Different Paths

All Orthodox Jews are basically on the same page in terms of theology and practice. As I have shown in previous posts, there are differences, but what unites us is far more than what divides us. One fairly central division, however, is one of emphasis more than substance. The differences may seem huge, but the argument is not about the destination, but rather about which route is best to arrive at that destination.
We all acknowledge the centrality of Torah study. For some , all else pales in comparison. One Talmudic rabbi who emphasized study said to a colleague who spent the greater part of the day in prayer "You neglect Eternal Life for the needs of temporal life!" Those who take this approach are careful to observe the Mitzvot (commandments), but see study as the ultimate way of finding G-d. One group even says that study is NOT for knowledge, but the ACT of studying is the ultimate connection with G-d. One twentieth century advocate of this view was once sitting and studying while the congregation was dancing with the Torah scrolls on Simchat Torah. A student came up to him and asked "Rabbi aren't you going to dance?" he responded "I AM dancing".
Another approach is to see learning as important, but observance of the mitzvot in the strictest and grandest way possible is the ultimate connection with G-d. Holding on to a mitzvah, is to "grasp the King through his garments". Let's do that as well and as beautifully as possible. This image is found in the Tanya, the central work of Chabad Chassidism.
Rabbi Nachman of Breslov disagreed with this. he felt that stringencies led to depression. No human being can do ANYTHING perfectly. He commanded his followers to avoid stringencies. He said that the only part of the mitzvah that can be perfect is our DESIRE. Fulfill the letter of the law, as spelled out in the Shulchan Aruch, but put your all into connecting to G-d through the mitzvah.
The Ari (Rabbi Isaac Luria) said that he age of depth in study had passed. We are in an age where prayer is our main connection. Slow, meditative prayer, struggling within ourselves to have mastery over our inner forces, is the ultimate connection with G-d. We soar both inner space and "outer space". We need to study, we need to perform mitzvot, but prayer is the key.
Rabbi Yoel of Satmar, commenting on the Talmudic dictum "The world stands on three things; Torah, Divine Service, and acts of loving kindliness" There were three eras in Divine service; the era of Torah study, when there were scholars of immense proportions who found G-d in every crown of every letter, the era of intense, transcendent prayer, as described by the Ari, and the era of loving kindness, where our primary connection to G-d is by helping others.He felt that in our era, although we must study and pray as best we can, the emphasis must be on helping the poor, they sick, the orphan. He set up vast charity institutions on this basis.There have been times in my life where I was the beneficiary of these institutions.
So, are we really at odds? No! We seek G-d. We try to do His will. Which is the best road? We have different paths to the same goal!

Fruit

The Lubavitcer Rebbe said that man can live very well on bread, meat, vegetables, etc. However, one thing will be missing; sweetness! Therefore G-d gave us fruit to enjoy. (The rabbis of the Talmud state that one will be rebuked in the Heavenly court for each fruit that he abstained from enjoying.)
He said the same is with Judaism. One may study Tanach, Talmud, Halachah, but lack the sweetness. One needs to pursue those Torah studies that inspire and make sweet, along with the "basic nutrition" of those aspects that make up the framework of our actions.

Tu B'Shvat

Back in the early '70s, I heard a very amusing radio commercial. I think it was for a chewinggum company. In the ad, a very zealous worker runs into his employer's office, shouting "Boss! I found a location for our new ad campaign., there's a place in the Fiji Islands that looks just like Columbus, Ohio!" The boss asks "then why not just go to Columbus, Ohio?" The employee says "Oh..." and walks out sheepishly.
Tonight is Tu B'shvat, the New Year of the Trees. Why is there a New Year of the trees? There are many laws in the Torah relating to trees, tithes and produce that are determined by the age of the tree, or the year of the produce having been planted. Just as in our day, every race horse's age is measured from January 1st (a horse born a day earlier, or 364 days earlier will be considered one year old on January 1st), trees are considered a year older on Tu B'shvat, which is when the sap begins flowing towards the end of the Mediterranean winter, and the almond trees begin to blossom. It is a holiday that is technical, rather than festive or commemorative. There is no traditional ceremony marking Tu B'Shvat. The early Israeli pioneers made it a tree-planting holiday, but this was new. Moreover, agrarians have pointed out that trees need to be planted in the Israeli environment at the beginning of Winter, so as to have the benefits of an entire season of rain. 
However, the followers of the sinister Shabbatean heresy of the 17th century saw a parallel between eating fruit, and the descent into evil that was at the center of their cult. Some fruits are eaten in their entirety. Some are eaten and an inside pit is left behind. But some (especially nuts) are eaten by penetrating their shell. This fit with the bizarre Shabbatean concept of Sacred Sin. Man had gone as far as he could by avoiding sin. Now it was time to go into sin to find G-d! They devised a Tu B'Shvat "seder" to celebrate this concept. They first ate fruits entirely edible, then with pits inside, then various kinds of nuts. Forty-nine species in all! With the decline of Shabbateanism, this ceremony nevertheless continued in certain Middle Eastern Jewish communities. Some rabbis opposed it because of its origins. Some felt that since no one is thinking about its sectarian content, there was no harm in a fruit celebration. In the 1970s, "New Age" Jewish groups popularized this ceremony, and it is now a staple in many Jewish communities. It is seen as the holiday to celebrate the Earth, and to consider the meaning of ecology from a Jewish perspective.
But does Judaism lack such a holiday? The Biblical Sukkot holiday comes just before Israel's rainy season. We leave our homes and live in huts called "sukkot", covered with vegetation. This symbolizes our wandering in the wilderness, under divine protection. It also shows that the world is a temporary dwelling. We pray for rain, waving four species of vegetation symbolizing different types of people, and the dependence of all on the G-d sent rain. The Prophets speak of all nations coming to Jerusalem to celebrate Sukkot. Here we have it all! Ecology, the connection of Man and the Earth, the eventual unity of all men. Yet, in most non-Orthodox communities, Sukkot is little more than a children's festival. In the Bible and Talmud, it is often simply called "Chag" "Holiday". it is THE holiday! At the end of Sukkot we complete our annual cycle of Torah reading and begin again. The cyclical nature of life is acknowledged and celebrated. The relegating of Sukkot to a back burner, and trying to find its message in a heretical ceremony is an exercise in futility. it's looking for Columbus, Ohio in the Fiji Islands. Judaism contains everything for all people. Let's open our eyes, rather than groping in the dark

The Halachic Process Part 3

In my last post, I left a number of issues unanswered. These may seem very minor, but, in fact, have far reaching implications.
In our dairy frying pan, we acknowledged that if the pan had been used for hot dairy in the last 24 hours, and i put a steak in it, both steak and pan are  non-kosher. if more than 24 hours have passed, the steak will be kosher, but the pan is forbidden, and needs to be koshered. But what if the pan is not completely clean, and residues of dairy remain? Here we have varying views, but first some background information.
The question is raised in the Talmud if soil is considered non-kosher. After all, every bit of it contains the decayed remains of innumerable insects and other animals. The conclusion is that once they cease to be in an edible form, there is no prohibition. Now, we must distinguish between two situations. A non-kosher animal is forbidden unless totally inedible. If edible with difficulty, it remains forbidden to eat, but will not make something else non-kosher. Most Sephardic rabbis consider it only a problem if it imparts a GOOD taste. If it imparts NO taste, it isn't a problem. Most Ashkenazic rabbis feel that it is forbidden unless a BAD taste is imparted. This is the background of debates about non-kosher ingredients in a food which give no taste, such as colorings, stabilizers, thickeners, etc.Some rabbis consider these tasteless, chemically altered substances as of no significance. Others say hey, it's a non-kosher product, which doesn't negatively affect the taste, and hence still a problem. The major kashrut services in the U.S. do not permit these products to be used. The ones in Israel do, with the exception of the Hareidi (so called "Ultra Orthodox") groups. Some companies in Israel actually put out two lines of products, one "kosher" and one "mehadrin" (extra strict, literally "beautified"). So getting back to our pan, some rabbis would take the view that as long as the residue was edible, it is still a factor. Others would say that once it is dried out and tasteless, it could not render anything else non-kosher. Some of the latter even go so far as to say that if it has been washed with soap or detergent, that it can be assumed to impart a bad taste.
A related debate concerns gelatin. Most gelatin is made from calf skins and pig bones. In some countries, horse skin and bones are used. (Please note that there is kosher gelatin that is made from fish or sea weed). The forbidden substances are placed in an acid bath. At that point they are tasteless, odorless and colorless. Some rabbis consider them permissible at that point. Even if later made edible by the addition of sugar and other flavorings. we are simply making a non-food into an indigestible item. Two major Israeli rabbis. Rabbi Tzvi Pesach Frank (long time rabbi of Jerusalem) and Rabbi Ovadia Yosef (former Chief Rabbi and leader of most Sepharadic Jews worldwide) both permitted gelatin. Rabbi Ovadia even called the non-consumption of gelatin an "excessive stringency". The policy of the Israeli rabbinate is to permit gelatin, except on products labeled "mehadrin". In the United States, however, nearly all Orthodox Ashkenazi rabbis forbid gelatin. Rabbi Aaron Kotler, the dean of the renowned Lakewood (N.J.) Yeshiva, forbade it completely. His primary argument was that it is a component of the original animal (collagen), which has been little changed. He compared it to a concept called "achshaveih" ("he considered it"). In the laws of the great fast of Yom Kippur, when no food or water may be consumed for nearly 25 hours, the questioned is raised, what if a person, in an attempt to assuage his hunger, ate a non-food item,. like pebbles or wood? The Talmud answers that even though these items are not food, his thoughts of considering it food make it so, and therefore he has transgressed the rules of Yom Kippur. Rabbi Kotler reasoned that it is the same with kashrut. If I took a pig, and burned it to a crisp, it is indeed not food. But if I proceed to eat it, I an CONSIDERING it as food! Most Hareidi rabbis accepted this reasoning, and forbade gelatin. Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, considered by many to be the outstanding halachic decisor of the 20th century, considered this doubtful. But it is a doubt in a Biblical law, which requires us to be strict. Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchic, the doyen of Modern orthodoxy in the U.S., agreed with this reasoning, except in regard to medications, where one is not "considering" it to be food, and therefore it is permissible. The bottom line is that very few American Orthodox rabbis, whether Hareidi or Modern, approve the use of gelatin. No major American kashrut agency approves it. Many American Sepharadic rabbis do permit it, deferring to the opinion of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef. One prominent American Sephradi rabbi, Rabbi Yitzchak Abadi, has written and spoken extensively that gelatin, and other animal derivatives that have lost the status of food, are totally permissible. (Full disclosure: I am related to him, as one of my son-in-law is his great nephew). His sons even run a website promoting his viewpoints. However, when travelling to different countries, one encounters different stances from the local rabbis, on this, and many other questions.
Again, I am not writing all of this to take sides (although you can probably guess where I stand). I am merely trying to show that seemingly simple questions are actually complex, and that all opinions rely on sources and their interpretation. Occasionally, we will encounter rabbis who are NOT source based, but rely on local tradition, or even their "gut feelings". I do not consider these valid approaches, and such rabbis should be avoided. We must bear in mind the admonition of our sages "Make for yourself a teacher...", and remember the Biblical injunction "Know Him in all your ways". Every aspect of life is to be sanctified by the awareness of G-d.

Sweeten the Waters

In this weeks's Torah portion, we have an unusual incident, where shortly after the Splitting of the Sea, the people saw that they were without water. The grumbled against Moses, whereupon G-d showed Moses a tree, which, when thrown into the bitter lake before them, turned the waters sweet. The question is asked, why does the Torah criticize the people their grumbling? Isn't thirst in the middle of a desert a good reason to grumble? Rabbi Isaac Meir of Gur suggests as follows: The Torah first says (Exodus 17:1-2) that they had no water to drink and they fought with Moses. The next verse says that they were thirsty, and they complained bitterly. The sequence was that FIRST they SAW the lack of water, and began to doubt G-d and Moses. THEN they became thirsty, and all the stops were out. They were angry and argumentative before the problem began! . When the problem actually began, they were angry and rebellious beyond any proportion! What should they have done? When the problem was only apparent, they should have taken counsel with Moses. and proceeded to pray. Long before they had become thirsty, the problem would have been solved. Instead, the problem became an emergency even before they were faced with the problem. Once in the midst of it, they felt hopelessly trapped.
When I lived in Israel, I taught sofrim (scribes). Each letter must be perfect. Some imperfections render the writing invalid, others are still passable. I always told my students, when they saw a problem, to put a pencil mark next to it, and come back to it in half an hour. The more one looks at the problem, it will undoubtedly get worse by the minute. Concentrate on what MAY be wrong, and it WILL become horribly wrong. We need to think, pray, trust, and see things in proper proportion. The waters WILL become sweet

The Halachic Process Part 2

In Part 1, I showed how rabbinic experts deal with different facets of questions, I will now take a typical question which a rabbi will be asked on a regular basis, show the Talmudic and other halachic considerations involved, as well as various viewpoints that must be considered. Although I will use an example from the laws of Kashrut, the same could apply to literally thousands of topics. My intent is not to make a ruling here, but to show why I and the many other rabbis don't make public rulings, and recoil at halachic pronouncements made by laymen. (Few things raise my blood pressure more than "I was told", or "I heard". From whom, and on what basis?) Only highly qualified rabbis may rule in these matters.
Question: "Rabbi, I fried a steak this morning. Soon after I put it on the fire, I realized that I was using a dairy pan. What do I do?"
Now this is a frequent occurrence.Few people realize that the halachic considerations are so complex, that in secular studies one could write a doctoral thesis on the topic.
First, some background information. When we speak of Biblical law, we don't necessarily mean that it is in the Bible. Almost no law is spelled out in the Bible, and the details are given in the Oral Law. The Torah, in three separate passages forbids cooking a "kid in its mother's milk". We have by tradition that the Torah here means three separate things; a prohibition of cooking the meat of a kosher mammal in milk (even if we have no intention of eating it), a prohibition of eating that which has thus been cooked, a prohibition of having benefit of such a dish; as in selling it or burning it for fuel. We regard all three as Biblical; the tradition reveals to us what the Torah means. The rabbis made a "fence around the Torah", forbidding the eating of meat and milk in the same meal, even if not cooked together. Custom beyond the law requires waiting a period of time after a meat meal before eating dairy. Customs vary from one to six hours. Since rabbinic law is also a feature of the Torah (Deut. 17:8-13), it must be strictly observed as well. However, an exception is made in case of doubt. In a Biblical law we must be strict, in rabbinical law we may, in a case of doubt, be lenient. In the case of custom, it should be observed. However, there is room to allow its non-observance in an emergency situation. Most rabbis will, for instance, allow a nursing mother to drink milk after waiting only an hour after meat.
Now, what about utensils? That utensils must be kosher, or made kosher if they became non-kosher, is Biblical (Numbers 31:21-23). Anything that became non-kosher through fire (broiling, grilling) must be passed through fire, Anything made non kosher in water (boiling) must be boiled. There is NO BASIS for the often heard folklore custom of burying a utensil overnight. However, a utensil can only make food cooked in it non-kosher if it imparts a good taste. A piece of pork which is slightly rancid will remain non-kosher as long as it is in any way edible. If slightly rancid pork fell inadvertently into my kosher chicken soup, it will impart a bad taste. The pork may be removed and discarded, and the chicken soup remains kosher. The rabbis received by tradition that after 24 hours, the taste absorbed in a utensil will be unpleasant, and therefore unable to impart a good taste. Biblically, at that point, it would no longer requite burning or boiling, but could be used as is. The rabbis made a rabbinic ruling that even after 24 hours we should burn or boil it, so as not come to use an un-kashered utensil within 24 hours by mistake. However, if 24 hours have past, and I inadvertently used the utensil without kashering it, it would still, even by rabbinic law, not render the food non-kosher. In some cases, the utensil WILL be rendered non-kosher by rabbinic law. So, in the above case, if the pan had been used within twenty four hours for dairy, and then I cooked meat in it, both the pan and the meat will be rendered non-kosher. The meat will be discarded, and the pan will need to be made kosher, either by burning or boiling, depending on if there was some liquid in the pan. If the pan had NOT been used in 24 hours for dairy, the steak would be kosher, and the pan would need kashering by rabbinic law. If the pan and food were not yet hot (how hot is a subject of debate. I go by 130 degrees Fahrenheit (54 C); many go by higher or lower temperatures), there is no problem. Rinse the pan out with cold water and all is well. So, when the question is posed, I will need to ask "when was the last time the pan was used for dairy? How hot did it get?" But wait. What if the pan was not completely clean? What if there were residues of last week's cheese omelet? What if I used my neighbor's pan, and there were residues of pork? How might these rules apply to factory made food, where I don't know when the last time the equipment was used for dairy...or non-kosher food? These topics and their implications will be the topic of my next post.