We don't know (1) why the Vatican Insider reports this as news and (2) why they report the decision as "intended to cause controversy"? And why the picture of Jewish men in rain hats?In the Netherlands on Saturday orthodox Jews can go around without documents
The Supreme Court of the Netherlands has established a principle intended to cause controversy: religious obligation prevails over the law
Giacomo Galeazzi
Vatican City
In the Netherlands on Saturday orthodox Jews will go around without documents. In this case, the lay Supreme Court of the Netherlands has established a principle intended to cause controversy: religious obligation prevails over the law. So Orthodox Jews have been exempted from showing, at the request of the police, their identity card since this is in conflict with their religious beliefs. In fact, their religion forbids Orthodox Jews to take anything out of the house on the Sabbath. Therefore also their identity card....more
The Times article, "When Truisms are True" describes research on simple extrinsic factors that contribute to creative thinking.GRAY MATTER. When Truisms Are TrueHere is the money shot from the article:
By SUNTAE KIM, EVAN POLMAN and JEFFREY SANCHEZ-BURKS
WHAT ignites the engine of creativity? A popular metaphor in American business urges you to think “outside the box.” Folk wisdom advises that problem-solving is helped by thinking about something “on the one hand” and then “on the other hand.”
Is there any psychological truth to such metaphors for better thinking? Our research suggests that the answer is yes. When people literally — that is, physically — embody these metaphors, they generate more creative ideas for solving problems.
In another study, 40 undergraduates from the University of Michigan were asked to lift and hold a hand outstretched (as you might while addressing an audience from a stage). Some were asked to lift just one hand, while others were asked to switch between hands. While they were doing this, we asked them to generate novel uses for a new university complex. Among students who were allowed to switch hands — in other words, to think about a problem on “one hand” and then “on the other hand” — we found a nearly 50 percent increase in the number of uses generated.So as we would say, on the one hand, on the other hand, to think Talmudic, out-of-the-box you first need to have Halakhah, the box.
By showing that bodily experiences can help create new knowledge, our results further undermine the strict separation between mind and body — another box that has confined our thinking for a long time. In addition, although we’re only starting to grasp how catchphrases shape how people think, it’s possible to begin prescribing some novel suggestions to enhance creativity. For instance, if we’re performing a job that requires some “outside the box” thinking, we may have to avoid working in cubicles.
But we shouldn’t avoid cubicles altogether: to think outside the box, you first need a box.
On the face of it, "Through the Door of Life: A Jewish Journey Between Genders" (just out from University of Wisconsin Press) is the story of how Jay Ladin, the author and an English professor at Yeshiva University in New York City, transitioned into living as Joy Ladin. But it's Ladin's relationship with Judaism that anchors this book and makes it stand out.So is transgender kosher? Because it is rabbis who determine what is kosher, the official answer to the that is no, transgender is not kosher. Here is more from the review that makes clear what the situation entails.
Several weeks after she was awarded tenure, in June 2007, Ladin told the dean at Stern that she was transitioning to become female. She was kept on the payroll but forbidden to set foot on campus until September 2008, when her attorneys demanded that she be allowed to return. Since New York City prohibits the firing of employees based on gender identity, legally Y.U. had to retain Ladin on its academic staff. On her first day back at Y.U., the New York Post snapped a photo of Ladin and then published it under the headline "YE-SHE-VA." Ladin was taken to task for "sporting pink lipstick, a tight purple shirt and a flirty black skirt." In fact the shirt was not tight and the knee-length skirt was far from immodest.
At Y.U., the distinction between male and female is as absolute as that between milhig (dairy) and fleishig (meat). You can tell whether a student is female or male from a mile away, since females wear skirts, never pants, and males wear skullcaps.
"Gender is so central to tradition-based communities such as Orthodox Judaism," Ladin writes, "that it is more or less impossible for those communities to accommodate people who can't be easily identified as male or female." Ladin points out that this rigidity is hardly limited to Orthodox Judaism -- the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, for instance, welcomes only those born female -- but within Orthodox Judaism, being trans is considered sinful and amoral.
Rabbi Moshe Tendler, a senior dean at the rabbinical school, as well as a professor of biology and medical ethics, told the Post, "He's not a woman. He's a male with enlarged breasts," pointedly referencing that Ladin had been taking progesterone and estrogen to feminize her appearance. "He's a person who represents a kind of amorality which runs counter to everything Yeshiva University stands for. There is just no leeway in Jewish law for a transsexual."...
Reuven wrote to tell us "Oy Vey" that Arutz Sheva reports, "Feldheim Books In Israel in Danger of Collapse. Feldheim Publishing in Israel, which caters to the hareidi religious community, is in danger of collapse and may be bought out."Feldheim Publishing in Israel, which caters to the hareidi religious community, is in danger of collapse but may be bought out.E-books are on the way in. Amazon owns Kindle, the dominant e-books ecosystem. For Hebrew books it looks like PDF is the way to go. Reuven also sent us this announcement from Jewish E-books:
Its financial difficulties, reported Monday by B’Hadrei Haderim, are the latest in the book publishing and distributing industry that has been overwhelmed by online publishers and e-books.
Feldheim officials said it has asked for a stay in proceedings of financial claims against the company, and an industry source indicated that the Or Chaim publishing house is negotiating with Feldheim Israel to buy it out.
The stay in proceedings has not affected the operation of Feldheim’s chain of book stores, at least for the time being.
The publishing company was founded in 1939 by Philip Feldheim and now is managed by his son and grandson, who have expanded the firm. His son operates the publishing house in Jerusalem, with several bookstores in the capital city in addition to other Israeli cities with a large hareidi religious population.
Feldheim is known for publishing high-quality books on Judaica and pioneered in adding fiction and non-fiction titles that suit religious readers to its range. Its stores feature books from other publishing houses as well as its own.
The news of its financial difficulties is a blow for authors and readers for whom Feldheim has been their favorite for marketing English language books geared for the orthodox Jewish community both in Israel and in the United States and elsewhere.
“This is very sad,” one author told B’Hadrei Hareidim. “Feldheim is very well organized and a very serious company, and the book market will miss it. If it collapses, not only hundreds of workers will be affected but also thousands of readers.”
Feldheim officials confirmed to Arutz Sheva the financial difficulties at its Israeli branch and added it will decide in the next few days between several possibilities it is examining for rescuing the company.
Jewish E-Books-the most extensive Jewish digital library to date-has built a literary empire of over 1,200 English and Hebrew titles of an assortment of genres, including Judaism basics, Jewish law, Kabbalah, biographies, Jewish history, and fiction, to name a few. Representing major Jewish publishers like Feldheim, Israel Bookshop, Jerusalem Publications, Aish.com, and Sichos in English, the E-Book giant’s repertoire features bestselling Jewish authors like Akiva Tatz, Gila Manolson, Matityahu Glazerson, and Tziporah Heller.
"What makes us unique is that you can’t get our e-books on any other site," explains CEO Levy. "We’ve got classic Jewish books for half the price of hard copy."
Jewish E-Book’s Hebrew sister site, www.j-ebooks.co.il, boasts over 600 Hebrew titles-and has just went live with its one-of-a-kind Hebrew e-Book lending library.
But the e-book titan hasn’t confined itself to the bookshelf: in a trendsetting move, the company recently kicked off its Jewish E-Magazines Department, starting with the AMI e-mag-the very first Jewish digital weekly-and the Comics eMagazine for kids.
A massive breakthrough in Jewish publishing, the unprecedented partnership between Jewish E-Books and AMI Magazine inaugurates an entirely new e-mag market, setting a new standard.
"At Ami, we bring readers from all segments of Jewry a high-quality, intelligent and informative publication," says Rechy Frankfurter, senior editor at the magazine. "As part of our aim to reach a larger and more diverse readership, we’re excited to branch out with Jewish E-Books."
But more than just an e-commerce site, Jewish E-Books has used a cutting-edge business model to become a powerful marketing platform for Jewish authors and publishers. With a widespread presence on Jewish social media like Facebook and Twitter, as well its very own Jewish E-Books Blog-featuring fascinating author interviews and the latest news about Jewish books and everything Jewish, Jewish E-Books.com has become a hub of Jewish action and info, transforming the landscape of Jewish book promotion.
"We want to get the word out-big time," says CEO Levy. "We want every Jew and non-Jew-wherever they’re located-to get the Jewish books they want."
Jay Michaelson writes on RD, "Does God Want Jeremy Lin to Win?" And in the op-ed he ponders some questions about the religious sports figure of the hour.If you’ve unplugged your computer and TV for the last week, you may not have heard of Jeremy Lin, the sudden basketball phenomenon, Asian-American hero, and, like Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow before him, out-of-nowhere success story who wears his faith on his sleeve.Okay let's just stop right there.
Lin, like Tebow, is a deeply religious evangelical Christian. And while his own religious utterances have been both humble and thoughtful (Lin went to Harvard, after all), the press swirling around him has led to a spate of bad theology—which is a shame, because sports stories have the ability to capture the public imagination and have the potential to inspire us to reflect on truly important religious values, instead of truly awful ones.
The awful values, of course, have to do with theodicy: that God picks sides, and roots for one sports team over another. In the case of athletics, this belief is both ridiculous and widespread...
No, not yet. Rick Santorum is not an Israeli ultra-Orthodox Jew. He is not Jewish. He is an American Catholic politician. With a beard and a shtreimel, Santorum would be perfect for an Israeli ultra-Orthodox party
The battle over contraception and other 'culture wars' now raging in American presidential politics can make an Israeli feel right at home.
By Chemi Shalev
"Hadarat nashim", the exclusion of women, is the catchphrase that encompasses all of the recent manifestations in Israel of the attempts to distance females from sitting at the front of the bus, singing in military ceremonies, publicly accepting prizes, appearing on public billboards and what not. It's what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was talking about a few months ago when she reportedly told the Saban Forum in Washington that such things remind her of Iran.
Last week, in yet another sign of the close affinity of Republicans with Israel, "hadarat nashim" crossed the Atlantic and reached the U.S. Congress.
Representative Darrel Issa summoned an all-male panel – including an Orthodox rabbi of impeccable pedigree, Yeshiva University's Meir Soloveichik - to testify before his House Oversight Committee on the Catholic confrontation with the Administration over financing contraception for employees.
Issa refused to allow third year Georgetown University student Sandra Fluke to testify before his committee, thus providing Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman with a perfect comeback line to Clinton, who had cited Rosa Parks, the famous African-American civil rights hero, in her critical remarks about Israel in November. "At least in the Knesset, we allow women to testify," Lieberman might say.
Though there is clearly "a difference of sky and earth", as the Hebrew saying goes, between the U.S. and Israel, America's so-called "culture wars", such as those that have erupted in presidential politics in recent weeks, can sometimes make an Israeli feel right at home. The Republican battle cry that the Obama Administration is waging a "war on religion", for example, is standard operating procedure for Israel's ultra-Orthodox political parties. Hardly a day goes by without an ultra-Orthodox rabbi, leader or pundit circling the wagons and drumming up support by claiming that one secular politician or another – especially if his last name is Lapid - is waging a "war on Judaism" or "war on the haredim". And in recent days, if you close your eyes, listen to his words and conjure him with a beard and a traditional Orthodox shtreimel (fur hat) on his head, one might easily cast Republican frontrunner Rich Santorum as a leader of an Israeli ultra-Orthodox party rather than the devout Catholic that he is.
Santorum's views on contraception (wrong), abortion (never), gay marriage (no different than polygamy), homosexual relations (akin to bestiality, and traditionally punishable by death, according to the Book of Leviticus) are not much different, and, in some cases, perhaps slightly more rigid, than most Haredi politicians in Israel. Santorum's opposition to Federal and State intervention in school education is already being immaculately implemented in Israel's so-called "Independent" school system, in which religious studies are predominant and very little "secular" studies – such as math or the sciences – are allowed to get in the way. Santorum's skepticism about evolution, which he tried to translate into law in 2001 when he was the Senator from Pennsylvania, would be par for the course in ultra-Orthodox circles, where one wouldn't dare to mention the name Darwin, even in dreams.
On the other hand, and contrary to some of his Republican rivals who champion "states' rights", Santorum sees nothing wrong with federal legislation of "family values", just as Israel's religious parties have relied on Knesset laws to regulate issues ranging from marriage and divorce through working on the Sabbath all the way to pig farming. And Santorum's reference to Obama's "phony theology" is par for the course for haredi politicians who routinely describe Zionism as a "phony religion".
Of course, the critical difference between Israel and America is their drastically different political systems. American presidential candidates, if they are to win elections, have to appeal to a broad spectrum of voters, including moderate and mostly secular independents, which means that extreme conservatives such as Barry Goldwater or fanatic liberals such as George McGovern generally lose elections badly. For the same reason, many Republicans are increasingly worried that Santorum might also be too radical to beat Obama in the November elections, (although his increasingly controversial statements in recent days suggest that he's doing whatever he can to make sure that he doesn't get the nomination).
In Israel's proportional system, however, ultra-Orthodox parties don't need to pander to the general public or to bother with formulating policy on such irksome issues as the economy or national security: they can afford to think only of their own narrow constituency and its parochial interests. Given that the two main political blocs, left and right, are always short of an absolute majority, perennially at loggerheads over the "cardinal" issue of peace and territories and wouldn't trust each other if their lives depended on it, they have no choice but to rely on the religious parties to be their coalition partners. Secure in the knowledge that they will always hold the balance of power and be the kingmakers, the religious parties allow their secular colleagues to get on with their business of pretending to make peace or trying to annex the territories, whichever the case maybe, and all they ask for in return is influence, religious laws, autonomy, and enormous amounts of cash that will guarantee their predominance in a few short decades.
What saves America from this imposition of religious edicts in the public sphere is its two-party, winner take all political system. Imagine, though, that America also had a proportional system, with a staunchly social-democratic and dovish Democratic Party on the left and a fanatically free market and hawkish Republican Party on the right, both waging a never-ending political world war on the economy and America's place in the world. Now imagine that between these two poles there is a third party, a single-issue party, made up of Catholic fundamentalists and Protestant Evangelicals and perhaps even a rabbi or two thrown in for good measure, whose main raison d'etre was to eradicate godlessness and instill religiosity in American life.
Of course, the natural alliance of this third party would be with the Republicans, but if the Democrats got more votes, there is no doubt that the two sides would be able to reach an accommodation, with the Democrats being allowed to pursue their policies in exchange for far reaching concessions on abortions, say, or contraception, or religious education. If this doesn't sound plausible to you, it's because you haven't been exposed enough to the absolute cynicism of proportional coalition politics, which can make for the strangest of bedfellows (though not of the type that Santorum finds so offensive).
In any case, even in the current setup, if I were a Republican religious conservative, especially the "Jesus candidate" that Santorum has described, I would urgently dispatch an emissary or two to the courts of some of Israel's ultra-Orthodox rabbis and to the backrooms of their political representatives. If one is going to do battle in the confrontation between church and state - or synagogue and state in this case - one might as well learn from the pros who have been winning at this game for many, many years.
Quite interesting that there is an Amazon Judaism forum linked to our book pages:
Lin says in that interview that he has learned not to obsess about stats and championships. He continues, “I’m not working hard and practicing day in and day out so that I can please other people. My audience is God. ... The right way to play is not for others and not for myself, but for God. I still don’t fully understand what that means; I struggle with these things every game, every day. I’m still learning to be selfless and submit myself to God and give up my game to Him.”We've written about the "celebrity" archetype in religion, the type who proclaims "we're number one". Pretty darn close to a sports figure saying that. Only sports stars do not have to feign humility. Every religion has that quality of wanting to win, expressed in subtle and overt ways. Brooks thinks that religious people are humble and sports stars are not - or something like that, it is hard to tell what he thinks.
The odds are that Lin will never figure it out because the two moral universes are not reconcilable. Our best teacher on these matters is Joseph Soloveitchik, the great Jewish theologian. In his essays “The Lonely Man of Faith” and “Majesty and Humility” he argues that people have two natures. First, there is “Adam the First,” the part of us that creates, discovers, competes and is involved in building the world. Then, there is “Adam the Second,” the spiritual individual who is awed and humbled by the universe as a spectator and a worshipper.
Soloveitchik plays off the text that humans are products of God’s breath and the dust of the earth, and these two natures have different moral qualities, which he calls the morality of majesty and the morality of humility. They exist in creative tension with each other and the religious person shuttles between them, feeling lonely and slightly out of place in both experiences.
Jeremy Lin is now living this creative contradiction. Much of the anger that arises when religion mixes with sport or with politics comes from people who want to deny that this contradiction exists and who want to live in a world in which there is only one morality, one set of qualities and where everything is easy, untragic and clean. Life and religion are more complicated than that.
It's complicated. Yes, professional golfer Corey Pavin was born a Jew. But no, he does not practice Judaism. In religious practice he is a Born Again Christian. We don't understand how he can be a "Born Again" Christian since he was born a Jew. He is fervent in his Christianity, one of the few golfers who in interviews used to openly thank Jesus for his success on the tour.
Step right up. What a Deal! Hot New Releases. Four Kindle Talmud Tractates for 99 cents.
No, pop singer Nicki Minaj is not a Jew. She is multiracial -- of African, Trinidadian and Indo-Asian descent (Times).Catholic League takes aim at Minaj
A leading Catholic activist group is upset with Nicki Minaj for her exorcism-themed performance at the Grammy Awards, condemning the rapper for the "vulgar" sexual undertones during her set.
The Super Bass hitmaker staged a bizarre performance art show at music's big night as she debuted her new song Roman Holiday at Los Angeles' Staples Center, surrounded by dancing choir boys and a man dressed up as a priest.
The show depicted the exorcism of her alter-ego, Roman - but the elaborate set has not been well-received by Bill Donahue, the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.
In a post on the Catholic League's official website, Donahue brands Minaj a "fool" and describes his anger at one sexually suggestive part of the gig.
He writes, "Perhaps the most vulgar part was the sexual statement that showed a scantily clad female dancer stretching backwards while an altar boy knelt between her legs in prayer. Finally, Come All Ye Faithful was sung while a man posing as a bishop walked on stage; Minaj was shown levitating."
Donahue is blaming Grammy bosses for failing to put a stop to what he claims was a sacrilegious performance.
He adds, "None of this was by accident, and all of it was approved by The Recording Academy, which puts on the Grammys. Whether Minaj is possessed is surely an open question, but what is not in doubt is the irresponsibility of The Recording Academy. Never would they allow an artist to insult Judaism or Islam."
A new escalation in the current culture wars -- poster wars -- in Israel. Nude images hung in religious J'lem neighborhood
Haredi residents of Kiryat Yovel neighborhood in Jerusalem shocked to discover that paintings of nude women are hung on local bulletin boards – during Shabbat
Kobi Nahshoni
The Secular-haredi tensions over the exclusion of women reached new heights in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Kiryat Yovel where there is a growing haredi community. Local bulletin boards were recently pasted with pictures of women posing almost entirely in the nude.
The pictures were put up suring the Sabbath and included a caption that read: "The glorification of women." The haredi residents were horrified by the "abominable signs" but could not remove them because it was the holy day and doing so would involve desecrating the Sabbath.
Many signs were hung on the walls and fences of building sites in the neighborhood some with pictures of The Birth of Venus by Italian painter Botticelli, others featured the painting Two Tahitian Women by Painter Paul Gauguin.
The ANASH news website reported that the haredi residents were furious over the secular provocation which they claim, joins a series of acts of harassment against them. The secular struggle campaign headquarters made it clear they were not behind the acts – but were less than critical of the acts themselves.
Rutie Vazana, a religious resident of Kiryat Yovel told Ynet: "We immediately understood that (the acts were carried out) by the handful of secular residents campaigning against the neighborhood's "haredization."
Vazana believes beyond all doubt that the people behind the signs had no artistic or commercial intentions, their goal was to challenge the haredi population. In her opinion "it is clear that this was an intentional anti-haredi act."
She noted that as soon as Shabbat was out her husband and others removed the posters.
Ronit Gilboa from the secular struggle campaign headquarters in Kiryat Yovel said that she saw the posters in the neighborhood but had no information about the sources responsible.
Unlike the haredi residents, Gilboa found a positive aspect to the signs and said: "It was a nice decoration for the neighborhood – Gauguin and Botticelli. I'm not dissimulating; they really are beautiful works of art and are preferable to the Pashkevillim (haredi posters).
"This may be intentional secular provocation , but that's what the haredi residents do in the neighborhood every day – with their attempts to take over, their calls of 'Shabbos' and 'sluts' and by turning quiet synagogues into noisy yeshivas that operate from 5 am to midnight. The haredim have not realized that Kiryat Yovel will not surrender."
The Soncino Babylonian Talmud tractate Temurah - Kindle Edition is $.99 at Amazon.
Another new Kindle Edition from Talmudic Books: "Kosher Talmud: Babylonian Talmud Hullin" - live for sale now and available for ordering at Amazon.From Ioudaios Review. Reviewed by: Sigrid Peterson, Department of Religious Studies, University of Pennsylvania.“All may slaughter,” has to be one of the more memorable three-word opening lines ever invented – right up there with “Call me Ishmael.” While the latter is the opening to Melville’s Moby Dick, the former is less readily identifiable. In fact, the words “All may slaughter” open and form the reiterated recall to the ground theme of Tzvee Zahavy’s modern English translation of Hullin, one of the Tractates of the Babylonian Talmud. On beginning Moby Dick, I am sure I would feel conscientious and obligated and virtuous and bored. Similarly, that was my expectation in opening Hullin on preparing to review it. That expectation has been dispelled by this accessible and fascinating portrayal of the world of the rabbis.…The critical question in evaluating this work, and Z.’s contribution, is the quality of the translation. I am happy to report that it is an excellent translation. Z. has managed the difficult task of keeping to a literal rendition of the Aramaic and Mishnaic Hebrew of the original, while making excellent sense as one reads the English version alone. Often, translations of rabbinic literature represent paraphrases, and pass along the traditional meaning of a passage. This approach is extremely frustrating to one who is learning the language from an academic point of view, because words and phrases do not always mean, in the translated literature, what they seem to mean lexically. One often has the sense of being tricked.Zahavy’s translation does not perpetuate this world of special meanings that lack any correspondence with the words of the text. Nevertheless, he translates with full knowledge of those meanings, as a one-time Yeshiva University student under the late R. Soloveitchik, the celebrated posek (decider of difficult questions of Jewish law). Now, however, from his academic vantage point as a professor in the Department of Classical and Near Eastern Studies at the University of Minnesota, Z. has provided the reader with clear English equivalents of the Mishnaic Hebrew and Aramaic of the original, as well as the parenthetical comments that are necessary to translate the laconicities of the original that contribute so much to that sense that understanding the language is never enough.For example, the Mishnaic Hebrew phrase BO MISTAKEL does have the extended meaning “here is the proof,” and the Soncino edition of the Babylonian Talmud provides that translation. Z., however, translates “Come and take note.” This literal meaning becomes amply clear in the context; it is hard to see why the phrase needed to be given a special meaning over and above the literal translation.The overall excellence of Z.’s translation gains from such features of Neusner’s approach as the bracketed explanatory concepts which take the place of Soncino’s footnotes. Z. uses these conventions with extraordinary economy and respect for the text and the reader. Z. has mastered the Neusner approach, and as a result the text speaks clearly for itself and the world it portrays.Zahavy’s choices of American English equivalents are generally excellent; perhaps I was at first taken aback by his use of ‘heretics’ to translate MINIM, the word the Rabbis often used to designate Christians. After some consideration, I found that I agreed with Z.’s choice. The discussion distinguishes between Jewish and Gentile heretics with respect to the validity of their acts of ordinary slaughter (p. 72). I would have found two words, apostate and gentile, understandable in the English, yet I agree with a translation technique that finds the same equivalent for all cases, however odd the concept of Gentile heretic sounds at first.What is it about Hullin that dispelled my initial sense of obligation, virtue, and boredom? Why do such excellent work as Z.’s, to translate an ordinary collection of rabbinic discussions of minutiae? The answer lies in the content of Hullin. Come and take note.Hullin means “ordinary slaughter.” It is not until one is well into the discussion that the relationship of the book to its origins in Deut 12:21 is explored. Upon entering the land, all worship was to be in a central location, which meant that sacrificing animals for worship and food could only occur at that place. Until that point in the story, only priests could slaughter; however, priests could be found in a number of local sanctuaries. Now that the cult was to be centralized, there were no local priests to slaughter the meat, offering a portion for sacrifice, keeping a share, and returning most of the meat to the devotee upon some occasion for feasting. Now the rule would become “All may slaughter,” so that outside the designated central place people could still eat meat. The Deut 12:21 passage is cited as follows in this edition…:R. Yemar said, “The verse says, ‘[If the place which the Lord your God will choose to put his name there is too far from you], then you may kill (ZBHT), any of your herd or your flock, which the Lord your God has given you...]’I know of no one who has suggested that the intention of Hullin is to encourage vegetarianism. That may well be the effect, however, of reading through easily understandable discussions of the validity of slaughter if the knife is examined afterwards and found to be notched or nicked when the cut was made in a sawing fashion, back and forth. It is a bloody book.It is in the midst of such discussions, however, following the details of what renders meat TEREFAH, “torn” or fatally damaged in some way that would render the meat carrion, that one learns the fascinating and relevant bit of rabbinic lore that it is not a capital crime to kill someone who is terminally ill, or TEREFAH.“All may slaughter,” means women as well as men may slaughter; does it mean Samaritans, gentiles, apostates? The Mishna has already qualified the permission somewhat, in saying that the deaf-mute and the idiot and the minor may not slaughter, on the practical grounds of being unlikely to do it properly. However, if supervised, they too may slaughter. The discussions range widely and show some of the best of rabbinic thought, without omitting to display the pickiness of the issues. Yet the first word, “all,” characterizes the attempt at rabbinic inclusiveness.The portrayal in Hullin of the rabbinic world grappling with the implications of the word “all” is fascinating. A similar discussion of the extent of meaning implied by permitting “all” to do something is found at the beginning of the first volume of b. ‘Arak., 2A-2B. There the Mishna begins “All [persons] are fit to evaluate,” in the Soncino translation, or “All may pledge the Valuation [of others],” in Neusner’s translation… The discussion is confusing, however, and neither translation explains the meaning of what it is the Mishna has permitted “all” to do. Also, the discussion in b. ‘Arak. wanders around, sometimes including women and minors, sometimes excluding one or the other, in a consideration of various other occasions where “all” are permitted to do something. In contrast, “All may slaughter” is a straightforward statement that requires a minimum of social explanation for today’s reader. The discussion that ensues is straightforward enough—by rabbinic standards, that is.While the initial discussion in Hullin deals with the standard group of deaf-mutes, minors, and imbeciles, who comprise those who are excepted from mishnaic permission to slaughter, women are unequivocally admitted under the wings of the inclusive “all.” Nor does Hullin show a rabbinic discussion that is completely non-sexist, and therefore an inaccurate representation of the rabbinic world. Hullin provides insight into a world that is not hermetically sealed off from reality; that tends to prefer academic points to the close study of animal anatomy; that occasionally takes the world of women for granted; and that has a great deal of investment in determining the ethical way in which humans should proceed – in the specific case of ordinary slaughter of our food, and in the general case of the abstract consideration of “all” and its exclusions.The discussion in Hullin is simple, clear, and precise. One does not need extensive explanation of rabbinic concepts to understand and follow the discussion. I have begun to imagine using this edition of Hullin as the text for a beginning course in Rabbinic Judaism, and find myself enthusiastic about the prospects. Hullin would also work well as a text for those fascinating courses that are often listed and seldom taught, where some students are reading the original language, and some are reading an English translation.A Seminar on Christian Origins might look at Hullin in this edition to gain a preliminary understanding of a rabbinic view of Christianity. Since there is also material defining sacred and profane time, as well as grappling with the effects of idolatry and apostasy on the food supply, one might wish to use selections from Hullin in any number of approaches to the academic study of religion(s)…
The rabbi at the posh KJ synagogue on 85th street has poked his ultra-conservative head into a political fray. Here is the quintessence of how to overstate an opinion, bathing it in the waters of our finding fathers, anointing it with the oils of patriotism. Ahem. Way out of line.United We Stand for Religious FreedomHat tip to Abe, thanks.
ObamaCare's contraception mandate stands the First Amendment on its head.
By DONALD WUERL, CHARLES COLSON AND MEIR Y. SOLOVEICHIK
Stories involving a Catholic, a Protestant and a Jew typically end
with a punch line. We wish that were the case here, but what brings us
together is no laughing matter: the threat now posed by government
policy to that basic human freedom, religious liberty.
Last month the federal Department of Health and Human Services
announced that the Affordable Care Act requires employers to pay for
insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs, sterilizations and
contraception. What made the announcement especially troubling is that
HHS specifically declined to exempt religious institutions that serve
those outside their own faiths, such as hospitals and schools.
Coverage of this story has almost invariably been framed as a conflict
between the federal government and the Catholic bishops. Zeroing in on
the word "contraception," many commentators have taken delight in
pointing to surveys about the use of contraceptives among Catholics,
the message being that any infringement of religious freedom involves
an idiosyncratic position that doesn't affect that many people.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The Catholic Church's
teaching on contraception (not to mention abortion and surgical
sterilization) has been clear, consistent and public. HHS Secretary
Kathleen Sebelius's decision would force Catholic institutions either
to violate the moral teachings of the Catholic Church or abandon the
health-care, education and social services they provide the needy.
This is intolerable.
And while most evangelicals take a more permissive view of
contraception, they share with Catholics the moral conviction that the
taking of human life in utero, whether surgically or by abortifacient
drugs, violates the basic human right to life. Evangelical nonprofits
such as Prison Fellowship would therefore also have to choose between
violating their consciences or paying fines that would ultimately
destroy their ability to help the people they are committed to
helping.
Even worse than the financial impact is the breach of faith
represented by Ms. Sebelius's decision. Her notion of an "appropriate
balance" between religious freedom and "increasing access" to
"important preventive services" stands the First Amendment on its
head.
In 1790, George Washington exchanged letters with Moses Seixas, the
warden of the Hebrew Congregation of Newport, R.I. Seixas praised the
newly formed United States for "affording to All liberty of
conscience, and immunities of citizenship." People who knew all too
well what it meant to be deprived of the "invaluable rights of free
Citizens" held religious liberty and freedom of conscience most dear.
In reply, Washington wrote that U.S. citizens had a "right to applaud
themselves" for setting an example of "an enlarged and liberal policy"
that enshrined freedom of conscience. He added that the ability of
members of one faith to seek the benefit of all Americans is the
foundation of America's civic strength.
We see evidence of that strength all around us: If a working mother's
child needs to visit the emergency room, there's a good chance the
hospital is a Catholic one. If an ex-offender needs help readjusting
to life outside of prison, there's a good chance help will come from a
Christian ministry like Prison Fellowship.
Yet instead of encouraging the different faith communities to continue
their vital work for the good of all, the Obama administration is
forcing them to make a choice: serving God and their neighbors
according to the dictates of their respective faiths—or bending the
knee to the dictates of the state.
For Jews, George Washington's letter has always been cherished. It
embodies the promise extended by America not only to them, but to all
citizens. That is why many in the Jewish community are alarmed to see
the very religious freedom Washington praised centuries ago endangered
by Washington's successor. "May the children of the stock of Abraham
who dwell in this land," Washington wrote, "continue to merit and
enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants."
At this critical moment, Americans of every faith, as guardians of
their own freedom, must, in the words of the First Amendment,
"petition the government for the redress of grievances." That's why
over the past two years more than 500,000 people have signed the
"Manhattan Declaration" in defense of religious liberty. They believe,
as do we, that under no circumstances should people of faith violate
their consciences and discard their most cherished religious beliefs
in order to comply with a gravely unjust law.
That's something that this Catholic, this Protestant and this Jew are
in perfect agreement about.
Cardinal Wuerl is the archbishop of Washington, D.C. Mr. Colson is the
founder of Prison Fellowship and the Colson Center for Christian
Worldview. Rabbi Soloveichik is director of the Straus Center for
Torah and Western Thought at Yeshiva University and associate rabbi at
Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun in Manhattan.
Here is the Table of ContentsNow that's a lot of eTalmud!
Preface
Kosher Prayers
Yerushalmi Tractate Berakhot
Additional Reading
The Daily Morning Prayers
The Shema and its Blessings
The Amidah
Yerushalmi Berakhot Chapter One
Mishnah 1:1
The Right Time to Pray
What is the right way to stand and pray?
The Bedtime Shema and the Demons
Juxtaposing Rituals I
The Early Shema Reciters
Mishnah 1:2
The Shema’s Early Light
Juxtaposing Rituals II
Interrupting Your Life to Recite the Shema
Interrupting Your Studies to Recite the Shema
Mishnah 1:3
Proper Positions for Reciting the Shema
Mishnah 1:4
Why Recite the Blessings of the Shema?
The Ten Commandments are in the Shema
History of Liturgy I
Why Not Recite the Ten Commandments Every Day?
History of Liturgy II
The Blessings for Torah Study
Precedents for Exigent Circumstances
There are Long and Short Blessings
Blessings and Bowing
Praying During Praying in an Undertone
How Now to Bow?
Questions about Blessings that Begin with Blessed
One Who Erred While Reciting a Composite Blessing
Mishnah 1:5
Practices for Reciting the Exodus at Night
Mentionings in the Morning Shema and Grace after the Meal
Mentionings in the Messianic Age
Yerushalmi Berakhot Chapter Two
Mishnah 2:1
Intention for Reciting the Shema
The Protocol for Reciting the Shema
The Duration of Disruption in Rituals
The Purpose of Interrupting
Mishnah 2:2
Rules for Tefillin
More Protocols for Praying
Mishnah 2:3
Important Enunciations
The Logical Order of the Hallel Liturgy
The Logical Order of the Amidah
More on the Order of the Amidah
Focus on your Prayers
Mishnah 2:4
Focus on Praying for Householders and Workers
Focus when Praying with your Purse
Yerushalmi Berakhot Chapter Three
Mishnah 3:1
Mishnah 3:2
Protocols for Conflicting Rituals and Recitations
Mishnah 3:3
Religious Exemptions of Women, Slaves and Children
Religious Obligations of Women
Conundrums about Women’s Obligations
Other Proxy Recitation Conundrums
Various Notions about Prayer in Filthy Locations
Mishnah 3:6
Yerushalmi Berakhot Chapter Four
Mishnah 4:1
Precedents of Prayer
Derivations of Prayer
Limits of the Time Frame of Prayer
Derivations of the Time Frame of Prayer
Precedence among Prayers
Calculating the Time of Prayer
The Closing Prayer on Yom Kippur
Prayers on Coinciding Holy Days
Torah Readings on Coinciding Holy Days
Bending the Time Frame for Sabbath Prayers
Political Upheaval over the Evening Prayer
Mishnah 4:2
Prayer Versions of the Rabbis
Mishnah 4:3
Derivations of the Amidah of Eighteen Blessings
Derivations and Contents of the Amidah Variants
Mishnah 4:4
Variety in Praying
Duplication in Praying
Mistaken Praying
Digests of Praying
Insertions in Praying
Derivations for the Locus of Praying
Mishnah 4:5
Mishnah 4:6
Orientation for Praying
Mishnah 4:7
Protocols for the Additional Prayer
Repeating one’s Prayers
Yerushalmi Berakhot Chapter Five
Mishnah 5:1
Creating Serious Contexts
Redirecting Consciousness by Contemplation of Laws
Postures and Protocols of Praying
Protocols for Prayer in Synagogues
Concentration for the Amidah
Mishnah 5:2
Praying for Rain
Erring in Praying for Rain and Dew
Stories about Praying for Rain
Protocols for the Prayer of Division
Formulas and Rules for the Prayer of Division
Mishnah 5:3
What Makes the Formulas Heretical
Protocols for Replacing the Faulty Leader
Mishnah 5:4
Reciting Amen in Synagogue
Prerogatives of the Priests
Mishnah 5:5
Prayer as an Omen
Rabbi Zev Farber discusses "Desexualizing Public Space" in a column in the Jewish Journal....The concept has roots in Buddhist teachings. Just as there are forms of meditation that involve sitting, breathing, standing and walking, many Buddhist teachers encourage their students to meditate with food, expanding consciousness by paying close attention to the sensation and purpose of each morsel. In one common exercise, a student is given three raisins, or a tangerine, to spend 10 or 20 minutes gazing at, musing on, holding and patiently masticating.We disagree with the limited definition of mindful eating, as we discuss in our chapter, "The Meditator" in our recent book, "God's Favorite Prayers."
Lately, though, such experiments of the mouth and mind have begun to seep into a secular arena, from the Harvard School of Public Health to the California campus of Google. In the eyes of some experts, what seems like the simplest of acts — eating slowly and genuinely relishing each bite — could be the remedy for a fast-paced Paula Deen Nation in which an endless parade of new diets never seems to slow a stampede toward obesity.
Mindful eating is not a diet, or about giving up anything at all. It’s about experiencing food more intensely — especially the pleasure of it. You can eat a cheeseburger mindfully, if you wish. You might enjoy it a lot more. Or you might decide, halfway through, that your body has had enough. Or that it really needs some salad.
“This is anti-diet,” said Dr. Jan Chozen Bays, a pediatrician and meditation teacher in Oregon and the author of “Mindful Eating: A Guide to Rediscovering a Healthy and Joyful Relationship with Food.” “I think the fundamental problem is that we go unconscious when we eat.”...
Was Jesus Kosher? That question automatically demands an absolute answer. It's a total no-brainer. No, Jesus was not and is not Kosher. There are thousands, perhaps millions of reasons that Jesus cannot be considered kosher -- meaning in a narrow sense, "(of a person) Observing Jewish food laws" or "Satisfying the requirements of Jewish law" and in a wider sense, "proper" or "acceptable" to Jews."Boteach's latest book is apikorsus and must be treated as such," Rabbi Yitzchok Wolf of Chicago said Jan. 10, using a Hebrew word that roughly translates as heresy. Wolf said he had "utter contempt" for the idea of the book: He had only read its title.
Rabbi Jacob Immanuel Schochet wrote on an Orthodox Jewish Web site saying, based on his interpretation of Jewish law, the book "poses a tremendous risk to the Jewish community." He also said it was "forbidden for anyone to buy or read this book, or give its author a platform in any way, shape or form to discuss this topic."
The Times said Boteach was furious when he responded.
"We in the Jewish community have a choice. We can either, as has happened for 2,000 years, allow the Christian community to teach us about the Christian Christ, or we can take the initiative and the responsibility of teaching the Christian community about the Jewish Jesus. He was a Jew, after all," Boteach said.
