מונה מספר לכוכבים

Didn't post- been busy with math.

I've always had an aversion to mathematics. Mostly because I just wasn't too good at it. Though my mother has mathematics practically as her religion.

But as I got older, and tried to 'read theology into everything', I came the conclusion that math is important. Not only because the world runs on math, and that someone without math is walking clumsily through the world, not only because Maimonides lists math as one of those things that keeps one's mind busy, and therefore pure from sin, not only because arithmetic is up there with reading as a must know for everyone who wishes to aspire to the basic minimum amount of knowledge necessitated by the board of education for everyone, not because of these reasons has the importance of mathematics grown in my eyes, but because the universe was built USING mathematical principles. G-d created the universe using mathematic principles! Creating mathematical principles and incorporating them into reality! Is it not true therefore that one who delves into the physical sciences, and particularly mathematics draws himself closer and closer to the mind of his creator?

So one doesn't have to 'know math just to know math', one has to know math, to know G-d!

Busha

...I think this guy sort of takes the term "executive brach" a litle too siriously, by the way...

סוגיא דפריעת הראש

Last week I read a post from blogger "Bad Rabbi" (he's listed among my links as "רב שאינו הגון". In the Oct. 14 2007 post) about the subject of covering of the hair for women, from a Judaic/halachic perspective.The background for this requirement is well known; the bible (Numbers 5) has a prescribed method to deal with a ‘woman who has gone astray’. Basically the suspected woman should be brought to the priest, and it then states “ופרע את ראש האשה”, which can be understood as “then he should unbraid her hair”, or “then he should uncover her hair”. Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac of Troyes (1040-1105) suggests that simply it is perhaps more likely to mean ‘he should unbraid’, but from a semantic perspective it can really go either way.

The Talmud (Ketuboth 72a) comments; "then he should uncover the woman’s hair"- and "if so", it states, "then we see it once was covered- if it once was covered, then it should always be covered. From here we can infer" says the Talmud, "that G-d would want a woman to have her hair always covered".

The author of the ‘Bad Rabbi’ blog had difficulty in understanding the logic of this talmudic derivation; “Let us review the logic:

.

1. The hair of the woman in ‘The Sotah’ story was uncovered by the Kohen

2. If her hair was uncovered, then it must have been covered to begin with

3. If her hair was covered, then it must have been covered all the time

4. If her hair was covered all the time, then ALL women’s hair must have been covered at all times

5. Therefore all women must have their hair covered!”, to quote his understanding.

But he adds “…does it follow that just because a woman’s hair was uncovered in that act of judgment then all women’s hair must from then on be covered? Maybe the fashion of the time three thousand years ago was to keep hair covered. Does this mean that we must keep with that fashion even now? Should we wear exactly what they were wearing too? Thank goodness the story does not describe the color and the dress this woman was wearing, or else, the rabbis would have required women to wear that dress as well!A more respectable argument for covering of hair could have been made on grounds of modesty. The rabbis could have said that modesty in dress includes covering hair. Certainly those women who wear hats or otherwise cover their hair tend to be less flamboyant then those who flaunt their hair. An argument could have been made that a dignified woman should cover her hair out of modesty. Unfortunately, when asked, Rabbis always point to ‘The Sotah’ story for justification for this law, and only add the modesty issue as an afterthought.”

I pondered his argument against the logic of the Talmud on and off for a few days. Initially I thought- that his whole understanding of the halachic process was faulty; the Talmud here is not trying to prove that it is a biblical imperative for a woman to cover her hair, it cannot be suggesting that- for we know such a thing is not one of the 613 Divine Laws. Rather this form of proof in the Talmud is called an "אסמכתא" ("a leaning"). The point of bringing an asmachta is not to prove something biblically, but just to provide a verse that somewhat assists our idea. But that is not THE proof for woman’s head covering.

It is known to all reading this, that most observant Muslim women cover their hair. It would seem to us that this would be based on the Koran, or perhaps only in the Hadith. When one searches through the Koran though, to one’s surprise, he finds no such verse instructing women to cover their hair!

Why is it then that all observant Muslim women have their hair covered? From the simple understanding that the Koran felt it was understood (in that time and place, at least- I.e. seventh century Saudi Arabia) that women cover their hair. This was understood by all. The Koran does state though, that women should generally be modest. The prophet (Mica 4:8) also bequeaths man to ‘walk modestly with g-d’.

So if the argument can be made that woman should cover their hair, because she had it covered, the argument can also be made that if Moses was wearing shoes, we all should be wearing shoes. True, but who among us is not wearing shoes? It is understood.

That is what I thought at the time. But still that argument is slightly (I stress- slightly faulty) because times and norms change. There is a famous Hassidic dictum that "how do we know that Moses wore a ‘shtreimel’ (the fur hat that Hassidim wear)? For it says “ and Moses came out"!...would Moses come out without a shtriemel?!”. Rabbi Dr. Josef Breuer (1842 –1925) in his book ‘The Jewish Marriage’ brings up this problem. He writes “you might say that the practice of covering the hair does not seem to be a custom followed by Jews only; it is the common heritage of the orient, and thus it brings to mind the inferior position of woman in the east and the degradations that were associated with the harem”. After convincing the Jewish woman that this is a practice of Jews, he adds “And even if upon superficial examination there might be some truth in this argument- might it not be possible that two persons might engage in the same practice, but each for quite different reasons that the other? Does not the oriental also pray…, does not he have temples priests and prophets- and still, would you be so thoughtless as to consider identical certain phenomena and concepts which, while seemingly alike, actually represent ideas diametrically opposed to each other by virtue of the spirit in which each is performed?”

.

(I personally wish to add to his words that the New Testament also testifies to the fact that women of the orient were expected to cover their hair in the time of Paul, for he writes (I Corinthians 11.5) "But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven". this is not kept in actuality by most Christians today for the very reason that it was 'only said for that time', though there is a movement today among Evangelical Christians to bring the practice back).

Though the original problem still lingers; but then it hit me- the Bad Rabbis whole premise is off. It does not say that anyone ever uncovered anyone else’s hair. It says ‘this is what you should do in this situation’. In fact there is a wording of our prestated Talmudic derivation on this verse in the Midrash. The Midrash Sifri (ibid.) formulates “this is to teach you that a woman’s hair should be covered”, not “it was covered”, but “should be covered”! In other words the Torah is telling us “this is what you should do in this situation…then uncover her hair”, i.e. I expect her hair to be covered then.

Ah but the eyes of those who do not wish to see will always be blind! For all time, those who have discarded and mocked the commandments which we understand to be of Divine origin, did so out of ignorance and an unwillingness to learn!

עבד

נחית דרגא

Just one small point I wish to concentrate on today, and that is “feeling lucky”; Personally, I haven’t been to meetings of a romantically, or marriage oriented nature a great many times. But there was one girl (from Miami Beach) that I came in contact with in such a meeting, that I, over time, grew an emotional attachment with. Although I was, after a point of mutual satisfaction, ultimately rejected.

In my mind I pondered many things I could have done to stop that ‘evil decree’. But after a while I realized that my main problem was that she was just ‘out my league’ (i.e. in many ways, she was objectively ‘better’ than me). And it dawned on me that that was obviously why I was so interested in her; mainly because of her greater ‘class’ (so to speak). In other words; let’s say it worked out between us and we got married, what would she be thinking of me her whole life? “You know, honestly, I could really have done a lot better than that, I should have got rid of him while I was still able to”, and forget about what her mother would be saying to her for the rest of her life…

All I could think is “how was I deserving of her interest in me?”, and how ‘lucky’ I was to end up with this person. So my whole interest in her was in essence an interest in myself, in bettering my situation. As far as I was concerned, I would be the main person benefiting from the relationship. Is that not just egotistical self-love? The ideal relationship, in a way, is one where ‘they’ are the one who is interested in ‘you’; where they are the one who feels lucky to be with you.

The Talmud itself in Tractate Yebamot (63a) teaches us this great principle; נחית דרגא ונסב איתתא (“go down a step (a rung in the social ladder) and then marry”) are it’s ever famous words of practical relationship advice. And what definition of social class is there by men if not the attractiveness of their spouse. If so then, “going down a level” would to a large extent be defined as being less superficial, and more open to romantic interest in someone who doesn’t fit today’s subjective mold of what’s considered attractive. And anyone of a male orientation knows that to a man, says “don’t be so interested in looks”, is like telling a nine month pregnant woman who’s water broke to “put off childbirth for a few months”! Then how much more important is it in that case, to engrain in our minds that which king Solomon told us in the conclusion of his book of Proverbs “שקר החן והבל היופי, אשה יראת ה היא תתהלל”!

By the way...trust Jimmy Soul on this one, he knows what he's talking about!

עבד

Ashkenazi vs Sefaradi follow up

In concluding response to Shoshana from Maine's comment on my "I prayed on Shabbat!" post:

First I want to say though, that I harbor no strife towards any Jew; all our ideals (though they be many) are legitimate. I just state my opinions.

And about what I said before about Ashkenazi prayer, I think I left a few things out; you see; Brooklyn has a very large Syrian Jewish community that rivals the Ashkenazi ones. Generally the Ashkenazim around here are from eastern Europe and are VERY traditional (there is a small minority Ashkenazi non-ultra orthodox), whereas the Syrians are generally sort of what can be considered 'modern orthodox' (most don't wear 'kipot' or the like outdoors, and are very involved in secular matters), but ALL have a deep connection to religion and pray and go to religious classes daily.

So when the average Sefaradi thinks of an Ashkenazi shul, he thinks of this room packed with sweaty people dressed in black mumbling these inaudible words. Even for someone well trained in even their form of Jewish prayer it is impossible to know what part of the prayer they're up to (because they, again, don't know what it means, don't say it in a way that sounds like any language, and say it at a speed which would make it very difficult to understand if it were a language). They shake while praying. They scream. They sleep in their sanctuaries. There are millions of people going around asking for 'tzedaka' at one time. ...you get the picture

Yet isn't this a pitiful form of prayer, especially when we are constantly being showcased to outsiders? We, Jews who come from Muslim countries, either personally or ancestrally, by and large didn't live as segregated from the non-Jews as they did in the 'shtetl'. We saw with what respect the Muslim approached his prayer. All the more so us, from whom those prayers somewhat originate, how much more so should our sanctuaries be ‘sanctvm’?

Sefaradi Jews (especially those from Muslim Spain) always prided themselves on prayers that sounded beautiful (the richer sefaradi congregations here in Brooklyn for example pay absolutely TONS of money to get 'hazzanim' who are experts in the makamat; the Arab 'modes' or 'tunes' from singing and holy liturgy...which differs greatly between north Africa and the middle east by the way). On beautiful architecture, clean, open spaces for praying (which is what Ashkenazim also had before the Hasidim, and after, by non-Hasidim. The thing is by them (Ashkenazim) it seems like the more liberal they are, the more respectful their prayers and the places where they are done are). A Sefaradi is proud to be able to say the holy words of our beautiful and ever-meaningful prayers. Not to have them on himself, as the Ashkenazi, as a constant burden..

Anyway; the argument can always be made- we are in essence a Semitic people without a clearly defined culture, so if anything, our culture is steeped deep in the ground of the Middle East. Syrian culture, Lebanese culture, Palestinian culture, is ‘Jewish culture’ to some extent (though there is no such thing, just as there is no Jewish ‘race’). And that, by the way, is again, part of the complaint of the Palestinians; the Western domination. We only seem so Western because the first Ashkenazim who came insisted on a strictly Western or ‘European’ culture dominating the country. Which is all fine and dandy, but it does to a large extent not only minimize, but negate the fact that the collective culture of the Jew is Semitic at heart. Not only by the Sefaradim who were culturally Arab for all intents and purposes, but the Ashkenazi himself was always ridiculed at in Europe for being Semitic (which, even after so many years in Europe is evidenced by the fact that so many of them have Semitic type noses, and other characteristics). Which also minimizes therefore the ‘cultural similarity’ between Jews and Muslims, which was responsible in part for the fact that after all is said and done, we (the Sefaradim) lived with the Arabs in relative peace and harmony for Millennia, before the Ashkenazim came.

[Bonus: Listen to actual Moroccan Jewish payer, recorded in a synagogue in Morocco in the 50's].

עבד

לזכרו

I think, by the way, "twas grace that taught my heart to fear, and grace my fears releived" is based on "כי עמך הסליחה, למען תורא"

על מות

אבד חסיד

ה"ה הרב שמואל בירנבוים תהא זכרו ברוך- פליט מארץ ליטא, וישם משכנו בעיר ברוקלין. שם למד ולימד להמונים במסירות נפש והתמדה גמורה. זכותו עלינו יגן- אמן

I prayed on Shabbat!

OK, being that I don’t usually write in a story telling manner, I wanted to try that a bit;

Well, guess what? I went to ‘shul’ this past Shabbat morning! And the funniest thing is I REALLY enjoy going, but the closest Moroccan Synagogue is pretty far from my house, and walking back I would stall the meal. But that’s only a secondary reason, the main reason is that I’m usually way too busy sleeping, which is why I barely ever go, which is why when I do go I really enjoy it.

I happened to wake up early on Shabbat, which happens to me so rarely I can count all the times it’s happened. It took me around an hour to get there, and surprise; no one was there. So I went in and waited. Some old guy sat next to me who was sort of crazy…but he gave candies to every kid, so, in a way he’s a lot more caring than me, because I wouldn’t even fathom doing that, so who’s crazy?

You know, it’s funny; I’ve been to many different Moroccan synagogues in many different countries, and I think it’s safe to say that the one here in Brooklyn is one of the best. Some of the best architecture I’ve seen in a synagogue. One of the best Hazzanim I’ve ever heard. The congregants are also very participating, understand the tunes, and sound nice.

Well, after a while we got started, and there was just a lovely tune for everything. I thanked G-d I’m not a Eurpean Jew (the Lor”d knows what they have to endure in their places of worship!). I kept noticing the architechture, and how similar it was to the great synagogue in Madrid (Spain) though a lot smaller. I thought how one day people would come here and say “there were once Jews who prayed here”; Hopefully soon.

One thing I want to say about the prayers is that I’m a 'pesukei d’zimra' addict! Pesukei d’zimra are the verses of psalms read before the recitation of 'shm’a' and the actual prayer, to get everyone ‘warmed up’. And warm up it does, and where else as in a Moroccan synagogue! For me there’s always this absolutely sublime feeling that I get when the sequence that starts from 'hodu' and ends by 'yishtabach' is done. Now I see why atheists need a place to go pray! It’s a lot of fun; the Muslims (especially Arab-Muslims) from Morocco to Iraq (and beyond) also have a great time praying, as do they in Churches world wide. Again, I sometimes wonder about European Jews, but I suppose it’s their issue, not mine..

Anyway, after a great prayer session the Torah was read very nicely (I mean, I myself barely ever hear it read that nice), but it was a really long parasha, and something was a’ cookin’ downstairs, so I felt a little sick and had to leave early.

Well, all I can conclude with is that I hope to make it to prayers all three times on Shabbat from now on!

העבד

"מידי הירהורים לא יצא"

I found this interesting:

"Who Controls Your Mind?

by Remez Sasson

Few people are aware of the thoughts that pass through their minds. Thinking is performed like a habit, in an automatic manner. If the thoughts are positive, then it is all right, but if they are negative, they may cause trouble.

The mind is like small child, who accepts and takes for granted whatever it sees or hears, without judgment and without considering the consequences. If you let your mind behave as it likes and give it complete freedom, you lose your freedom.

We are constantly flooded with thoughts, ideas and information coming through the five senses, other people, the newspapers and TV. These thoughts, ideas and information penetrate the mind whether we are aware of this process or not.

This outside flow influences our behavior and reactions. It influences the way we think, our preferences, likes and dislikes. This means that we let outside powers shape our lives. So where is freedom?

Most people think and believe that their thoughts originate from them, but have they ever stopped and considered whether their thoughts, desires, likes and dislikes are really theirs? Maybe they have come from the outside, and they have unconsciously accepted them as their own?

If there is no filter to process the thoughts that enter the mind, there is no freedom. Then all actions are like the actions of a puppet on a string, though no one will admit it.

You may object and say that the thoughts that pass through your mind are yours, but are they? Have you deliberately and attentively created every thought that entered your mind?

Why let outside influences control your mind and life? Why let other people's thoughts control your life and mind? Do you want to make your mind free or do you prefer to enslave it to other people's opinions and thoughts? If you leave your mind open to every thought that passes by, you put our life in other people's hands, and without realizing it, you accept their thoughts and act in accordance with them.

Each person is more susceptible to certain kind of thoughts than others. Certain thoughts and ideas we ignore, and others spur us to immediate action. Thoughts concerning subjects we love have more power on us than other thoughts, but even thoughts and ideas that we don't care about, if we are frequently exposed to them, eventually sink into the subconscious mind and influence us.

Everyone has desires, ambitions and dreams that he or she may foster from childhood. They may be the thoughts of parents, teachers and friends, and which have lodged into our minds, and are carried around throughout our lives. Are they necessary? Do we need all this excessive baggage?

In order to reduce the power of outside influences and thoughts on your life, you need to be aware of the thoughts and desires that enter your mind, and ask yourself whether you really like them, and are willing to accept them into your life. Analyze your motives and actions, and you will be surprised to find out that many of them were triggered by outside influences.

You do not have to accept each and every thought, idea or information. Think and find out whether you entertain certain thoughts because you decided to do so, or because they just popped into your head due to outside influences.

Learn not to accept every thought that you encounter. Find first whether it is for your own good to follow it. It may not be so easy at the start, because the mind will revolt against this control. If you want to be the master of your mind and life, you should not let other people's thoughts, desires and motives rule your life, unless you consciously choose so."

From www.successconsciousness.com

The Arab Question

In response to the blog of Shoshana (Ruraldox) "Israel is *NOT* apartheid", just some thoughts I wanted to get out;

And the Mexican-American border is *not* apartheid?! Why is it only when Americans come to a new land, displace it's peoples and make a border with the areas natives (the Aztec peoples of Mexico, who, by the way, were discussing complex philosophy and architecture when the western Europeans were having each others brains for breakfast!) -who they are better off than- and don't let them in for totally and *only* racial white supremacist reasons, even though they need them for their economy- it is OK?(!)

Listen, everyone wants to overlook it, but we won the West Bank, Gaza, and Sinai fair and square. 'Fare and square' though is a huge understatement; we were attacked. Not an attack to scare us, not an attack to take some land, wealth; an attack to destroy the Jewish presence in Israel like they did in Hebron in the twenties. We fought in self protection -nation-wide preservation for G-d’s sake! - And we found ourselves on our own ancient homeland, which we needed for agriculture and new immigrants, and much more importantly security! A land which had very few natives, descended from Arab peasant natives who could only be counted on two hands before the Jews made Israel a prosperous place, natives who themselves started fleeing from their towns- the remains of ancient Jewish towns (which is historically and archaeologically proven) in the early second half of the nineteenth century. The land is also some of the most beautiful in Israel, and the Jews who came to live there- the greatest idealists.Ah, but no one researches the recent roots of Palestinian nationalism! It's influence from North Korea, and the fact that Arafat himself was just an Egyptian anti-Semite guy, who, although had an interesting sense of humor, was not himself Palestinian, and didn’t necessarily represent its cause.

It's true; the plight of the Arab refugees is great. But why are they refugees in Jordan and Syria and Egypt? Is it perhaps because their own coreligionists of the same persuasion do not want to accept them? The Muslim Arab in Israel is by and large richer and more well to do than Arabs in any other Middle Eastern country.

Now, again, I'm not saying that we don't mistreat the Palestinians, I'm not saying we don't alienate them, and preach anti-Arabism and anti Muslimism to our children. I am not suggesting we don’t humiliate them in their own land with roadblock checking and restrictions. I am not suggesting that we are not bringing all the worst aspects of Westernism into one of the last bastions of Muslim purity in the world- to taint its youth. I am not suggesting that we have not become a demoralized people bent on leaving our own homeland for the West (especially America). I’m not saying our leaders are not so corrupt that it’s hard to look them in the face and not vomit. I am only suggesting that they have no right to their own state, and barely a right to live in their own land until they humanize, and learn to be peaceful people like they were before we came, and before Arafat came.

The Arabs in general are known to have strong pride in themselves and their culture, as well as a strong nationalistic fervor. No Arab wants to be living under Western dominion on his own land, especially not Jewish dominion. There is a famous statement by the Mufti of Jerusalem in the 1890's basically saying that "it's true, the Jews made Palestine a much more livable place; they introduced large scale agriculture, a postal system, better housing water management etc etc., but that doesn't mean that we don't despise them, and can't stand living with them".

OK then, a Palestinian state; will that really solve every Arab problem? Will that make them attack us less, or with better weapons? Did the Egyptians not have a state in 1967 that they attacked us (like, the fourth time in ten years)? Did the Jordanians not have a state, do the Iranians not have a state that they always taunt us (and it's not that they care so much for Palestinians. Persians and Arabs are like, sworn enemies, and they wouldn't dream about having such people in Iran). And yet, because of this over-industrialized life we have created around us, and our new need for oil, and because of the over influence and over industiousness of the western metropolitan Jew, which causes all to despise him, world politics are mangled and misrepresented to the public.

What rather? Rather the obvious truth (to me) is that the whole story is a little too weird to be totally by chance. Any naturalistic explanation would be difficult. We gotta' do our political activism and stuff -G-d orchestrated it that the democratic system would become prominent- but in honest analysis it would seem something supernatural is going on- something divine.

עבד

It's time for some sirious mussar baby!

Ok, I made a new 'Messilat Yesharim' blog, and I'm sort of interested in getting some people together so we can have some sort of 'mussar vaad' (sort of translates into spiritual 'devotional' group) where we can all try to be better people, and divulge to each other what we do; if it's a sin- then the other members encourage future abstaining somehow. If it's a 'mitzva', then we all would commend it. I need like at least three people, ok?

עבד

Naturalists

OK, I know this a really stupid question; but how do people who grow up in 'nudist colonies' experience sexuality if there is really nothing more than nudity to inspire sexual exitement?

Little Miss Sunshine

Well, I just saw the film "Little Miss Sunshine" (G-d knows why), (directed by Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris). Which is basically about an American family who all "want to win" real badly, but are all sort of losers, and have to learn to live with it.There are probably many lessons that were intended in it. The one that caught on to me is one statement, where the guy playing the 'bummed out teenager' says "our whole lives are beauty pageants". He was represented as being a fan of Nietzsche, and I could kind of imagine Nietzsche sort of going on that theme. Our whole lives people are judging us; how we look, how much money we make, if we're likable. It's true, and it is rough, especially for unmarried, marriageable age people like me. But it's true throughout life.

מעשה ידינו- כוננה עלינו

Ah, what the hell! I have a song from a certain Mormon American (of Sweedish decent) from Alaska in my mind, and I just saw a girl put down fun song lyrics in her blog, so I said...what the hell!

"If I could tell the world just one thing, It would be that "we're all ok". And "not to worry, because worry is wasteful, and useless in times like these". I will not be made useless! I won't be idled with despair! I will gather myself around my faith for light does the darkness most fear! My hands are small, I know, but they're not yours they are my own, and I am never broken!

Poverty stole your golden shoes, but it didn't steal your laughter. And heartache came to visit me, but I knew it wasn't ever after. We will fight, not out of spite. For someone must stand up for what's right, 'cause where there's a man who has no voice, there ours shall go singing!

In the end only kindness matters.

I will get down on my knees and I will pray.

My hands are small, I know, but they're not yours they are my own, and I am never broken! We are never broken!

We are God's eyes, God's hands, God's mind.
We are God's eyes, God's hands, God's mind.
We are God's eyes, God's hands, God's heart.
We are God's hands. We are God's hands!"

Jewel Kilcher

עבד

Holiday shopping

OK, news! I plan to force myself to put in, every week an at least 'semi'-scholarly Talmudic piece, just to keep up my learning a bit. The first will be the least scholarly though : (

well, here goes;

[Now, I would write in Hebrew, but then definitely no body would read it but myself, so..].

The Tosafot:
The Mishna states “it is prohibited to have any monetary transactions with someone who subscribes to what we consider to be pagan, from three days before their festivals”.

Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac of Troyes (1040-1105) suggests the reason for this to be that any successful monetary transaction might inspire verbal (pagan) religious appreciation to their god(s). His premise is that it is written Exodus 23:13 “Take heed to all that I have said to you; and make no mention of the names of other gods, nor let such be heard out of your mouth”, and he seems to suppose that perhaps causing others to recite the names of, and worship other gods is also forbidden.

The Tosafot use this as a basis for their ever so famous query; “why is it then, that we see so many Torah observant Jews do business dealings with non-Jews on their holidays in our times (i.e. 12th century France)?”(supposing, obviously, that Christians are full fledged pagans). Is there any Talmudic backing for their actions?

They first point out an inference from Tractate Hullin (13b) discussing the ritual slaughtering of animals performed by non-Jews. The Talmud there has a probing discussion about the inner intent, and the level of religious devotion of the peoples in whose provinces the Jews (who authored the Talmud) resided (mainly between the Euphrates and Tigris rivers, (modern day Iraq) which was part of the Persian Sassanid empire then, the state religion being the basically monotheistic Zoroastrian faith. Though there were many full fledged pagan residents as well) and concludes that “most people who adhere to pagan religions lack an emotional/intellectual attachment to it, but do it rather to ‘follow the ancient ways’ (pure paganism was in deep decline in the Mediterranean and Indo-Europe by that time). So too, add the Tosafot the people whom we live amongst are also not fully adherent pagans (Christians).

The Tosafot discard that reasoning though, bringing a disproving text from our own Tractate (7b) stating that “now the law is different; only on the holiday is it prohibited”; it does recognize that the pagans of their time have a different status, and therefore halakhah, but it still explicitly prohibits trade with them on their holidays.

The Tosafot then attempt to conclude that ‘the reason we are lenient today is because of the principle of ‘refraining from actions which may cause enmity’ among our neighbors, the natives of every land, which is actually used by Rabbi Judah the prince (6b) as reason for accepting a gift from a Jew with differing religious views from his own on his holiday. But they admit that this is far from a full proof being that they are greatly limiting themselves on one possible understanding of the text there. There can also be doubts, they add, to the logic of this reasoning being that one would not necessarily be causing enmity by refraining from business dealings for a day.

Therefore they finally conclude using another Talmudic principle “we know that the people we live amongst, in essence, are not pagan” (65a). A reasoning used both by Rabbi Yehuda, and by Raba for their sending gifts on behalf of the Jews to Shapur II (Sassanid Monarch at the time) on a Zoroastrian holiday.

The Tosafot mention that one can also rely on a stipulation of the Jerusalem Talmud (), which clearly states that the Mishna only discusses a person one knows, but one would be permitted to do business with a pagan stranger on their festivals.

The Tosafot then record the opinion of Rabbi Jacob ben Meir ‘Tam’ (1100-1171), that; the Mishna is only discussing something that can be used as a sacrifice, but not general buying and selling. (The editor mentions that in Rabbi Tam’s opinion “buying and selling” in the Mishna (lit. “picking up and giving”) means not to ‘buy and sell’, but to ‘take and give’, i.e. ‘take the money, and give something that can be used as a sacrifice. He also has a fascinatingly novel approach to the text on 6b in accordance with his opinion

They conclude that even in Rabbi Tam’s opinion even if Christians were to be viewed as pagans, there would be no problem, because they don’t use sacrifices.

But the Tosafot do stipulate that in the situation that a (Catholic) Christian were to approach you, asking for a loan for ‘religious purposes’ (Jews were money lenders), giving it would also be permitted, being that anyway it would not be used as a sacrifice, but at that time would have probably have been used for ‘indulgences’.

Christianity:

My interest here though, is to examine the first conclusive resolution of the Tosafot, namely “we know the people we live amongst are not pagan”. Now, I am not interested in the halachic aspect of this discussion (the Maimonides- Tosafot argument), but rather a more philosophical/theological approach (whether the brand of Zoroastrianism popular then could be considered pagan is also quite an important discussion, but due to the reigning relevance of the former for us, will unfortunately have to be left for another time.

The point I wish to discuss is whether or not Christianity is objectively pagan in the Jewish view. Now, one does not have to look far and wide in the New Testament to know that it’s authors and those who subscribe to it were “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great G-d, and [whom they believe to be] our (no one’s) Saviour Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13), or that they all felt that “without controversy, great is the mystery of godliness: G-d was [again, in their humble opinion] manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit” (I Timothy 3:16). And no one needs go any further than Christian (mostly Catholic) shrines to see something which seems unmistakably pagan to any Jew. But, to put it shortly, my personal feeling is that the reason we consider them pagan is not because G-d ‘couldn’t’ or even "wouldn’t" make himself manifest in human flesh (G-d can do anything), it’s that we believe it’s much more logical to say that G-d "didn’t" manifest himself in human form. But again, if he did, and it was proven, we would believe it, and it wouldn’t be going against any previously established Biblical principles about the unity of G-d.

Tosafot seemed to equate Amoraic statements about Zoroastrianism to Christianity; I don’t see that comparison as inconsequential, or out of convenience. There are many comparisons between the religions, but I wish to focus on the idea that Tosafot seem to understand from the Talmud a rule for approaching semi-monotheistic religions (or, more accurately; religions, which the purity of their monotheism may be brought to question) i.e. both religions have what is called in rabbinic literature “a partnership” with the one G-d (good and evil in Zoroastrianism, and the father and the son in Christianity). Many Jewish scholars of the past few centuries suggest that “the nations were never commanded not to have ‘a partnership’ in their monotheism (i.e. as long as they believe in one G-d its ok). We find this benign view about Christian theology in the writings of Rabbi Mosses Isserles (1520-1572) and Rabbi Jacob Emden (1697-1776) to name just two.

Happy holidays!

עבד

לכפות בטוב

Background; Basically this is a response to a comment on my ‘דמים’ post:

To be honest though, this blog was initially intended for me to jot down little thoughts of mine on the Internet, which might otherwise become forgotten to me. But I nonetheless am always exited by new opinions, new thoughts, and new ideas.

Now, I admit; it is true- We, the philosophers, the priests, the monks, the theological students, all people devoted to thought and religion are the parasites of the world. We feed off the production of men, but do not ourselves produce. Yet, in turn, have we not produced what no man outside of us hath produced? Morals? Thought? I am reminded of a statement of David Hume that (to paraphrase) "all other sciences are sciences, and they have real world affects. But the science we are engaged in is an utter waste of time, an utter waste of life, we expound on things that are improvable, make no real difference, and of which many consider to be rubbish and pure fancifulness". But then again, where would the world be without religion, where would the world be without philosophy? I know, John Lennon would tell you “paradise”, but I highly doubt that (I obviously side with theologians). Now, I know you, as well as most Jews, are at least subconsciously affected by writers like Marx and Hegel in your approach toward the Jewish religion and its institutions, but just remember, they themselves are products of historical and sociological forces, which are no longer as apparent. (Truth is though, I can’t call myself a n enemy of Marx, for is one of the great heroes of rationalists of our time, and I do agree with him on most of his economical opinions. I feel that he was capable of such charisma only because

Although it is true what you say, that the working world is not as lowly as I make them out to be, being that they are the ones sponsoring the building of yeshivas, and not yeshiva people. True, it is a real show of these people’s religious and truly altruistic natures (I know I personally rarely ever give ma’aser or even tzedaka unfortunately, so who am I to talk about being lowly!). But it is also just a manifestation of their being addicted to opium. They help build those religious institutions because they themselves need them; they’re addicted to religion! And their religion is one of emotional and cultural and communal need, not one of conviction. I see them as more the ‘Religious-Man’ discussed by Rabbi Joseph b. Soloveichik in Halakhic Man, and not as that more profound Halakhic-Man.

Therefore, I wouldn’t praise religion too much, especially not Judaism, especially not Orthodox Judaism, and especially not the backward lifestyle that I had the misfortune of being exposed to, of the Eastern European Traditionalist Jews, and their descendants in today’s ‘global north’. For I feel we are all, in essence, misunderstanding the main points of the Bible, and especially ‘the five books of mosses’. Unfortunately, religion is not the outcome of only sound minded people’s interpretations of life and of the texts, but it is mostly a sociological evolution, and takes turns, sometimes for the worse, for needs of historical and sociological necessity, again, especially in regards us; the unfortunate religious minority in every country. It’s true, that yeshiva system is waaay out of whack. One of the only truly commendable books I’ve seen in the last few centuries, by an Orthodox Jewish author is Horeb, by Rav Hirsch. There, you don’t find a mindless stress on ritual (אורח חיים), but an equal amount of stress on the moral and ethical teachings of the Bible (חושן משפט ואבן העזר), which so many Jews today seem to neglect, and then get arrested for money laundering, even though they’re the head of a well known Hassidic sect.

Plastico

Hey, and check out this site by the way; the true health problems with plastic, and some healthy alternatives!

.

I was just telling my brother that "there is no concrete scientific evidence that plastic may be harmful to one's health- even in the long run". Then I looked it up (what did people do before the Internet again?), well, plastic consumption is very negative, though almost invertible. In one century, it seems we've managed to cover everything in plastic

.

Site number one.

.

Site number two.

דמים

Man, everything I think of is forgotten by the time I want to post! Well, from what I can scrape back together...

Money. So benign. So necessary. So good. Yet so evil. The more I try to think about this the more mind boggling it is; we don't view paper money (especially the ''dollar'') in the same way we would view things bartered (obviously), or even fine metals and such. The dollar we see so often here in America (or it's electric equivalent) is really a pretty abstract idea. We know that with this paper is the potential for anything physical. But that's it- potential, and not actual physicality and earthiness which subconsciously blinds the explicit evil that could be viewed in items and services. But it is! Is money not the essence of 'גשמיות' itself?And yet, so many of our dear flock, give all their time and attention to this one thing, without a second thought. Perhaps that is why I was in yeshiva for so long? A pure scorn of the low interests of the mindless -and therefore thoughtless- un-spiritual majority.

But again, of course, I have no negativity towards the idea of making an ample living -for one's family! Again, this kind of thing we cannot take for granted. All the yeshiva people and monks and priests don't live like they do for nothing. Money is very dangerous. And it takes intense intent and judgment to know how to approach it in a spiritually healthy way. Especially Jews! (Perhaps we will speak more about that over-ambitious lot another time).

The Past

OK, I wanted to write this a little while ago; but here goes;

[Disclaimer- Those involved in psychology and addiction recovery, as well as Jewish scholars of all time agree that it's a good idea to treat a persons inclination towards evil in 'human' terms.]

There is a little person, around all the time- הוא השטן הוא יצר הרע הוא מלאך המות. Always trying to make us sin. One big way he does that -especially to me- recently, is trying to make one concentrate on one's past, especially the negative aspects thereof. For me; how I wasted my life for four years in Yeshiva. It eats at me all the time. 23-24 starting college?! Maybe try for a Masters. So I'll be eligible for marriage at 30?! But again, first of all, going to yeshiva is a very good thing for many, many reasons (even though they probably learn more in monasteries, madrases and Buddhist temples). Secondly; it's of UTMOST importance to remember that you can't change what happened in the past now, all you can change is what happens in the future.

So there Satan!

Bindng Issac, Crossing the Red Sea

YO!

Ugh! Tonight is similar to so many nights, I had so many interesting thoughts, but can't get around to recording them. So; here goes, some main points; Genesis 22: G-d tells Avraham to kill his son? Murder? That kind of murder? What was Avraham thinking? -Probably that "G-d told me I'll have many children etc., I'm sure G-d knows what He's doing and will get things together right. Maybe Yitzchak is like "זרע פסול", like Yishmael (sending out to dessert also sort of like killing). What G-d said back to Avraham in response to his acquiescing was basically 'well now I see you fully -trust- me (made a lot more sense while I was walking!)

But that's a similar idea to the yam suf. What? We're all going to die now, just like that? But G-d told us He'll take us to Israel (they were still on the right level, Moshe was with them). Now, it could be they all trusted G-d, but only one person -not Moshe!- decided to walk -not swim- straight into the water because "G-d said we should go, let's go, and nothing can get in our way!" Now, it could be G-d would have made a different miracle if circumstance demanded, but He also wanted to sort of test the people to see what direction they would take -after all, He put them in that situation-. And all G-d wanted to see was people who could transfer the logical into the emotional and physical, and say; "if G-d said to keep going, we"ll keep going and He'll protect us!". To fully trust in G-d.

And so too in our lives; Chanukah is a good time for teshuvah. How do you do teshuvah? Above all else- determination! You have to be determined that this is what you must do no matter what. And if you have that determination, you will trust that G-d could help you change your own reality, and run a counter-culture, and let logical healthy living overcome natural-instinctive living -Amen!