Jewish American Heritage Month

Posted By admin on September 2, 2022

Danny,already in his mid-40s,decidedto move to Jerusalem,Israel andenroll inayeshiva.Having never receivedan extensive Jewish education,he was overwhelmed by thelarge number ofTorahlawsthathe wasentirelyunaware of.He was particularlyintriguedbytheagricultural laws of the Sabbatical year(shemitah),which apply this year (5782),and dedicated most of his energy tostudying these laws.Then,heembarked on thestudy of thefinancialaspectof the Sabbatical year, namely, thecancellationof all debts with the conclusion ofshemitah, with the onset of thenew yearon Rosh Hashanah.Thecancellationcan beavertedby signing a special form called aProzbol.

Danny panicked,as he had recalled collecting a loan of $50,000 after the last Sabbatical year some seven years ago.The loan was collected from his friend Stanley, and Danny was not in a financial position to return the sum.As he was then unaware of the laws ofshemitah, he had not prepared aProzbolform to allow collecting the debt.

Danny and theyeshivas rabbinical staffconsulted with our Bet Din to determine whetherhe needs to return the money toStanley.

How should the Bet Din rule,and why?

Torah Law

The Torah mandates that all loans extended be cancelled with the conclusion of the sabbatical year. Today, this decree is of rabbinical origin since our nation is in exile. Thus, by rule of the Shulhan Aruch it is prohibited for one to claim a loan any time after sunset on the eve of Rosh Hashanah of the following year. This ruling is applicable to basically all types of loans, though it excludes instances in which a lender previously collected collateral from a borrower in order to secure the outstanding obligation. The rationale behind this ruling is that collection of collateral prior to the conclusion of the sabbatical year is comparable to collection of the loan.

A great sage of the Mishna named Hillel observed that because of this mandate people were growing reluctant to lend money as the sabbatical year approached, fearing the inability to collect the debt prior to the time of cancellation. Since the decree was already reduced to a rabbinic restriction, he effectively instituted a Prozbol, a system that enables one to collect outstanding loans even after the sabbatical year. By process of a Prozbol, creditors submit all loans to a rabbinical court, thereby authorizing the court to collect the debt. This effectively allows the creditor himself to collect the debt, since it is the court that is in essence prosecuting the borrower and not the individual. Additionally, a rabbinical court entrusted with the power of collection is similar to holding collateral against a loan and may be viewed as already collected before the cancellation date.

Legally, it is unnecessary for the lender to appear before a rabbinical court to submit the debts owed to him, as it suffices to fill out a Prozbol form before two witnesses. The witnesses are not to be related to one another, or related to the lender. The Prozbol is effective only for loans extended prior to the signing of the application. It is therefore customary to fill out the form shortly before the time of cancellation.

With the conclusion of the sabbatical year, only loans remaining unpaid that are past their due date are cancelled. If however, the loan is not overdue, rather the time set to repay a loan is only after the sabbatical year, it is not canceled and one need not complete a Prozbol form. Hence, in instances in which a loan extended was set to be repaid by a borrower only after the sabbatical year, it is not cancelled in the event a Prozbol form was not completed by the lender.

Interestingly, contemporary halachic authorities rule leniently with regard to people who were previously non-religious and unaffiliated with Jewish practice who consequently did not complete a Prozbol form. Hence, in the event a loan was already collected after the sabbatical year, in such instances the funds need not be returned to the borrower. The rationale behind this ruling is beyond the scope of this article.

A Prozbol form according to Sephardic tradition is being provided for our readers. As mentioned, once the form is signed by the witnesses it is valid, there is no need to contact or submit the form to the Bet Din. It is perfectly permissible to use the services of any well recognized Bet Din that is appointed by the masses, even if the Bet Din is located outside of ones area. Renowned sages of Syria would customarily use the services of the rabbinical courts of Israel to officiate a Prozbol.

Endnotes: See Hazon Obadiah, Prozbol

Verdict: The Time Is Right

Our Bet Din ruled that Danny was permitted to withhold the $50,000 he collected from Stanley. Although Danny did not prepare a Prozbol prior to last years Sabbatical, by law he was not required to do so. As mentioned, only loans past their due date are cancelled with the conclusion of the Sabbatical year. Since the loan extended to Stanley was only payable after the sabbatical year, it was not cancelled and a Prozbol was not needed. Furthermore, even for other smaller loans Danny collected from borrowers that should have been cancelled, he nevertheless does not need to return the funds. Since Danny was a non-observant Jew unaware of the prohibition at the time he collected the loans, according to leading contemporary halachic authorities he may withhold the funds. Obviously, now that Danny is an observant Jew he is required to prepare a Prozbol for the upcoming cancellation date. If he fails to do so, his loans past due will be cancelled upon sunset the eve of this Rosh Hashanah.

A Prozbol form according to Sephardic tradition is being made available to our readers. Follow the instructions detailed in Torah law when filling out the form.

YOU BE THE JUDGE

Get Out!!

David rented a home from Steven for ten months, with the rental contract expiring on June 30, 2022. Although David was planning a trip overseas in early June, he nevertheless, as per his contractual obligation, sent Steven payment in full for the month of June. David moved all his belongings out of the house and returned the keys to Steven on June 7th, before he left for overseas with his family. While overseas, David immediately realized that he forgot to empty the vault in the master bedroom prior to his departure. He contacted his brother and gave him the code to the back door to enter and collect his valuables from the vault. Upon his brothers entry to the home, he was confronted with an entire family living on the premises. The brother contacted Steven, the owner, and he arranged for the vault to be emptied and its contents returned. However, David was exasperated that Steven, without consent, rented out the home to another family before June 30. In Bet Din David demanded of Steven that all proceeds from the new tenants are to be forwarded to him. David explained that since he rented and paid for the home until June 30, he is the rightful owner and is entitled to the earnings. Steven replied that as the owner he had the right to rent out the vacancy especially after David returned to him the keys. Furthermore, Steven explained that he rented his home for the summer at a high summer rate per month and he clearly had no intention of forwarding his earnings to David. David responded by threatening that either the summer tenants vacate the property until July 1, or all proceeds of the three-week term be paid to him.

Read the rest here:

The Case A Year of Sabbatical - Community Magazine

Category: Sephardic | Comments Off on The Case A Year of Sabbatical – Community Magazine
Tags:

Posted By admin on August 30, 2022

Browse > Home / Books, Featured Articles / The Choice: A Novel of Love, Faith, and the Talmud - reviewed by Rabbi Jeffrey Cohen J-Wire

August 25, 2022 by Rabbi Jeffrey Cohen

Read on for article

Maggie Anton has introduced us to a number of stories around Jewish life, beginning with her series on Rashis Daughters [3 novels] followed by Rav Hisdas Daughter [2 novels] and one about personal relationships {Fifty Shades of Talmud].

The story is based on a young woman reporter of a Jewish newspaper who in interviewing a young up-and-coming rabbinic scholar, convinces him to teach her Talmud- something which does not surprise the reader of today, for it has become not uncommon, it clearly was viewed as a no-no in the 1950s orthodox world. Not even American reform had admitted women into their rabbinical school when this novel was set (this year marks the 50th anniversary of the first woman in North America being granted the title Rabbi by any rabbinical seminary).

One of the things I like about novels by Anton is how easily she makes traditional Jewish texts (in this novels case, it is primarily rabbinic texts). Being of a particular generation, such texts were available in English in what could only be described as an analytical manner which most would consider boring. Even the works of Potok did not really make the texts alive [except perhaps his introduction to most readers of gematria]- he did so in a series of pamphlets he produced as a rabbinical student for a (now defunct) study group known as the Leaders Training Fellowship.

Being a novel of our time, it does reflect sexual tensions and sexual realities rather than dancing around the topic as was common in the 1950s. As such it seems a logical follow-up from Antons 2016 book Fifty Shades of Talmud: What the First Rabbis Had to Say about You-Know-What.

The basis of this novel is how men and women establish relationships. It is what happens in each and every generation. The time of the 1950s and the setting of Jewish New York make this novel unique.

Burt Visotzky of the Jewish Theological Seminary described the novel as a marvellous piece of Midrash (early rabbinic interpretation of a classical text) or, as its called today, fan fiction. Ellen Wolintz-Fields of the Womens League highlights that it is not only a novel but also a guide to learning about the role of women in Judaism and should be required reading in classes on the topic of women and mitzvot and women and Talmud study. I would add that it also dispels some of the buba meisers I have heard over the years about Judaism and sexual relations.

Anton makes no bones about being a Jewish feminist. This novel would not be what it is if this had not been part of what shaped the narrative. It is a book which is well written and interesting.

Rabbi Jeffrey Cohen is associated with the School of Medicine (Sydney), University of Notre Dame Australia as well as on Staff at St. Vincents Private Hospital, Sydney. He has previously held academic appointments at UNSW Sydney and St Louis University. He also served as CEO of the Sydney Jewish Museum for 5 years and was Senior Consultant to Museum Planning Services.

Like Loading...

Visit J-Wire's main page for all the latest breaking news, gossip and what's on in your community.

See more here:

The Choice: A Novel of Love, Faith, and the Talmud - reviewed by Rabbi Jeffrey Cohen J-Wire - J-Wire Jewish Australian News Service

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on The Choice: A Novel of Love, Faith, and the Talmud – reviewed by Rabbi Jeffrey Cohen J-Wire – J-Wire Jewish Australian News Service
Tags:

Posted By admin on August 30, 2022

Jews around the world had a sense of detachment as we watched the brutal attack last week on Salman Rushdie. There is almost some relief in the knowledge that this isnt our battle. It is not our text that was undermined, and it certainly was not one of us who carried out this heinous act. But it is important to ask ourselves how we would react if any of that was the case. If the situation were different, and it was about the chumash he was writing, would Jews still react in horror? Of course they would not encourage anyone to harm such a figure, but would they lament the act? Put differently, what if it was Zalman instead of Salman?

Putting aside the historical issue of bans, both on people and on books, which have had mixed results historically, one of the earliest extended discussions of apostasy and the attitude towards it is in the Talmud. It is the famous story of Elishah ben Avuyah, a second-century figure, who was later known as Acher (literally, the Other).

The exact catalyst of Elishas downfall is unclear. In the Jerusalem Talmud, it is said that he sees a boy fulfill a biblical commandment of sending away the mother bird, by the instruction of his father, only to die shortly thereafter. Besides the magnitude of the tragedy, which is mentioned elsewhere in the Talmud, what makes the episode so perplexing to Elisha is that the two commandments that the boy had fulfilled are both said by the Torah to be rewarded with a long life. In contrast to this account, elsewhere in the Babylonian Talmud it says he witnessed the aftermath of the execution of one of the great sages killed in the second century, and was astonished that that could be the fate of a Torah scholar. In perhaps the longest discussion of Elishas life, the Talmud in Chagiga states that Elisha ben Avuya was one of the figures involved in the study of Pardes, which can be described as a metaphysical study of the world. The Talmud then relates that Elisha saw a vision of a high-ranking angel functioning in a way that was out of keeping with what he had learned about heaven. According to another account, he fell under the influence of Greek thought, whose texts would fall from under his bosom.

In all the accounts, he concludes that what he witnessed can only be explained if there are other forces in control in the universe. And from that point forward, his interpretations and his conduct were influenced by that mistaken notion. Compounding this problem was that repentance was withheld from him for one reason or another. Case in point, depending on the account, subsequent divine voices that he hears or verses that a schoolchild repeats to him are understood, and even misunderstood, by him to mean that G-d is not interested in his repentance. And according to most accounts, he dies without having repented. When he does die, however, it becomes clear that he is in limbo: he studied too much for him to go into purgatory, but his apostasy prevents him from going into heaven. So Rabbi Meir who had tried during Elishas lifetime to bring him back, even when it meant walking alongside him as he rides a horse on the Sabbath in contravention of the law decides that he will eventually bring up smoke from his grave, so that he will receive his purification and can then go to heaven, which is what happens.

There are several unusual elements to this story, not least of which is why it is important to know the background of Elishas fall from grace. More than an entire half of an amud in Chagiga discusses it, and it is found in more than a dozen places across the rabbinic corpus. Does it really matter, if the end result was that he was an apostate? Also, why does Rabbi Meir play such a central role in this story; being the Sage that he was, it would make more sense to diminish Rabbi Meirs involvement. Moreover, it is incredibly difficult to understand that such a downfall should involve divine voices and bibliomancy. What significance does that have?

Three things become clear. The first is that, particularly in the way the story is portrayed, there is a modicum of understanding, if not for Acher than for his circumstances. For one reason or another, he could not find his way back and not for lack of trying. The attitude that is espoused here is to look for insights into how someone could become estranged, not to look for ways to punish them.

The second is that the Talmud is concerned more with the impact that his thought has on Rabbi Meir and others, than it does with the fact that he took on those views. This is borne out by the way the Talmud asks how Rabbi Meir can learn from him; the answer given is that he ate the fruit and threw away the peels, meaning he retained only the doctrinally pure ideas. And also by the statement in Shir HaShirim Rabbah that defines his destruction of plantations, a term for apostasy, as the fact that he used to disturb the study of others telling us that what is of greater concern is the negative impact that Acher had upon other students. That is to say, more will be gained when we look for ways to minimize the impact of mistaken views than to address or correct them.

Finally, the fact that Achers ultimate fate had to come from a divine voice or be communicated through providence is also an indication that it is not up to human beings to decide such a persons fate. In our day and age, this translates into never taking divine justice into our own hands, even as we distance ourselves from offending views.

Here is the original post:

What If It Were 'Zalman'? - The Jewish Press - JewishPress.com

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on What If It Were ‘Zalman’? – The Jewish Press – JewishPress.com
Tags:

Posted By admin on August 30, 2022

Question: As we now read Sefer Devarim, the Torah tells us that Moses was instructed by Hashem to appoint a successor. Moses wanted his sons to succeed him but Hashem tells him to appoint Yehoshua as the next leader. Why was this request of the greatest and most righteous of men denied? Also, were Yehoshua and Caleb the only named leaders or personalities to enter the land of Canaan?

M. GorinVia email

Synopsis: Last week we cited Rambam (Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:1) who states, The Jewish people were adorned with the three crowns, Torah; priesthood and royalty. Aaron and his progeny merited priesthood; David and his progeny merited royalty. The crown of Torah is available to all Israel. We noted Moses promise to Jethro that his firstborn son adopt Jethros idolatry and thus Moses was punished in that his sons would not inherit his leadership. Instead, Joshua, his student, earned the leadership. Yet Moses saw that if the daughters of Tzelophechad could inherit, possibly his sons could as well. Yet the reply remained the same. There is a view that his two sons died during his lifetime; thus, the question is moot. We noted that Caleb and Joshua were the only ones of that generation to enter the land, but we did note a few exceptions: Elazar the high priest, his son Pinchas (Elijah, Bava Metzia 114b, Rashi ad loc.) who served as high priest in the land of Israel. We noted our Sages criticism of both Pinchas and Yiftach, the leader at the time, in the matter of Yiftachs daughter.

Answer: The following are responses to your first question that were received from readers of this column. Mr. Asher Weingarten of Brooklyn offers additional information on the subject of Moses offspring:

The Targum of Rav Joseph (by the Amora Joseph ben Hiyya) identifies Shevuel (I Chronicles 23:16, Bnei Gershom, Shevuel Harosh) as Jonathan, the idolater priest (Judges 18:30, And Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of Menashe [read: Moshe], he and his sons). As related in Tractate Bava Batra (110a), David put him in charge of the treasuries. He was called Shevuel because he repented and returned (shav) to G-d.

Moses offspring are mentioned again as Temple treasurers (I Chronicles 26:24). Shevuel is cited as chief treasurer with his brothers (Eliezers) great-grandchild, Shlomot (Shlomit), also a head treasurer.

The promise Moses made to his father-in-law, Jethro, is difficult to understand and the commentators (the Baal HaTurim, and the Zayit Raanan on Yalkut Shimoni) discuss Moses behavior. It is difficult to imagine that a grandson of Moses would be an idol worshiper.

My uncle, Rabbi Sholom Klass, seems to resolve it as follows: It is interesting to note Ralbags commentary to Judges 18:30. Yehonatan, according to Ralbag (citing the Jerusalem Talmud, Berachot ch. 9) misinterpreted the teaching of his fathers house: Hire yourself out to idol worship rather than to be dependent on others. The true meaning of avoda zara (strange gods) in this context is work strange to him, work that he is unused to do. Thus Moshe probably agreed that his son would do work strange to him.

Returning to Rambams ruling that we cited at the outset, we seem to be faced with a contradiction in the very verse he quotes, Torah tziva lanu Moshe morasha kehillat Yaakov The Torah that Moses commanded us is the inheritance of the Congregation of Israel. Simply put, the verse would be stating that every Jew is automatically imbued with Torah. [This seems to mean every Jew is entitled to inherit Torah leadership.]

Tiferet Yisrael (to Avot 2:12) reconciles this inconsistency by explaining that the inheritance is to the Congregation of Israel as a whole, as stated (Deuteronomy 31:21), Ki lo [t]ishachach mipi zaro For it shall not be forgotten out of the mouths of [Israels] offspring, meaning that the observance of the Torahs commands shall not change in any time, place, or generation. However, it is not an inheritance for the individual, even if that individuals father or grandfather is a scholar. To the contrary, this may cause one not to make efforts to become a scholar. We must explain this statement of Tiferet Yisrael to mean that while a father would be only too willing for his son to succeed him in Torah scholarship, the son, seeing the scholar that his father is, might not fully appreciate the effort that went into attaining that level of Torah knowledge and would be inclined to rely on the family inheritance.

Moses leadership, as the central [pre-eminent leader and Torah] authority, continued with his pupil, Joshua, as the verse states (Exodus 33:11), umesharto Yehoshua bin Nun naar lo yamish mitoch haohel but his servant [student] Joshua son of Nun, a lad, would not depart from within the Tent.

Ones student, indeed, is like ones own child (Vaetchanan 6:7, Sifrei).

To be continued

Originally posted here:

Q & A: The Mantle Of Leadership (Part II) - The Jewish Press - JewishPress.com

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on Q & A: The Mantle Of Leadership (Part II) – The Jewish Press – JewishPress.com
Tags:

Posted By admin on August 30, 2022

Posted on August 26, 2022 (5782) By Rabbi Label Lam | Series: Dvar Torah | Level: Beginner

See I place before you today blessing and curse. (Devarim 11:26)

Hear OIsrael Hashem is our G-d Hashem is One! (Devarim 6:4)

Hearing is not comparable to seeing! (Talmud Rosh HaShana)

We see that sometimes the Torah shouts LISTEN or Hear and sometimes we are told LOOK- SEE. We know that the Torah is both read and heard. There is an Oral and a Written Torah. When the Talmud wants to invite us to inquire and to study more deeply it states, Ta Shma Come Hear and when the Zohar wants us to delve deeper it says, Ta Chazi Come see! Sometimes its an appeal to the ears and sometimes there is an invitation to the eyes. What is the difference between the way we learn with hearing and the way we learn by seeing?

The answer may be in these familiar Torah instructions, You should know today and return it to your heart that Hashem is G-d in the heavens above and on the earth below. There is no other! (Devarim 4:39) How is that done?

That we know there is HASHEM may be the easier task. Moshe is speaking to the generation that experienced firsthand and witnessed the plagues in Egypt, the splitting of the sea, and the giving of the Torah. He is also speaking contemporaneously to us, know it today.

Since that date we, as a nation of individuals and families have not gone a day or a week or a year without doing something that hearkens back to and reverberates from those cosmic events. They are on our lips in the reading of the 3rd paragraph of Shema, twice a day. They are scripted on to the Tefillin that we don daily. Every Shabbos we mention at Kiddush that all of this is a reminder of the exodus from Egypt. Every year we dive deeply again and again into the entire event. Sukkos too is in order that our generations should know that HASHEM housed us in Sukkos in the desert when we left Egypt.

Knowing it even today is something that can be accomplished with patient thought and utter honesty. Yet even after knowing this well, there is much work to be done. What does it mean to return it to your heart? That seems to be a separate task.

Rabbi Yisrael Salanter had said, The distance between the mind and the heart is greater than the distance between the sun and the earth! To get what we know into our hearts is giant job and when it is done it is a humongous accomplishment. How does that job look? What we hear through our ears is processed as intellectual knowledge. The advantage of hearing a thing is that it can remain in cold storage in our minds for a long time, like thousands of years long. That is the beauty of listening and hearing O Israel. The facts dont change whether we are in a good mood or bad or if the economy is doing well or not. Its money in the bank! Its a steak in the freezer.

The only problem is that sometimes money is not always liquid and a frozen steak is inedible. A person can remain emotionally starved and be led to live in violation of what he truly knows if he cannot get his heart engaged. The heart is like a barbecue grill, a fire pit. There is a fire in the heart! The heart is less responsive to hollow words and more reactive to pictures and images. Sometimes picture words can excite images in the mind and awaken a fire. When we take what we know intellectually out of the freezer of our mind and place it on the heart then we are having an authentically edible Jewish experience.

We dont act on what we know! We act on what we feel! Feelings, however, are reliably unreliable, spontaneous, and short lived. The challenge is that the world around us wants to impress their pictures on our minds and turn feelings into facts, as if feelings alone are holy. The Torah mandates that we take what we know to be true and create richly colorful pictures that will begin to inspire that inner fire. Then noble ideals become a holy reality.

Madeline Hunter wrote a book on the elements of instruction. It shows how to make great lesson plans. She says that when a teacher employs both audio and visual cues then it is like teaching a student to catch a ball with two hands. There is more likely to be a clean reception. It only makes sense then, that at the greatest lesson of all time, the giving of the Torah, the best teaching methodologies were employed. The verse testifies, The whole nation saw the sounds. We saw what could normally only be heard. We heard and saw simultaneously. This breathes new meaning into the saying, Yiddishkeit is not taught, it is caught, with two hands!

See the article here:

It is Caught with Two Hands Torah.org - Torah.org

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on It is Caught with Two Hands Torah.org – Torah.org
Tags:

Posted By admin on August 30, 2022

Some people get angry at the Jewish calendar. It takes away their ability to decide when they want to rejoice, when they want to mourn and when they want to repent. While narrowing our choices is true of halacha in general, there is something about the calendar that can feel especially oppressive.

But even without the anger, who has not experienced the discomfort of not feeling spiritually ready for a holiday? And of all the holidays, I imagine that we are most likely to experience this with Rosh HaShanah. Besides the greater difficulty that teshuva entails, Rosh HaShanahs date may feel negotiable. What I mean is Pesach, Shavuot, Purim and Chanukah all celebrate events that happened specifically at that time of year. Rosh HaShanah however does not really celebrate a historical event. And if you tell me that it celebrates the creation of man, I will remind you that the Talmud (RH 10b) relates to the date of mans creation as an unresolved debate. The Talmud (RH 16a) also tells us that there are different days of judgment for different things scattered throughout the year, not to mention the more intuitive approach of Rabbi Natan that our judgment by God is actually constant.

Yet precisely because we would be so likely to delay the observance of Rosh HaShanah, it is the most important not to delay. I would go even further and say that this may well be its most central teaching. You see, deadlines are a tricky thing. Though they are usually self-created, they are also a key element in making sure we get the job done. When it comes to teshuva, it is trickier still, since it only really needs to be done once in our lifetime. Like anything really, our lives can only be fully evaluated once they are complete. (Of course, there are immediate benefits to doing teshuvah regularly, which is another reason why we are instructed to do it yearly at this time.) Yet if we choose to wait until the last minute in our lives to put our lives in order, it is not just that we might suddenly die or be incapacitated and never actually get the chance. It is also that we will simply be unprepared and not know how to go about it. Hence if we do not do teshuvah now and every year, it is more than likely that we will never do it.

This makes Rosh HaShanah a tricky exercise indeed, all the more so when life expectancy is high and danger from war, pestilence and the like are even at the height of the Covid pandemic relatively low. Yet it is clear that people have always procrastinated. Why else would the Talmud (Shabbat 153a) have pointed out that we must constantly repent, since we never know when we are going to die, or Rabbenu Yonah (Shaarei Teshuvah 1:2) have pointed out the great moral failure that comes with not repenting for sin at the earliest possible moment? But neither of these teachings is enough by themselves. The Torah anticipated the critical need for a time of year dedicated to buckling down and fighting our all too human tendency to procrastinate even the most important things.

Keeping the above in mind allows us to fully appreciate what Rosh HaShanah is all about and why it is so important. This yearly day of judgment is meant to truly maximize our chances of a favorable judgment after concluding our time on Earth. As such, it is not meant to just be good advice. It is meant to make us realize just how much is truly at stake.

To reinforce this, Jewish tradition constantly and advisedly conflates our yearly deadline on Rosh HaShanah with our ultimate deadline (ever wondered why it is called a deadline?). For example, it is no coincidence that we speak about Rosh HaShanah as Yom HaDin (the day of judgment), even though the term is also and technically more correct used for the day of our ultimate judgment. This also explains the power and impact of the famous UNetaneh Tokef prayer, as well as why some Jews wear shrouds that are otherwise only used for burial. But more than anything else, it is this holidays very existence that serves to remind us that just like we cannot prevent the smaller day of judgment from coming, so too can we not prevent the ultimate day of judgment from coming as well.

This is presumably why the month of Elul is singularly associated with preparation. Whether saying selichot or simply listening to the shofar, the traditions of this month are all about taking the deadline of Rosh HaShanah seriously. As taking it seriously means we may not delay.

Read the original:

Anger, Procrastination, and Elul - The Jewish Press - JewishPress.com

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on Anger, Procrastination, and Elul – The Jewish Press – JewishPress.com
Tags:

Posted By admin on August 30, 2022

Drive along any main street of an American town. You will pass a building with a sign in front: Read the Bible!

I can guarantee you that building is most likely an evangelical Protestant church. It is certainly not a synagogue.

Here is why. Jews might be a people of the book, but the Bible is not a book that we read.

Jews dont read the Bible. Jews study Torah, and Jews hear sections of the Bible in synagogue.

This assertion surprises many Jews. But, think about it.

As a rule, most Jews do not sit down and read the Hebrew Bible, or Tanakh, cover to cover. I know some very sincere people who tried, but they barely got beyond the first round of begats in Genesis.

When Jews encounter Scripture, it is in synagogue, when they hear the Torah read and interpreted, or in Torah study groups, which have become increasingly popular over the last few decades.

They will also, most likely, hear the haftarah, the sections from the historical and prophetic literature.

On the festivals, they will hear the five scrolls (megillot): Song of Songs on Pesach; Ruth on Shavuot; Lamentations on Tisha BAv; Ecclesiastes on Sukkot, and Esther on Purim.

They will also hear and recognize snippets of the Psalms that appear in the liturgy.

But, thats pretty much it. There are entire books of the Hebrew Bible that never make a formal appearance in synagogue. There are entire books of the prophets that we never hear Nachum, Habakkuk, and Haggai, for example.

As for the later writings, we encounter Proverbs and Job in snippets.

For the vast majority of Jews, the later books of the Hebrew Bible Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and First and Second Chronicles is terra incognita.

Our lack of biblical literacy is a shame, because there is so much treasure there. That is why Edward Felds new book, The Book of Revolutions: The Battles of Priests, Prophets, and Kings That Birthed the Torah, (JPS) is such a spectacular resource so much so, that I confess that I could not put it down.

Sometimes, people will ask me: Who wrote the Bible?

The answer to that question is: Its complicated. Richard Friedman wrote a book with that title, and he has done a great job of putting flesh on a controversial modern scholarly theory the Documentary Hypothesis.

Here goes. The Documentary Hypothesis, invented by a pair of German scholars, posits that the Torah is a patchwork of different sources: J (in which Gods name is YHWH, or, in German, Jehovah); E (in which Gods name is Elohim); P (the work of priestly authors); D (the work of the author of Deuteronomy), and finally R (the final redactor, who put it all together).

Once thought heretical, the Documentary Hypothesis has even found a home in modern Orthodox scholarship. Check out Thetorah.com.

Rabbi Feld goes one step further. He suggests that the each of the Torahs various law codes has a rather unique origin.

Each of these codes the Covenant Code in Exodus, the law code in Deuteronomy, and the Holiness Code in Leviticus is the product of revolutions that took place in biblical times, and this book describes the cultural and political background that defined each of these cataclysmic biblical moments. One of these revolutions was accomplished through a military coup, another was instituted after an assassination and a regency, and the third was a quiet revolution made by outsiders whose ideas proved persuasive.

In other words, move over Game of Thrones. There is far more intrigue here than we had ever imagined.

Rabbi Feld takes us on a whirlwind tour of biblical history. He shows how of these historical moments created a different way of understanding Gods revelation and how to respond to it. That leads to numerous contradictions within the biblical text itself, which many have found frustrating, but which I find to be human and exhilarating.

My favorite material in the book is about the geography of the ancient land of Israel the differences between the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah regional differences that even preceded the spit of the unitary kingdom of Israel into the two kingdoms after the death of Solomon.

First, by which name do we call God? The northerners called God El or Elohim, a derivative of the ancient Canaanite god of the same name, which makes sense, because that territory bordered on the remnants of the ancient Canaanite kingdoms, and was highly susceptible to foreign influences.

The southerners called God YHWH or Adonai. At a certain time, those two gods became merged together which gives new meaning to the Shma Hear, Israel, Adonai is Eloheinu, Adonai is One which I might mischievously translate as: Adonai and Elohim are the same.

Second, who are our heroes? The stories in Genesis about Abraham and Sarah and Isaac and Rebecca take place in the south Hebron, Beer Sheba, etc. Therefore, these were southern figures.

Not so with Jacob, Rachel and Leah; their narratives have a way of occurring in the north. The same is true with Joseph. At a certain point, these stories have to merge together, in order to create a coherent national narrative.

It made me think of the United States, and its geography. As Colin Woodard makes clear in American Nations, the United States of America has never been unified, and has never had a common story. Regional differences are crucial. They create culture. Austin is not Boston, though it probably feels more like Boston now than it ever did.

It turns out that such divisions, and contrasting and competing narratives, were present in biblical times as well.

What Rabbi Feld teaches us is this: The Bible, as we have it, is a mess. A sacred mess. A collection of disagreements and divergences.

This is beautiful:

The Five Books of Moses seems to have triumphed in the Jewish community that survived precisely because it did not resolve contradictions but instead incorporated the theologies of numerous traditions and parties. In holding on to its internal contradictions, it preserved a certain mystery, and a profound understanding that contradictory viewpoints and a variety of beliefs provide insight into truths beyond single-minded formulations.

But, herein lies the challenge. The Torah presents itself as a unified, straight forward law code: This is what you do.

Then, generations later, the Mishnah does the same thing. This is what you do.

Ah, but then come the sages of the Talmud and they re-introduced the multitude of voices and arguments that had always been there. That is basically what the Talmud is a cacophony of voices. It reminds me of the time I took a Georgia politician around Jerusalem and we stopped in at a yeshiva and hear the students studying Talmud.

Rabbi, he said to me, You got yourself a very noisy religion here.

Centuries later, Maimonides and other codifiers quieted down those voices. All those arguments had gotten confusing. He re-introduced that sense of clear, unified, straight forward law. This is what you do.

So. this is amazing. Judaism, as we have it, is the result of a constant tension between a fixed tradition, and complex conversation about those traditions. A unified voice, and many voices.

The cool thing about this? We might be living in a time of the triumph of many voices in which we must be able to say that there are many approaches to living in covenant with God. Which is why Jewish life, even and especially outside the yeshiva world, is so noisy.

And that will even mean that there will be contradictions within each of us, as well. Rabbi Feld writes personally:

There are moments when I understand the performance of a religious act as following a command.at other times I sense that the obligation occurs because of my initial agreement to enter into this Jewish religious life, and because the benefits I now experiencenecessitate that I undertake participation in all its facets, even those whose meaning is not immediately obvious to me at other moments, I perform the same act thinking that it brings me closer to the Divine, that the behavior transforms my life so that I experience myself as entering a holy realm.

One last thing. I resonate with those signs: Read the Bible!

Perhaps we all should.

Especially the parts about economic justice and that thing about everyone being created in the image of God.

Continued here:

You say you want a revolution? Try the Bible - Religion News Service

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on You say you want a revolution? Try the Bible – Religion News Service
Tags:

Posted By admin on August 30, 2022

When was the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament (OT) written? The answer is complicated because the OT is not a single bookits a library. In addition, even within that library, the books themselves are not books in the modern sense, but composite texts which themselves weave together both oral and written traditionssometimes gathered together over centuries.

This is not some big secret the Vatican is hiding from you. The Bible itself talks about drawing on earlier documents.

This is not some big secret the Vatican is hiding from you, by the way. The Bible itself talks about drawing on earlier documents. For example, Joshua 10 and 2 Samuel 1 both draw on the Book of Jashar (which is lost to history but preserved in these citations). It is normal for biblical books to weave together different genres, a bit like the way a modern documentary film brings together interviews, archive footage and B-roll to tell its story.

So looking through the library of the OT, what time periods are we talking about? There are three main sections in the OT library, so lets look at each of them in turn.

Parts of the Law or Pentateuch (the first five books, from Genesis to Deuteronomy) are very ancient. Jewish tradition in the Talmud is that Moses himself was the original author, and Ezra published it in the fifth century BC (Ezra 7:6, Neh 8). Personally, I dont think Moses wrote these five books, at least not cover to coverthe bits about him being the most humble man on earth (Numbers 12:3) and about him dying (Deuteronomy 34) would be a bit weird if he did. But I see no reason to dismiss the texts own claim that parts of the tradition it is preserving go back directly to Moses (Exodus 34:27; Deuteronomy 31:19 c.f. John 5:46).

Assuming a late date for the Exodus, that would make these parts thirteenth-century BC material. Some songs, stories, corporate memories and family traditions in Genesis seem to go back even earlier, preserving real memories of the ancestral period and their time as displaced people in Egypt.

The prophets refers to both the big-name prophets who got book deals (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel) but also the Twelve minor prophets (Amos, Joel, Habakkuk, Haggai, etc) and books we might think of as historical (Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings).

Prophets were active in Israel throughout its history, often delivering their messages orally in real time. But the preserving of their messages for future generations in a prophetic book was usually a team sport involving scribes and editors. Sometimes this process happened during the prophets own ministry, but sometimes it continued into later generations too. Again, this is not a secret: we hear about the process behind Jeremiahs prophecy in the book of Jeremiah:

So Jeremiah took another scroll and gave it to the scribe Baruch son of Neriah, and as Jeremiah dictated, Baruch wrote on it all the words of the scroll that Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire. And many similar words were added to them. (Jeremiah 36:32)

Most of the books associated with the prophets were probably collected in their final form between the fifth and second centuries BCafter the exile and before the Old Greek (Septuagint) and other translations start showing up. For example, the earliest of the prophetic books is probably Amos, who was an eighth-century prophet. His work, however, was bound up together into the Book of the Twelve, a collection which includes post-exilic works like Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. That collection seems to have been edited together in the third or fourth century BC.

Some of the youngest books are found in the final collection called The Writings. The Writings include Psalms, wisdom texts like Proverbs and Job plus the five scrolls traditionally read at festivals including Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Ruth, Esther, Lamentations. It also includes Ezra-Nehemiah and Chronicles as these give a post-exilic view on the history of Israel. Surprisingly, Daniel also shows up here too (rather than with the Prophets as in English Bibles).

Depending on your preferred dating for books like Daniel and Ecclesiastes, this collection brings us up to the early second century BC (so yes, the intertestamental period is more like an intertestamental power nap). Bits of all the books in the Writings were found in the caves at Qumran (except Esther, for some reason) so that helps confirm that people thought of these books as Scripture in (roughly) Jesus day.

These are the rough dates for the different parts of the OT. But when did these books come to be accepted as Scripture? This is known as the question of canonwhat belongs in the library of OT Scripture, and what belongs in the fan-fiction category of nice-to-read-but-not-Gods-word.

Writing a canonical list is not about making books authoritative Scripture, its about listing the books that we recognise as already authoritative.

Ive written elsewhere about the different canons or lists of authoritative books in Judaism, Catholicism, Orthodoxy and Protestantism. To recap: writing a canonical list is not about making books authoritative Scripture, its about listing the books that we recognise as already authoritative. While different traditions have different ways of arranging the books, historically the consensus has been pretty clear on what should, and should not, go in there (especially around the core).

The OT canon as a whole seems to have been relatively stable by at least the time of ben Sira (180 BC) because he refers to the prophets by name including Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the Twelve (in that order), and even quotes from the book of Malachi. His grandson, when translating this work into Greek a little later, refers to the Law, the Prophets and the other books, which is the earliest mention of the three part canon. By Jesus day people know what you meant by The Bibleits the Law, the Prophets and the Writings.

As for the ages of the manuscripts that have survived, these vary. The earliest textual evidence for the Pentateuch we have is the priestly blessing from Numbers 6:2426, dating to the sixth or seventh century BC. Many of the other early sources we have are actually translations: Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus are Greek translations from the fourth century AD and contain all or nearly all the OT. Then there are other versions including the Old Latin, Samaritan Pentateuch and the Targums (Aramaic).

Until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the main Hebrew manuscripts we had to go on were medieval: the complete OT in the Leningrad Codex (AD 1009), plus the large chunks of OT in the Aleppo Codex (AD 925) and Cairo Prophets Codex (AD 896). Thats why the Dead Sea Scrolls were such a huge discoverythey contain manuscripts that date between 275 BC and AD 68.

The similarities and differences between all these manuscripts and translations are interesting (if you are that sort of person), and so scholars will compare between them to work out the likely original text. Sometimes we arent 100% confident which word was original, but even then, the message of the whole gets through. Thats the beauty of communication. Unlike a game of Telephone where the message quickly gets garbled down the line, Israels Scriptures are preserved in thousands of manuscripts, in dozens of languages, by different communities in different parts of the world. God is good at getting his message across.

This is a complex answer to a simple question. But the big picture is that the library of the OT has preserved traditions throughout the history of Israels relationship with God, from the time of Abraham to the time of Jesus. We can be confident that what Jesus meant when he referred to Scripture is what we pick up when we read the OT today.

See the original post:

When was the Old Testament Written? - The Gospel Coalition

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on When was the Old Testament Written? – The Gospel Coalition
Tags:

Posted By admin on August 30, 2022

For Fall 2022, the Zahava and Moshael Straus Center for Torah and Western Thought, in collaboration withYeshiva College(YC) and Stern College for Women, is offeringnumerous coursesforStraus Scholarsand Yeshiva University undergraduate students to study the great texts and traditions of the West and Judaism.

Back by popular demand, Straus Center Clinical Assistant Professor Rabbi Dr. Dov Lerner is teaching The Thought of Rabbi Sacks on the Beren campus, as well as Malbim and Modernity, which focuses on the nineteenth-century exegete. Rabbi Dr. Mordechai Schiffman, clinical assistant professor of Jewish education, will continue his work with the Straus Center with Happiness: Torah and Psychology, while Straus Center Associate Director and Clinical Assistant Professor Dr. Neil Rogachevsky is teaching American Political Thought.

Straus Center Director Rabbi Dr. Meir Soloveichik and Straus Center Resident Scholar Dr. Shaina Trapedo are splitting their time between the Beren and Wilf campuses. On Beren, Rabbi Dr. Soloveichik is teaching Zionist Political Thought and co-teaching Rashi & Rembrandt with Dr. Jacob Wisse. On Wilf, he co-teaches Epistemology of Judaism with Associate Professor of Philosophy Dr. David Johnson. Dr. Trapedo is teaching Jews in Western Literature at Yeshiva College and The Wisdom of Solomon: Love, Learning, Leadership at Stern.

Dr. Rogachevsky is also teaching at Yeshiva College this year, pulling double duty with Modern Political Thought and American Political Thought. Rabbi Dr. Lerners Malbim and Modernity course is also being offered on the Wilf campus this year, and Rabbi Shalom Carmy, assistant professor of Jewish philosophy and Bible, is teaching Repentance and Forgiveness.

Finally, the Straus Center is excited to welcome a number of new affiliated faculty from YC and the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary (RIETS). Rabbi Dr. Ari Bergmann is teaching his first Straus Center course, titled Schools of Aggadah, while Talmud instructor Rabbi Nathaniel Wiederblank and Rabbi Dr. Mois Albert Navon, a professor at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, are teaching the cutting-edge new course: Ethics in Artificial Intelligence.

The new course in AI ethics is a unique opportunity for our students to study an important problem with a rare combination of professors, said Dr. Judah Diament, clinical professor and chair of the YC computer science department. Rabbi Wiederblank is not only a maggid shiur at YU, but he is also the author of two very well-received volumes on Jewish thought that have been praised for their rigorous and systematic approach to topics that are often viewed as being fuzzy. Rabbi Dr. Navon brings to bear his professional career, which ranged from NASA to Mobileye, as well as his own knowledge in both Torah and general ethics. Far from being passive learners, the students will be writing full-length papers on a topic in AI ethics, working together on them with these stellar professors.

To learn more about Straus Center courses, click here.

You can learn more about the Straus Center by signing up for our newsletterhere. Be sure to also like us onFacebook, follow us onTwitterandInstagramand connect with us onLinkedIn.

Originally posted here:

Straus Center Fall 2022 Courses: The Wisdom of Solomon, Rembrandt and AI - Yu News

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on Straus Center Fall 2022 Courses: The Wisdom of Solomon, Rembrandt and AI – Yu News
Tags:

Posted By admin on August 30, 2022

There is a curious artistic feature in the US Capitol: above the gallery doors in the House Chamber are 23 relief portraits, the faces of lawgivers from across history. They were identified by scholars, legislators, and the staff of the Library of Congress as sources for the American constitutional tradition, noted for their work in establishing the principles that underlie American law.

Some of them are those youd expect influential English jurists like William Blackstone and Founding Fathers such as George Mason. At least one of the 23, though, may come as a surprise: Moses Maimonides.

While Maimonides is indisputably a major figure in the history of Jewish law, his writings are not generally remembered as containing the seeds of modern liberty and constitutionalism.

Perhaps, though, the link to Maimonides is not so far-fetched.

Aside from codifying the law that all political leaders even monarchs are always subject to the rule of a higher constitutional law (see Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings and their Wars, Chapter 3), Maimonides also included rules that were to govern the prerogative powers available in times of crisis or emergency.

Relying on an earlier fundamental law recorded in the Talmud (great is human dignity, which overrides even a prohibition of the Torah), Maimonides ruled unequivocally that human dignity must be weighted heavily among the factors in any crisis decision, as it overrides even divinely-inspired legislation and decreesand certainly mere positive law.

Looking back today, it is obvious these rulings are important precedents for the principles of the rule of law and limited government that respects human rights.

So how does Maimonides end up in the US Capitol as a source for American constitutional principles?

An important figure in English constitutional history supplies the most likely connection. The 17th-century scholar and parliamentarian John Selden was a constitutional thinker well known to the American Founders. Along with Sir Edward Coke, he was closely involved in producing the 1628 Petition of Right, a milestone in the history of limited, lawful government.

Selden today is usually remembered for his influence on modern international law, in which his view that countries can own part of the ocean largely prevailed over that of his contemporary, the continental scholar Hugo Grotius. A polymath described by the poet and political theorist John Milton as the most learned man in England, Selden spent a tremendous amount of his time studying Jewish legal sources, even though he was not himself Jewish.

The key he used to guide much of his research was Maimonides codification of Jewish law. Selden knew Maimonides well and wrote learned treatises on the relevance of Jewish law to contemporary legal theory, citing it as a major source in his debates with Grotius on the law of nations and as a necessary subject of study to understand natural law.

Selden, though, was not simply a scholarly antiquarian; he also brought his vast learning with him to his work as an active member of Parliament.

There is an ancient legal maxim frequently trotted out whenever a crisis or emergency appears, typically used to justify allegedly necessary government measures that are in fact unlawful. That maxim is salus populi suprema lex esto: the safety of the people is the supreme law (Cicero, De Legibus, Book III, right before his discussion of the Roman dictator).

I have seen other translations of salus populi as the welfare of the people or the well-being of the people or even the health of the people. Leaving aside which translation is most plausible, in our times the words resonate with calls for society-wide lockdowns and biosecurity authoritarianism.

Partisans of crisis government in every age recite salus populi and its vernacular equivalents in order to claim that the seizure and deployment of illegal dictatorial prerogatives is actually the most lawful act of all and always for the peoples own good.

It is noteworthy that during the constitutional crises gripping England in the 17th century, when another member of Parliament cited this maxim to justify the kings power of discretionary imprisonment in emergencies, Selden retorted, Salus populi suprema lex, et libertas popula summa salus populi the safety of the people is the supreme law, and the liberty of the people is the greatest safety of the people.

Selden understood that reducing the people to unfreedom and subjugation to unaccountable political masters deprives them of their dignity. He threw his lot in with the liberty of the people, defining that as the true supreme law in politics.

Maimonides, whose writings guided so much of Seldens studies, had insisted centuries before on both the rule of law and the inherent, divinely-established dignity shared equally by all human beings which was not to be violated, even in emergencies. This may explain his inclusion among the lawgivers in the Capitol.

In these times, when calls for crisis government and more emergency powers for the administrative state seem to grow louder by the day, the legislators in Congress the peoples representatives and trustees ought to pause, look around the Capitol, and consider the long tradition of freedom and dignity that is our inheritance and could still be their legacy.

Originally posted here:

Maimonides on the Liberty of the People - Brownstone Institute

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on Maimonides on the Liberty of the People – Brownstone Institute
Tags: