Passover 28

The Eighth Day of Passover has no special rules. It might even seem anticlimactic. But Jewish tradition, and especially Hasidic Tradition, has made it into a climax. As I pointed out in one of my posts about the Seder, although the immediate emphasis is on past events, the future is also a factor. (Next Year in Jerusalem!). Prayers for the restoration of the Temple are also present. The Eighth Day is the flip side of this, when the historical makes way for the history that is yet to be. The Prophetic reading (Haftarah) prescribed in the Talmud for that day is Isaiah 11 and 12, which speaks of the coming of the Messiah (although the word is not actually used); a descendant of David, who will gather in the exiles from all lands, and reunite the alienated portions of our people. Peace will reign. From a Jewish standpoint, this is THE central Messianic prophecy; a great Prophet and Teacher, who will gather the exiles, and usher in a period of universal Peace. Any claimant to that title must fulfill these things, or is simply to be regarded as an imposter. One of the frustrations of our long exile is not only that the Messiah has not yet arrived, but that strangers sit on his throne. As far as Jewish tradition goes, that reading from Isaiah tells it all. We are being reminded not to lose hope, Deliverance is coming. Hasidic tradition took this much further. Every holiday would conclude with a meal (or other celebration) extending into the night after the festival. This was at once to savor another hour or two of the joyous occasion but was also seen as "illuminating the darkness" ahead, with the light of the Holy Day. (This has long been a feature in most communities for the end of Shabbat). But the last day of Passover is different. Many Hasidic communities call this "The Meal of the Mashiach". The Rebbes encourage their flock to keep faith strong. The Egyptian Exile had lasted for centuries, and when Moses announced that deliverance was here, few believed him. The reality of deliverance is emphasized. Chabad Hassidim actually drink four cups of wine at this meal. At the Seder, these symbolized the past redemption. But now, they are a symbol of a new deliverance that is surely coming. Often, a famous letter, purportedly from the Baal Shem Tov, written to his brother in law, Rabbi Gershon Kitover, describing a vision he had had, is discussed. In this vision, the Baal Shem Tov saw the Messiah. "When are you coming?" he asked. The Messiah responded "when your wellsprings overflow into the world". In other words, when a more spiritual understanding of Judaism, as taught by Hasidism, is accepted, Mashiach will come. Historians doubt the authenticity of this letter, but its message rings true nevertheless. These are, to say the least, comforting words. It is interesting to note that Moroccan Jews have a similar institution called the Mimouna. It is held the night after Passover. Hametz food is served, especially traditional pastries, and fried wraps called mufletas, which the participants fill with either jam or butter and honey The rabbis speak words of encouragement and faith. (Mimouna is derived from the Arabic word for "Faith"). The tradition is rapidly spreading to other communities. Should you walk by a Mimouna celebration, you can expect to be dragged in, dressed in North African garb, and stuffed until you can hardly walk.There are culinary differences for the Hasidim as well on the Eight Day. As I have discussed earlier, most Hasidim observe a tradition of not eating matzah that has become wet. (No matzah balls, etc). This is known as gebruchs. This has little (if any) halachic basis, and was denounced and mocked by non-Hasidic rabbis for many years. (I do not observe this, and urge others not to follow this absurd stringency). Today,however, it has become almost standard in most ultra-Orthodox communities. For seven days, the matzah is kept covered on the table, for fear that a crumb might fall into the soup. But on the Eight Day, not only is wet matzah permitted, but it becomes a sort of ritual. In some groups, a huge bowl of soup is brought to the table, with forty-nine matzah balls in it. The number forty-nine is an obvious reference to the Omer period. The Omer, brought on the second day of Passover, consisted of barley, which was primarily an animal food. After the Omer period, on the holiday of Shavu'ot. two loaves of hametz wheat bread were offered. This is a symbol of transformation. The transition from no wet matzah, to the deliberate, ceremonial wetting of the matzah, has many interpretations. But most obvious is the transformation from a strictness born of concern for possible transgression (no matter how unlikely), to a confidence that we live under Divine Providence, where soon even the dreaded hametz will become not only permissible, but an actual Divine service. Oppression shifts to Redemption. Next year in rebuilt Jerusalem!

Biblical New Year? Not in my Bible!

In some heretical Jewish sects, and especially in their online versions, one sees the New Moon of Nisan referred to as Biblical New Year. The supposed basis for this assertion is Exodus 12:2 "This month will be for you the first of months". Indeed, the months of the Jewish calendar are numbered from Nisan (called in the Torah "The Month of Spring"). People are often confused when they find out that Rosh HaShana, the "real" Jewish New Year" is in the seventh month! Yet, we never find the first of Nisan referred to in Scripture as the "new year", nor do we find any special observances for this New Moon more than the others. The sacrifices of the Temple were the same. No special ceremonies were ordained to mark this New Moon more than others. The problem here is that New Year has a totally different meaning in the context of Torah, from our modern concept of celebrating January 1st. The New Year, or, more correctly, the New Years, are the dates marking shifts in status of various things. A modern example is that racehorses, when said to be two or three years old, are counted from January 1st. A horse born anytime between January 2nd to December 31st, becomes one year old on January 1st. Similarly, in the Jewish calendar, we have four such "New Years".The first of Nisan is the New Year for dating the reign of Kings, and for setting the order of festivals. Therefore, Passover, which occurs in Nisan, is considered the first festival of the year. The first of Elul is the New Year for tithing animals. One may not tithe animals of different ages together. Like the racehorses, their age is determined by the first of Elul. This, too, has no special ceremonies. The first of Tishri, which we actually call "Rosh HaShana", establishes the years for Sabbaticals and Jubilees, agricultural cycles of grains and vegetables, as well as the Divine Judgement, made for every person. It is not so much a day of celebration, as of introspection. The Torah calls it "the Day of Remembrance". We find the month of Tishri, the Seventh Month, referred to as the New Year twice in Scripture. One time is in Exodus 34:22, with the Sukkot holiday (which occurs in the Seventh Month) referred to as "the Feast of the Harvest, at the return (renewal) of the year". In Ezekiel 40:1, the prophet speaks of a revelation on "Rosh HaShana, at the tenth of the month". The Tenth of Tishri is Yom Kippur. There is no special observance connected with the tenth of Nisan. The fourth Rosh Hashana is the fifteenth of Shevat, the New Year of the Trees, when the trees are considered one year older, which has implications for tithing of fruit, as well as fixing the first three years of a tree's life, when its fruit is forbidden ('orlah). Sabbatical year laws regarding fruit are also dependent on the fifteenth of Shevat. It should be noted that the years marked on the Jewish calendar today, originate from a Second Century work called "Seder Olam". Before that, years were marked by the reigns of Kings, later replaced in most Mediterranean lands by years marked from the reign of Alexander the Great. This was the dating system in force in Talmudic times, and is still used by the Yemenites. Other Jewish communities employ the system of the Seder Olam. Each of these days is significant. But only the First of Tishri is marked by special observances, and has become known as Rosh HaShana.

CREDO

"Credo" (I believe) is a major part of every Church service in traditional Christianity. One of the first parts of the service is the recitation of one or more "creeds"; basic beliefs of the Church, formulated mostly in the fourth century. The worshiper must recite, and subscribe to, these basic tenets. In Islam as well, there is the "Shohada", the declared belief that there is no deity but Allah, and Mohammed is his messenger. In fact, conversion to Islam only involves the recitation of the seven words of the Shohada before witnesses. We search in vain for a Jewish equivalent to either of these. Although some basic ideology is present in both the Tanach and the Talmud, is not systematized in either work. Yes, certain Talmudic rabbis put forth some ideas that are "bedrock", but even most of these are challenged by other Talmudic rabbis. With the exception of the existence of G-d, no other Jewish idea (that I can think of) has gone unchallenged within Judaism. Classical Judaism refrains from conceptualizing and fixing dogma. In Leviticus 19 and 20, we have a parshah named "Kedoshim" (Holy). It opens "Be Holy, for I, the L-rd you G-d, am Holy". We would expect an explanation defining "Holiness". We do not find it. Instead, we meet a list of observances, that go from "Love thy neighbor", all the way to a prohibition of cross dressing. The message is "we don't define holiness. The way of life of the Torah will teach you what holiness is all about. Keep these rules. Make them part of your life. Words are cheap".It is only after the rise of the Karaite heresy in the seventh century, that Judaism had to define itself, in order to defend itself. Rabbis penned works of philosophy, theology, and apologetics, in order to defend the faith. Some limited their sources to Tanach and Talmud. Many relied more on Greek philosophy, which was widely accepted in intellectual circles, in order to defend the Torah. Here we are faced with an unanswerable dilemma. Often, these works take an Aristotelian (more rarely Platonic) interpretation of the Torah, and come to far reaching conclusions that are incompatible with the simple meaning of Scripture, or the express views of Talmudic rabbis. Did the authors of these works really mean what they wrote, or were they being less than candid in order to save Judaism from strange views, whether Karaite, Islamic or Christian? I have in my possession a book written by a contemporary rabbi, based on the idea that the Big Bang theory justified the Biblical narrative of Creation. His ideas are quite brilliant, actually. However, one of my daughters-in-law had that rabbi as a High School teacher. In class, he lectured extensively against his own words, urging simple faith, without recourse, or even reference, to science. Tempers will flare when we bring this discussion to RAMBAM. In his legal work, he rarely says anything contrary to Biblical and rabbinic theology. His philosophical work, on the other hand, is replete with statements that contradict both Scripture and rabbinics, to the extent that one eighteenth-century rabbi refused to believe that the same man had authored both books, declaring the philosophical one to be a forgery. In his legal works, RAMBAM outlines "Thirteen Principles of Faith". These are somewhat curious, as they contain elements not mentioned in earlier sources, and therefore could hardly be considered to be our Credo. However, in his philosophical work, he demonstrates that he, himself, founded some of these principles. They are, shall we say, other than bedrock. Was he being untruthful in his legal works, in order to win the hearts and minds of the masses, or was he fooling the non-believers, by using their own heresy or secularism, against them? For example, his legal code goes into great detail on how the sacrifices are to be performed; even how may Priests carry various limbs onto the altar. In his commentary to the Mishnah, he blasts those who doubt that sacrifices will return., In his philosophical "Guide", he says that G-d does not desire sacrifice, and the Torah only included it as a concession to the norms of the day. (This, despite the fact that two thirds of the laws of the Torah relate to sacrifice). In any case, before the Shabbatean debacle of 1666, philosophy was the province of an intellectual elite. Most Jews either performed the mitzvot simply, or else delved into the mysteries of the Kabbalah (which I contend were the original, albeit not widely known, tenets of Judaism). When many communities jettisoned Kabbalah after 1666, they turned to philosophy. The prose exposition of RAMBAM's thirteen principles is printed in most prayer books, although I have never witnessed their public recitation. The poetic form of the thirteen principles, "Yigdal", is sung in many communities, but few realize that this was meant as a Credo rather than just a hymn. Judaism, then, is not committed to a Credo, but rather to a way of life, connecting us with G-d. There may be many approaches, all valid. (Another reason I dislike ArtScroll, which paints a very narrow view of matters that are vaster than the sea). I find greatest meaning in the understanding of the Kabbalists and the Hasidic Masters, especially Rabbi Nachman. Others may find inspiration elsewhere. That is fine, and as it should be. In the words of the Talmud "every river takes its own course".

Shabbat, Sepharadi Style part 9

It is forbidden to heat water on Shabbat to the point that one could be scalded. There are different estimates of how hot that is, but scientifically, that is between 130 and 140 degrees Fahrenheit (54-60 C). One may not wash in water that has been heated to that level  on Shabbat, or even drink it. If it was heated before Shabbat, one may only wash their hands, face and feet with it; not the entire body. What about the hot water in my sink or shower? Logically, it should be forbidden. The water in the boiler was heated before Shabbat, and should then be suitable for the limited washing mentioned above. But once a sensor "notices" that the water level has dropped, cold water enters the boiler to be heated. I am therefore "cooking". Besides this, when the water temperature falls below a certain point, a flame goes on to reheat the boiler. Perhaps I caused that to happen by removing some hot water, thus allowing in the cold. In light of all of this, most Ashkenazim will not touch the hot water faucet on Shabbat at all. Many Sepharadim have also accepted this approach. However, a very distinguished minority of Sepharadic rabbis has challenged this. Firstly, it is a long accepted practice to heat a mikveh, even on Shabbat. How? No one is heating it! A thermostat controls the temperature automatically. Any human influence on that process is a very indirect causation. Rav Moshe Feinstein suggested that the person entering such a mikveh should have in mind not to enjoy the heat. Therefore, the "distinguished minority" I spoke of permits, especially in cases of illness or great discomfort, the use of hot water for bathing, showering, or any other similar usage. (I am speaking of a hot water system employing a boiler. The type of system where water is heated instantly, as it comes out of the cold water pipe, being more direct, is much more problematic.) Rav Yitzchak Abadi goes a step further. If the thermostat is set for well under 130 degrees, the water never actually "cooks", and may be used freely, even where no minor emergency exists. Therefore, many Sepharadic Jews freely shower on Shabbat morning, and see it as part of the mitzvah of honoring the Shabbat. This is also my practice. Although some object to the washing of hair on Shabbat, even most Ashkenazim permit it if patted dry with a towel, rather than being wrung out. Many Sepharadim are far more lenient, understanding the admonition found in some sources that one may not wash hair as referring to a hair garment, not hair still attached to a living person, which should be viewed as any other part of the body.. As mentioned earlier, Sepharadim have no problem with solid soap. Sepharadic rules of the Shabbat, as well as other areas, differ on key points. Let's see what those are.
1.For Ashkenazim, Minhag (custom) is a major factor in determining halachah. For most Sepharadim, (other than North Africans), this is not the case. Most follow the ruling of RAMBAM that customs later than about 400 ce have no validly, and even then, no custom can uproot a halachah,but only add to it. Although this is challenged in the Jerusalem Talmud, it is bedrock in the Babylonian, which we follow.
2. Ashkenazi rulings are often personality based. ("Rabbi so and so ruled this way. Therefore it's what we do"). Sepharadim will examine both the logic of a rabbi's ruling, as well as its fidelity to sources. 
3.Svara (Theoretical constructs). Ashkenazi poskim will often base a decision on a theory; as in the case of the tea leaves we discussed earlier. Heated leaves that are wilted, are considered "cooked" in the laws of tithes. Therefore, why not apply this to the laws of Shabbat? Sepharadim will need a textual basis for such a far reaching  conclusion. 
4. All agree that we have no authority to make new halachic decrees after the last Sanhedrin. Many Ashkenazim will nevertheless say of a new situation, that had the Sanhedrin known about it,they would have issued a ban, so we must even now consider it banned. The "logic" of this leaves Sepharadim scratching their heads. 
5. There is a concept of "halachha k'batrai (the halachah follows the later authority). RAMBAM limits this to opinions only of Talmudic rabbis. (Until about 400 ce). Ashkenazim will prefer a 20th century rabbinic opinion to a twelfth century rabbinic opinion; a rabbi in Brooklyn trumps RAMBAM.. 
Sadly, many Sepharadic rabbis have been heavily influenced by Ashkenazi opinion. This is especially true since the passing of Rav Ovadia Yosef in 2013. I see no figure of stature on the horizon to "return the Crown to its former glory." I wait and pray. 
The ways of the Torah are "ways of pleasantness".Enjoy your Shabbat.

Shabbat, Sepharadi Style part 8

Wait, did I say at the end of my last post that we should have some tea? Wow, does that open a can of worms! How shall we make it? I have discussed in other posts, that ,in the laws of Shabbat, a vessel cooking over the fire is a "kli Rishon" (first vessel). Theoretically, we may put into it any dry, fully cooked food. But most avoid doing this. Anything not fully cooked will become cooked in a kli rishon, thus violating Shabbat. If we pour the water from a kli rishon into another vessel (kli sheni; second vessel), according to the vast majority of authorities, no further cooking takes place. However, the boiling water coming out of a kli rishon, before it comes to rest in the kli sheni, still can "cook", at least by rabbinic law. Since there is "no cooking after cooking", a Sepharadi will not hesitate to pour boiling water over coffee, which has, of course, been roasted. An Ashkenazi will never do this, as they fear we do not know if the principal of "no cooking after cooking", also applies to roasted, baked, fried, etc. Sepharadi eyes roll at this point. In the kli sheni, we may place anything...probably. In a totally different area of halachah, in the laws of tithes, we find an idea that one cannot take tithes from cooked food on raw food, or vice versa. Thus, carrots grown in Eretz Yisrael, if raw, can only be tithed with raw carrots. But how do we define raw? If they were heated, until they appear cooked, they are cooked. This would apply even in a kli sheni. So, since a kli sheni will make certain foods appear cooked, especially thin leaved vegetables. perhaps we need to apply this to Shabbat as well? Most Ashkenazi rabbis do, in fact, apply this to leafy vegetables and herbs. They insist on placing these foods into a kli shlishi (third vessel), before putting in hot water. One seventeenth century posek even wrote that anyone avoiding putting ANYTHING into a kli sheni "will be blessed". (One early twentieth century posek wrote that although this makes little sense, it's worth it to be strict, in order to receive that rabbi's blessing.) Some Sepharadic poskim are also hesitant to put leafy foods into a kli sheni, but most see no relationship between the principal of tithing, and the laws of Shabbat. Tea leaves, although they have been heated as part of the drying process, are not actually "cooked". The degree of heat is generally under the temperature needed to "cook". Therefore, most Sepharadim will put a tea bag into a kli sheni (into which the water has already been poured). Most Ashkenazim will insist on a kli shlishi. Some will argue that even this may be problematic, and prepare, before Shabbat, a tea "essence", to be mixed with hot water in a kli shlishi. So, if you are following Ashkenazi practice, pour the water into a kli sheni, then into a kli shlishi, and put in your tea bag, or, better yet, use tea "essence", and enjoy.If you are following Sepharadi halachah, pour the hot water into a kli sheni, then feel free to add whatever you wish. Rav Ovadia Yosef writes at length that it is permitted, but qualifies his ruling with a "better not to". I do not know if he meant that for real, or if it was merely a nod to Ashkenazi sensibilities. I, personally, will place a tea bag into a kli sheni. Now. let's have that cup of tea, and please squeeze some lemon into it.

Shabbat, Sepharadi Style part 7

Since we have enjoyed out gefilte fish, how about a salad? If we are Ashkenazi, not so simple. If vegetables need to be peeled, we run into the issue of "borer". Even if we determine that peeling a vegetable is NOT borer, the halachah stipulates that most permissible preparations, cannot be performed with "a specialized utensil" (kli hameyuhad l'kach). According to most Ashkenazim, that woulod rule out a vegetable peeler. Sepharadic rabbis disagree, arguing that a vegetable peeler is merely one of many types of knives, and hence permissible, But wait. May I cut the vegetables? Ashkenazim point to a Talmudic passage that says that we may not cut vegetables "finely". This is interpreted as a prohibition of "grinding" (tohen). How fine constitutes "grinding"? As it is not defined, we had better leave the vegetables in fairly large chunks. In fact, to be safe, let's cut them a little bigger than we do on weekdays. Sepharadim will say "Wait. The context of the above mentioned passage in the Talmud is cutting vegetables or herbs finely in preparation for cooking, either for food or medicine. It has nothing to do with "grinding'." The Sepharadi will prepare the vegetables as finely cut as he pleases. Do you want some lemon juice on that? Not so fast. We have before us a question of "sohet" (squeezing, wringing out). "Sohet" is a subset (toldah) of "separating". The Talmud informs us that the squeezing of grapes to make wine, or olives to make olive oil, is Biblically forbidden, as we are separating the desired liquid from the rest of the fruit. The Talmud extends this, as a rabbinic "fence", to pomegranates and raspberries, which were frequently juiced and fermented at that time, in that part of the world. All other fruits, where juicing is uncommon, are permitted. Ashkenazi opinion later extended that to all fruit that we may wish to juice. Sepharadic opinion, based on RAMBAM, says that no new decrees can be made after the demise of the last Sanhedrin (fourth century), except for a recognized local rabbi, for his community only. Many Ashkenazim, on the other hand, consider a situation that, had it been known to the Sanhedrin, we may reasonably assume that they would have forbade, to be, in fact, forbidden. (Lemons were unknown in the Middle East in Biblical and Talmudic times). Therefore, all juicing is now prohibited on Shabbat according to Ashkenazi opinion. An almost universal "out" in this, is if we are squeezing the lemon not into a bowl, or even into a drink, but rather only onto a solid food. It never had the status of a juice, but only of a condiment. Even here, though, many Ashkenazim say "it's permitted, but better avoided". Most Sepharadic rabbis see this as a strange interpretation. Only the juicing of grapes and olives is Biblically forbidden. Pomegranates and raspberries are rabbinically forbidden. No decree was made on anything else, and hence it is permitted. (Surprisingly, Rav Ovadia Yosef forbade the juicing of oranges, as orange juice today is extremely common). Since lemon juice is almost never consumed as a beverage, unless other ingredients are added, it is not considered juice at all. Therefore, it may be freely squeezed, even into a bowl. Again, it is not that the Sepharadim are looking for "outs", but rather that they do not consider the stricter opinions in this case, to have any textual or logical merit. That one great rabbi or another ruled differently, is of no interest or importance, unless he put forth a source, or a reasonable argument. Now, let's have some salad, along with tea and lemon.

Shabbat, Sepharadi Style part 6

The next part of our story, I like to call "the Gefilte Fish". It is a long established custom of most Jews to have a fish course at all, or at least some, Shabbat meals. This is mostly custom, but greatly emphasized in Kabbalah. However, some see a problem in doing so. One of the prohibitions of Shabbat is "borer"; the process of selecting out bad from good, or even good from bad if it is to be kept for later. For example, a bowl of fruit, in which one is rotten. It is absolutely forbidden to remove the rotten one on Shabbat. Rather, one may take out the good ones. This, too, would be forbidden if the good is put aside for later use. This even applies where one item is not bad, but not what I want right now. If peanuts are mixed with raisins, and I want the peanuts now, pulling out one or more raisins would be "borer". What does one do with fish? Most Ashkenazi poskim (legal decisors) see the removal of a bone from the fish as a Biblical prohibition of "borer". One must eat the flesh from around the bones. Therefore, European Jews developed the "Gefilte". The bones have been removed before Shabbat, with the flesh being cooked and seasoned. Classically, it was then stuffed back in the fish skin, or more commonly, made into a sort of fish dumpling. In Poland, even the non Jews enjoyed it, calling it "Jewish Fish". Problem solved. One early nineteenth century posek even forbade the eating of nuts on Shabbat (although this practice is widely reported as being done in Talmudic times), as sometimes a piece of shell gets mixed in. Its removal would constitute "borer". Most Sepharadic poskim see here no problem. First of all, if done in the normal process of eating, there can be no "borer".(Derech Achilah) That is the way of eating. One would not be likely to eat a nut without removing the shell. It makes no difference if the shell has inadvertently become mixed in with the nut. To do so BEFORE the meal, in the course of preparation, would indeed be forbidden. But not during the meal. Furthermore, most Sepharadic authorities say that there is no such thing as "borer" within a single item. The fish and its bones constitute a single item. The bones can be removed, according to this view, even before the meal! In addition, most Sepharadim see no problem in separating an unwanted solid from a liquid. They were never really "mixed", thus obviating the need for separating. if a fly fell into one's wine, most Ashkenazim would be sure to remove it along with some of the wine, with others saying that even this is forbidden. A Sepharadi would simply remove the fly. It never was "mixed" with the wine. I can still remember my younger, Ashkenazi self, swallowing watermelon seeds along with the flesh, in order to avoid "borer" (most people would spit out the seeds once in the mouth). Now, I freely remove the seeds before eating.The more relaxed the atmosphere of Shabbat observance, the more the soul can soar. I love being Sepharadi.