proportion:
Leah has 6 sons of
But Levi gets no land leaving 5
So Reuven is about 20% of Leah
Gad is about 25% of the maidservants
Needed? 20-25% of Rachel
Half Menasseh - about 12.5 to 20% depending on how you compute. (Menasseh is MUCH larger than either Ephraim or Benjamin)
So Moses' agenda was to conform East-Jordan to a matriarchical balance. Half (or part of) Menasseh did the trick
Proof?
None
Hint?
Look at the configuration of the tribes in pasrshiyot Bamidbar and Beha'alotecha. They march by matriarch -
Except forGad who gets promoted to replace Levi with Reuven and Shim'on.
This model "suggests" the Torah had a matriarchical proportion re: tribe vs tribe
Since Half-menasseh jumps out of the clear blue sky, I simply plugged them in and voila! It conformed to a an existing model.
KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Ma'akeh, Safety at Work, Profit
Originally published 7/2/09, 12:02 am.
Recently, the following string of events occurred:
A friend of mine was injured at the (fictional) Jewish Institute of Hackensack building. Apparently, a repair to the brick stairs was not made properly and he got quite shaken up on a loose brick...
While investigating the Mitzva and Halachah of Ma'akeh, someone pointed out that there is no Torah requirement to make the work-place safe.
I'm not convinced.
The Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 184:5 states that it is prohibited to allow any hazard that may cause one to get injured.
Plus there is the requirement of a Ma'akeh which prohibits allowing a hazard lest someone fall.
Question: are those who look the other way or justify these blatant kinds of hazards a form of Rodef?
At any rate, while I support the economic freedoms we enjoy in North America, unbridled capitalism can engender an unsafe and even cutthroat society.
B"H most modern societies have curbed extreme capitalism, and AISI, it is antithetical to Torah ideals.
Think of the prohibitions of lo sachsom (the last few dappim in Bava Metiza) and the absolute socialism enforced by during the shemitta year.
Of course - it goes without saying - the Torah opposes unbridled socialism, too.
Rather, the Torah economy is not subject to any "ism." It transcends them all. While elements of several "isms" co-exist, anyone who is a TRUE Marxist or a TRUE capitalist cannot be true to the transcending Torah. By defiintion it is a compromise.
The same may be said for other isms.
But this post is about not letting the great Mammon undermine our loyalty to Hashem, the People of Israel, and the Torah way.
KT,
RRW
Recently, the following string of events occurred:
A friend of mine was injured at the (fictional) Jewish Institute of Hackensack building. Apparently, a repair to the brick stairs was not made properly and he got quite shaken up on a loose brick...
While investigating the Mitzva and Halachah of Ma'akeh, someone pointed out that there is no Torah requirement to make the work-place safe.
I'm not convinced.
The Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 184:5 states that it is prohibited to allow any hazard that may cause one to get injured.
Plus there is the requirement of a Ma'akeh which prohibits allowing a hazard lest someone fall.
Question: are those who look the other way or justify these blatant kinds of hazards a form of Rodef?
At any rate, while I support the economic freedoms we enjoy in North America, unbridled capitalism can engender an unsafe and even cutthroat society.
B"H most modern societies have curbed extreme capitalism, and AISI, it is antithetical to Torah ideals.
Think of the prohibitions of lo sachsom (the last few dappim in Bava Metiza) and the absolute socialism enforced by during the shemitta year.
Of course - it goes without saying - the Torah opposes unbridled socialism, too.
Rather, the Torah economy is not subject to any "ism." It transcends them all. While elements of several "isms" co-exist, anyone who is a TRUE Marxist or a TRUE capitalist cannot be true to the transcending Torah. By defiintion it is a compromise.
The same may be said for other isms.
But this post is about not letting the great Mammon undermine our loyalty to Hashem, the People of Israel, and the Torah way.
KT,
RRW
Sunday, 26 July 2009
Amaleik and Honest Weights and Measures
Background:
My former Congregation in Washington Heights Inwood consisted of German-Jewish survivors. In fact it was proverbially "built upon the rubble of Krystalnach". Amaleik and Naziism was a very sensitive topic 3 times a year:
Note in Devarim (mishneh Torah) we darshan "semuchot" (juxta-positions)
This "mini-catechism" below is derived from my drashot on Ki Teitze or Parshot Zachor over the years. This is certainly something to ponder for this Shabbat Hazzon!
------------------------
Drasha:
Q: In Ki Teitze, Why does the parsha of Amaleik follow the mitzva of honest weights and measures?
A: To teach us that when Israel practices its business dishonestly, Amaleik (anti-Semites) may come out and attack us.
Q: This sounds fairly harsh! Does this mean that Dishonest Jewish Businessmen create "anti-Semitism"?
A: Not as I see it. Rather, the anti-Semites always lurk in the "woodwork". And then, if/when Israel is dishonest in business, God's Divine protection is thereby withdrawn. This in turn triggers anti-Semitic "action.". IOW the anti-Semites always exist in an inert state - until Israel violates Honest Weights and Measures. Only then Amaleik (or Nazis) rear their ugly heads and attack us.
May we do Teshuva so as to merit the restoration of the Divine Magen Avraham and the Divine Magen David.
Shavu Tov
RRW
- Parshat Zachor
- Beshalach
And - Ki Teitze
Note in Devarim (mishneh Torah) we darshan "semuchot" (juxta-positions)
This "mini-catechism" below is derived from my drashot on Ki Teitze or Parshot Zachor over the years. This is certainly something to ponder for this Shabbat Hazzon!
------------------------
Drasha:
Q: In Ki Teitze, Why does the parsha of Amaleik follow the mitzva of honest weights and measures?
A: To teach us that when Israel practices its business dishonestly, Amaleik (anti-Semites) may come out and attack us.
Q: This sounds fairly harsh! Does this mean that Dishonest Jewish Businessmen create "anti-Semitism"?
A: Not as I see it. Rather, the anti-Semites always lurk in the "woodwork". And then, if/when Israel is dishonest in business, God's Divine protection is thereby withdrawn. This in turn triggers anti-Semitic "action.". IOW the anti-Semites always exist in an inert state - until Israel violates Honest Weights and Measures. Only then Amaleik (or Nazis) rear their ugly heads and attack us.
May we do Teshuva so as to merit the restoration of the Divine Magen Avraham and the Divine Magen David.
Shavu Tov
RRW
Siyyum Ta'anit - Reprise
NB: This Siyyum was done Three years ago at my son's Bar Mitzva. Being that his Hebrew Birthday is Rosh Chodesh Av and he did a Siyyum on that Masechta in partiular.
This is In conjunction with the Siyyum on Masechet Ta'anit, I will say a D’var Torah connecting:
The 3rd to last Mishna in Ta’anit WITH The Final Mishna in Ta'anit.
Background:
Ta'anit Chapter 4 Mishna 6 lists 5 catasrophes that occured on the 17th of Tammuz and 5 catastrophes that occured on the 9th of Av:
TA'ANIT: CHAPTER 4: MISHNAH 6
This is In conjunction with the Siyyum on Masechet Ta'anit, I will say a D’var Torah connecting:
The 3rd to last Mishna in Ta’anit WITH The Final Mishna in Ta'anit.
Background:
Ta'anit Chapter 4 Mishna 6 lists 5 catasrophes that occured on the 17th of Tammuz and 5 catastrophes that occured on the 9th of Av:
TA'ANIT: CHAPTER 4: MISHNAH 6
Five things befell our ancestors on the seventeenth of Tammuz, and five on the ninth of Av. On the seventeenth of Tammuz the Tablets were broken and the tamid ceased, and the city was breached, and Apostomos burned the Torah and placed an idol in the sanctuary. On the ninth of Av it was decreed against our ancestors that they would not enter the Land, and the Temple was destroyed the first time and the second time, and Betar was taken, and the city was ploughed up. When Av enters they reduced rejoicing.
======================================================
Mishna 8 lists the 2 most joyous occasions are the 1 5th of Av and Yom Kippur - i.e. the 10th of Tishrei?
TA'ANIT: CHAPTER 4: MISHNAH 8
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said, There were no holidays for Israel as the fifteenth of Av and as Yom Kippur, for on them the daughters of Jerusalem go forth in borrowed white garments, so as not to embarrass whoever does not have; all the garments require immersion. And the daughters of Jerusalem go forth and dance in the vineyards. And what would they say? "Young man, lift up your eyes and see, what you choose for yourself. Do not set your eyes on beauty, set your eyes on the family: 'Grace is deceitful, and beauty is vain, but a woman that fears the Lord, she shall be praised' (Prov. 31:30), and it says, 'Give her the fruit of her hands, and let her works praise her in the gates' (ibid., v. 31)." And similarly it says, "Go forth, O you daughters of Zion, and gaze upon King Solomon [ha-Melekh Shelomo], even upon the crown with which his mother has crowned him on his wedding day, and on the day of the gladness of his heart" (Cant. 3:11). "His wedding day" is the giving of the Torah, "on the day of the gladness of his heart" is the building of the Temple, may it be built speedily in our days. Amen.
Questions:
1. How is it that the 15th of Av and the 10th of Tishrei the most joyous of occasions. Aren't Holidays such as Purim and Sukkot even more joyous?
2. What is the connection between these 2 dates in Mishna 6 - Namely the 17th of Tammuz and the 0th of Av - with the 2 dates in Mishna 4 - namely the 10th of Tishrei and the 15th of Av?
3. Furthermore, what is the connection between the 2 catastrophes in the "Wilderness Generation"
Answers:
a the 2 catastrophes are:
1. The worship of the Golden Calf.
2. The Sin of the Spies leading to the Death Decree for the Wilderness Generation.
Regarding Question #2 the events are:
1. The final forgiveness for the Sin of the Golden Calf culminated with the reception of the 2nd tablets.
2. The discovery that the death decree had been completed and no longer would anyone die from that decree.
Thus, the juxta-position is no mere co-incidence. Rather, the catastrophes that instituted the 17th of Tammuz and 9th of Av as days of Mourning for all generations, were originally forgiven on Yom Kippur and the 15th of Av respectively. Therefore, these are days of "original forgiveness!" Thus, the joy of 10 Tishrei & 15 Av - at least in terms of Masechet Ta'anit - ARE THE greatest Joys.
In the merit of completing this Traractate - may we Merit the Final Redemption
======================================================
Mishna 8 lists the 2 most joyous occasions are the 1 5th of Av and Yom Kippur - i.e. the 10th of Tishrei?
TA'ANIT: CHAPTER 4: MISHNAH 8
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said, There were no holidays for Israel as the fifteenth of Av and as Yom Kippur, for on them the daughters of Jerusalem go forth in borrowed white garments, so as not to embarrass whoever does not have; all the garments require immersion. And the daughters of Jerusalem go forth and dance in the vineyards. And what would they say? "Young man, lift up your eyes and see, what you choose for yourself. Do not set your eyes on beauty, set your eyes on the family: 'Grace is deceitful, and beauty is vain, but a woman that fears the Lord, she shall be praised' (Prov. 31:30), and it says, 'Give her the fruit of her hands, and let her works praise her in the gates' (ibid., v. 31)." And similarly it says, "Go forth, O you daughters of Zion, and gaze upon King Solomon [ha-Melekh Shelomo], even upon the crown with which his mother has crowned him on his wedding day, and on the day of the gladness of his heart" (Cant. 3:11). "His wedding day" is the giving of the Torah, "on the day of the gladness of his heart" is the building of the Temple, may it be built speedily in our days. Amen.
Questions:
1. How is it that the 15th of Av and the 10th of Tishrei the most joyous of occasions. Aren't Holidays such as Purim and Sukkot even more joyous?
2. What is the connection between these 2 dates in Mishna 6 - Namely the 17th of Tammuz and the 0th of Av - with the 2 dates in Mishna 4 - namely the 10th of Tishrei and the 15th of Av?
3. Furthermore, what is the connection between the 2 catastrophes in the "Wilderness Generation"
Answers:
a the 2 catastrophes are:
1. The worship of the Golden Calf.
2. The Sin of the Spies leading to the Death Decree for the Wilderness Generation.
Regarding Question #2 the events are:
1. The final forgiveness for the Sin of the Golden Calf culminated with the reception of the 2nd tablets.
2. The discovery that the death decree had been completed and no longer would anyone die from that decree.
Thus, the juxta-position is no mere co-incidence. Rather, the catastrophes that instituted the 17th of Tammuz and 9th of Av as days of Mourning for all generations, were originally forgiven on Yom Kippur and the 15th of Av respectively. Therefore, these are days of "original forgiveness!" Thus, the joy of 10 Tishrei & 15 Av - at least in terms of Masechet Ta'anit - ARE THE greatest Joys.
In the merit of completing this Traractate - may we Merit the Final Redemption
Latest Messages on Nishma Minhag
33 Shabbos Hazzon - Lecah Dodi and Eli Tziyyon
Q: How can we mourn publicly on Shabbos By chanting lecha Dodi to the tune of Eli Tziyon? A: 1. While the tune is mournful, that does not necessarily...
32 Why Stand? Why Sit?
Question: 1. When the Ark is opened and the Torah remains in its place, why do the peoplestand? 2. When the Torah has been removed from the ark and is opened...
31 Targum and Meturgeman
The Halachah as derived from the Talmud requires: 1. That the Torah reading be accompanied by a Meturgeman and 2. That the parsha be read shnayim Miqra v'echad...
30 Minhag of Avel to Lead Benchin
My Chaver Gershon: "Where is there a minhag for an avel to lead benching? Gershon gershon.dubin@juno.com ___" Answer: Mourning in halachah P 380 40:19 "The...
29 A 9 Days Shower - The Navy to the Rescue?
Given Bathing for pleasure is restricted before Av 9, either all 9 days or at least shavua shehol bo... The dilemma - how to stay "clean" w/o stepping on this... Richard Wolpoe
28 Three Weeks: Minhag of no Meat nor Wine
The SA 551:9 mentions 3 differing customs re: refraining from meat and wine during the period leading up to the 9th of Av 1. During the week of the 9th...
27 Who drinks the 4 cups at the Seder
This research is courtesy of Jon Baker and is reprinted with permission -RRW A long piece on the history of drinking Four Cups at the seder in Ashkenaz and...
26 Washing Before Qiddush
MY daughter e-mailed me as follows: PS we were discussing customs and such in our Hilchot Shabbat class, and I wanted to know, what is the basis for washing...
Q: How can we mourn publicly on Shabbos By chanting lecha Dodi to the tune of Eli Tziyon? A: 1. While the tune is mournful, that does not necessarily...
32 Why Stand? Why Sit?
Question: 1. When the Ark is opened and the Torah remains in its place, why do the peoplestand? 2. When the Torah has been removed from the ark and is opened...
31 Targum and Meturgeman
The Halachah as derived from the Talmud requires: 1. That the Torah reading be accompanied by a Meturgeman and 2. That the parsha be read shnayim Miqra v'echad...
30 Minhag of Avel to Lead Benchin
My Chaver Gershon: "Where is there a minhag for an avel to lead benching? Gershon gershon.dubin@juno.com ___" Answer: Mourning in halachah P 380 40:19 "The...
29 A 9 Days Shower - The Navy to the Rescue?
Given Bathing for pleasure is restricted before Av 9, either all 9 days or at least shavua shehol bo... The dilemma - how to stay "clean" w/o stepping on this... Richard Wolpoe
28 Three Weeks: Minhag of no Meat nor Wine
The SA 551:9 mentions 3 differing customs re: refraining from meat and wine during the period leading up to the 9th of Av 1. During the week of the 9th...
27 Who drinks the 4 cups at the Seder
This research is courtesy of Jon Baker and is reprinted with permission -RRW A long piece on the history of drinking Four Cups at the seder in Ashkenaz and...
26 Washing Before Qiddush
MY daughter e-mailed me as follows: PS we were discussing customs and such in our Hilchot Shabbat class, and I wanted to know, what is the basis for washing...
Saturday, 25 July 2009
Davar Barur Baposqim - Expanding Halachah Beyond the Talmud
A while back I explained that in the time of Shas [thru Rambam?], toeh bidvar Mishneh did not and could not include the Posqim... However by the time of the SA this principle COULD be applied to Posqim. See SA ChM 25:1 who adds Posqim to the L'shon HaRambam WRT To'eh bidvar Mishnah...
What changed? In the time of Gmara There was no force of Posqim and the Rambam siezed the expression of shas - "haRambam L'shon haShas naqit" This concept has already been expounded by AhS YD 242:32-33 to explain the Rema. (Baruch shekivanti)
Shas allows a davar mefurash Battorah to be pasqened by a Sh'suy yayin, and similarly the Rema is mattir to pasqen while imbibed those matters that are "ledidan davar hamefurash baposqim"
What changed? In the time of Gmara There was no force of Posqim and the Rambam siezed the expression of shas - "haRambam L'shon haShas naqit" This concept has already been expounded by AhS YD 242:32-33 to explain the Rema. (Baruch shekivanti)
Shas allows a davar mefurash Battorah to be pasqened by a Sh'suy yayin, and similarly the Rema is mattir to pasqen while imbibed those matters that are "ledidan davar hamefurash baposqim"
KT
RRW
Shelah - An overlooked acronym?
Originally published 7/25/09, 11:50 pm.
Everyone realizes that the Shelah is the acronym for his magnum opus:
SHnei
Luchos
HAbris
What few realize is that it alludes to the initials of the author's name as well. Viz.
yeSHaya
haLevi
Horowitz
Calling him SHAYA instead of Yeshaya.
Ever wonder what other "hints," such as double entendres, go over our heads all the time? Perhaps in the Torah, the Talmud, and in regular every day life?
Shavua Tov!
RRW
Everyone realizes that the Shelah is the acronym for his magnum opus:
SHnei
Luchos
HAbris
What few realize is that it alludes to the initials of the author's name as well. Viz.
yeSHaya
haLevi
Horowitz
Calling him SHAYA instead of Yeshaya.
Ever wonder what other "hints," such as double entendres, go over our heads all the time? Perhaps in the Torah, the Talmud, and in regular every day life?
Shavua Tov!
RRW
Rav Ashi Pasqens "Not according to Halacah"
In preparing for giving the DAF this Shabbos, I found an interesting passage ...Bavli: Bava Metzia 91B Re: mating diverse species - kilayim.
Rav Ashi said: ...Inquired of me regarding this Matter: What about placing a species of its own kind and with a different kind in the same animal pen. Do we say that it is drawn to its own kind (implying permitted)
OR
Perhaps even then it is NOT permitted?
Rav Ashi's Pesaq:
I ruled for them prohibited - which is not according to the halachah - because of the lax observances of slaves .."
Thus, Rav Ashi tailored his pesaq - even against the Halachah - in order to deal with the particular people involved. [And some say this can only be done lehumra]
Rav Ashi said: ...Inquired of me regarding this Matter: What about placing a species of its own kind and with a different kind in the same animal pen. Do we say that it is drawn to its own kind (implying permitted)
OR
Perhaps even then it is NOT permitted?
Rav Ashi's Pesaq:
I ruled for them prohibited - which is not according to the halachah - because of the lax observances of slaves .."
Thus, Rav Ashi tailored his pesaq - even against the Halachah - in order to deal with the particular people involved. [And some say this can only be done lehumra]
Shavua Tov
RRW
Wednesday, 22 July 2009
Problems in the Rational-Mystical Dialectic
Everyday, it seems, we read of a new story of some Orthodox group, individual or leader that is, for many of us, embarrassing. Oftentimes it specifically concerns some segment of the charedi community which, by distinguishing them, allows for us to distance ourselves from them. Other times, however, that distancing is not so easy: what we see as embarrassing does concern individuals with whom we associate; the statement made is from someone steeped in Torah knowledge, demanding of our respect. When this occurs, our only response is dismay.
We could join those, in blogs and other means of communication, who ignore the problem of distancing -- perhaps even want to distance themselves from everything Orthodox -- and simply attack anyone and everyone who seems to make a statement or do something that is perceived as embarrassing. But to do so, would demand a distancing from Orthodoxy -- for what we may not recognize is that much of these problems emerge from the very complexity of Orthodoxy. Perhaps, more correctly, from the very need for us to understand and recognize the complexity of Orthodoxy.
In a certain way, many of these bloggers and those they criticize are actually in the same world -- they want simplicity, a simple world, a simple reality. This is the real problem. These Orthodox individuals want a simple to understand Orthodoxy. Those who critique this world also want this simple to understand Orthodoxy so they can attack it from their own simple understanding of reality. The fact is that at the root of Orthodoxy is a powerful complexity. Those who attempt to be Orthodox while challenging this reality simply yield so many of the problems we are now facing. This is not to say that those wishing to attack Orthodoxy would drop their attacks if confronted by the reality of the complexity of Orthodoxy. No, I don't think so -- but they could not simply attack a foolishness.
What is, though, this essential complexity that is at the core of Orthodoxy. It is the Rational-Mystical Dialectic. On one hand, we believe in a God without limitations. This means that everything is possible. On the other hand, God has instructed us to think and to apply this process of the mind in our decision making even within Torah. Thought demands parameters: a recognition of cause and effect, a perception of consequences. This is a realm of potential conflict. From the latter rational perspective, we arrive at certain conclusions. We, then, may potentially encounter statements of Torah that challenge these conclusions. The simple Torah person will say there is no problem because God can do anything anyways and the conclusion derived from rational analysis is thereby limited and not binding. The problem is that God also demands of us to apply such reasoning in our decision making processes.
The fact that God is able to do anything is limited, by Him, because He wishes for us to think. Yet, the further problem, though, is that God did not just leave it like that. That would yield a world of philosophy and the results of thought alone. God, though, also revealed the Torah and thereby gave us directions outside the realm of rationalism, cause-and-effect, and this world. On one hand, He tells us to think and work our our decisions. On the other hand, though, He presented to us decisions he mandated, through the revelation of the Torah, that we are to follow that challenge the parameters that enable us to even think and analyze. Balancing this -- therein lies the essential complexity of Torah.
Take for example the recent statements of Rabbi David Batzri at a conference for woman wishing to get married. See http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3744525,00.html. He told all these women that, even on their first date with someone, they should commit in their hearts to have, at least, 12 children and to not worry about becoming pregnant after 40 for they need not be concerned with statements from doctors to the contrary. From a rational perspective, there are so many potential critiques of such a blanket statement to a group of women. I am sure, though, that these critiques could and would be dismissed as challenging the very ability of HaKodesh Baruch Hu to take care of them. Just do the mitzvah. God will take care of any perceived problems. Is this not a message of Revelation itself -- that God intervenes in this world and makes demand beyond our abilities of reason. But the challenge is that God still wants us to think, analyze, contemplate. Can we afford 12 children? Can I, as a parent, properly raise 12 children? What about other aspects of my life? What's the problem, the challenger would hear: can't God make sure that everything works out? These questions are only a reflection of lack of faith. Yet, without these questions and applying them within our lives, we do meet God's very goal for us to think.
The call of Torah is to be rational, work within the parameters of existence as we know it through our senses and the processes of philosophy AND to be mystical, work within the recognition of a reality beyond these perceptions that is centred in the existence of One Who is unbounded. The problem is that we are always fighting this truth, this complexity of life.
We are suffering the problems of the Rational-Mystical Dialectic.
Rabbi Ben Hecht
We could join those, in blogs and other means of communication, who ignore the problem of distancing -- perhaps even want to distance themselves from everything Orthodox -- and simply attack anyone and everyone who seems to make a statement or do something that is perceived as embarrassing. But to do so, would demand a distancing from Orthodoxy -- for what we may not recognize is that much of these problems emerge from the very complexity of Orthodoxy. Perhaps, more correctly, from the very need for us to understand and recognize the complexity of Orthodoxy.
In a certain way, many of these bloggers and those they criticize are actually in the same world -- they want simplicity, a simple world, a simple reality. This is the real problem. These Orthodox individuals want a simple to understand Orthodoxy. Those who critique this world also want this simple to understand Orthodoxy so they can attack it from their own simple understanding of reality. The fact is that at the root of Orthodoxy is a powerful complexity. Those who attempt to be Orthodox while challenging this reality simply yield so many of the problems we are now facing. This is not to say that those wishing to attack Orthodoxy would drop their attacks if confronted by the reality of the complexity of Orthodoxy. No, I don't think so -- but they could not simply attack a foolishness.
What is, though, this essential complexity that is at the core of Orthodoxy. It is the Rational-Mystical Dialectic. On one hand, we believe in a God without limitations. This means that everything is possible. On the other hand, God has instructed us to think and to apply this process of the mind in our decision making even within Torah. Thought demands parameters: a recognition of cause and effect, a perception of consequences. This is a realm of potential conflict. From the latter rational perspective, we arrive at certain conclusions. We, then, may potentially encounter statements of Torah that challenge these conclusions. The simple Torah person will say there is no problem because God can do anything anyways and the conclusion derived from rational analysis is thereby limited and not binding. The problem is that God also demands of us to apply such reasoning in our decision making processes.
The fact that God is able to do anything is limited, by Him, because He wishes for us to think. Yet, the further problem, though, is that God did not just leave it like that. That would yield a world of philosophy and the results of thought alone. God, though, also revealed the Torah and thereby gave us directions outside the realm of rationalism, cause-and-effect, and this world. On one hand, He tells us to think and work our our decisions. On the other hand, though, He presented to us decisions he mandated, through the revelation of the Torah, that we are to follow that challenge the parameters that enable us to even think and analyze. Balancing this -- therein lies the essential complexity of Torah.
Take for example the recent statements of Rabbi David Batzri at a conference for woman wishing to get married. See http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3744525,00.html. He told all these women that, even on their first date with someone, they should commit in their hearts to have, at least, 12 children and to not worry about becoming pregnant after 40 for they need not be concerned with statements from doctors to the contrary. From a rational perspective, there are so many potential critiques of such a blanket statement to a group of women. I am sure, though, that these critiques could and would be dismissed as challenging the very ability of HaKodesh Baruch Hu to take care of them. Just do the mitzvah. God will take care of any perceived problems. Is this not a message of Revelation itself -- that God intervenes in this world and makes demand beyond our abilities of reason. But the challenge is that God still wants us to think, analyze, contemplate. Can we afford 12 children? Can I, as a parent, properly raise 12 children? What about other aspects of my life? What's the problem, the challenger would hear: can't God make sure that everything works out? These questions are only a reflection of lack of faith. Yet, without these questions and applying them within our lives, we do meet God's very goal for us to think.
The call of Torah is to be rational, work within the parameters of existence as we know it through our senses and the processes of philosophy AND to be mystical, work within the recognition of a reality beyond these perceptions that is centred in the existence of One Who is unbounded. The problem is that we are always fighting this truth, this complexity of life.
We are suffering the problems of the Rational-Mystical Dialectic.
Rabbi Ben Hecht
Monday, 20 July 2009
Jerry Manuel and Mixed Messages
We were discussing both in cyberspace how the same author can contradict himself in 2 works
One of my favorites is a minor one re: Tallith before Tefillin
(FWIW I like BY's reason better!)
------------------------
On Sports radio a caller noticed that Mets Manager Jerry Manuel seemed to be flip-flopping...
The wise host (IIRC a woman) used first class Talmudic reasoningJerry wasn't changing his mind!
Similarly, an author may be addressing 2 audiences, or 2 situations:
Or
KT
RRW
One of my favorites is a minor one re: Tallith before Tefillin
- Bet Yosef: Due to tadir V"sheino Tadir
- SA: Ma'alin BeQodesh
(FWIW I like BY's reason better!)
------------------------
On Sports radio a caller noticed that Mets Manager Jerry Manuel seemed to be flip-flopping...
- In one interview: We need more hitters!
- In a 2nd interview: We have a good enough team as is!
The wise host (IIRC a woman) used first class Talmudic reasoningJerry wasn't changing his mind!
- In the first interview he was sending a message to his General Manager Omar Minaya: "Get me some sluggers, NOW!"
- In the 2nd interview he was patting his current line-up on their proverbial backs saying "I have confidence in you guys"
Similarly, an author may be addressing 2 audiences, or 2 situations:
Ideally XOr
But Y is technically OK
Or
Talmidei Chachamim should do X and Y is fine for baalei batim
In ivory tower academics it's X
But
In the real world it's. Y
Or
Al pi Halachah do X-------------------------
And
Al pi Qabbalah do Y
- Bet Yosef is aisi written primarily for scholars
- Shulchan Aruch primarily for simple students. (Caveat: it can also be utilized by rabbis to make a "P'saq/decision" between alternate choices)
KT
RRW
Course Outline for Hirschian Thought
Here is a program for Yeshiva High School and Beis Midrash based upon the Works of R Samson Raphael Hirsch
Grade 9:
Grade 10
Grade 11 As introduction to Hirsch on Chumash
Grade 12
-----------------------
Beis Midrash level:
RRW
Grade 9:
- 19 letters
- Dayan Grunfeld's Hakdama to Horeb
- Hirsch Haggadah
- Pirke Avos - First Chapter
Grade 10
- Complete the Horeb both in class and homework
- Pirke Avos - Chapter Two
Grade 11 As introduction to Hirsch on Chumash
- Siddur - Note Use the Siddur's Ezehu Mekoman as intro to commentary on Vayikra
- Psalms
- Wisdom from Mishle
- Pirke Avos -Chapters 3 and 4
Grade 12
- Hirsch Chumash - Vayikra
- Pirke Avos -Chapters 5 and 6
-----------------------
Beis Midrash level:
- Complete Hirsch Humash - one Volume per Year
- Cover Collectted Writings - On volume per Semester
- Add Writings by Dayan Grunfeld and the Breuers
RRW
Wednesday, 15 July 2009
The real question is: WHY? What the riots really show!
Of course, there is always the journalistic question of whether this article correctly portrays the truth -- but based upon these facts, the problem is pretty apparent and this article in the Jerusalem Post presents a most powerful challenge. See:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443817985&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Doesn't the term Chilul Hashem come immediately to mind? Can there be any justification for this behaviour? What, though, really is going on? It would seem that these rioters could not possibly have any connection to Torah; it must be that they are ascribing to some other system that is absent Torah values. Yet, here we have individuals who define themselves as adherents of Torah -- in fact, devout adherents of Torah -- acting in this manner. It is easy to dismiss them, to criticize them -- but that does not get to the root of the issue. The question is: what are they thinking? How could they possibly act in this manner yet declare that they are adherents of Torah? It must be that they actually do not see themselves as violators of Torah but the issue is even more bewildering. They actually see themselves as upholders of the values of Torah and that through this behaviour they are promoting Torah values, that through their behaviour they are actually demonstrating their adherence to Torah values. This is an even greater problem. It is one thing if someone is acting contrary to Torah but knows and admits that he/she is doing so. We may wonder how criminals can still do what they do and, furthermore, still live with themselves -- we may specifically wonder how Bernie Madoff or a religious child molester could live with himself -- but, at least, they are not declaring that what they did was in fact correct and a fulfillment of the values of the religious system. It is quite another matter, though, if someone is acting in this manner -- or cons someone as Madoff did or molests a child -- and not only thinks that he/she is not violating Torah law but actually thinks he/she adhering to it, supporting it, promoting it. This latter situation is, for so many reasons, a greater problem -- and this is sadly what, I believe, we are witnessing here -- and it is to this issue that we must directly respond. Its not enough to yell that they are wrong. We must discover what they are thinking and respond to the problem that allows for this reasoning.
Let's start at the most basic way of looking at this situation. A very sick Neturei Karta child is brought to a hospital, a chiloni hospital. The hospital determines that this child's illness is due to a psychiatric disorder of the mother, the charedi mother. The mother is arrested. The mother also denies the charges. So what does the mother's community say -- must be another example of chiloni oppression of Torah. This assertion obviously can't be true for how could a frum charedi woman be psychologically ill? After all, frum people can't be as the doctors are describing this woman for they are frum, she is frum Such an asssertion may also imply that there is a problem in the community; what is the connection between this psychological illness and her upbringing and environment? Can't be! This is the ideal Torah community. There can't be anything wrong within it. Must be that the chilonim are inventing problems and critiques to thereby attack us. This, I believe is the starting point, the place where all this begins. Its not just Neturei Karta or charedim but, sadly, permeates the whole frum community. We are frum. We are God's chosen. Can't be something wrong with us -- especially if it means that the chiloni person is right or doing something better.
When the Rambam said that one could learn from everyone and anyone, he was making a most powerful statement about education and thought. You don't think simply through adopting a code of behaviour or memorizing a collection of rules. Thinking demands observation and analysis -- with an openness to reconsider one's thoughts. The problem in the frum world, in so many ways, is that we think we know it all and approach existence with a sense of surety. The humility that instructs us to be somewhat unsure of ourselves, of approaching life with caution and consideration is almost a thing of the past. We're right and we'll take on anyone that says we aren't, regardless of the facts. And the more in the minority that your are, the more adament you become. Of course, the fact that one is in the minority should not lead this person to necesarily dimiss himself/herself. One does need the strenght to stand by one's opinion in the face of challenge and adversity. Yet when one is in the minority, one should also be open to questions, to investigate in order to be sure. It a balance, a dialectic that God demands of us. It's time that we demonstrated the thought inherent in the recognition of this reality and not demonstrate to illustrate an allegiance to a simplicity that only shows foolishness.
Bottom line, there was a two year old kid whose very life was at stake. Wouldn't you think that the concerns, even if you want to call it safek sakanot nefashot, a possible life-threatening situation, would, at least, make people think twice before adamently adopting a position? But how can there be a safek? We're frum and they're not. We are the bastions of Torah and their not. But what is this foolish representation of Torah that they are promoting? Its a Torah that says not to think but just to follow your assumed rote viewpoint.
Rabbi Ben Hecht
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443817985&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Doesn't the term Chilul Hashem come immediately to mind? Can there be any justification for this behaviour? What, though, really is going on? It would seem that these rioters could not possibly have any connection to Torah; it must be that they are ascribing to some other system that is absent Torah values. Yet, here we have individuals who define themselves as adherents of Torah -- in fact, devout adherents of Torah -- acting in this manner. It is easy to dismiss them, to criticize them -- but that does not get to the root of the issue. The question is: what are they thinking? How could they possibly act in this manner yet declare that they are adherents of Torah? It must be that they actually do not see themselves as violators of Torah but the issue is even more bewildering. They actually see themselves as upholders of the values of Torah and that through this behaviour they are promoting Torah values, that through their behaviour they are actually demonstrating their adherence to Torah values. This is an even greater problem. It is one thing if someone is acting contrary to Torah but knows and admits that he/she is doing so. We may wonder how criminals can still do what they do and, furthermore, still live with themselves -- we may specifically wonder how Bernie Madoff or a religious child molester could live with himself -- but, at least, they are not declaring that what they did was in fact correct and a fulfillment of the values of the religious system. It is quite another matter, though, if someone is acting in this manner -- or cons someone as Madoff did or molests a child -- and not only thinks that he/she is not violating Torah law but actually thinks he/she adhering to it, supporting it, promoting it. This latter situation is, for so many reasons, a greater problem -- and this is sadly what, I believe, we are witnessing here -- and it is to this issue that we must directly respond. Its not enough to yell that they are wrong. We must discover what they are thinking and respond to the problem that allows for this reasoning.
Let's start at the most basic way of looking at this situation. A very sick Neturei Karta child is brought to a hospital, a chiloni hospital. The hospital determines that this child's illness is due to a psychiatric disorder of the mother, the charedi mother. The mother is arrested. The mother also denies the charges. So what does the mother's community say -- must be another example of chiloni oppression of Torah. This assertion obviously can't be true for how could a frum charedi woman be psychologically ill? After all, frum people can't be as the doctors are describing this woman for they are frum, she is frum Such an asssertion may also imply that there is a problem in the community; what is the connection between this psychological illness and her upbringing and environment? Can't be! This is the ideal Torah community. There can't be anything wrong within it. Must be that the chilonim are inventing problems and critiques to thereby attack us. This, I believe is the starting point, the place where all this begins. Its not just Neturei Karta or charedim but, sadly, permeates the whole frum community. We are frum. We are God's chosen. Can't be something wrong with us -- especially if it means that the chiloni person is right or doing something better.
When the Rambam said that one could learn from everyone and anyone, he was making a most powerful statement about education and thought. You don't think simply through adopting a code of behaviour or memorizing a collection of rules. Thinking demands observation and analysis -- with an openness to reconsider one's thoughts. The problem in the frum world, in so many ways, is that we think we know it all and approach existence with a sense of surety. The humility that instructs us to be somewhat unsure of ourselves, of approaching life with caution and consideration is almost a thing of the past. We're right and we'll take on anyone that says we aren't, regardless of the facts. And the more in the minority that your are, the more adament you become. Of course, the fact that one is in the minority should not lead this person to necesarily dimiss himself/herself. One does need the strenght to stand by one's opinion in the face of challenge and adversity. Yet when one is in the minority, one should also be open to questions, to investigate in order to be sure. It a balance, a dialectic that God demands of us. It's time that we demonstrated the thought inherent in the recognition of this reality and not demonstrate to illustrate an allegiance to a simplicity that only shows foolishness.
Bottom line, there was a two year old kid whose very life was at stake. Wouldn't you think that the concerns, even if you want to call it safek sakanot nefashot, a possible life-threatening situation, would, at least, make people think twice before adamently adopting a position? But how can there be a safek? We're frum and they're not. We are the bastions of Torah and their not. But what is this foolish representation of Torah that they are promoting? Its a Torah that says not to think but just to follow your assumed rote viewpoint.
Rabbi Ben Hecht
Monday, 13 July 2009
14. The Fringes
I asked someone recently about the health of her faith. She responded with a despondent, but not vanquished, glance, telling me that lately she is “having trouble remembering.”
She did not refer to a weakness in belief or focus or practice, but in the particular area of memory. The philosophically-minded religious person is the perfect prey for this form of memory-attack.
What do we find in memory? From a scientific perspective, the memory is imprecise—a risky tool when it comes to exactitude and reliability. It taunts us, tricks us, aggrandizes here, demoralizes there, this memory is really from that time, that memory really from this time, a fact is ignored, a face is distorted, weather is altered, context is abandoned. In many ways, it is a mystery to us, in a category with God, heaven, the soul, and the like.
But to unconditionally categorize memory in such a way would be inaccurate—the memory is not entirely transcendent. It is a physical part of the human organism. It is no more transcendent, in this sense, than, for example, the fingers or the spleen are transcendent. It is untrue to suggest that the memory is a complete mystery to science. It has been studied and will continue to be studied. It certainly has a provable, this-world component, a characteristic that could not likewise be corroborated by scientists in regard to God or the human soul.
This duality presents us with a recurring challenge: what do we do with a memory that haunts us? What do we do when a memory weakens or vanishes?
If we turn to the scientist, he will put a microscope over the mind and seek an understanding of the corporeal source of the memory. This will forsake the memory’s vital mystery component.
If we turn to the metaphysicist, he will proceed consistent with the contention that the memory originates beyond the physical realm, housed in an unreachable domain, transmitting messages with a specific purpose, heard but not touched. Such an approach will forsake the biological reality of the memory.
Since neither the empiricist nor the mystic will be able to provide adequate assistance, there may arise a desire to abandon memory (as a tool) entirely. It is not manageable and it is not worthy of worship—where does it fit? But God confirms the indispensable nature of memory when He tells us to “remember and do all My commandments and be holy unto your God,” isolating the process of remembering from the action: it is not enough merely to ‘do,’ one must also ‘remember’—this is the key to being ‘holy unto your God.’
From a simplistic religious perspective, the focus on memory seems odd. Why is it not enough to believe in God and do His commandments? What is the purpose of memory?
The question can be asked more specifically in regard to the many other times that we are commanded to remember: Amalek, the creation, the seventh day, the exodus from Egypt (among others). Why are we halachically obligated to engage in the process of remembering? Why are the relevant actions associated with the memory (destroying Amalek, resting on Shabbat, eating matzah, etc.) not sufficient?
The religious lifestyle can lead to a divided existence, comprised of the so-called ‘spiritual’ aspect and the so-called ‘practical’ aspect. When we pray in the morning, we might be involved in a spiritual pursuit. Going to work, then, would be a practical pursuit. Our faith in God, in such a model, exists in an isolated realm. We seek ‘holy’ experiences and then, when that hunger is satiated, we return to the secular. There is nothing connecting the two worlds.
But, unlike scientifically proven and metaphysically speculative entities, memory crosses into both the realm of the ‘spiritual’ (‘I remember feeling uplifted.’) and the realm of the ‘practical’ (‘I remember paying my taxes.’). It can neither be considered entirely a part of this world (it refers to something absent) nor entirely apart from this world (it exists as a biological entity in the brain). Instead, it is a connection between the tangible and the intangible and can act as a bridge between the two worlds.
The bridge functions by virtue of the act of remembering. It is a two-step process: 1) We take something that is non-existent—the past—and we give it form in the present; 2) We take something housed in the body—the physical memory—and we admit its inherent mystery. These two effects work in tandem to create a bridge that goes in both directions simultaneously.
When there is “trouble remembering” (of an existential nature), it means that the bridge between the realm of the mysterious and the realm of the apparent is not functioning effectively. Though there is a sense that there should be constant interaction between the worlds (supported by the Biblical affiliation of memory, action and holiness), the “trouble remembering” makes such interaction difficult. For someone who is comfortable with a divided existence, the lack of memory can actually be relieving. But for someone who cannot accept the divided existence, the trouble infects both realms—making the ‘spiritual’ seem concocted and desperate and the ‘practical’ seem trivial and degrading.
What, then, is one to do when he or she suffers from memory trouble? As Rambam teaches in Shemoneh Perakim (1:4), the source of memory is the imagination. That is why a trouble remembering can be linked with a trouble imagining. In a sense, this can be a somewhat uncomfortable association. It is unappealing to consider that our memories and our fantasies share a common source as it could lead us to lose faith in our memories. But I think the reverse logic is more apt: since we can find reality in our memories—despite the fact that they emerge from the imagination—we should search attentively for reality in our dreams.
The significance of the imagination clarifies the role of the tzitzit as a mnemonic device. Even considering the famous, hidden 613, the fringes do not seem to be the best possible choice for their assigned purpose, namely, “that you may look upon [them] and remember all the commandments of the Lord.” There is nothing inherent in the fringes to convey this message. Without the involvement of the imagination, the memory will not emerge. In a sense, each time we look down at our tzitzit and “remember,” we are affirming the incredible and essential role of the imagination in our daily, religious life—and, perhaps, it is specifically the need for a strong and sharp imagination that is at the heart of the mitzvah of tzitzit. Because whether we were all present at Sinai or not, it requires the imagination—not the scientist’s telescope or the metaphysicist’s meditations—to see Moshe descend the mountain.
So before a person can “remember all the commandments of the Lord,” she has to attain (or regain) a faith in her imagination, as it is the imagination, Rambam explains, that “has the strength to remember impressions of experiences when they have vanished from the senses involved.” Truly, what instrument could be more crucial to the ideal Torah scholar than the photographic imagination?
She did not refer to a weakness in belief or focus or practice, but in the particular area of memory. The philosophically-minded religious person is the perfect prey for this form of memory-attack.
What do we find in memory? From a scientific perspective, the memory is imprecise—a risky tool when it comes to exactitude and reliability. It taunts us, tricks us, aggrandizes here, demoralizes there, this memory is really from that time, that memory really from this time, a fact is ignored, a face is distorted, weather is altered, context is abandoned. In many ways, it is a mystery to us, in a category with God, heaven, the soul, and the like.
But to unconditionally categorize memory in such a way would be inaccurate—the memory is not entirely transcendent. It is a physical part of the human organism. It is no more transcendent, in this sense, than, for example, the fingers or the spleen are transcendent. It is untrue to suggest that the memory is a complete mystery to science. It has been studied and will continue to be studied. It certainly has a provable, this-world component, a characteristic that could not likewise be corroborated by scientists in regard to God or the human soul.
This duality presents us with a recurring challenge: what do we do with a memory that haunts us? What do we do when a memory weakens or vanishes?
If we turn to the scientist, he will put a microscope over the mind and seek an understanding of the corporeal source of the memory. This will forsake the memory’s vital mystery component.
If we turn to the metaphysicist, he will proceed consistent with the contention that the memory originates beyond the physical realm, housed in an unreachable domain, transmitting messages with a specific purpose, heard but not touched. Such an approach will forsake the biological reality of the memory.
Since neither the empiricist nor the mystic will be able to provide adequate assistance, there may arise a desire to abandon memory (as a tool) entirely. It is not manageable and it is not worthy of worship—where does it fit? But God confirms the indispensable nature of memory when He tells us to “remember and do all My commandments and be holy unto your God,” isolating the process of remembering from the action: it is not enough merely to ‘do,’ one must also ‘remember’—this is the key to being ‘holy unto your God.’
From a simplistic religious perspective, the focus on memory seems odd. Why is it not enough to believe in God and do His commandments? What is the purpose of memory?
The question can be asked more specifically in regard to the many other times that we are commanded to remember: Amalek, the creation, the seventh day, the exodus from Egypt (among others). Why are we halachically obligated to engage in the process of remembering? Why are the relevant actions associated with the memory (destroying Amalek, resting on Shabbat, eating matzah, etc.) not sufficient?
The religious lifestyle can lead to a divided existence, comprised of the so-called ‘spiritual’ aspect and the so-called ‘practical’ aspect. When we pray in the morning, we might be involved in a spiritual pursuit. Going to work, then, would be a practical pursuit. Our faith in God, in such a model, exists in an isolated realm. We seek ‘holy’ experiences and then, when that hunger is satiated, we return to the secular. There is nothing connecting the two worlds.
But, unlike scientifically proven and metaphysically speculative entities, memory crosses into both the realm of the ‘spiritual’ (‘I remember feeling uplifted.’) and the realm of the ‘practical’ (‘I remember paying my taxes.’). It can neither be considered entirely a part of this world (it refers to something absent) nor entirely apart from this world (it exists as a biological entity in the brain). Instead, it is a connection between the tangible and the intangible and can act as a bridge between the two worlds.
The bridge functions by virtue of the act of remembering. It is a two-step process: 1) We take something that is non-existent—the past—and we give it form in the present; 2) We take something housed in the body—the physical memory—and we admit its inherent mystery. These two effects work in tandem to create a bridge that goes in both directions simultaneously.
When there is “trouble remembering” (of an existential nature), it means that the bridge between the realm of the mysterious and the realm of the apparent is not functioning effectively. Though there is a sense that there should be constant interaction between the worlds (supported by the Biblical affiliation of memory, action and holiness), the “trouble remembering” makes such interaction difficult. For someone who is comfortable with a divided existence, the lack of memory can actually be relieving. But for someone who cannot accept the divided existence, the trouble infects both realms—making the ‘spiritual’ seem concocted and desperate and the ‘practical’ seem trivial and degrading.
What, then, is one to do when he or she suffers from memory trouble? As Rambam teaches in Shemoneh Perakim (1:4), the source of memory is the imagination. That is why a trouble remembering can be linked with a trouble imagining. In a sense, this can be a somewhat uncomfortable association. It is unappealing to consider that our memories and our fantasies share a common source as it could lead us to lose faith in our memories. But I think the reverse logic is more apt: since we can find reality in our memories—despite the fact that they emerge from the imagination—we should search attentively for reality in our dreams.
The significance of the imagination clarifies the role of the tzitzit as a mnemonic device. Even considering the famous, hidden 613, the fringes do not seem to be the best possible choice for their assigned purpose, namely, “that you may look upon [them] and remember all the commandments of the Lord.” There is nothing inherent in the fringes to convey this message. Without the involvement of the imagination, the memory will not emerge. In a sense, each time we look down at our tzitzit and “remember,” we are affirming the incredible and essential role of the imagination in our daily, religious life—and, perhaps, it is specifically the need for a strong and sharp imagination that is at the heart of the mitzvah of tzitzit. Because whether we were all present at Sinai or not, it requires the imagination—not the scientist’s telescope or the metaphysicist’s meditations—to see Moshe descend the mountain.
So before a person can “remember all the commandments of the Lord,” she has to attain (or regain) a faith in her imagination, as it is the imagination, Rambam explains, that “has the strength to remember impressions of experiences when they have vanished from the senses involved.” Truly, what instrument could be more crucial to the ideal Torah scholar than the photographic imagination?
Friday, 10 July 2009
Parshah: Huqqat: Mixed Messages?
It seems according to many that Moshe Rabbeinu erred at mei meriva in that he HIT the rock instead of speaking to it. That seems pretty pashut! However, when HKBH tells Moshe "asei le saraph" And Moshe Rabeinu actually: "Vaya'as Moshe Nechash Nechoshes.."
Now HKBH said "Saraph" and Moshe instead made "Nechash nechoshes" lich'ora is this not, too, a deviation - albeit minor - from HKBH's statement? Does anyone comment on this apparent contradiction?
KT
RRW
Now HKBH said "Saraph" and Moshe instead made "Nechash nechoshes" lich'ora is this not, too, a deviation - albeit minor - from HKBH's statement? Does anyone comment on this apparent contradiction?
KT
RRW
Three Weeks - A Siyyum on Ta'Anit
NB: This Siyyum was done Three years ago at my son's Bar Mitzva. Being that his Hebrew Birthday is Rosh Chodesh Av and he did a Siyyum on that Masechta in partiular.
Background:
Ta'anit Chapter 4 Mishna 6 lists 5 catasrophes that occured on the 17th of Tammuz and 5 catastrophes that occured on the 9th of Av:
This _ In conjunction with the Siyyum on Masechet Ta'anit - I will say a D’var Torah connecting: The 3rd to last Mishna in Ta’anit WITH The Final Mishna in Ta'anit.
Background:
Ta'anit Chapter 4 Mishna 6 lists 5 catasrophes that occured on the 17th of Tammuz and 5 catastrophes that occured on the 9th of Av:
TA'ANIT: CHAPTER 4: MISHNAH 6
Five things befell our ancestors on the seventeenth of Tammuz, and five on the ninth of Av. On the seventeenth of Tammuz the Tablets were broken and the tamid ceased, and the city was breached, and Apostomos burned the Torah and placed an idol in the sanctuary. On the ninth of Av it was decreed against our ancestors that they would not enter the Land, and the Temple was destroyed the first time and the second time, and Betar was taken, and the city was ploughed up. When Av enters they reduced rejoicing.
======================================================
Mishna 8 lists the 2 most joyous occasions are the 1 5th of Av and Yom Kippur - i.e. the 10th of Tishrei?
TA'ANIT: CHAPTER 4: MISHNAH 8
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said, There were no holidays for Israel as the fifteenth of Av and as Yom Kippur, for on them the daughters of Jerusalem go forth in borrowed white garments, so as not to embarrass whoever does not have; all the garments require immersion. And the daughters of Jerusalem go forth and dance in the vineyards. And what would they say? "Young man, lift up your eyes and see, what you choose for yourself. Do not set your eyes on beauty, set your eyes on the family: 'Grace is deceitful, and beauty is vain, but a woman that fears the Lord, she shall be praised' (Prov. 31:30), and it says, 'Give her the fruit of her hands, and let her works praise her in the gates' (ibid., v. 31)." And similarly it says, "Go forth, O you daughters of Zion, and gaze upon King Solomon [ha-Melekh Shelomo], even upon the crown with which his mother has crowned him on his wedding day, and on the day of the gladness of his heart" (Cant. 3:11). "His wedding day" is the giving of the Torah, "on the day of the gladness of his heart" is the building of the Temple, may it be built speedily in our days. Amen.
Questions:
Answers:
a the 2 catastrophes are:
1. The worship of the Golden Calf.
2. The Sin of the Spies leading to the Death Decree for the Wilderness Generation.
Regarding Question #2 the events are:
1. The final forgiveness for the Sin of the Golden Calf culminated with the reception of the 2nd tablets.
2. The discovery that the death decree had been completed and no longer would anyone die from that decree.
Thus, the juxta-position is no mere co-incidence. Rather, the catastrophes that instituted the 17th of Tammuz and 9th of Av as days of Mourning for all generations, were originally forgiven on Yom Kippur and the 15th of Av respectively. Therefore, these are days of "original forgiveness!" Thus, the joy of 10 Tishrei & 15 Av - at least in terms of Masechet Ta'anit - ARE THE greatest Joys.
In the merit of completing this Tractate - may we Merit the Final Redemption
KT
RRW
TA'ANIT: CHAPTER 4: MISHNAH 8
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said, There were no holidays for Israel as the fifteenth of Av and as Yom Kippur, for on them the daughters of Jerusalem go forth in borrowed white garments, so as not to embarrass whoever does not have; all the garments require immersion. And the daughters of Jerusalem go forth and dance in the vineyards. And what would they say? "Young man, lift up your eyes and see, what you choose for yourself. Do not set your eyes on beauty, set your eyes on the family: 'Grace is deceitful, and beauty is vain, but a woman that fears the Lord, she shall be praised' (Prov. 31:30), and it says, 'Give her the fruit of her hands, and let her works praise her in the gates' (ibid., v. 31)." And similarly it says, "Go forth, O you daughters of Zion, and gaze upon King Solomon [ha-Melekh Shelomo], even upon the crown with which his mother has crowned him on his wedding day, and on the day of the gladness of his heart" (Cant. 3:11). "His wedding day" is the giving of the Torah, "on the day of the gladness of his heart" is the building of the Temple, may it be built speedily in our days. Amen.
Questions:
- 1. How is it that the 15th of Av and the 10th of Tishrei the most joyous of occasions. Aren't Holidays such as Purim and Sukkot even more joyous?
- 2. What is the connection between these 2 dates in Mishna 6 - Namely the 17th of Tammuz and the 0th of Av - with the 2 dates in Mishna 4 - namely the 10th of Tishrei and the 15th of Av?
- 3. Furthermore, what is the connection between the 2 catastrophes in the "Wilderness Generation"
Answers:
a the 2 catastrophes are:
1. The worship of the Golden Calf.
2. The Sin of the Spies leading to the Death Decree for the Wilderness Generation.
Regarding Question #2 the events are:
1. The final forgiveness for the Sin of the Golden Calf culminated with the reception of the 2nd tablets.
2. The discovery that the death decree had been completed and no longer would anyone die from that decree.
Thus, the juxta-position is no mere co-incidence. Rather, the catastrophes that instituted the 17th of Tammuz and 9th of Av as days of Mourning for all generations, were originally forgiven on Yom Kippur and the 15th of Av respectively. Therefore, these are days of "original forgiveness!" Thus, the joy of 10 Tishrei & 15 Av - at least in terms of Masechet Ta'anit - ARE THE greatest Joys.
In the merit of completing this Tractate - may we Merit the Final Redemption
KT
RRW
To Take Hazal at their word - or is there a Hidden Agenda?
Pursuant to a thread on Avoda re: Midrashim. As I like to say:
KT
RRW
Midrashim are true but not always to be taken as LITERALLY True!In other words [as I stated]:
Actually I think Hazal were doing political comments regarding their own time and used proxies just like Gulliver [lhavdil]Thus:
- Attacks on Esav/Edom were frequently veiled attacks on Rome
- And attacks on Sodom were frequently veiled attacks against the hedonisitc Hellenic culture.
KT
RRW
Why I don't learn much Nach
It is hard enough to learn peshat in the Midrashim of Hazal which are between 1500 and 2500 years old. Nach is older. The idioms, images, similes, metaphors, etc. Are very difficult to fathom. Most mefarshim are aiui guessing.
And from what I can see in most schools, the bottom line patch quilt of what the peshat is, is highly speculative. Too much hit and miss. Occasionally a gem of an insight is found amongst the sifted sands of time.
Of course elements of Nach are essential. Some texts are less esoteric. Ruth, Esther, Mishlei are quite assessable. Most haftaros are also quite meaningful. Only a handful are obscure.
If we can discover a "Rosetta stone" to decipher the imagery of nach as originally intended, this would shift everything.
Meanwhile, I put my energies elsewhere
And from what I can see in most schools, the bottom line patch quilt of what the peshat is, is highly speculative. Too much hit and miss. Occasionally a gem of an insight is found amongst the sifted sands of time.
Of course elements of Nach are essential. Some texts are less esoteric. Ruth, Esther, Mishlei are quite assessable. Most haftaros are also quite meaningful. Only a handful are obscure.
If we can discover a "Rosetta stone" to decipher the imagery of nach as originally intended, this would shift everything.
Meanwhile, I put my energies elsewhere
KT
RRW
Women kosher supervisors on the rise, earning respect | JTA - Jewish & Israel News
Women kosher supervisors on the rise, earning respect JTA - Jewish & Israel News
http://jta.org/news/article/2009/06/28/1006182/women-kosher-supervisors-on-the-rise-earning-respect
Teaser:
SAN FRANCISCO (JTA) -- Evelyn Prizont does it for the glamor.
"And the respect," she adds with a smirk.
Prizont, an Orthodox woman in her early 40s, is a mashgicha, a female
kosher supervisor in Seattle...
KT
RRW
http://jta.org/news/article/
Teaser:
SAN FRANCISCO (JTA) -- Evelyn Prizont does it for the glamor.
"And the respect," she adds with a smirk.
Prizont, an Orthodox woman in her early 40s, is a mashgicha, a female
kosher supervisor in Seattle...
KT
RRW
Rambam on Esoterica - Is It Good For All?
Hil. Yesodei Hatorah 4:11 (Touger-Moznayim)
Shma mina Trei:
Here we see the Mithnaged position on Qabbalah etc.
KT
RRW
Rambam:
Touger: In his commentary to the Mishna Chagiga 2:1 the Rambam writes:
"... Because not every person has the vast knowledge to grasp the interpretation and the explanation of these matters in a complete manner."
Touger: In his commentary to the Mishna Chagiga 2:1 the Rambam writes:
The masses will understand very little of these matters. Should a simple person be exposed to them, his faith will be confused and he will think (THINK) they contradict the truth"
Shma mina Trei:
- 1 That There are esoteric sections of Torah. The Torah has components for both the masses and components for "yechidei segulah"
- 2. That Esoteric Sections are subject to abuse by the un-initiated.
Here we see the Mithnaged position on Qabbalah etc.
- That it exists
YET - It's not for everyone.
Disclaimer: Rambam's view of ma'aseh merkaba may or may not correspond to what we NOW call Qabbalah. That is not essential to this point about Esoterica in general.
KT
RRW
On Learning Qabbalah - Some Concerns
One of the concerns re: learning Qabbalah was articulated by Reb Shloymie as follows:
Thus, a major potential error is conflating physics and meta-physics or worse morphing meta-physics into physicality. This Ch"V Is a potential violation of "ein lo demus haggoof"
The Rambam to the rescue.
It has been argued that the metaphysics of the Rambam equates to the metaphysics of the Qabbalah. This is a dubious extrapolation. However R Sasha Pecaric has demonstrated a different but essential relationship between the two, a relationship that the Rambam himself probably never anticipated. The Moreh Nevuchim was so strong and so firm in rooting out any physicality or anthopomorphic aspects of HKBH that a "new world order" :-) became possible.
In other words, given the Moreh as a prerequisite to Qabbalah, the danger of making the conceptual sprituality into anthropomorphic reality was removed or at least diminished.
Thus the Rambam's Moreh created at least 2 dynamics:
As I best understand it, anyone without this firm rooting in the definition section of the Moreh IS indeed in danger. And so to divorce the two paths into metaphysics is risky.
Caveat: The first chapters of the Moreh do not deal with the Haqira investigatory aspects of understand G-d. As such, they should be kosher and safe even for those who otherwise oppose Haqira. Also, this post does not address the need for - or the legitimacy of - Qabbalah itself. There are those who opine that the metaphysics of the Moreh covers all the necessary basis.
It would seem that both Rema and Rabbi Pecaric would advocate mastering Moreh Nevuchim first but not to stop there, but rather to investigate Qabbalah, too.
KT
RRW
"It [spirituality] means that everything we do is done in Hashem's Presence (first se'if in Shulchan Aruch from Moreh Nevuchim). It's goal is not to map the cosmic circuitry (if there is any) and to make metaphysics resemble physics. The latter seeks to make spirituality physical rather than the other way around."
Thus, a major potential error is conflating physics and meta-physics or worse morphing meta-physics into physicality. This Ch"V Is a potential violation of "ein lo demus haggoof"
The Rambam to the rescue.
It has been argued that the metaphysics of the Rambam equates to the metaphysics of the Qabbalah. This is a dubious extrapolation. However R Sasha Pecaric has demonstrated a different but essential relationship between the two, a relationship that the Rambam himself probably never anticipated. The Moreh Nevuchim was so strong and so firm in rooting out any physicality or anthopomorphic aspects of HKBH that a "new world order" :-) became possible.
In other words, given the Moreh as a prerequisite to Qabbalah, the danger of making the conceptual sprituality into anthropomorphic reality was removed or at least diminished.
Thus the Rambam's Moreh created at least 2 dynamics:
- 1 The abandonment of seeing anthropomorhic references as literal - following the lead of Targum Onkelos
- 2 Permitting Qabbalistic speuclation in a purely conceptual way w/o fear of it devolving into heretical notions of physciality regarding HKBH (iow HIS so-called "Godhead"). I.E.That a firm grounding in Rambam would save souls from going astray.
As I best understand it, anyone without this firm rooting in the definition section of the Moreh IS indeed in danger. And so to divorce the two paths into metaphysics is risky.
Caveat: The first chapters of the Moreh do not deal with the Haqira investigatory aspects of understand G-d. As such, they should be kosher and safe even for those who otherwise oppose Haqira. Also, this post does not address the need for - or the legitimacy of - Qabbalah itself. There are those who opine that the metaphysics of the Moreh covers all the necessary basis.
It would seem that both Rema and Rabbi Pecaric would advocate mastering Moreh Nevuchim first but not to stop there, but rather to investigate Qabbalah, too.
KT
RRW
Avot deR. Reuven - 3 Types of Rabbis
There are 3 types of Rabbis
- 1 Those who are headstrong whether right or wrong
- 2 Those who cave-in whether right or wrong
- 3 Those who are at times headstrong and at times pliant and submissive.
The first type to what may he be compared? To a superstar who exhibits the trappings of infallibility. By dint of sheer will and personality he convinces many of his "omniscience." However, when his headstrong positions based upon charisma instead of scholarship break down, his crediblity is undermined and soon even his utterly correct stances become suspect.
The second is too humble, too meek, too timid. Not only does he fail to champion his hypothesese, he fails to stand up even for his positions when they are black-and-white correct. He becomes a pushover and loses influence over people.
The third is judicious. When solid evidence supports his position he confidently advocates from a position of strength. However, when he merely is guessing, supposing, or proposing, he is willing to refine or withdraw his position in the face of hard evidence And kesheim shekibbeil sechar al haddrisha, kach yekabbeil sechar al happrisha.
KT
RRW
The second is too humble, too meek, too timid. Not only does he fail to champion his hypothesese, he fails to stand up even for his positions when they are black-and-white correct. He becomes a pushover and loses influence over people.
The third is judicious. When solid evidence supports his position he confidently advocates from a position of strength. However, when he merely is guessing, supposing, or proposing, he is willing to refine or withdraw his position in the face of hard evidence And kesheim shekibbeil sechar al haddrisha, kach yekabbeil sechar al happrisha.
KT
RRW
Monday, 6 July 2009
Rav Ovadiah Yosef on the Holocaust
I really was not surprised that more than one person sent me the link to the Jerusalem Post article on Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef's latest statement regarding the Holocaust. (See
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1246443718416) I recogninzed that it clearly would bother many people. What I pointed out to these individuals, though, was that Rabbi Yosef's words were, in fact, within the pale of Torah so what was the real problem. Obviously, those outside the pale of Torah would have their problems but within the world of Torah -- especially given eilu v'eilu -- what was the problem. You can disagree but you can't dismiss -- yet there was this attitude of dismissal. What I really was trying to get at was -- what really bothered them.
We define Moshe Rabbeinu's famous question as tzaddik v'ra lo, why do bad things happen to good people? We all know the many answers that are attempted -- with merit -- yet Moshe was still bothered. The issue, I believe, went beyond this classic question. The real question was the whole concept of judgement and punishment. Can we think of anyone deserving of the punishment of the Holocaust? Can we think of any sin deserving of the terrible tortures that many Jews endure throughout the ages? Therein lies the real problem -- we just don't understand the whole system. Especially in our world with its view of 'cruel and unusual punishment', we just cannot understand the realm of Divine punishment. That's what really bothers us with Rabbi Yosef's statement, at least, I believe. True, other issues emerge with his introduction of the theme of reincarnation but, bottom line, whenever the Holocaust is mentioned within the realm of punishment, we become unnerved. Yet this actually is the basic Torah approach to any misfortune that befalls our people. The real problem is that we just don't understand it -- and I believe that started with no one less than Moshe Rabbeinu.
And herein lies what I believe was the essence of what bothered people about Rabbi Yosef's statement. It was really just a basic Torah approach. But sometimes even the most basic Torah idea is still beyond our comprehension -- and I think people just wanted to see in Rabbi Yosef's statement a recognition that, while this idea may even be true, it is still not understood
Rabbi Ben Hecht
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1246443718416) I recogninzed that it clearly would bother many people. What I pointed out to these individuals, though, was that Rabbi Yosef's words were, in fact, within the pale of Torah so what was the real problem. Obviously, those outside the pale of Torah would have their problems but within the world of Torah -- especially given eilu v'eilu -- what was the problem. You can disagree but you can't dismiss -- yet there was this attitude of dismissal. What I really was trying to get at was -- what really bothered them.
We define Moshe Rabbeinu's famous question as tzaddik v'ra lo, why do bad things happen to good people? We all know the many answers that are attempted -- with merit -- yet Moshe was still bothered. The issue, I believe, went beyond this classic question. The real question was the whole concept of judgement and punishment. Can we think of anyone deserving of the punishment of the Holocaust? Can we think of any sin deserving of the terrible tortures that many Jews endure throughout the ages? Therein lies the real problem -- we just don't understand the whole system. Especially in our world with its view of 'cruel and unusual punishment', we just cannot understand the realm of Divine punishment. That's what really bothers us with Rabbi Yosef's statement, at least, I believe. True, other issues emerge with his introduction of the theme of reincarnation but, bottom line, whenever the Holocaust is mentioned within the realm of punishment, we become unnerved. Yet this actually is the basic Torah approach to any misfortune that befalls our people. The real problem is that we just don't understand it -- and I believe that started with no one less than Moshe Rabbeinu.
And herein lies what I believe was the essence of what bothered people about Rabbi Yosef's statement. It was really just a basic Torah approach. But sometimes even the most basic Torah idea is still beyond our comprehension -- and I think people just wanted to see in Rabbi Yosef's statement a recognition that, while this idea may even be true, it is still not understood
Rabbi Ben Hecht
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)