Undercover Kofer

Abi Gezunt! Or not?

2011-12-23T13:42:00.003+01:00

Shigella bacteria

Last week, at the request of my guest, we and our children went to a chassidishe shteeble on Shabbos morning. During the prayers, my son needed to go to the toilet. He came back and said that he could't wash his hands because there was no soap! I told him to just wash it with water in the meantime, but inside I felt upset about yet another primitive ritual that is outdated these days.

And then I came across the following post by DovBear called Health Department takes notice of obscure Jewish ritual:

"From what I understand Shigella spreads more frequently among the OJ because we tend to wash with a cup, often before saying Asher Yatzer. The bacteria goes from your hand to the cup, where it waits for the next person to use the cup for washing.

In the letter that follows (contributed by Efrex) the NYC Health Department seems to acknowledge this problem, however delicately. In any event, its neat to see our rituals acknowledged."

NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE
Thomas Farley, M.D., M.P.H., Commissioner
December 2011

Dear Parent:

The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) is concerned about a recent increase in the number of children with diarrheal illness caused by the bacteria Shigella in the Borough Park and Williamsburg sections of Brooklyn. Most illness has occurred among young children (ages 1-5). Shigella germs are found in the intestinal tract. The disease is most commonly spread by direct contact with an infected person. The Shigella germ can spread quickly among young children in day care programs or pre-kindergarten programs. Symptoms include diarrhea, abdominal cramping and bloody diarrhea.

Large outbreaks of shigella have previously occurred in traditionally observant Jewish communities in Boro Park and Williamsburg as well as other parts of New York State, New Jersey, Illinois, Maryland and Canada. One such outbreak affected over 1900 persons and lasted for eight months.

The most important way to prevent this disease is good hand washing with both soap and warm water. This is especially important after going to the bathroom. Before performing Asher Yatsar, children should wash with soap and warm water. Hands should be also washed on arrival at day care or school, before eating or whenever hands look, feel, or smell unclean. For parents, handwashing after diaper changing is also very important. Developing the habit of good handwashing will prevent not just Shigella but many other diseases that spread person-to-person, some of which may be serious.
If your child develops diarrhea, he/she should not be sent to day care or school until the diarrhea has completely resolved. Because transmission is person to person, we want to be sure that other children as well as teachers do not get sick from this germ. One way to make sure that your child no longer has the germ is to test the stool. The DOHMH asks that ill children have at least two negative stool tests to be sure that the child is no longer carrying the Shigella germ. While we understand it can be a hardship, this is a requirement in all New York City daycares and is to protect other children in the daycare and the community. You can have the stool tested either at your regular doctor or through the DOHMH.
Since the Shigella bacteria has become resistant to two commonly-used antibiotics, we are not recommending that all infections be treated. Mild illness will usually resolve on its own without antibiotics. More severe infections need to be evaluated by your physician.

We appreciate your cooperation in helping to control this outbreak and ensuring continued good health for your family and your community.

Sincerely,

Marcelle Layton, M.D.
Marcelle Layton, M.D., Assistant Commissioner
Bureau of Communicable Disease
New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene

Just imagine this: An obviously significant amount of children are suffering from diarrhea and other diseases just because some fanatics never updated their hygiene standards. Some kids even receive antibiotics they don't need. Imagine also all the other diseases like flues and colds that are transmitted among adults just because of the lack of hygiene.

Perhaps Jews were more hygienic in the Middle Ages than our non-Jews neighbors and this saved many lives. But we already know about bacteria since the 17th century when Antony van Leeuwenhoek discovered them, and we know at least for a century already that washing our hands with soap will reduce bacterial infections.

So much for 'Abi Gezunt'!

Zecher Kofer Livrachah

2011-12-16T15:21:00.000+01:00

A great man of reason and integrity has unfortunately succumbed to cancer at age 62. We will sorely miss him for his candid, witty and outspoken remarks against religion. A sadness crept into me that has accompanied the whole day already.

What made Hitchens unique was that he spoke with his heart what was on his mind. He was candid, honest enough to commend his adversaries in debates (unless they really didn't want to listen). A fellow kofer as well-read, eloquent and charming will be hard to find.

Below, I linked a video that gives you an impression of his astuteness, wit, eloquence and passion:

We'll miss you, Hitch.

Morality: Only for Orthodox Jews?

2011-12-08T10:34:00.001+01:00

On Orthodox Jewish Leadership

2011-12-07T12:21:00.000+01:00

Life in Israel (a blog I regularly check) reported on Rav Shteinman's alleged 'explanation' of the shidduch crisis in a blog post called Rav Shteinman Explains The Shidduch Crisis. My two cents after the quote:

"There has been lots of discussion and reasons given for the shidduch crisis. This is a novel approach that I never heard before to explain the crisis.

According to Kikar, some askanim from the United States of America went to Rav Shteinman the other day and asked about the shidduch crisis - why it is such a crisis, what caused it, how it can be resolved.

Rav Shteinman blamed it on the teachers in the frum schools.

Rav Shteinman did not blame the teachers in the way you might be thinking right now, they are teaching girls, or boys, to be picky, to demand x, y or z, to only accept this or that. Rather, Rav Shteinman explained that many of the girls [graduating from school in the frum community] become teachers. As teachers, there are times where they might not be careful enough with showing respect to their students. One comment out of place, or one comment that was said the wrong way, that is enough to cause a girl to be insulted and deeply hurt. That insult might cause a "kpeida" against the teacher.

Rav Shteinman said teachers should be very careful regarding the honor of their students, not to chalila hurt anyone. Such a kpeida is very serious and can cause girls to not find their proper zivvug."

What I am bothered about most in the Kikar report is the way the askanim and Rav Shteinman are dealing with the subject matter. Let me explain.

Let's assume for argument's sake that the information brought back to Kikar was word-for-word correct.
How do the askanim / how does Rav Steinmann define 'shidduch crisis'? If a girl is not married yet by age 22? If 50% of the girls get married after their religious expiry date (meaning they can't have more than 7 kids anymore)?

Moreover: Does the shidduch crisis only happen to girls? Doesn't it take two to tango?!

The proper approach would be first to define the problem, to get some statistics, and then research this alleged shidduch problem properly. Do we really have a problem? What circles are affected? How do we define the issue and what are its parameters? What are they being taught in sem / yeshivah? Are these mindsets compatible?

The pious approach of explaining phenomena along the lines of some mystical thing that is blocking blessings from above serves nobody and doesn't get anywhere.

Whereas a more practical approach might require some leadership and actually be effective.

Footsteps on National Geographic

2011-12-07T12:06:00.000+01:00

Can't Subject Religion to Science?

2011-11-29T23:15:00.000+01:00

I often heard people say that you can't bring any contradictions between science and religion as a proof that Judaism is not true, because they are simply not acting in the same realm: science describes the how, whereas religion explains the why.

This way, many people think to rationalize their irrational beliefs. Also, it makes their religion sound super sophisticated: "science 'only' explains the 'how', but religion knows the 'why'!"

Of course, the claim that "we can't bring any contradictions between science and religion" just shows how scared people really are to subject their beliefs to proper investigation.

But it turns out that...their claim is simply untrue. Judaism does indeed occupy itself with a whole lot of 'hows'. Some examples where the Torah tries to explain the 'how':

How the world was created (not why)
How man was created (not why)
How the Mishkan was built (not why)
How the Jewish people were redeemed from slavery in all its details (the why not being the focus of the story)
How the Jews traveled through the desert, where they stopped, etc. (the why not being the focus of the story)
How the Torah was given in all its boring details (not why)
How sacrifices are to be brought in all its boring details (not why)
Etc., etc.

So, my dear fellow Jews, before you claim again that your religion is above all criticism, to phrase it in jargon: hafoch bah vehafoch bah ki kulah bah: delve into it and see it is all there...

Kudos to Daat Emet for bringing this up in their Q&A.

Interview with Yaron Yadan

2011-11-19T21:21:00.002+01:00

Innocence Betrayed

2011-11-16T15:49:00.001+01:00

Anonymous guest post

By the time I was ten years old I knew this life wasn't for me. No, I was not molested. I was not beaten or abused in any way. I was the middle child in a large Orthodox family and I always felt loved and cared for. My parents are honest and kind, good people.

But there was something in this life filled with rules and limits that I couldn't understand, something that tugged at my heart and told me that my path would be different. And all this before any Jew would disappoint and disgust me and lead my intellectual self running toward the place my heart had been taking me to.

I was fourteen at the time. I was hanging out with whomever I wanted. I was eating whatever I wanted. But I was in an Orthodox school and environment and my friends were, as well. I wasn't doing drugs. I wasn't staying out late with a bad crowd and partying. I was living the life I knew was right for me.

My friend Leah was rebellious. She knew she was would always be frum, but the pull of my attractive life had her acting out and doing stupid things. She was looking for answers and wanted help, so when someone suggested she speak to Rabbi Ezriel Tauber, she did. She liked him and found that his approach worked for her. Maybe she just wanted some extra attention and validation of what she already believed. In any case, she harassed me into going to see him. I did, just to make her stop.

And then my whole life changed.

My view of Jews and Rabbis became warped. He was the first of many to show themselves for who they really are - wolves in sheep's clothing.

It was a chilly night and Rabbi Tauber's small office was warm and cozy. I thought to myself, "This will be quick and easy". Oh boy, was I wrong! So painfully wrong.

The Rabbi told me that my soul wanted to be better than I was. That I was giving in to animalistic cravings and I had to stop. I told him I didn't agree with him and liked where I was in my life. When he asked if I was involved with a guy, I was honest and said yes. Then he asked for the boy's phone number. I was immediately suspicious and said I didn't want to share that with him. Why did he want the number? The Rabbi said he just wanted to talk to my friend and see what kind of guy he was. I was curious. I wanted to know what he would say and how my friend would respond. So I gave him the number.

The Rabbi dialed the number while I sat there, totally trusting him at his word. And then he blew my naive world apart. He told my friend that I had come to him for help. That I wanted to break up with him but didn't have the courage to do it myself. He said I wanted to be a better Jew and wanted nothing to do with boys anymore. Consider the relationship over.

I was shocked.

Rabbis don't lie! Rabbis are trustworthy! How could this have happened?! But it had.

I left Rabbi Tauber's office with an open wound that night. Over the years salt has been poured on my wounds and they have been reopened wide, time and time again. The further away I travel from that world, the easier it is for me to breath. The air over here is clear.

I think I'll stay.

Another Great Article About Atheism

2011-11-14T17:27:00.001+01:00

At the risk of the trolls again accusing me of being an atheist (which I am not and which I wouldn't consider an insult anyway), let me be clear: I am still not sure if I believe in a deity or not. I just know that I don't believe in organized religion and that if I would believe in a God, it would have to be more like Einstein's or Spinoza's God.

Still, even though I am not an atheist, atheism is often purposefully misrepresented by religious zealots. This article from the American Atheists website puts the record straight. An excerpt (emphasis mine):

Speaking of the original meaning, the word atheism comes from the Greek atheos, which means “without god.” The original meaning of the word, based on its Greek origins, mentions nothing about “disbelief” or “denial.” A short and single-word definition would be “godless.”

The fact that the dictionary definitions use the phrase “there is no God” betrays the theistic influence in defining the word “atheism.” If dictionaries did not contain such influence, then the definition would read, “A belief that there are no gods.” The use of god in singular form, with a capital G, is indicative of Christian influence.

In addition, using words like “doctrine” and “denial” betray the negativity seen of atheists by theistic writers. Atheism does not have a doctrine at all and I certainly do not “deny” that gods exist. Denial is the “refusal to believe.” Atheism does not “know there is a god but refuse to believe in him (or her, for that matter).” That is as silly as saying that you know Big Foot exists but you refuse to believe in him. If the evidence of gods was insurmountable and provable, and atheists still refused to believe, then that would be an act of denial. This is similar to how Scully refused to believe in aliens and UFO encounters even though Mulder had insurmountable evidence of their existence. Scully denied the existence of aliens and UFO’s even though the evidence was overwhelming. She was a horrible example of a skeptic!

Atheism is not a belief system. Atheism is not a religion. Atheism may be part of an individual’s religious beliefs, but atheism, in and of itself, is not a belief or religion. Some religions do not have a concept of god(s). One out of three religions worldwide is atheistic in nature, meaning that they worship no gods: Taoism, Buddhism, Spiritualism, New Age, and others (Macmillan Information New Encyclopedia: World Religions, 1998).

Atheism is a lack of belief in gods, from the original Greek meaning of “without gods.” That is it. There is nothing more to it. If someone wrote a book titled “Atheism Defined,” it would only be one sentence long.
Is atheism a religion or a belief system? Let us look at the different definitions of religion and see if atheism belongs in any of them (using the American Heritage Dictionary, Fourth Edition, 2006).

1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.

No atheism resides in that definition. Atheists do not believe in a supernatural power or powers.

2. Beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.

Atheism does not have a spiritual leader and atheism does not have any rites or rituals (practices) around such a spiritual leader. Atheism requires no initiation, no baptism, there is no Atheist Bible (Koran, Vedas, etc) to read, no rituals that atheists must go through to join an Atheist Church (temple, mosque, synagogue, sect, etc), and no central beliefs that all atheists must adhere to in order to be “true atheists.”

As I mentioned above, there are religions that are atheistic in nature, and they may fit the second definition. Atheism is not the religion. The religion just happens to be godless. Atheism is not the central tenet of their belief system, nor is it the foundational rock of their belief system.

The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Every atheist is as unique as a fingerprint when it comes to his or her individual philosophy, convictions, and ideals.

Orthodox Judaism's Evolutionary Features

2011-11-10T18:06:00.000+01:00

Disappearing Minhagim
The Hirhurim blog (nowadays called Torah Musings, as if that sounds better) featured an article called The Disappearing Melaveh Malkah about the meal after Shabbos that "has long suffered widespread abandonment", despite it being codified in the Shulchan Oruch.

I can't blame the people. After all, they have been busy stuffing themselves with challah, cholent and meat all day. In addition, sometimes Shabbos is out late and people just can't stomach any food anymore (seudah shelishit is difficult enough!). I mean, where I grew up Shabbos finishes after 11 PM in summer and to even think about a Melaveh Malkah then...

New features of Orthodox Judaism
However, I did not want to discuss disappearing minhagim as much as I want to address the new ones that have 'creeped into the system'. Let's forget for a minute about the shtreimelach and the black hats. Over my short lifespan, I have seen some new features of Judaism that have quickly become mainstream.

Upsherin
For starters, the outlandish minhag of Upsherin (or 'Chalakah') or waiting with cutting a boy's hair until he is three, and then having a party when cutting the boy's hair (preferably on Lag baOmer). (Now, try to explain to anyone that your son has to look like a girl because...)

I do not remember having seen this minhag at all when I grew up (except for at the Lubavitchers about whom we always said they were the closest thing to Judaism). But nowadays, it is kind of a 'in' thing to do. Personally, I had several times that people asked me if I let my boys' hair grow or not. As if that should come into consideration! And when I tell people I don't do it because it is not my minhag and I don't think it is authentic, they seem to be perturbed.

Shalom Zachor
There is no sillier strain on a couple that just had a boy born to them than to have to organize a Shalom Zachor (sholem zocher / shulem zucher) on the Friday night following the birth. Wouldn't that be a beautiful time for the family to be together? The original idea is to comfort the boy that just had forgotten the Torah by coming by and by 'comforting him'. Bet some of you didn't know that. Nowadays it's just an opportunity to say mazzeltov and 'snack until you crack'.

I have never seen this in my youth. And when my turn came, the fact that people would turn up anyway forced me to organize one. Why can't a kiddush in the babie's honor be enough? Why these unnecessary expenses? And who really believes that the boy, who is totally unaware of the whole ceremony since he usually is in the hospital with the mother at that time, is at all aware of having forgotten his learning?

Yehi Ratzon in Bentshing
Although the custom is mentioned in the Gemora already, still, the whole thing about saying the Yehi Ratzon for the baal habayis is something that was 'reintroduced' only in the last two decades or so. Until then, bentshers didn't even feature this prayer (think about the standard Artscroll small-sized birkon that still doesn't have it!). Nowadays, it is hard to find a bentsher without it.

Not that I think that it is a bad custom, I am just saying that this stuff didn't exist during my upbringing.

White shirts during the week
Bochrim from outside of Israel (the so-called 'chutznikkim') who learnt in the big yeshivos (I know the example of Kol Torah) mostly wore normal, striped and colored shirts and a cap. Nowadays, you will only find people wearing white shirts and dark suits and a black hat of course, in mainstream charedi yeshivos. (Only bale batim - nebbech! - wear blue shirts in frum circles.)

I remember distinctly the disgust I felt by people wearing almost the same clothes during the week as on Shabbos, even while frum. There was something disrespectful to Shabbos about it. And now, this dress code has become quite common in my home town.

Other changes
Other chumras and new customs include: not relying on cholov stam (despite stringent government regulations!), the issur of chodosh, mechitzahs during public lectures, mehadrin hechsherim, Avos uBonim, perek shira segulos, mehadrin buses and, believe it or not: washing strawberries with soap!

Evolution?
Orthodox Judaism (at least as I experienced it over only the last few decades!) still is work-in-progress and that it has grown organically over time. And unfortunately, the new chumras and superstitions appear to outweigh the disappearing customs.

Increasing the likelihood of me coming out of that kofer closet...

Alan Dershowitz: On Secularism

2011-11-01T12:47:00.001+01:00

Alan Dershowitz is one of the most famous US lawyers. What some don't know about him is that he was born from Orthodox parents, then became conservative and nowadays he is secular. Listen to this YU / Yale graduate when he speaks about separation of church and state.

From the Center for Inquiry.

On the Ibn Ezra’s ‘Rational’ Approach

2011-10-25T13:53:00.001+02:00

DovBear last year featured a posting by Yeedle called The Ibn Ezra's 'valid' approach for solving difficult verses (like the flood of Noah, topic of this week’s parashah).

I found the original quote on the Daat site and added my own translation. The text is from the second edition of the Ibn Ezra’s introduction to the book of Bereishit (Genesis):

והנה אומר כלל בתורה גם בדברי המקרא גם במשנה ובכל מסכתותובכל ברייתות ומכילתות
שאם מצאנו באחד הנזכרים דבר שיכחיש אחד משלשה דברים
כי האחד‚ שקול הדעת הישרה או כתוב מכחיש אחר בדרך סברא או יכחיש הקבלה הנגמרה
אז נחשוב לתקן הכל כפי יכלתינו בדרך משל‚ או תוספות אות או מלה על דרך לשונינו
ואם לא נוכל לתקן אל האמת‚ נאמר כי זאת החכמה ממנו נעלמה
כי יד שכלנו קצרה ודעת בני דורנו חסרה והדבר שהלאנו‚ יהיה כספר מונח ונעזב
וחלילה לנו לומר שהוא שקר וכזב גם לא נאמין שהוא כמשמעו רק נאמין כי הכותב זה הסוד הוא ידעו
כי יש בדברי הקדמונים סודות על דרך משלים וחידות שלא יבינום כל השומעים ולבעל המחקר יהיו נודעים

Now I will say a general rule concerning the Torah, both the words of the written text and the Mishnah and in all the Books (of the Babylonian Talmud) and the Baraita and Mekhilta. That if we find in one of the [above-]mentioned something that contradicts one of the following three [things]: Firstly, common sense (1) or a verse contradicting another verse through reason (2) or contradicting a taught tradition (3), then we should try to rectify it all, according to our capabilities: trough [seeing it as] a parable, or by the addition of a letter or word, in the way of our language. And if we can’t correct it [according] to the truth, we will say that this wisdom has disappeared from us because our mental capabilities are limited and the knowledge of our generation is lacking. And the matter that we exhausted (brought up?) will be like a book that is laid down and abandoned. And God forbid that we should say it is falsehood and a lie. We should also not believe that it is [to be understood] literally. Rather, let us believe that the one that wrote down this secret knows it (the secret). Because there are in the words of our ancestors secrets through parables and riddles that those who hear it will not understand and they will [only] be known to those who investigate it [properly].

What we learn from here from the Ibn Ezra, a supposed ‘rational thinker’: If something in our tradition is difficult to understand: a) first try to see if it can be understood as an allegory, b) then correct the text by adding one letter or word, and if this all doesn’t work: c) say that we can’t understand it because our brains are limited.

In other words, his approach is:

The Written Torah and the Talmudic books are always true, regardless of the facts.
If they don’t make sense, make sure it will make sense by saying it should be understood in another way or tampering with the evidence!
If this doesn’t work, just say: We can not understand it. Rational thinking ends here.

In short: a more ‘Rational’ Rabbi like the Ibn Ezra admits that he is not really being rational.

So tell me: how on earth can the representatives of Orthodox Judaism expect us to take the Torah, Gemara, etc. seriously?!?

Off The Derech Facebook Group Comment of the Week

2011-10-24T18:03:00.001+02:00

Ch. said:

It's really great to be a part of this group. I've doubted since I've been a child, but I've never had a community of people who are like minded. The nice thing is that if we all go to hell, at least I'll know people there ;)

In the meantime, the group has steadily grown to close to 250 members. Interested? Just request to be added here: http://www.facebook.com/groups/offthederech/.

PS Kiruv clowns need not apply.

Nira is Back!

2011-10-19T09:08:00.001+02:00

We missed ya, Nira! Looking forward to more kofer wisdom on the weekly parsha ;)

An Intro to the Documentary Hypothesis

2011-10-11T04:51:00.001+02:00

Great Article On Atheism

2011-10-05T17:31:00.001+02:00

Disclaimer: I do not, currently, classify myself as an atheist, but I find the following article from American Atheists very instructive for those who foolishly believe atheism is a religion. Vehameivin yovin!

The Persistent And Incorrect Belief That Atheism Is A Religion

I wrote an article a while back that debunks the myth that Atheism is a religion. The topic has come up frequently as of late, especially in light of some of my more recent writing, and it was one of the topics of discussion on the October 4th edition of Pennsylvania State Director Ernest Perce’s television show “Atheist Perspectives,” which I guest host from time to time. Over the past several weeks I have received numerous requests to “reprint” it here on the No God Blog, so without further adieu…
It is suggested by many people that atheism is a religion. Before we can examine why atheism is sometimes defined as a belief, it is important to understand who defines it as such. Rarely, if ever, will you find another atheist, agnostic, freethinker, humanist, secularist, etc., putting the definition of religion in the context of atheism. Almost without exception, it is the religious who do so. The reason is simple. The religious are are so caught up in their own beliefs that imagining another person without having any religious beliefs is largely incomprehensible. Those who claim that atheism is a religion do not only lack a clear understanding of what atheism is, they also tend to use religious terms to describe atheism.
There exists only one definition of atheism, and that is simply the lack of a belief in a deity. There is a philosophical aspect to atheism, but it is not part of the definition, but an extension of the individual. Atheism, in of itself, cannot be described as religous because it takes mental gymnastics to attach the narrative, experiential, social, ethical, doctrinal, ritual and materialaspects of religion to atheism because it is not a structured system with defined rules. It has no uniform beliefs and is not a means of understanding our existence.
With respect to the philosophical, atheism is not a philosophy. Unbelief in Santa Claus is not a philosophy and thus unbelief in deity is not. There does exist within the individual atheist a philosophy that is an extension of their atheism. The philosophical aspects of atheism are germaine only to the individual. They do not surround their lack of belief, but are an extension of their experiences that have been affected by their unbelief. Whereas religion is a shared experience that is directly dependent on and pertinent to specific dogma, doctrine and superstitions, the atheist experience is dependent on nothing and pertinent only to the effect that unbelief has on how the atheist can effectively integrate in a religious society.
Thus, any comparisons that put atheism in the same context of religion are dishonest dialogue. Atheism includes nothing even remotely similar to the religious. Atheists can and do adopt a wide variety of points of view that can include anything except the belief in gods and still fit the definition of atheism. Even those who are outspoken, widely read and well known cannot be intelligently compared to religious leaders, and atheist organizations cannot be compared to religious congregations. There exists none of the aspects that command such designations.
Inasmuch as the religous have a profundity to change the definition of words to suit their propaganda, atheism has no “preachers” nor “congregations”. Atheist groups have leaders and agendas, much in the way as groups such as the United Way. To suggest that atheist groups are religious in nature is not only preposterous, but shows a lack of intellectual savvy that is common found in very young children. The lack of “faithful believers” and the other inherent characteristics of religion do not allow for anything parallel between the two other than the assembly of human beings in one place. The religious leader has a goal of uniting his congregation under one dogmatic banner where there is no room for congregational interaction, skepticism or free thought. The atheist organization may or may not have the same speaker at their events, usually not, and the membership is encouraged to interact, discuss and be skeptical, and free thought and expression of opinion is accepted as the norm.
The fact that atheism has a literal definition and completely separate, individualized philosophical extension that is not connected to a common belief also separates it from religion. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in an article on Religion, includes characteristics that in no way reflect someone who lacks the belief in supernatural beings, nor anything that unites atheists on a dogmatic level. Atheism does not include any distinctions between sacred and profane objects. There are no ritual acts or a moral code believed to be sanctioned by god(s), or any characteristically religious feelings such as awe, a sense of mystery, guilt or adoration. Atheism includes nothing even remotely similar to prayer or other forms of communication with the supernatural.
Religion is a system of belief and atheism cannot be classified as a system of belief because there is no belief and there is no system. No rituals, practices, rules, doctrines or dogma. Atheism does not concern itself with gods and it is definitely not a “faith” that includes unquestioning belief requiring no proof. Atheists live according to reason and do not apply a reference to a higher power. Atheism is a scientific approach to theistic belief systems. It is not a theory, requires no faith and has no hidden agenda. While an individual atheist may seek to contradict theism by using rational thinking and scientific theory to debunk the dubious and irrational assertions of religion, atheism merely awaits evidence to confirm the existence of god.
Defining atheism as a religion is embellishment and bad philosophy. Atheism has no dogma, no rites, no holy books, no places of worship and no clergy of any description. It offers no moral guidance, no political opinions and no world view. Atheism is a religion like “off” is a channel on your television or bald being a hair color.
—————-
Al Stefanelli – Georgia State Director, American Atheists, Inc.

Well put, Al!

Strawman of the Week Award

2011-09-19T15:16:00.001+02:00

In the otherwise informative business news site Globes, Yerach Toker, a media advisor to the Knesset Finance Committee chairman and a self-proclaimed Haredi gets to write an article about the the Trajtenberg Committee (the committee appointed by Netanyahu to examine and propose solutions to Israel’s current socioeconomic problems). I quote (italics are mine):

It is not nice to say, but I have a feeling that the Trajtenberg Committee is simply superfluous. Even before the professor was brought in to carry out one of the main tasks the ministers in the elected government in any proper democratic country are responsible for, a few wise people and economists had already found the real culprits in the socio-economic crisis: the haredi (ultra-orthodox) community. The haredi community, so they claim, is responsible for the social -- economic situation, for holding back GDP, and in general, it is the haredi community that is guilty, end of discussion. It sounds good. The media also love it. So why not?
What happens to the haredi community never happens to any other sector in Israel. Reporters and commentators permit themselves to write the magical word haredi as much as they like, without learning about or investigating their way of life, or the significant socio-economic changes taking place in the sector. If these same reporters would just learn a little and get to know a few simple facts about the lives of these same "haredi " people they write about time and again, maybe they would understand how wrong and misleading they have been.
Some of the claims are simply unbelievable, yet over the years that the social debate has been taking place, they have become facts. In every argument between haredi and secular people, the same claims are heard, and this is despite the fact that most of them have no factual basis. And now, in the socio-economic campaign, these same commentators are repeating these claims and slogans without thoroughly checking them.
Many thousands of haredi men and women work for a living in the present, have done so in the past, and will continue to do so in the future. They work as teachers, educators, engineers, lawyers, doctors, journalists, laborers, and cashiers. This is the reality. Thousands of haredi people go out every morning to their place of work in order to properly provide for their families. This is the reality that I, as a haredi man, know and live. But you will never hear or read about this from well-known commentators or economists.
Another ridiculous claim that is heard again and again is that the haredi community does not pay taxes. I searched, checked, and asked my accountant which tax I, as a haredi person, am exempt from paying, and I just couldn't find one. He also could not find one. The haredi community pays much higher indirect taxes than secular Israelis. haredi families buy much more milk, bread and diapers than secular families. On each of these items, taxes are paid to the state. So where is this outrageous claim taken from, that haredi people do not pay taxes. Why do the media back these generalized, unfounded slurs?
Even if the claim refers to income tax, half of the haredi workers do not even reach the income tax threshold. Is this claim aimed at them too? Most income tax revenue comes from the upper echelons. It is time for this economic arrogance towards the haredi community to stop, and for these lies and slogans that are repeated, without having a drop of truth to them, to cease.
I would never dare to write a column on science. I also wouldn't write a column about biology or medicine. All of you wise-guys who blame the haredi community -- before you write something, check your facts, study a little, get to know some people, and know what you're writing about. The facts as I know them are not hidden. Whoever truly wants to know, is invited to become acquainted with the truth.

As behooves a media advisor, you can almost smell the propaganda in this piece. And how could Toker, being haredi himself, be objective about haredi workforce participation anyway?
Whereas I do agree that there may be many people who have absolutely no clue about haredi society and therefore may have a totally warped picture about its workforce participation, the following statistics as cited by Momo Mahadav, CEO of Maala (a non-profit organization that promots corporate social responsibility worldwide) are pretty straightforward:

The statistics on workforce participation in Israel are astounding. Some 59% of Haredi (ultra-Orthodox Jewish) men and around half of Haredi women do not participate in the workforce. Only approximately 27% of Arab women work, along with some 50% of people with disabilities. Altogether, this represents an enormous chunk of society that is simply not part of the country’s economic productivity.
Even more worrying than the present state of affairs is the future, if these trends are allowed to continue. At present, around half of Israeli children belong to population groups in which non-employment is inordinately high (mainly Arabs and ultra-Orthodox Jews). If nothing is done to correct the trend, future job prospects for most of these kids will be less than bright.

So all I can conclude is that Toker has been setting up the following strawmen:
Strawman #1: “Many thousands of haredi men and women work for a living”.
The same is probably true for drug trafficking. But as you can see in the above stats, haredi people participating in the workforce are in fact the minority. This is unprecedented in the history of Judaism.
Strawman #2: “Another ridiculous claim that is heard again and again is that the haredi community does not pay taxes.”
This statement is not quantified and therefore useless. Fact is that haredi people pay fewer taxes than people in other socioeconomic strata due to the fact that: a) they participate less in the workforce and b) those who are working are less likely to contribute much to the GOP because of the high birthrates and the lower-earning jobs they have (teachers, shopkeepers, etc.).
Conclusion: It looks like Toker is misleading the Globes leadership on purpose using the strawman technique. For this, he receives the Undercover Kofer Strawman Award.

A Choshuva Proposal

2011-09-14T17:12:00.001+02:00

Guest post by Bruce Holland

I'm sure many of you heard about the incident in Monsey during Hurricane Irene. A 5-year-old boy (Reuven Herbst) was being electrocuted by a downed power line, a neighbor (Moshe Reichenberg) rushed to rescue him. Reichenberg was killed, and Reuven was injured critically.

You can read all about it here.

As you can see below, in the Monsey ad magazine Community Connections dated September 8-15, approximately a dozen women from the neighborhood where this occurred (including Reichenberg's widow) took out a full-page ad. The ad quotes the Chofetz Chaim, who said (allegedly) that machlokes is like fire. The women urge everyone to forgive old grudges and increase peacemaking as a merit for the boy's recovery.

Underneath the copy, as you'll see, is a section that includes updates regarding Reuven's condition: August 31 update: Since this campaign began, we heard that the boy's heart became stabilized and strong (sic). September 5 update: Doctors say that his body is recovering!

Of course, they add 'Chasdei Hashem' and 'Hodu L'Hashem Ki Tov' so we all know that we're praising the Lord for these miraculous signs of recovery, not the righteous women who are burying hatchets and forgiving one another and letting go of resentments right and left.

(Side note, it's Lashem, not L'Hashem. But hey, some of these women are BTs, and some of the others went to Beis Yaakov schools, so they don't know any better.)

So they're implying that the kid is improving as a direct result of their actions.

But apparently their actions weren't good enough, because Reuven died on Friday, 9/9.

I have so many questions, and yes, I don't mind voicing them even while the Herbst family is still sitting shiva.

How do people--BTs or FFBs or Rabbis or Rebbetzins or lay people--justify this kind of sanctimonious nonsense? It's not like we haven't seen it before. We saw it after Motty Borger killed himself, and after Leiby Kletzky's murder, too. People actually believe that they can draw direct corollaries from human actions to G0d, unless and until they can't, at which point they shrug and say, "Who can understand the ways of G0d?"

But you just got finished beating me over the head with guilt, and building up my hopes, telling me that by forgiving my insufferable shrew of an aunt (for example) and letting bygones be bygones, I'm actually making the world a better place *and* helping heal a critically injured child!
Yes, but, you didn't do enough. The improvement in Reuven's condition was from Hashem. And the deterioration was also from Hashem. Who are we to question?

It's infuriating to me that this drivel is what passes for discourse and what passes for Torah and Yiddishkeit among the rank-and-file here in Monsey and throughout the 'frum' or 'haredi' world. They're pushing dumb, blind, feel-good thought control, telling a naive and unquestioning audience that it actually makes a difference, and then wringing their hands piously when G0d, in His infinite humor, yanks the rug out from under them.

I hope that this story causes more people to question and doubt. Because these questions and doubts are more real than a thousand parroted kapitlech of tehillim. If some lose their faith, so be it. If others find it strengthened, more power to them. But for G0d's sake, don't drink the kool-aid. Push back. Force these patronizing know-nothings to admit that they can't predict anything, they don't know anything, and that ultimately, if there is a G0d, they can't say anything about it.

Tuesday Kofer Links

2011-09-13T23:08:00.001+02:00

And on Tuesday he beheld the following koferdika posts. And behold they were very good:

A 'vort' on this week's parshah (Ki Tavo) called What is meant by ולא נתתי ממנו למת? by Dov Bear
A Messianic Prophecy for 1840 by Mississippi Fred MacDowell. (Did Moshiach oversleep?)
Varieties of Domesticated Religions and Smart Secular Strategies by John Shook of the Center for Inquiry
Why All Religions Are Scams by Al Stefanelli, American Atheists, Inc
Prayer: The Ultimate Hypocrisy by Al Stefanelli, American Atheists, Inc
Source of Values and Virtues by Three Jews, Four Opinions

A Telling Non-Rationalist Moment

2011-08-31T20:09:00.001+02:00

Some time ago, Rabbi Slifkin published a post on his great Rationalist Judaism blog called A Grand Vision. Before I say anything, I should note that I respect Rabbi Slifkin for his courage and scholarship. I read his blog frequently and am in possession of his great work called The Challenge of Creation. I think that if there would be more Rabbis like him, many people would not have opted out of Orthodox Judaism. So perhaps it is a good thing there is only Rabbi Slifkin. But I digress…

In the abovementioned post, he divulges the reason why he doesn’t address an overall vision of Judaism:

“I am more of an intellectual historian than a theologian. And my own emunah is primarily based on Jewish history, which doesn't speak to everyone, and on hashgachah pratis in my own life, which is very personal and non-rationalist to the extreme!”

Those are frank and honest words.

Which should make everyone think: If even the most radically rationalist Orthodox Rabbi I am aware of does not base his religion on facts but on faith, what does this tell us about Orthodox Judaism?!

Introducing the Off the Derech Facebook Group!

2011-08-02T14:13:00.001+02:00

If you haven’t read Abandoning Eden’s auto-biographical post yet, you may have missed the fact that we created an Off the Derech Facebook group, just a few weeks ago

Actually, the original group was already created a while ago, but thanks to AE’s visionary prod, I upgraded it to the new Facebook Groups format. And so far, it has been a smashing success:

Our group membership has grown from about 92 to almost 200 now
In total, over 500 posts were created!
There is even an Openly Off the Derech now for people who are more outspoken about their beliefs
Rumor has it that there now even is a Facebook group for people who are On the Derech as a reaction to this group, but I wasn’t able to find it so far

It really seems that users are finding a home in the OTD FB group. Probably also because this is a closed group, respecting people’s privacy and security. If you would like to know more, please read our suggestions.

Some positive feedback we received so far…

“I really like what this group represents. I feel like I can express anything and its almost like having a very diverse open minded family. Someone somewhere always seems to pop up and have your back. I don't mean to be mushy or anything but Thanks... “ (Daphne)
“just want to say how great it is to have this group...so far been doing mostly browsing instead of posting, but it still gives me a lot of strength by reading all of your posts” (Jeff)

If you would like to join the group, just request to be added and we’ll take it from there.

Update: Our group has a shotlink called http://www.facebook.com/groups/offthederech/. Also, the On the Derech FB group, created as a reaction to our Off the Derech FB group is called http://www.facebook.com/groups/openlyon/.

Why Debating is a Debatable Exercise

2011-07-19T18:25:00.001+02:00

Ever tried to argue on the Internet with a frum person? Whether it’s a guy like Amnon Yitzchak or JP, it usually doesn’t get you anywhere.

Here’s 3 reasons why.

1. Cognitive dissonance

Just imagine you would have to be open for suggestions that challenge your current belief system. It potentially could mean that you would have to revise this belief system and, ultimately, your comfortable way of life. There’s too much at stake for your average kiruv clown to even start considering the option of the other person being right: It may lead to the disintegration of the family or financial insecurity.

Now, just because I see this question coming: these are same reasons why skeptics like me decide to stick to their current lifestyle (at least, for the moment). However, there is an important difference: at least skeptics are willing to listen to what the other guy has to say. What you do with that information is for you to decide.

But there are more interesting reasons why it doesn’t pay to debate religion with the religious…

2. You stick to the original information

In Why You Think You’re Never Wrong (and What to Do About It), Lifehacker quotes a Scientific American article called Lingering Lies (note: you have to pay for the full article):

Once an idea enters your mind it's hard to get rid of it. Even after you've been proven wrong and know that you are, your brain is wired to stick with the original information. It even influences you subconsciously. This makes it exceptionally difficult to actually feel wrong even when you know you are. Scientific American has the explanation of this phenomenon:

Psychologists asked college students to read an account of an accident involving a busload of elderly passengers. The students were then told that, actually, those on the bus were not elderly. For some students, the information ended there. Others were told the bus had in fact been transporting a college hockey team. And still others were warned about what psychologists call the continued influence of misinformation-that people tend to have a hard time ignoring what they first heard, even if they know it is wrong-and that they should be extra vigilant about getting the story straight.

This is one of the reasons why it is so difficult to shake of the frum belief system.

3. Debating only strengthens beliefs

Now don’t get me wrong here. I am not saying that their arguments are better so we’d better stay out of their way. Quite the opposite.

As the author of You Are Not So Smart argues in a post called The Backfire Effect:

Once something is added to your collection of beliefs, you protect it from harm. You do it instinctively and unconsciously when confronted with attitude-inconsistent information. Just as confirmation bias shields you when you actively seek information, the backfire effect defends you when the information seeks you, when it blindsides you. Coming or going, you stick to your beliefs instead of questioning them. When someone tries to correct you, tries to dilute your misconceptions, it backfires and strengthens them instead. Over time, the backfire effect helps make you less skeptical of those things which allow you to continue seeing your beliefs and attitudes as true and proper.

It is the same reason why you double-check your weighing scale if the weight seems to high but you never double-check it if it tells you that you lost some weight.

Tachles: If someone is wrong and passionately believes he is right, not only are your chances small you will win the argument, but you may end up strengthening his opinions.

Our Local Vaad Hatznius

2011-07-18T12:32:00.003+02:00

My son had a siddur party at the kindergarten some monts ago. I find these parties odd; why celebrate the fact that a child receives a siddur if they anyway don’t teach them what they are praying about? Why make such a fuss about some practise that is post-biblical anyway?

At least my son had a good time.

But that’s not what I wanted to write about.

After the party, one of our neighbors (let’s call her lady X) complained that there were women at the party that did not wear any head covering. Now, lady X is really worried about her husband who can’t chas veshalom come to these occasions with untznius women. The fact that these women wear skirts and do not show any cleavage is somehow not what counts. It’s the sexy, uncovered hair of course!

Last week, we received a letter stating that since our kindergarten is Chinuch institution linked to our synagogue, we are kindly requested to be dressed appropriately when bringing our children to kindergarten, especially when it comes to head coverings. All phrased neutrally, as if there were men without head coverings as well.

Needless to say, I was outraged by the letter. Especially since I know that Lady X is very close to two of the three women that signed the letter. The fact that the letter was sent just a few days before the end of the school year only adds more suspicion that lady X was involved since the farewell party is the only thing still happening until the end of the year.

Now why can’t they just be grateful that the less frum people send their kids to their fundamentalist kindergarten? Don’t they realize they are just estranging people from Judaism?

What upset me most was this veil of halacha used. As if God wants you to be dressed in kindergarten the same way you are in shul just because it is a chinuch institution linked to our shul.

Perhaps I should come next time in my tallis. The idiots.

Update: Last time was still mixed, but now it was separated! Also, all the ladies that did not wear a head covering last time, decided to come without one. Bravo! The funniest is that my son danced with a girl from his class as part of the act. Tsss...tsss...past nisht! :P

Tale of a Tailor

2011-06-12T20:33:00.002+02:00

Faith Healing or Recovering from Religion

2011-06-01T08:48:00.002+02:00

We all know that if a tragedy befalls a person or a group of people, the way to deal with this is to strengthen our beliefs and to do some great deal of introspection. In the old day you would either fast or flog yourself, nowadays your Rabbi will advise you to give tzedakah.

In other words, we ate taught to always see the fault within oneself and never in God. And if we didn't commit any sins, perhaps it was our lack of simcha in learning Torh and doing mitzvos.

A similar way of thinking is the survival strategy of little children that are abused or who have parents that fight a lot. "Perhaps it was my fault?" "Maybe I caused my parents to be upset?" "I must have deserved this punishment. Somehow."

This has crushed many children's souls and stripped them of their self-esteem. And it may take decades to recover from these guilt feelings.

Don't you think it is odd that if things are bad we are to blame ourselves, but if things are going well we suddenly turn the tables and thank Hashem for his abundant blessings and mercy?

When the Jews went down to Egypt, Abraham was supposedly to blame because of his lack of faith. And that must have been a heinous crime because hundreds of thousands of Jewish people were enslaved and tortured because of it. But as soon as we are released from bondage, we thank the same Deity that put us there in the first place. How is that for Stockholm syndrome!

The only way to mature is to hold those authorities accountable for their own deeds, expose their true nature and change our childish thinking.

And then, only then we may experience true faith healing: freedom from religion.

New Blog on the Block

2011-05-22T19:52:00.000+02:00

Skeptical Yid, a frequently heard voice on OTD blogs and a partner in crime (we pun for fun!) has started a blog called On a Different Derech.

A very warm welcome to the blogosphere, ODD (somehow that sounds odd to me)! And may you be zoiche to many koferdika posts, omein!

Aished Jazz Player Insults Atheists, then Gets Grilled

2011-05-19T00:11:00.000+02:00

Rabbi Adam Jacobs, who was Aished after he got his degree in music at Brandeis and a Masters in Jazz Performance, has some assertions to make that infuriates atheists and insults people with an IQ higher than the amount of valves on a jazz trumpet. So he probably thought he did a big mitzvah.

In a blog post in the Huffington Post called Atheism's Odd Relationship with Morality, Jacobs displays his ignorance about atheism and reveals a condescending attitude so typical of kiruv clowns.

He starts off bashing Sam Harris, who is probably one of the greatest experts on the topic of morality and atheism:

What I do not yet understand is why he (or any atheist for that matter) makes so many moral proclamations. The average atheist makes certain basic assumptions about reality: that we all exist as a result of blind and purposeless happenstance, that free will is illusory, that there is no conscious "self" and that there is no objective right or wrong. As Dr. Will Provine has said, "[as an atheist] you give up hope that there is an imminent morality ... you can't hope for there being any free will [and there is] ... no ultimate foundation for ethics."

And later on, he writes:

Through my private conversations with atheists, most of whom I would describe as very good people, I am becoming convinced that they don't really buy the party line when it comes to ethics. Like it or not, they seem to have an objective sense that certain things are "just wrong" and it's almost as if those things are built into the fabric of reality. Objective morality requires an absolute standard by which to judge it. The alternative is amorality.

Very much the Aish party line of course.

Thank God therefore (sorry for the pun) for people like Ezra Resnick who wrote a devastating rebuttal called A rabbi’s odd relationship with morality. I highly recommend you read it.

Now, just for the record, I am not an atheist (perhaps I am agnostic, not really clear about that yet), but the argument that there are no real morals without God is really bad. Resnick offers a superb refutation and I hope Jacobs read it:

The Bible repeatedly and unequivocally supports slavery, tribalism and discrimination, and commands the destruction of entire nations including women and children. The idea that all people have intrinsic value and ought to be treated equally — regardless of race, gender, or religion — is a modern, secular value, resisted mightily (to this day) by traditional religion.

His conclusion is priceless:

If Jacobs were not so arrogant and ignorant, he would realize that whatever parts of his own ethics are defensible are products of human rationality and secular thinking. And if he cares more about obeying the purported will of God than about the actual well-being of people in this world, then his morality is a disgrace, and he might stand to learn a few things from some atheists.

I would suggest Rabbi Jacobs to stick to his posts on Jazz and Kabbalah, a topic that would be more in his area of expertise and less likely to insult his target audience.

For more reading material on morality and religion, click here.

Tuesday links

2011-05-17T16:44:00.001+02:00

It feels like Friday, but it really is still Tuesday. And I have some links that I think are worth sharing today:

Rav Shteinman On Torah, Steak And Ice Cream. One of our ‘gedolim’ pretends not to know what ice cream or steak is and is very insensitive towards a yeshiva bochur that happened not to like learning Torah. Familiar, anyone?
OTD shares some thoughts with us about living at home. Going OTD has ramifications for the family (shidduchim, how do I approach other people’s beliefs?). Many thought to ponder and he deserves our advise.
Daat Emet has a great section of Questions & Answers with some interesting English translations as well. This one is called Mass Revelation (make sure to click the English flag here!) where he refutes some Lawrence Kelemen arguments. He questions the assertion that people always double-check what their religious leaders tell them by referring to some urban legends. Also, he disputes assertion that what needs to be disproven is the fabrication of a story out of a whole cloth, whereas it is more likely a story that developed over time.

College is Assur

2011-05-16T16:53:00.001+02:00

I just read Fence Sitter’s excellent first blog post where she writes:

I did not go to college because I thought that it was assur to do so and then I had three kids by age 23.

This hit a raw nerve in me.

When I was in Yeshiva, I was also brainwashed not to go to University. In my particular yeshiva, the saying went “PENN yifteh levavchem”. In other words, going to PENN (or for that matter any IVY League university) would definitely make you go astray…

After 3 years of yeshivah, I was convinced that going to university would make me lose my yiddishkeit. So I did some 3-year course way below my ‘level’ and I am actually currently working on a job that required only a 3-month course.

(This, of course, is one of the pet ‘proofs’ of the frum community that you don’t really need a degree to earn a living: “I know someone who did not do a degree but earns a lot of money”. The exception should somehow prove the rule. Well, actually, the rule is that people who don’t have some higher degree of secular learning will end up having a job in which they can not support their families.)

Of course, not having studied is not trivial to me.

First of all, there is little possibility for me to advance in my job since I haven’t got the right CV because most jobs in IT require some higher level of studies. OK, I am sure there are jobs that don’t really require that as a rule, but it nevertheless is give as a requirement for pretty much every interesting job I ever looked for.

Secondly, I should easily be able to study according to the career coaching tests I did. It is stam a waste not to have studied and instead doing some lame course where my brain cells were fermenting most of the time, I could have learnt some tachles skills.

But what really eats me is that I never knew what it is like to be in university and never had the intellectual satisfaction of studying something real.

Now that I am married with 2 children, I will have to think of a way to do a bachelor with an Open University program if I am ever to pursue some higher level studying. Since most of them require some 10 hours of week studying (minimum!), Î am currently too reluctant to sacrifice the time I have with my family, especially my children, and my wants and aspirations will have to take a backseat.

The Banality of Eden

2011-05-09T00:25:00.000+02:00

One of the reasons, I am sure, why they don't start teaching children Torah with Bereshit is because teachers would get too many simple questions they couldn't answer. I mean, if people already can't make up their minds if Adam haRishon had a belly button, what could one answer if asked how they could already converse in Leshon haKodesh on the first day they were created?

In any case, I am reading The Bible According to Mark Twain and I just have to share this genius piece with you. Enjoy!

Today, in a wood, we heard a Voice.
We hunted for it, but could not find it. Adam said he had heard it before, but had never seen it, though he had been quite close to it. So he was sure it was like the air, and could not be seen. I asked him to tell me all he knew about the Voice, but he knew very little. It was Lord of the Garden, he said, and had told him to dress the Garden and
keep it; and it had said we must not eat of the fruit of a certain tree and that if we ate of it we should surely die. Our death would be certain. That was all he knew. I wanted to see the tree, so we had a pleasant long walk to where it stood alone in a secluded and lovely spot, and there we sat down and looked long at it with interest, and talked. Adam said it was the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
"Good and evil?"
"Yes."
"What is that?"
"What is what?"
"Why, those things. What is good?"
"I do not know. How should I know?"
"Well, then, what is evil?"
"I suppose it is the name of something, but I do not know what.""But, Adam, you must have some idea of what it is."
"Why should I have some idea? I have never seen the thing, how am I to form any conception of it? What is your own notion of it?"
Of course I had none, and it was unreasonable of me to require him to have one.
There was no way for either of us to guess what it might be. It was a new word, like the other; we had not heard them before, and they meant nothing to us. My mind kept running on the matter, and presently I said, "Adam, there are those other new words -- die, and death. What do they mean?"
"I have no idea."
"Well, then, what do you think they mean?"
"My child, cannot you see that it is impossible for me to make even a plausible guess concerning a matter about which I am absolutely ignorant? A person can't think when he has no material to think with. Isn't that true?"
"Yes -- I know it; but how vexatious it is. Just because I can't know, I all the more want to know."
We sat silent a while turning the puzzle over in our minds: then all at once I saw how to find out, and was surprised that we had not thought of it in the beginning, it was so simple. I sprang up and said, "How stupid we are! Let us eat of it; we shall die, and then we shall know what it is, and not have any more bother about it."

Can't beat Mark Twain.

Some More Unsollicited Chinuch Advise

2011-04-18T12:17:00.001+02:00

So yesterday, during the annual chometz sale (which in my opinion is a ferking joke anyway), I happened to bump into X. X has feverishly tried to convince us to send our oldest child to the haredi institution as opposed to the normal Jewish school we will send him to next year.

Some things he said:

“I know someone that I think you could talk to. His children also went to the haredi school and still found a job”.

I love the way how people use exceptions to prove their point. Especially since these kids happened to be geniuses and probably were able within no time to make up for what they missed.

Note that X is also a working man but he has been rather unsuccessful. Of course none of his children have a decent education and I am sure that if it weren’t for his wife teaching at the other school (!), the child allowance he receives for his army of kids and other tricky shtick he wouldn’t be able to make ends meet at all.

And why the F does he think I have a problem so that he is doing me a favor referring me to someone to speak to anyway?!

“You are playing with neshamos”

I told him we knew some fine people who had their kids in the non-haredi school and turned out fine. Of course he named one or two kids that went OTD and all I could do was secretly being jealous of the bright kids.

“Better a frum shnorrer than a frei bank manager”

Now this part was quite revealing. Here is an admission that staying within the haredi fold is more important than a child’s human dignity!

A poor man is considered to be like a dead man (Nedarim 64b)

Chinuch Angst

2011-04-06T12:30:00.001+02:00

Yesterday, my wife and I decided against sending our child to the haredi school in our area and to sign our big son up for the local Jewish primary school that has a better chol program although their kodesh program sucks (even the headmaster admitted that his son needed extra lessons!).

Now, although I am an undercover kofer, I still don't want my son to be a 'boor veam haaretz', especially since I respect my wife and we sort of agreed to keep a minimum standard of yiddishkeit at home.

Of course, we are aware of the possible repercussions if our son gets accepted (which is most likely). We already had people come up to us with unsolicited advise, emotional pleas and high expectations. Most likely, this will change our social landscape and although I think it is all right, still, I am afraid to lose people I was very friendly with and for the unknown in the more snobbish, less frum crowd.

Also, we are slightly anxious about the fact that our son will now be confronted with many ‘foreign’ ideas (which is good!) and that I would need to deal with questions I'd prefer not to answer.

In any case, the social 'angst' that I have resulted in the following strange dream last night:

I was called up to the Torah in my old shul at home and before I was able to say anything, the congragation already replied. I was amazed and shrugged my shoulders, and then said "Borechu es Hashem hamevorach" and nobody responded.

I then looked around and suddenly saw that the paroches was taken off, the cover of the bimah was removed and people were sitting on the bare floor, as if it were Tisha be’Av and they were mourning for my soul.

I turned back to my father and he looked at me with a face that did not display any surprise, rather sympathy. I then asked: "This is a dream, isn't it?". And he replied "yes".

I then woke up in a worried state of mind. Not for being afraid to have taken the wrong decision but for that which lies ahead…

There is Still Hope for Peace

2011-03-15T13:26:00.001+01:00

After all these sad events, some glimmer of light?

WTF Moment of the Day

2011-03-03T18:38:00.001+01:00

So I am working late with nothing to eat for dinner and am looking for some sneaky treife little something to silence the rumblings in my stomach. The risk is low here, because it is out of town and most people are home by now.

I walk past the train station and see this new sushi bar. I smile and grab the voucher inside my coat pocket. I look inside the store and the asian-looking lady smiles at me and waves. I vaguely recognize the face but am not sure from where.

I enter the store. She keeps on smiling and says hi. I give her the voucher and she shows me the choices.

“These not kosher fish”, she says. And then it cuts like a knife. “You’d probably like vegetarian, right?”. I nod yes because I have no choice anymore.

OMFG. This sushi chick used to work at the local kosher restaurant. We used to come there rather frequently and she even knew our food preferences, our kids…

“And the sauce is parev, have a good night. Shalom!”.

I walked out with a red head and look up to the sky thinking: “If You really exist, what a sunnuvabitch you are!”

The Luz Bone

2011-02-23T14:15:00.001+01:00

Returning in the flesh, Jewish style
According to current Jewish tradition, the belief in the resurrection of the dead is a principal article of faith:

“And these are the ones that will not have a portion in the World to Come: One who says that the resurrection of dead is not of biblical origin.” (Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:1)

(Incidentally, this means that if you don’t believe in heaven, you will not gain entrance to heaven. Which, I am afraid, won’t really scare anyone that doesn’t believe in heaven in the first place.)

Resurrection creates an obvious problem: After a person dies, the body disintegrates to such an extent that resurrecting it as is will not be feasible. Even better: sometimes there is nothing left of a body, e.g. when a body was burnt.

How does Judaism deal with this theological problem?

As it often does, the answer needs a miracle. The Rabbis believe that there is a bone in the human body from which the body is rebuilt after the resurrection. This is what is called the Luz bone. As stated in Bereishit Rabba 28:3:

“And G’d said: ‘I will wipe away mankind’... Hadrian was [once] grinding bones. He asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Chananyah: ‘From where does the Holy One Blessed be He reconstruct man in the future to come?’ He answered him: ‘From [the] Luz of the spine.’ Said he: ‘From where do you know this?’. He said: ‘It has come to me [it was delivered to me as a tradition] and I will show you.’ They tried to grind it in a mill but it was not ground, they burnt it in fire but it was not consumed, they put it in water but it was not softened, they put it on an anvil and he started to beat it with a hammer but the anvil slipped, the hammer was broken and it remained intact.”

Incidentally, muslims also believe in the Luz myth and call it "^Ajbu al-Thanab" (عَجْبُ الذَّنَب). At least something Muslims and Jews agree on!

However, it seems to be that the chiddush of the Luz bone was not entirely ours. The JewishEncyclopedia.com website brings the following:

Possibly the legend owes its origin to the Egyptian rite of burying "the spinal column of Osiris" in the holy city of Busiris, at the close of the days of mourning for Osiris, after which his resurrection was celebrated (Brugsch, "Religion und Mythologie," 1888, pp. 618, 634).

Luzing it
Now everybody knows that if you cremate a corpse that only ashes are left. Even the Ohr Somayach website says in an article on cremation (disagreeing with the Midrash):

“Furthermore, one who has his body cremated will not merit resurrection a fundamental belief of Judaism expressed in Maimonides' 13 Principles of Faith: I believe with complete faith that there will be a resurrection of the dead, when the wish emanates from the Creator. One explanation is that cremation destroys even the extremely hard luz bone from which a buried body is reconstituted.”

The fantasy only starts from there. Same web site, different article:

It [the Luz bone] has curious properties: It receives nourishment only from food eaten Saturday night at the melave malka meal (Mishna Berurah 300:2 in the name of some ‘kadmonim’).

Rabbi Asher Meir from on the OU website adds:

“The Eliah Rabbah relates a remarkable tradition explaining the connection between the LUZ and melave malka. He points out that originally, the entire body was indestructible; Adam and Chava were meant to live forever.

Death was decreed for them only because they ate of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. However, one tiny bone was not nourished by this fruit, the LUZ, which is only nourished by the Saturday night meal! Thus this bone retained its original, pre-fall immortality.”

Meir goes on to explain that Motzaei Shabbat is the day after Shabbat, the day representing Olam Haba and that Motza’ei Shabbat exudes a higher level of perfection. Therefore:

“this special limb was created to be nourished and cultivated only in an environment of perfected development.”

Note that association between ‘Luz’ and defying death was already hinted at in Bereishit Rabbah 69:8. There it tells us about the city of Luz and its magical powers over death:

“This is the same Luz that the Angel of Death never had power over.”

Shoyn.

Bone of contention
Instead of scientificillay trying to prove where the bone can be found, i.e. testing where this strongest bone really is to be found, there is a difference of opinion. After all, chazal would have nothing to teach if we didn’t have a machloket about every single thing, regardless of its sillyness.

The Arizal and Chida hold that it is located in the place where the knot of the tefillin is placed. This certainly sounds more mystical than some other commentators (including Aruch, Rokeach, Recanati) who believe that the Luz bone is located at the bottom of the spine and that it is nothing less than the tail bone (Coccyx), which incidentally is believed to be evidence for evolution.

And you know that many Rabbis believe that not believing in evolution is almost an article of faith. Just as belief in the resurrection is!

On the Age of the…Gedolim™!

2011-02-21T11:14:00.001+01:00

It’s a long-established fact that Lithuanian Rabbis (better known as gedolim™ or giants) have de facto become the Rebbes of the yeshivishe world, including when it comes to brochas (blessings). The Rabbis have been put on such a high pedestal that their followers can’t conceive that they may be making mistakes. Let alone turning senile.

Just consider this: Rav Kanievsky is 83 now, Rav Eliashiv 100 and Rav Steinmann around 99. The question then arises: can one really on such old people for their guidance?

Perhaps below you will find a hint. In this video that was posted on Life in Israel, you can see that Rav Chaim Kanievsky does not have a clue about what Beit Shemesh is, one of the major Jewish centers in Israel. He even asks if it is in America!

That Beit Shemesh is situated in Israel should be obvious since Tenach is full of references to Beit Shemesh:

Joshua 15:10
Joshua 19:22
Joshua 21:16
Shoftim 1:33
Shmuel I 6:19
Melachim I 4:9
Melachim II 14:11
Divrei Hayamim I 6:44
Divrei Hayamim II 25:21
Divrei Hayamim II 28:18
...

Now if you will argue that haredim don’t learn much Tenach, they still should know their Gemara. Well, it happens to appear several times, not including the Yerushalmi:

Sotah 35a
Avodah Zarah 24:2

So there are two possibilities: either our Gadol Hador™ doesn’t know his sources, which would be unforgivable for a ‘gadol hador’…or he is turning senile.

In which case we should probably disregard any psak or cherem issued in his name from now on.

(Still, you could perhaps argue that he was having a bad day. Well, in that case, we should probably disregard any psak or cherem issued in his name since he was born since we don’t know if he was having a bad day or not.)

What If You Were Wrong?

2011-02-06T23:27:00.000+01:00

This is one of the questions that nagged me in the back of my mind ever since I went to yeshivah: how do we know we are right and all the others wrong? It would be quite an accident for us to be right amongst all these thousands of different belief systems.

If you think of it, if there is only one true belief system, the vast majority of religions will always be wrong. And every religion has a reason why they are right and all the others are wrong.

Dawkins brought his point across rather clear here:

Buying David Gottlieb's book 'Living up to the Truth' on Torah Min Hashamayim never managed to convince me. What is your excuse for believing in exactly the same thing your parents believed in?

Atheists are Wrong and Evil!

2011-01-31T16:38:00.000+01:00

LOL!

Now This Torah is Exciting!

2011-01-29T23:35:00.000+01:00

Let me explore this bright Torah!

Torah Bright, the most famous Australian Snowboarder:

Damn, she is a mormon. I guess that explains her first name though.

Another Awful Amnon Yitzchak Moment

2011-01-09T02:03:00.000+01:00

In the clip below, so aptly put together by NuBemet, Amnon Yitzchak is asked a question by a 17 year old kid. The kiruv clown shows his true face: a smug, condescending idiot.

The question was a simple one: All scientists believe that the world is older than about 5770 years old, so doesn't this contradict the Torah?

Amnon's answer is basically that everyone agrees at least that the world is at least 5770 years old, whereas there are doubts about the scientific estimates made, so why not stick with what we know for sure?

This, of course, is an extremely weak argument and at best a play of words. It also makes me wonder why he doesn't use Gerald Schroeder's more sophisticated arguments like the one he published on Aish haTorah's website. I guess he is afraid his viewers won't understand them or he doesn't understand them himself (likely option for someone with such a track record of lousy answers).

Even more interesting is his premise that the Torah says that the world is 5700+ years old. Where does it say that in the Torah? It is brought in Seder Olam Rabbah, but it is not an article of faith anywhere whatsoever.

If Amnon manages to convert tens of thousands of people to his primitive, fundamentalist beliefs, what does this say about his followers?

Wednesday posts

2011-01-05T18:39:00.000+01:00

Excellent post by Larry Tanner called Do You Really Believe in an Afterlife? with an excellent question to ask your local kiruv clown:

Imagine you have a blue pill and a red pill, and you must swallow one of them right now and not the other.

If you take the red pill, you will die immediately. If there is an afterlife, all your sins will be pardoned and you will spend eternity there. If there isn’t an afterlife, you will just be dead.
If you take the blue pill, you will live a long, happy, and fulfilling life on Earth. You won’t die early of illness or injury. You will be an asset to society. But if there is an afterlife, you will not partake in it when you die. When you die you will cease to exist, even if there is an afterlife for everyone else.

Which pill will you choose?

Study probes religious teens' sexual guilt (YNet), via FailedMessiah.com:

Asif was relying on testimonies by interviewed teens. One of them described his emotional reaction to watching pornography as "a feeling of self-loathing, inability to be in close proximity with myself, repulsion from being with myself, nausea, vomiting, and general disgust".

Another described religious quandaries: "Every time I battle the urge, I don't know how to describe it, I feel pressure, fear… waiting for the punishment to come already because I know I deserve it."

Please Bring a Photo of Your Inner Beauty for the Shadchan, by OnionSoupMix, responding to an article about eating disorders in the religious community:

That whole article is so incredibly ironic in light of the kiruv machine's continuous insistence that following the laws of tznius will ensure that women are valued for their inner beauty

Who wrote the Zohar? Not Rashby, by DovBear, citing 8 reasons why it was not written by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai:

There's a book we call the Zohar that is attributed to someone who lived long ago. For those unfamiliar with the background, the Zohar is a work of Jewish mysticism alleged to have been written in the second century by Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai (ie Rashby) and passed, teacher to student, until the 13th century when Moses de Leon published it.

Tuesday Posts

2011-01-04T00:19:00.000+01:00

Lakewood’s Reasons for Supporting the Vos Iz Neias Ban on FrumFollies:

Otto Von Bismarck once quipped, “Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made.” Bans are like sausages, a melange of ingredients that are only held together by the casing of the final printed product. If you want to understand a ban disregard the text. Pay attention to the players who came together to stuff the casing and then sell the sausage. This ban is about factional politics. It is about Vito Lopez and David Greenfield against Dov Hikind and some other politicians. It is aboutMatzav and Yeshiva World News attacking a very successful competitor, Vos Iz Neias. It is about the business interests of BMG. It is about politics, not about tzniusor kovod hatorah.

Eating disorders a problem among haredim on Ynet:

Israel has one of the highest rates of anorexia, bulimia and binge eating in the world, said Dr. Yael Latter of the University of Haifa. No organization tracks the numbers of eating disorders among Jewish women, which experts say is partly because of a cultural reluctance to divulge the illness. Studies in different countries and Latzer's research, however, indicate a high rate in Israel.

Reversing the Hierarchy on Rationalist Judaism:

For anti-rationalists, the Gedolim are much more important than the Rishonim. But even the Gedolim are only respected and followed insofar as their views concord with what the anti-rationalist himself considers legitimate. Amazingly, the hierarchy of rabbinic authority that they loudly claim to be true, is the complete opposite of the one that they actually follow.

A Narrow Bridge, film about Sexual Abuse in the Frum Community now on YouTube via FailedMessiah:

Not very professional but, hey, it's a start.

Morality Shmorality

2010-12-28T06:04:00.000+01:00

When you go to kiruv seminars or if you listen to shiurim of the more moderate voices within Judaism like the one of Rabbi Nathan Lopes-Cardozo (whom I do hold in high esteem), you will always hear the mantra that Judaism is an ethical religion, with the main imperative for this Chosen People® to be a moral light unto the nations.

The facts don't substantiate this claim though:

We are commanded not to take revenge or to bear a grudge. However, God holds himself to different standards that he judges other people by, by calling himself a 'El Kanah Venokeim', a jealous and revengeful God.
The book of Shulchan Aruch we are being taught most, is the daily ritual part of Orach Chaim. If you learn for Smichah (Rabbinic ordination), you are likely to be taught the dietary laws of Yore Deah. However, how many people do you know that are proficient in Choshen Mishpat (financial law)? This book will most likely contain moral laws. And guess what? These laws are mostly man-made (although they may reinterpret verses to fit them back into the Torah).
We are all being taught that, according to one opinion, Rivkah was 3 years old when she married Yaakov. Do you remember being taught that marrying a toddler was disgusting? No, of course not, we will find anything to make the Avos holy. The cognitive dissonance is mind-blowing consider these comments at The Yeshiva World:
A 3 year old then was not the same 3 year old now. Things were different then. People lived longer, and they did not age. We can already see from the story with Eliezer and the camels that she had high intellect and a high level of functioning.And:
It's very clear she musta been born during Adar Sheini and therefore as her real birthday didn't come around too often, she was really more like 12 years old.
The conquest of Kenaan that butchered the local population in the name of God.
The many laws that were perhaps considered advanced in antiquity but are considered by most people to be reprehensible nowadays, such as the laws condoning slavery, death penalty for homosexuality and other 'crimes' such as waiting too long before consuming sacrifices.
The position of women in Judaism: whichever way you want to turn it, she is unable or not supposed to bear witness, become a judge, show her hair in public, sing in front of others, study Torah for its own sake, write a Torah scroll, inherit like men do, marry or divorce a man, etc.

But more than the question of whether certain laws and / or customs are ethical or not is this. The focus of our education is not to be moral and ethical people. What really really counts is what we keep or not. What we wear and how to fit in. The uber-goal is to subjugate yourself to the law and the community and to be 'Shomer Tora uMitzvos'.

Whether this Torah or these Mitzvos are morally inspiring or not.

This, in my opinion, is one of the main points why people are uncomfortable about their Judaism and, eventually, slip out through the back door.

Wednesday links

2010-12-15T22:51:00.000+01:00

Today's roundup:

Speaking Volumes About ‘Hush’ Of Sexual Abuse, by Hella Winston. If I have enough time, I will write a short book review myself.
The little lies of Jewish history, by DovBear. Excerpt from the quoted article:
So much of what Orthodox, and particularly ultra Orthodox Jews argue for in their own lives, particularly when it comes to family and working life, is based on what they claim is "tradition". Turns out it's not, and probably never was.
2010 army figures show 25% jump in Haredi enlistment, Haaretz. What will its impact be? What type of haredi goes to the army? Would be interesting to read a proper study about this.
Kugel's HTRTB (Part 5): How the Bible Became the Bible, by Larry Tanner on Textuality. I loved Kugel's How to Read the Bible although I disagree with the conclusion. Larry Tanner is brilliant, as always.
Author Christopher Hitchens in conversation: On his Jewish grandmother, his atheism, his writing—and facing his own mortality, by Noah Richler from macleans.ca. True-sounding quote:
...as can dealing with the argument from charity. If in a seminar you were to argue that I’ve committed a well-known fallacy by not deriving my conclusions from my premises and I reply, “You don’t know what you’re on about, I’ve just given 10 bucks to a homeless person,” my answer wouldn’t be accepted. But if you’re a religious person, it’s a fantastic counter-argument. It’s the special permission they expect to be granted to talk nonsense.

Monotheistic Faiths Violent by Definition?

2010-12-14T23:56:00.000+01:00

Thanks to Baruch Pelta for directing me to the debate video below on 'Islam is a Religion of Peace', where Ayaan Hirsi Ali says that by definition all monotheistic religions can not be peaceful.

And then it hit me:

All 3 monotheistic world religions claim to have the true faith and that God has chosen them as opposed to any other religion.
By definition, the majority of people / religions does not believe in what you are saying (the other faiths or non-believers).
So there must be some justification as to how your monotheistic religion will still win in the end in order to inspire your people to spread this religion.
There are two options on the table (correct me if I am wrong): either they must convince the 'non-believers' about the truth of religion a,b or c, or by forcing it onto them.
Since most people tend to follow the beliefs of their parents, regardless of their inherent truth (if one of them were hypothetically to be true, the majority of the people will still believe in the other options), this convincing business will never happen.
So a monotheistic must then either rely on subjugation of their opponents whenever they can get away with it actively or by believing in some apocalyptic event, which is violent by its very definition.

I'd be interested to hear about what you have to say in the comments. The debate is interesting although I think that those that claim Islam is a Religion of Peace really meant to say that they want it to turn into a religion of peace.

Would have been way more interesting if a muslim clergyman would have the guts to turn up for these debates:

ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF PEACE from Intelligence Squared US on Vimeo.

Amnon Yitzchak refuses to deal with NuBemet

2010-12-03T13:44:00.001+01:00

Here is a classic case of how kiruv clowns like Amnon Yitzchak refuse to deal with questions they are being asked and how condescending and cheap their retorts can be. NuBemet has an excellent YouTube portal where he wipes the floor with their arguments and this makes the likes of Amnon Yitzchak nervous.

In the clip below, a person in the crowd asks Amnon Yitzchak an innocent question. See how the Yemenite kiruv clown with GPS receiver in his turban answers:

This is Relitainment™ that frum people watch in order to suppress their doubts. It is cheap and false. I feel a pity for the people that become frum because of him. But then again, I guess I pity all who do so of their free will...

Pass this on to your frum friends and don't forget to note their answers in the comments below.

Selected Kofer Posts

2010-11-24T22:57:00.000+01:00

I thought I'd share some post links with you before I take off to Israel for a few days. Not all of them are koferdik, but nonetheless interesting kofer reading:

The Kvetch of the Kolel Wife (Life in Israel blog)
Instead of shortening hours for the overworked kolel wife, we should indeed be looking for a solution where the husband gets up his lazy bum to work for a living.

Getting over the joy of believing? (Jewish Atheist blog)
Losing belief can be like losing an abusive partner; emotions can endure against better knowledge.

Are people saying "I am spiritual" to just appear attractive? (Center for Inquiry)
One explanation why so many people are not honest enough to be agnostic.

A Creator God cannot be a Reasonable Explanation (Center for Inquiry)
Kiruv clowns preach otherwise, but really they have no better explanation for the universe.

Beliefs validate actions, actions don't validate belief (Thinking Bochur blog)
Good quote: "Religious people are religious because overall it works out for them. Then because it works out for them they validate it by convincing themselves it is true." The guy has great potential to become one of us.

See you again next week!

Heaven for Real?

2010-11-22T12:52:00.001+01:00

The proof is finally there! Heaven is for real after all, we were all wrong all along the way!

Hmmm…did he really just mention Jesus? He must’ve been mistaken; he probably meant to say Moishe Rabeinu olov haSholom!

Oh wait, they wrote a book about it and are earning money on this stuff.

Dang, disappointed once again.

PS Listen carefully to the slow answers of the child; I don’t think he even believes in it himself. But the father is far better at lying.

I Love Graphjam

2010-11-20T22:33:00.000+01:00

Hachnosas Kalloh Appeal

2010-11-18T10:31:00.001+01:00

Even though I am not a fan of shnorring and definitely not online, especially in light of the recent tzedokah scams, still I found it hard to resist sharing this holy appeal with you.

May we all be zoiche to biyah, each one to his / her own liking, omein.

Oh, Those Heretical Trees!

2010-11-15T22:54:00.000+01:00

Tree-ring dating or Dendrochronology is a reliable, scientifc way of determining the age of trees and, if you combine the results, of the miminum age of the earth.

And guess what? The trees whisper to us that they alone already can refute the myth of the earth being less than 6000 years old. In fact, we can prove, not using carbon or any type of dating, that the earth is at least 11000 years old!

Of course, the earth is way older than that, but that would already border on heresy... No, seriously, we just don't have an unbroken record of trees beyond 11000 years ago, so we can't go back further than that (in the meantime).

Credits: YouTube user cdkoo7. This video can only be found on Dnatube due to featuring music from Sony Music Entertainment (The Final Countdown, by Europe). If the logo in the top obscures viewing, just switch to fullscreen using the icon in the bottom-right.

A Taste of Some Warped OJ Thinking

2010-11-14T08:50:00.000+01:00

A recent post called The Long and Winding Road to P'shat -- Part Two by Shel Bassel of the Parsha'l Thoughts blog is symptomatic to the way many OJs think about learning Torah.

He starts off well by saying that:

Any thoughtful student of the Torah is confronted with myriad problems. Even if we can get through some sort of cursory reading of, say, the first chapter of B'reishit, we are then confronted with blatant contradictions to that narrative in the second chapter! One moment you think that male and female were created simultaneously into a world with a whole ecosystem and the next (chapter) you see that a male is created before any female or any trees, for that matter.

This is one screwy story, you might say.

Further perusal of the Torah will yield numerous anomalies including contradictions in the particulars of various commandments, many obscure passages and quite a bit of repetition.

In short, a rather messy book.

Shokiach, I like it so far. Almost offered him to do a guest post. But then:

If you take the critical approach you'll say that these discrepancies reflect a multiplicity of authors whose stories and versions are stitched together over time. This basic approach leads to the Documentary Hypothesis—and a very fancy hypothesis it is!

Also, to my mind, somewhat dull.

Is that your criterium for true or false?!

But more than that, it doesn't do a very good job of explaining how we end up with this variegated text. It's all well and good to say that various texts got edited together but then why would anyone put together a text that is so full of problems sometimes even within the same paragraph?

This hypothesis seems to assume that if God had written a book it wouldn't be so messy.

Oh boy, I am starting to wonder what stuff this guy was smoking?!

It doesn't do a good job explaining how we came up with such messy text? Well, it is a much better explanation to say that this mess is written by God! That sounds blasphemous, keveyachol!

Science does not concern itself with God and that for obvious reasons. Just like that it doesn't concern itself with Santa Claus. The hypothesis is not at all about why God can't have written the text. It tries to understand how such a 'messy' body of text came about from a scientific point of view.

He then goes on to ask us to accept the premise that God wrote the Torah (premise 1: that there is a God, premise 2: that he wrote the Torah). And here comes the crux of his piece. He wants us to believe that the universe is messy as well and maybe we just have the mistaken view that all should be perfect but that God does not work that way.

The same applies for the the Torah, of course:

Maybe it is precisely those parts of the Torah which seemingly contradict or don't fit in with each other very well that point to deeper meanings on other planes?

This is essentially the rabbinic approach.

When one puts his or her mind to it, and struggles with the text, one can actually, albeit usually briefly, hold the contradictory passages simultaneously and see something beyond.

OJ logic at its best. We have a messy Torah and no real good answer as to why. Instead of answering that its Author is imperfect, it is actually a sign of how perfect and unfathomable He really is!

(But I guess we can't expect much from a guy that posted a YouTube video called Why The Destruction of the Temple Was Worse Than The Holocaust...)

The Hand of Hashem?

2010-11-09T12:55:00.001+01:00

A relative of mine is a tmimusdika (gullible) person with a good heart that sometimes sends me stuff that I just need to defuse.

His latest mail showed a picture of a 'photo taken in Alabama:

The mail was forwarded and labeled as "G"D PARTING THE SKY". It was accompanied by the following text:

Bob Frew sent this out.

"I took this picture on Int.20, traveling to Leeds , AL . It has given me strength in the times of trouble. I feel I should share it with the rest of the world. I hope it is an inspiration to you. It just goes to show what we already know...We have a God, and he's watching over us.

I e-mailed this picture to News Channel Fox 6. I was contacted by Meteorologist James Spann. He said that this picture of the sky is showing up in all states and around the world. He wanted to know where I was from and where I took it. He saw a similar picture taken in Texas. He said this is amazing to him.

Would you look at this picture? It reminds me of that song 'He's got the whole world in his hands.' He is definitely in control. I needed this today more than ever.. Enjoy and pass it along!"

First thing you need to do when you read any forwarded frum mails is to check your facts. Just go over to Snopes and enter 'Hands of God'. It will quickly lead you here.

The original picture looks like this:

The picture was doctored by someone for www.shacknews.com and doctored with Photoshop in 2 minutes.

Interesting points:

This is clear proof that someone deliberately misled others in order to make people believe in God.
Wonderful how fundies always try to make their claims credible (in this case a meteorologist)!
WTF does the picture prove anyway?!?

Nira on Noach

2010-10-08T15:50:00.001+02:00

Nira’s rant on the flood, now also in English!

Enjoy and share with others!

Artscroll Censorship Unmasked

2010-10-07T13:20:00.002+02:00

From On The Main Line, a curious case of zealous censorship. Rabbeinu Artscroll has released an English translation of Rabbi Zalman Sorotzkin’s ‘Oznayim Latorah’. And guess what? A remark about Robinson Crusoe, seems to have gone missing.
The original:

The new Artscroll holy version, censored and all:

The following lines are missing after the paragraph that ends with “…and talk with him.” and before the paragraph starting with “Sitting in isolation…”:

I found the agony of solitude described in the book "Robinson Crusoe" where the tale is told of a man who survived a shipwreck by landing upon a small, desolate island without another soul. It described his great difficulties until he was able to find something to eat and drink, and to shelter himself with the skins of animals. After dwelling for a long time on this island, he began to forget how to speak and almost lost his mind. The writer portrayed with vivid colors the man's longing for another person to speak with.

Because a godol will, of course, never read any chol books!
PS I heard of this kind of thing before where a psak of Rabbi David Zvi Hoffmann got censored, to do with kol baisha ervah but perhaps that was the Tzitz Eliezer.

Update: Failed Messiah posted it, with a hat tip. Thanks Shmarya! And don't forget to vote for Shmarya!

Exaggerations? How about ‘Lies’!

2010-10-06T16:57:00.001+02:00

I ran into a nice article this week on The Skeptical Review Online, just in time for parshas Noach, called The Numbers of the Book, by Fred Titanich (now how ironic is that name?!).

He introduces his article as follows:

Every now and then, I run into someone who believes that every word in the Bible is true. If the Bible says that men lived for 900 years and that 5 linear miles of water fell on the earth, then it must have happened. There is really no way to prove that these events did not happen, since by definition, a "miracle" is something extraordinary.

However, sometimes the Bible writers slipped up. When they told a story, nothing but superlatives would do. More than anything else, the numbers that are tossed around in the bible show this to be true. Apparently, mathematics was not their strong point, because on numerous occasions, the Bible writers made statements that simply could not have happened. The following are some of the Bible’s numerical claims that are physically impossible.

He goes on to speak about Solomon’s offerings, the Temple’s gold and silver, the quail (‘slav’), the size of the city of Nineveh and the wall of the city of Aphek. Read more here.

His conclusion fits well to this week’s parshah as well:

So when the Bible says that Methuselah lived to be 969 years old, can we really take it at face value? In fact, if it can be conclusively proven that the Bible is filled with exaggerations, we have to wonder what else it lied about.

Amen!

PS Subsequently, I found an article called Those Amazing Biblical Numbers, on the same website. Read it.

Update: Nira sent me the following required watching in preparation for your Shnayim Mikra ve’Echad Targum for the week:

Little Goodie to Start Off the Week

2010-09-20T13:07:00.001+02:00

One of the sweetest discoveries I have made lately is the availability of a Open Yale Course on the Introduction to the Old Testament / Hebrew Bible. This means that you can actually inform yourself on the scientific aspects of the ‘Hebrew Bible’ for free on a university level. Something that I love. I am already through the sixth lecture.

Class sessions can be found here. Click the picture below for the first class:

I’d be interested to know what you think.

Happy 5771th Birthday, World?

2010-09-08T11:53:00.000+02:00

"The Lion Man",
dated 32'000 years
old.

According to our Sages (who were much smarter than you are, so don’t even start to doubt their eternal words of wisdom!), the world has a birth date that can be precisely determined. If we may take their word for it, the world will turn 5771 this Rosh Hashana.

Except…that this can not be true, because the world is around 4.5 billion years old (and the universe around 13.75 billion years, by the way). I don't think we had a calendar around that time.

Of course, there are always people who are willing to bend any logic and verses in the Torah to support their irrational beliefs, such as Dr. Gerald Schroeder. Others remain steadfast in their primitive opinions (Rabbi Dr. David Gottlieb, e.g.).

However, there is clear proof that there were intelligent human beings walking around on this earth, showing signs of high sophistication. As Wikipedia reads on the topic of Evolution of Human Intelligence:

Between 170,000 to 120,000 years ago Homo sapiens first appears in East Africa. It is unclear to what extent these early modern humans had developed language, music, religion etc.

They spread throughout Africa over the following 50,000 years or so: around 100-80,000 years ago, three main lines of Homo sapiens diverged...

...The "Great Leap Forward" leading to full behavioral modernity sets in only after this separation. Rapidly increasing sophistication in tool-making and behavior is apparent from about 80,000 years ago, and the migration out of Africa follows towards the very end of the Middle Paleolithic, some 60,000 years ago. Fully modern behavior, including figurative art, music, self-ornamentation, trade, burial rites etc. is evident by 30,000 years ago.

The oldest unequivocal examples of prehistoric art date to this period, the Aurignacian and the Gravettian periods of prehistoric Europe, such the Venus figurines and cave painting (Chauvet Cave) and the earliest musical instruments (the bone pipe of Geissenklösterle, Germany, dated to about 36,000 years ago).

So if we are able to date human art from 36'000 years ago using Radiocarbon dating, it means that indeed our ancestors lived much longer ago than the kiruv clowns make us believe.

On that note, you will surely enjoy the video below, called Response to INCONVENIENT SCIENCE THE AGE OF MAN by YouTube user thisis3d.

Happy 'New Year' to you all!

How To Keep Your Kid 'On The Derech'

2010-08-27T16:55:00.000+02:00

Rabbi Horowitz, in his latest column, listed a “Top Ten Things Parents Can do to Keep Their Children on the Derech”:

A charming twenty-something Chassidic fellow pushing a baby carriage containing a newborn child floored me with his response. “Rabbi,” he said, “My son is two months old. Just tell me what I should do so [that] he doesn’t go off the derech.” And he wasn’t kidding.

That comment reflects the deepest fear that parents have nowadays – that their adorable child might c’has v’shalom (G-d forbid) morph into an unruly teenager who veers off the path (derech is Hebrew for path) to a successful life, abandons Yiddishkeit, and falls into a sub-culture of antisocial and self-destructive behavior.

Disregarding the obvious bull-shit of ”and falls into a sub-culture of antisocial and self-destructive behavior”, it is interesting to note that there is such a deep-rooted angst for one’s kids to go off the derech.
Why do you think is that?

(Interesting detail is that a haredi Rabbi is willing to acknowledge the issue in public. Is the teshivah movement not about to bring Moshiach? On the other hand, he is spearheading a ‘kiruv krovim’ outreach organization called Project Yes, so this probably serves his cause well.)

RH thinks the problem lies mainly with the way parents deal with the children.

The ten things he suggest for parents who seek to prevent their kids to get into antisocial and self-destructive behavior are (some comments in square brackets):

1. Belong to a kehila with a Rov who can guide you, and live spiritual, meaningful and inspired lives where you are true role models for your children. [Get a guru to control your family unit]
2. Create a happy and nurturing home environment; avoid corporal punishment and refrain from sending them to settings where it is condoned.
3. Spend quality time and nurture your relationships with your children and seek help should you find yourself exuding negative energy with them.
4. Be flexible – treat them as individuals and allow them to chart their own course in life. [This advise is obviously necessary in frum circles but mostly superfluous in secular families]
5. Protect them from abuse and molestation.
6. Live in a forbearing community where the members have good Torah values and guide your children to develop friendships with peers who have good middos and share those values.
7. Provide them with a good and broad-based education – in Judaic and general studies. [I thought the gedolim think that secular studies will cause people to go ‘off’?]
8. “Stay in the Game” – never give up on them no matter how bumpy the road educationally or socially, and professionally identify and address any learning disabilities.
9. See to it that your values and those of their schools are consistent and maintain congruence between your words and deeds.
10. See that they exercise (very) often and have varied hobbies and interests.
And … always and above all, daven to Hashem for siyata dishmaya.

OK, so these are actually 11 points :)

Notice how the majority of these points concern issues that are not related to OTD but ensure the emotional well-being of the child, such as creating a safe environment, stimulating emotional and physical health, as well as ensuring proper education

However, IMHO, Rabbi Horowitz missed out on at least five points that may well keep people in the cozy nest of frum and heimishe yiddishkeit:

Stop teaching kids the literal and fundamentalist understanding of the Torah and other ‘holy writings’. Every child with a half a brain will sooner or later figure out that the stories of creation, the flood, etc. are etiological at best.
Stop this nonsense of gedolim being super heroes. They are all normal people who can be manipulated by askanim (see here).
Stop teaching these ridiculous midrashim from The Midrash Says; kfitzas haderech and the moon being shrunk are an insult to a youth’s intelligence.
Stop forbidding masturbation; everyone does it, will subsequently feel terribly guilty, and then start to resent Judaism.
Start saving marriages by teaching children in puberty about sex and leaving room for pre-marital, consensual sex. Many divorces can be avoided like this.

Whereas RH thinks that the problem lies (besides the factor of ‘siyata dishmaya’) solely with the way the parents treat their kids, the ‘problem’ lies with the product he is trying to sell: authentic / antiquated Judaism.

Eye Opener

2010-08-23T13:34:00.001+02:00

I am currently reading Richard Dawkin's The Blind Watchmaker". Although Dawkins' style does not really conform my taste, still he makes many good points that totally change my original anti-evolutionary bias. After all, how could an eye suddenly grow on someone's head and how can random change bring these changes about in such a small time scale of only a few billion years?

I still have many questions (how did the first DNA get created, e.g.) but I have 'evolved' in the meantime and I am looking forward to the rest of the book.

In the meantime, I came across a website with an article called "Top 10 Signs Of Evolution In Modern Man" (hat tip: NuBemet). It has 10 good arguments against the idea of a perfect Creator.

It shows some 'mistakes' of creation. All these ~~fuckups~~ faux passes can be ascribed to remnants of evolution. They also concern a favorite item of the kiruv clowns and evolution bashers - the eye:

If you watch a cat blink, you will see a white membrane cross its eye – that is called its third eyelid. It is quite a rare thing in mammals, but common in birds, reptiles, and fish. Humans have a remnant (but non-working) third eyelid (you can see it in the picture above). It has become quite small in humans, but some populations have more visible portions than others. There is only one known species of primate that still has a functioning third eyelid, and that is the Calabar angwantibo (closely related to lorises) which lives in West Africa.

If you still wonder how it could be that the eye evolved, even though half an eye doesn't do much, I invite you to watch the below video (a true eye-opener!):

Nira's Parsha Rant: Bereishit

2010-08-19T17:39:00.000+02:00

Nira is currently redoing some of her old videos, with a vengeance. Join Nira as she explores with us the secrets of the universe...

It Ain't Always That Simple!

2010-08-12T11:41:00.000+02:00

a Torah scroll

Last Shabbos, while I was getting bored during davvening, I peeked into the Gutnick edition Chumash and found the following on Parshas Re'eh (11:26): רְאֵה, אָנֹכִי נֹתֵן לִפְנֵיכֶם--הַיּוֹם: בְּרָכָה, וּקְלָלָה. "Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse".

Onkelos translates: חֲזוֹ, דַּאֲנָא יָהֵיב קֳדָמֵיכוֹן--יוֹמָא דֵּין: בִּרְכָן, וּלְוָטִין (no deviation from the original).

Targum Jonathan ben Uziel explains a blessing and a curse as בירכתא וחילופה, "a blessing and its opposite".

In the Sparks of Chassidus section, the following commentary is brought:

How could God, who is the very essence of good, issue a curse? Are we not taught, "No evil thing is issued from Above"? (Bereishis Rabah 51:3)

In truth, however, God does not issue curses at all, and only blessings are "issued from Above". The problem lies "below", in our ability to receive God's blessings. If a person is not a fitting receptacle for the goodness which God bestows upon him, he will simply be unable to accommodate God's blessings. The result will be that after its downward path through the spiritual worlds, the blessing is received in a way that appears, to our human eyes, as a curse (See Shaloh, Re'eh 374b). At least that is how it appears in the spiritually dampened moments of exile.

Thus, Onkelos, who authored his work amid the Babylonian exile, interpreted the word קללה as "curse" (see Classic questions). However, Targum Yehonoson wrote his commentary in the land of Israel during Temple times, when the average person could easily appreciate that "no evil thing is issued from Above". Thus, he rendered קללה as "substitute" (חילופא), indicating that God Himself only issues blessings, but that His blesings may later become "substituted" by something else.

And this also explains why, in the Messianic Era, we will not only forgive God for the sufferings of exile, but we will thank Him (see Isaiah 12:1), for then it will be evident how even God's "curses" were in fact blessings in disguise.
(Based on Likutei Sichus vol. 19, p. 13ff; vol. 4, p. 1091)

Right? Wrong!

There is no Targum Jonathan ben Uziel on the Torah, only on the prophets as testified in the Talmud. The Targum Jonathan that we know is in reality the Targum Yerushalmi (the Jerusalemite Targum). The reason why the two got mixed up is probably a copyist error: he thought that ת"י (T"Y in English) was Targum Jonathan and not Targum Yerushalmi (both have the same abbreviation in Hebrew). That is also the reason why, in the academic world, this Targum is called "Pseudo-Jonathan".

So the whole shtickl Torah from the Rebbe was made out of whole cloth. Nice try, still. And a nice fantasy about the times of Mashiach, explaining away the age-old problem of how evil can exist in the face of a benevolent God.

During that same Shabbos, I had to sit through a shiur which had a surprising moment.

In Devarim 13:2-6, it says the following:

If there arise in the midst of thee a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams--and he give thee a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spoke unto thee--saying: 'Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them'; thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or unto that dreamer of dreams; for the LORD your God putteth you to proof, to know whether ye do love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. After the LORD your God shall ye walk, and Him shall ye fear, and His commandments shall ye keep, and unto His voice shall ye hearken, and Him shall ye serve, and unto Him shall ye cleave. And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken perversion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed thee out of the house of bondage, to draw thee aside out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put away the evil from the midst of thee.

The good old passage about the commandment of killing false prophets, i.e. people that don't believe in your crap and decide to prophesize some more crap.

If you look up the Baal Haturim entry to כִּי-יָקוּם בְּקִרְבְּךָ in our chumashim, it says that בקרבך in Gematria is equivalent to זו האשה, which would mean that the false prophet in your midst is the woman.

Now, before we all start bashing the sages again (which they do deserve in e.g. the story of the garden of Eden where Eve is blamed for all our sorrows and in many passages in Tenach / the Talmud), the female discrimination in this case boils down to Christian censorship.

In the more elaborate Peirush haTur al Hatorah of the Baal Haturim himself, a note is made that the original gematria reads: כי יקום בקרבך נביא - זו האשה ובנה, 'THE woman and her son", obviously referring to the false Messiah Jesus and his mother Maria.

So to both the Rebbe and the Chazal-bashers: it ain't always that simple.

Nira's Mishpatim Rant Now Online

2010-08-05T23:13:00.000+02:00

And here is Nira's latest mussar drasha on parshat Mishpatim:

More videos of here can be found here.

Enjoy!

Motze Shabbos Meditations

2010-08-01T01:16:00.000+02:00

As I was waiting for maariv to start at the local Chabad shteeble, I leafed through one of their chassidus publications.

In the obviously nicely sponsored magazine, the Baal Shem Tov explained the difference between mussar and chassidus. He likened it to a burglar that wanted to steal something. The baal mussar screamed: "You are a filthy thief!" and scared him away. The chassid held the thief so strong to his chest that he wouldn't leave anymore.

Kach hee darkah shel Torah: These are also the two ways Orthodox Judaism deals with people on the fringe: either they are being castigated and chased out of the camp, or they are being blackmailed emotionally and thus choked until they wants no freedom no more.

Meditate on that!

Another thought as I was saying "Atta chonantanu" during the evening prayers:

Blessed are You LORD our God, King of the universe, who distinguishes between the holy and the profane, between light and darkness, between Israel and the nations, between the seventh day and the six days of work. Blessed are You, LORD, who distinguishes between the holy and the profane.

Note how there is this continuous contrast: between holy and profane, between light and darkness and Shabbat and the weekdays. Likewise, Israel is compared to light and the nations (read: non-Jews) to darkness.

Now let the kiruv clowns meditate on that!

Nira Amit on the Parasha: Yitro, Part I

2010-07-28T19:59:00.000+02:00

After her well-received first post on Parshat Yitro part II, I decided to translate part I as well. Nira Amit is an upcoming star in the Kofer world! ;)

OTD Depression and The Blame Game

2010-07-26T23:33:00.001+02:00

It’s a common phenomenon that needs no further introduction: People who turn their back on Orthodox Judaism are often faced with depression. This is easily understandable, as they are often lonely and are left to their own devices.

However, they are often told that they brought their depression on themselves by distancing themselves from God and Klal Yisrael. It’s they who are messing up their lives and God who knows where they’ll end up (drugs, suicide, etc.). In short: It’s all their fault!

Alice Miller (in her book The Drama of the Gifted Child), defines depression as follows:

Depression consists of a denial of one’s own emotional reactions. This denial begins in the service of an absolutely essential adaptation during childhood and indicates a very early injury. There are many children who have not been free, right from the beginning, to experience the very simplest of feelings, such as discontent, anger, rage, pain, even hunger – and, of course, enjoyment of their own bodies.

Religion is all about denying true feelings, redirecting emotions and controlling the natural child within. Laws are ruling the orthodox person’s every step, even in the bathroom (how much you are allowed to uncover yourself, with which finger not to wipe yourself off, etc.).

Orthodox Jews are told what to read, what to believe, what to think and what to feel, what to wear and what to eat. Everything else is kfirah.

No wonder that many people have the inner need to rebel! To put it a little more blunt: if an Orthodox person did not rebel against OJ during their youth, I doubt it that they were really given the opportunity to experience their youth. After all, who wants to voluntarily let his inner self die?

The critical voices that so conveniently blame the victims also conveniently forget that people like them may have been the root cause for the heretics’ depression.

And that by ostracizing them from their communities, they are standing idly by the blood of their (former) brothers.

Tisha Be’av Headbanger: Burn Baby Burn

2010-07-19T23:23:00.001+02:00

It surely beats the hell out of Eicha…

Oh yes, and these are my favorite Tisha Be’av posts for this year:

Rabbi Pinky’s Tisha Be’av droshah
Tisha be’av pickup lines (Frum Satire)
9 Av (Daat Emet)
When was the Temple destroyed (Dov Bear)
Do you really want Moshiach? (Dov Bear)
Tisha Beav (Shilton Hasechel)

May we merit next year to have the fast of the ninth of Av be turned into an unorthodox hell of a party!

An Eye-Opening Moment

2010-07-04T13:10:00.000+02:00

I read some Kugel last night and then it hit me: The Torah does not for one pasuk claim that God was its author or that it was inspired by anybody. For someone who was indoctrinated into the belief that God directly wrote / dictated every single verse of the Torah, this is totally new information.

Actually, the evidence seems to be on the contrary: the very first pasuk suggests already that it was written by someone not God as the creation story is written in the third person:

"In the beginning, God created heaven and earth."

Or, in the 'original':

בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ

Notice that it says "God created" and not "I created"!

To which I can only say: "Open my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things from your Torah"!

Oxymoron of the Day: A Meaningful Fast

2010-06-29T21:24:00.003+02:00

My wife's niece, a young and idealist OM, wished me an 'easy and meaningful fast' (tzom kal vemashmauti) on this day of 17 Tammuz.

But how meaningful can a fast day be if we commemorate:

the beginning of the destruction of a city that now, after so many years of exile, has become a city that is more vibrant than in biblical times (ever)?
that Apostomus burned a Torah scrol, when we have had so many other book and Torah burnings at other times: why is this Torah different from all the other ones?
that Moses broke the first set of tablets but we received a new set of Ten Commandments afterwards?
that we were not able to sacrifice anymore in the Temple because there were no animals anymore: who needs animal sacrifices anyway?
that an idol was placed in the Temple, but what does that matter if the Temple itself got destroyed anyway?

Needless to say that the Turkish showarma today was dedicated to all those fools who think the fast day is meaningful, just because they were told to bellieve so.

Amitnira's Posting on Parshat Yitro, now with English Translation!

2010-06-23T02:51:00.000+02:00

My first experiment with translations. And since I am a fan of amitnira, here is her weekly parasha!

Sign of the Times

2010-06-14T10:11:00.001+02:00

My thoughts about the latest child molesting scandal…

The old sign:

The new sign:

I love my Photoshop! ;)

Textual Variations in Tenach

2010-06-10T18:53:00.001+02:00

I vividly remember the time when a friend of mine, at that time studying Semitic languages, told me about textual variations in the Torah.

The example he gave me was Parshas Korach (this week’s Parsha for those ammeratzim that didn’t know ;):

וַיִּקַּח קֹרַח, בֶּן-יִצְהָר בֶּן-קְהָת בֶּן-לֵוִי; וְדָתָן וַאֲבִירָם בְּנֵי אֱלִיאָב, וְאוֹן בֶּן-פֶּלֶת--בְּנֵי רְאוּבֵן

The translation somehow doesn’t seem to flow since vayikach (and he took) does not seem to refer to anyone else than Korach since it doesn’t say “Korach, the son of Izhar took Datan and Aviram the sons of Eliav and On ben Pelet the sons of Reuven took” but it says “Korach, the son of Izhar took and Datan and Aviram the sons of Eliav and On ben Pelet the sons of Reuven”.

So what did they take? Where does the verb (‘took’) act upon?

Rashi says:

He took himself to a different side, to be disassociated from the community and to cast aspersion on the kehunah. This is why Onkelos translates, he separated himself from the rest of the community in order to maintain the dispute. Similarly, "why does your heart take you?"--- (i.e.,) it takes you to separate you from other people. Another interpretation [of] "Korach took": He won over the heads of the Sanhedrin among them, with flattering words, as it is said, "take Aharon," "take words with you."

So it either would mean “he took himself” or he convinced the Sanhedrin (‘caused to be taken?), which either way is problematic.

He showed me a different version of Chumash where it said ‘vayakom’ (and he got up), which seemed to fit in better:

And Korach, the son of Izhar stood up, and Datan and Aviram the sons of Eliav, and On ben Pelet the sons of Reuven”.

Now, we were taught that there are hardly any chilufei girsaot (different readings) of the Torah except for 9 differences between our scrolls and the Yemenite scrolls.

However, there are many more manuscripts that can shed light on different verses in the Torah. And I didn’t know about it! I remember how uncomfortable I was in this situation and how I tried to talk myself out of it.

Of course, things are a bit different at the moment.

In light of the above, I can warmly recommend an interesting article on the website of the Biblical Archeological Review by Harvey Minkoff (professor of linguistics at Hunter College in New York City) called “Searching for the Better Text - How errors crept into the Bible and what can be done to correct them”.

Happy reading!

OJ and Schools for Suicide Bombers: A Comparison

2010-06-04T17:31:00.001+02:00

Sharmeen Obaid Chinoy gave a presentation for TED called “Inside a school for suicide bombers”.

TED introduces her speech like this:

Filmmaker Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy takes on a terrifying question: How does the Taliban convince children to become suicide bombers? Propaganda footage from a training camp is intercut with her interviews of young camp graduates. A shocking vision.

Here is the excellent video:

After the video, I could not help but seeing some disturbing parallels to the insular world of Orthodox Judaism.

Some excerpts from her presentation:

“I, in my research, have seen that the Taliban have perfected the way in which they recruit and train children. And I think it's a five step process:

Step one is that the Taliban prey on families that are large, that are poor, that live in rural areas. They separate the parents from the children be promising to provide food, clothing, shelter to these children. Then they ship them off, hundreds of miles away to hard-line schools that run along the Taliban agenda.

Step two: They teach the children the Koran, which is Islam's holiest book, in Arabic, a language these children do not understand and cannot speak. They rely very heavily on teachers who I have personally seen distort the message to these children as and when it suits their purpose to. These children are explicitly forbidden from reading newspapers, listening to radio, reading any books that the teachers do not prescribe them. If any child is found violating these rules, he is severely reprimanded. Effectively, the Taliban create a complete blackout of any other source of information for these children.

Step three: The Taliban want these children to hate the world that they currently live in. So they beat these children. I have seen it. They feed them twice a day dried bread and water. They rarely allow them to play games. They tell them that, for eight hours at a time, all they have to do is read the Koran. The children are virtual prisoners. They cannot leave; they cannot go home. Their parents are so poor, they have no resources to get them back.

Step four: The older members of the Taliban, the fighters, start talking to the younger boys about the glories of martyrdom. They talk to them about how, when they die, they will be received up with lakes of honey and milk, how there will be 72 virgins waiting for them in paradise, how there will be unlimited food and how this glory is going to propel them to become heroes in their neighborhoods. Effectively, this is the brainwashing process that has begun.

Step five: I believe the Taliban have one of the most effective means of propaganda. Their videos that they use are intercut with photographs of men and women and children dying in Iraq and Afghanistan and in Pakistan. And the basic message is that the Western powers do not care about civilian deaths, so those people who live in areas and support governments that work with Western powers are fair game. That's why Pakistani civilians, over 6,000 of whom have been killed in the last two years alone, are fair game. Now these children are primed to become suicide bombers. They're ready to go out and fight because they've been told that this is effectively their only way to glorify Islam.”

OK, OJ is not that extreme. But there are many parallels that can be found on ‘this end of the extreme’. Let’s go through the steps in our imagination and replace for one moment the Taliban movement with Orthodox Judaism…

Step 1: If you ensure that families are large and therefore poor, they are more likely to become extremists. This is almost a prerequisite to the politicizing of religion. You cut their funds and they become dependent on you. (“Rebbe, I have financial problems, what should I do?”. “Pray harder, my son! And are you sure you gave 10% of your money to tzedokah?”) As a side effect, large families create a political time bomb that will ensure political influence.

Step 2: One does not learn how to rely on his own interpretations. Pesukim are distorted, raped by the Rabbis (we call that midrash, btw) and taken out of context altogether. Also, we are supposed to avoid sforim chitzoiniyim, radio, television, Internet, etc. and are warned to be careful not to befriend off the derech and non-OJ people (unless for kiruv purposes).

Step 3: We were taught that we are different from the goyim, that we should not mingle with them, to hate their aveiros and machshovahs. We are taught that Kach hi darkah shel Torah: Pas bemelach tochal. Frum people are encouraged to go to Kolel and be poor (or marry rich in-laws). We are supposed to learn Torah day and night. We are virtual prisoners of the system.

Step 4: Brainwashing starts at a very young age. My toddler son already knows that goyim are different from us and that we have mitzvos (boruch Hashem) and they don’t (nebbach). The earlier, the better!

Step 5: We believe that there is almost no holier thing than to die, like Rabbi Akiva, al kiddush Hashem, with Shema on our lips. But thankfully, it is not a Jewish thing to actively peruse this martyrdom.

This is where the comparison ends. For now.

Ostrich Politics

2010-05-30T13:47:00.001+02:00

Two friends that I have come out to carefully avoid the subject like a plague and act as if nothing happened.

One is a longtime friend of mine who is modern orthodox but knows in his heart that he only keeps what he feels like (shabbos, kashrus, etc.). He is very self-righteous about kashrus, possibly because he once was a mashgiach and may have to again once he loses his managerial position that he mostly owes to his father-in-law.

He is the one who invites me to davven for the chagim in his institution and has asked me again to davven for the yamim noraim (and noraim they are!). Now am I crazy here or do you only ask deeply religious people that are fitting (‘hagun’) for this job? The only conclusion that I can draw is that he doesn’t really care, as long as I am not too open about my kofer thoughts so that he would be forced to turn his back on me.

Another friend is currently getting out of a depression. He’s got the right meds and he seems to be faring well: he cuts his hear, grooms his beard and wants to lose weight. He seems to be acting as everything is fine and, who knows, may join the shidduchim scene soon again.

One small caveat: he confided in me that he does not feel at home anymore in the frum world.

Now I don’t think you can wish these things away like that. I expect him to have a real breakdown soon and I hope it is just not as bad as last time where I had to bring him to hospital for an overdose on sleeping pills.

Sticking your head in the sand apparently is more comfortable than embracing the inevitable….

Erev Shabbos Tznius Update

2010-05-21T16:46:00.001+02:00

Shoes can be dangerous. Just imagine: your wife is wearing black, closed, medieval grandma shoes in combination with thick brown stockings and then you come across one of these yummy, photoshopped legs with open shoes? Don’t you just vant to shqueeze them?!?

For more Taliban-inspired gezeilah pictures, click here. And, if you are zealous enough, feel free to join the Tznius Police Facebook group!

Hat tip: Life in Israel

Shavuot Post-Mortem

2010-05-21T16:18:00.001+02:00

So I survived this Shavuot feeling like a wreck. But then again, who doesn’t?

Erev Yom Tov, we had fleishigs and after my late ‘lunch’ (sandwich and a bag of roasted peanuts – needless to say that they had forgotten to put a hechsher on the products, those damned ammaratzim!), I was already cracking. Due to my heartburn and my wife’s pre-yomtov burnout, we decided to only make kiddush and have some cake with it. No washing, no bentching, yaye!

I stayed up late for the first night, learnt a bit (prepared some Daat Emet ‘maamarim’) and then decided Facebook chat was a worthier way to bide my time and went to bed at 2:30 AM. Thank God for cell phones and SG for the great chat. Now I know why the yidden at Matan Toire overslept! ;)

The next morning, davvening was at 10 AM, thanks to Chabad®. I was a chazan for Mussaf (which I like doing and I tried my best not to think about Facebook chats, clipping finger nails and polishing my shoes on Yom Tov) and then we had guests for lunch until 3:30 PM. By then, I was really, really exhausted and bursting from all the milchigs.

After the traditional nap, we ate again with the kids before the second night since our kids can’t stay up that long. I then walked to Chabad again for minchah with my neighbor and walked back for a maariv in the area. Which, of course, started after nightfall (10 PM!) and then some person who never comes to davven with us had a ‘chiyuv’ (read: his wife had Yahrzeit!). Now if only he had a decent voice and knew the nussach well enough…

The second day we were invited and I tried to restrain myself (no seconds and not too much challah). I was getting quite proud of myself…that is, until I surrendered when dessert was served: 3 diferent types of cheesecake, a chocolate cake and a pudding cake. I was filled to the brim of my black hat! Can you feel the spirituality come out of my ears?

In the afternoon, I did not manage to sleep (but I was able to read some kofer literature from Isaac Bashevis Singer’s ‘The Magician of Lublin’), then another Chanad mincha-maariv (forewent the meal with bagels and salads and instead read in one of Rabbi Wein’s history aka propaganda books).

I came home exhausted. Luckily, the end was near and we made havdalah, followed by hours of dishwashing, laundry and preparing for Shabbos (we are having guests sleeping over).

I am floored. I feel disgusted. I experienced Shavuos.

The Holy Sages' Opinion on Breasts of Twelve Year Old Girls

2010-05-14T00:02:00.000+02:00

Another great 'Daily Pilpul' by Daat Emet. Feel free to donate to them on their website for all the wonderful work they are doing by exposing the falsehood of Orthodox Judaism.

The post is called "What size breasts are required for a girl to be an adult?":

According to Halacha a female has three legal stages to her life, based on age: girl, youth, and adult. The legal status is determined by two parameters: age and physical maturity. In terms of age: a female is a girl until the age of twelve, a youth from twelve to twelve and a half years of age, and adult after the age of twelve and a half years. In terms of physical maturity: a female is a girl as long as her breast are immature, a youth when her breasts are as a fruit in the process of ripening, and an adult when her breasts have grown.

The sages were divided on the size of an adults breasts. One said that her breasts were large enough that a sort of crease was formed beneath her breasts, and Rabbi Akiva said that her breasts had grown enough that they incline. Another sage said that the aureole around the nipple begins to darken. A different sage said that her breasts are large enough that if one flattens the nipple is takes time to rise again.

One of the scholars, Samuel, clarified the opinion of the sage who said that a sort of wrinkle is seen beneath the breast. This does not mean that the breasts are very large and so a wrinkle is seen, but that if the girl puts her hands behind her back, a wrinkle is noticeable beneath her breasts.

To authenticate his idea, Samuel examined the breasts of his 12 and a half year old maid. After he examined her he paid her 400 zuz for having caused her embarrassment by forcing her to expose her breasts to him. Samuel was extremely careful about causing embarrassment to his slaves and maids, so he did not give his maid for strangers to sleep with, only his own slaves. In contrast, Rav Nachman was not careful about causing embarrassment to his maids and would give them to others' workers for sex. Rav Sheshet would even give them to gentiles for sex.

Other sages defined the adult woman's physical maturity needed to determined her legal standing. The sage Rabbi Elazar son of Tzadok ruled that her breasts must be large enough that she could sway them. Another sage, Rabbi Yochanan son of Baroka, said that she is mature when her breasts take on a silver tinge. The scholars asked: Is this not a sign of old age and not newly-gained maturity? Therefore he explained his words as meaning "When the top of her nipple splits" (an unclear definition). Another sage, Rabbi Yossi, said that her breasts must sprout a thick nipple with an aureole around it. Another sage, Rabbi Simeon, gave a clue about the adult woman's physical maturity based on her sexual organ: when the flesh of her sexual organ swells and can be noticeably bent, as though it were a spoon.

(Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Niddah 47a-b)

Two observations from someone living in the 21st century:

What business did Shmuel have to examine a 12 year old's breasts and what do the sages spend time discussing little girls' breasts in such detail?
Why did these kedoishei elyoin give their underage shiksah maid to other men for sexual enjoyment?

My conclusion: Pedophilia and underaged sexual exploitation is not only condoned in halachah. The 'infallible' Amoraim even had their underaged maidservants exploited. So why is everyone so surprised when frum people are into sex with minors?!

Loshon of the Gemorah itself:

‎"מתני'. משל משלו חכמים באשה: פגה, בוחל, וצמל. פגה - עודה תנוקת, בוחל - אלו ימי נעוריה. בזו ובזו אמרו: אביה זכאי במציאתה, ובמעשה ידיה, ובהפרת נדריה. צמל - כיון שבגרה, שוב אין לאביה רשות בה. איזהו סימנין? ר' יוסי הגלילי אומר: משיעלה הקמט תחת הדד, ר"ע אומר: משיטו הדדים, בן עזאי אומר: משישחיר הפיטומת, רבי יוסי אומר: כדי שיהא נותן ידו על העוקץ והוא שוקע ושוהא לחזור.

‎גמ'. פגה עודה תנוקת כדכתיב (שיר השירים ב') התאנה חנטה פגיה. בוחל אלו ימי הנעורים, כדתנן - התאנים משיבחלו, ואמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רב: משילבין ראשיהן. ואיבעית אימא מהכא: (זכריה י"א) ותקצר נפשי בהם וגם נפשם בחלה בי. צמל כמ"ד - יצתה מלאה.

‎ואיזהו סימנים? ר' יוסי הגלילי אומר: משיעלה הקמט. אמר שמואל: לא משיעלה הקמט ממש, אלא כדי שתחזיר ידיה לאחוריה, ונראית כמי שיעלה הקמט תחת הדד. שמואל בדק באמתיה, ויהב לה ד' זוזי דמי בושתה. שמואל לטעמיה, דאמר שמואל: (ויקרא כ"ה) לעולם בהם תעבודו - לעבודה נתתים ולא לבושה. שמואל מייחד להן, רב נחמן מחליף להן, רב ששת מסר להן לערבי, ואמר להן: אזדהרו מישראל.

‎רבי יוסי אומר כו'. מאי עוקץ? אמר שמואל: עוקצו של דד. ת"ר, אלו הן סימני בגרות? ר"א בר' צדוק אומר: משיתקשקשו הדדין, ר' יוחנן בן ברוקה אומר: משיכסיף ראש החוטם. משיכסיף? אזקונה לה! אלא א"ר אשי: משיפציל ראש החוטם. ר' יוסי אומר: משתקיף העטרה, ר"ש אומר: משנתמעך

‎הכף. וכן היה רבי שמעון (בן יוחי) אומר: שלשה סימנין נתנו חכמים באשה מלמטה, וכנגדן מלמעלה. פגה מלמעלה - בידוע שלא הביאה שתי שערות, בוחל מלמעלה - בידוע שהביאה שתי שערות, צמל מלמעלה - בידוע שנתמעך הכף. מאי כף? אמר רב הונא: מקום תפוח יש למעלה מאותו מקום, כיון שמגדלת מתמעך והולך".

Follow-up on Coming out to my Wife

2010-05-11T13:20:00.001+02:00

I have already wanted to write this post for quite a while, but never found an ‘auspicious’ time for it. However, some of you have been asking me about this issue and I think it is only fair to post some more on the topic of coming out to my wife.

For many weeks after my first coming out, there was radio silence on my wife’s side on this topic which made me uncomfortable. Why was she not mentioning me unfrumming anymore, what is going on in her head?

A little while ago, I finally was able to discuss with my wife, in a quiet moment before the end of Shabbos when our kids were already sleeping, what went on in my head, what my thoughts were on Orthodox Judaism and what she feels about me kofering out.

She asked me what my ‘doubts’ were about and I explained her a few things: How I believe that the creation story is not plausible, about the documentary hypothesis, about the mabul, the stuff in the Gemorah that is clearly wrong, etc.

What amazed me is that my wife did not seem to be bothered in the least about the fact that the Torah could have been written by a human being. Or that some parts were just plain impossible.

Another astonishing fact was that she somehow believes that people in their religion should follow in the footsteps of their ancestors by following their religion, be it Judaism, Christianity, Islam, etc. My attempts to explain that they are sometimes mutually exclusive and that this had nothing to do with truth or not fell on deaf ears. Or perhaps I just did not understand her correctly.

What is clear to her is that there is a God and that ‘he looks after us’ (I wisely skipped the Holocaust topic). She is also very determined about sticking to kashrus, Shabbos and Taharas Hamishpochah.

Perhaps one day, we will find a way for me to respect what is important to her while at the same time giving me the freedom I need.

Some big wins:

My wife understands that my critical examination of Judaism lead me to disbelief the Divine nature of the Torah and that the words of Chazal were not infallible. I think this would make it more acceptable for my wife to accept my ‘kfirah’ some day.
We both agreed that we both feel that Haredi Judaism is not for us and it pretty much means that our kids will either go to a more MO or a non-Jewish school (with extracurricular Jewish classes since we both don’t want our children to be am haaratzos).

Our talk did bring us closer together and an open approach is definitely the way to go. I still had no courage to tell her about me eating non-kosher stuff and breaking Shabbos, though

(Of course there is a lot more to say on this matter, but I will keep that for another post. Until then, I would be happy to hear your opinion in the comments.)

Good Step in the Right Direction?

2010-05-10T17:53:00.001+02:00

This whole business about one Jew being better than the other one is definitely something that has to stop.

Project ‘Ani Yehudi’, sponsored by Professor Linda Allen and started by Lenny Solomon of Shlock Rock, tries to unite religious and ‘hiloni’ Jews by sharing a unified message in We Are The World style:

When I ask myself, who am I?
I’m a little Sephardi, a little Ashkenazi
a little Israeli, a tiny drop galuti (exiled)
Maybe religious, maybe secular, but between you and me

The result is something that will appeal to many Jews, regardless of how religious we may be (or not):

Having said that, do you also feel that something is still awkward about this project? This is what I think spoils the broth somewhat:

There are no female soloists on the project.
Is anyone there haredi?
The lyrics are overtly religious:

Nothing will succeed to break me my brother
my soul, is a part of a high external light
to fix the world that is my motto
I was born like this, I am a Jew.

Simply a Jew - like in other religions
we have; festivals, Shabbat, customs and mitzvot.
To say that everyone is sure in his righteousness
at the end we're all Jewish, before the chair of His Holiness.

Still, I think it is a step in the right direction, erasing that righteous smirk of those who believe they are on the side of God.

(On a side note, Aish has used this campaign for their kiruv purposes, but you can bet they do not play this mixed music on their campuses!)

Powerful piece by new, talented writer

2010-05-01T23:41:00.000+02:00

From "If I Forget Thee" on Scribbler on the Roof, by Rebecca M. Ross (a fellow OTDer and contributor to Unpious.com):

The rabbi’s house. Cold white stone with thousands of years of history, waiting for the imprints of the present to smooth it into the sand that blows in the windows with the five o’clock gusts. Cold stones to cool daytime skin hot from the relentless sun. Hostility is this place. It remains God’s center and yet it is godless at its core.

Every thought creases her face and overwhelming loneliness crowds out her smile. Each day they come to her, asking for tzedaka. “You have so much and I have nothing.” And she knows they’re all charlatans, begging the foreigners who aren’t yet immune to their ruses and ultimately bringing home hundreds to families who are morally poor. She doesn’t give and they curse her, sending her imaginary ailments, harsh pregnancies, destructive children, poverty, cruelty of loss and the violent horrors of brutality. She holds her ears when she hears these words because even knowing they hold no power, they still make her shudder.

Read further...

Can’t Get Rabbi Nachman Out of my Head

2010-04-30T02:10:00.001+02:00

An obviously nicked Rabbi Nachman song by Gad Elbaz:

The original:

But wait a minute, is that not kol isha? Oh oh, tikkun time! LOL.

PS Do you guys think for one moment Gad Elbaz asked Kylie Minogue for permission for using her music?

King Yehoyakim had a Tattoo on his Penis

2010-04-29T23:18:00.000+02:00

Translated from a Daat Emet article:

Yehoyakim's was THIS big!

The early sages (Tannaim) listed evil kings that have no share in the World to Come: Yerov'am ben Navat, Achav and Menasheh.

One sage (Rava), asked another sage (Rabbah bar Mari): Why did the early sages (Tannaim) not list king Yehoyakim as an evil king who has no share in the World to Come? Behold, scripture points out that he was evil: "Now the rest of the acts of Yehoyakim, and his abominations which he did, and that which was found upon him, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah; and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead." (2 Chronicles 36:8)

The sages explained the words "and that which was found upon him" to mean that he had a tattoo of idolatry on his penis, and there are sages that derive from the words above that they found a tattoo with the name of God on his penis in order to jeer at the God of Israel. We see from here that Yehoyakim was a very evil person. If so, why did they not list him with the evil kings of Judah and Israel? Answered the sage: I didn't hear it and I don't know the answer to it. (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, 103b)

In the language of the Talmud:

Raba said to Rabbah b. Mari: Why did they not count Yehoyakim [amongst those who have no portion in the world to come], seeing that it is written of him, "Now the rest of the acts of Yehoyakim, and his abominations which he did, and that which was found upon him, etc.? (What is meant by that which was found upon him? — R. Yohanan and R. Eliezer differ: one maintained that he engraved the name of an idol upon his penis, and the other held that he engraved the name of Heaven thereon [as a gesture of contempt])? — He answered: I have heard no explanation concerning the kings [why Jehoiakim was not included]: but I have heard one concerning the commoners.

Proof for Techiyat Hameitim Min Hatorah

2010-04-28T00:06:00.000+02:00

Translated from an article on the Daat Emet website:

Even though Scripture does not mention the World to Come or the Resurrection of the Dead, the sages interpreted the verses such that they would strengthen the belief in the Resurrection of the Dead and that this is not an invention of the sages rather grounded in Scripture. They did so to such extent that they said: "And those do not have a portion in the World to Come: Someone who says that the Resurrection of the Dead is not from the Torah" (Sanhedrin 90a).

The sages gave many interpretations in order to conclude that there is a source for the Resurrection of the Dead in the Torah; and this is one of them. In the book of Mishlei (Proverbs) it is written: "The grave; and the barren womb; the earth that is not satisfied with water; and the fire that saith not: 'Enough.'" (Proverbs 30:16).

One of the sages, Rabbi Tabi, explained as follows: Why did the scripture place sheol (death and burial) adjacent to womb (sexual procreation and birth)? To teach you about the Resurrection of the Dead through an a forteriori argument: if it is true for the womb that the ones that enter do so in silence during the sexual act yet the baby comes out with sounds of cries, how much more so is it true for death and burial which is done amidst the sound of cries, that the dead will come out with sounds of cries. This teaching constitutes a compelling answer to those who claim that the Revival of the Dead is not from the Torah. (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 92a).

The quote from the Gemara itself, as translated by www.judentum.org:

R. Tabi said in R. Josia's name: What is meant by, The grave; and the barren womb; and the earth that is not filled by water (Prov. XXX, 16.): now, what connection has the grave with the womb? But it is to teach thee: just as the womb receives and brings forth, so does the grave too receive and bring forth. Now, does this not furnish us with an a fortiori argument? If the womb, which receives in silence, yet brings forth amid great cries [of jubilation]; then the grave, which receives the dead amid cries [of grief], will much more so bring them forth amid great cries [of joy]! This refutes those who maintain that resurrection is not intimated in the Torah.

In my dictionary, refuting means overthrowing someone else's arguments. I guess the fact that it is mentioned in the Gemara makes it true for OJ fundies, regardless of its logic.

Elisha and the bears: A Scary Story as a Scare Story?

2010-04-21T14:32:00.001+02:00

Thought-provoking article by the Center for Inquiry. Melachim Beth, Perek 2 (Kings II chapter 2) contains a most gory and disturbing story, featuring the mystical figure Elisha.

Mechon Mamre translates it as follows:

23 And he (Elisha - ed) went up from thence unto Beth-el; and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him: 'Go up, thou baldhead; go up, thou baldhead.' 24 And he looked behind him and saw them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she-bears out of the wood, and tore forty and two children of them. 25 And he went from thence to mount Carmel, and from thence he returned to Samaria.

Some extracts from the CFI post:

“It is not that there is nothing for the poor preacher to say about the passage. As we will see momentarily, there is in fact much to say. It’s just that there’s nothing good , nothing edifying or uplifting, to say about it. It goes so far in the other direction that any moral lesson a preacher may try to hang on it will seem so preposterous, so far-fetched, that few will risk the embarrassment.”

Indeed, so why did they include this horrific story in the Bible?

As we now read it, the story of Elisha and the Bears is a prime example of a “cautionary tale,” a scare story told in order to keep the intimidated listeners in their place—as defined by their rulers. Other such biblical scare stories include that of the expulsion from Eden in Genesis chapter 3 (how dare mere mortals covet the knowledge that belongs to God—and his priests—alone?), the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11:1-9 (again, it discourages inventive autonomy), Uzzah (2 Samuel 6:6-11) getting zapped for steadying the Ark of the Covenant without ritual preparation (“Men, don’t let this happen to you!”)…

I think the author forgot the Korach story here, by the way. It concludes:

These are all religious boundary markers, warning people not to envy their betters lest God smite them, not to help themselves to the privileges inherited by the sacred aristocracy. ..

…Whenever the lower castes’ envy of the upper castes’ privileges threatens to boil over again, these cautionary tales will be trotted out to remind people (albeit in a somewhat disguised form) of the massive violence from which order once emerged and into which it could collapse again. Is it worth risking the return to Chaos and Old Night? Ah… maybe not.

I nevertheless wonder how the apologetic rationalized this story away…

Oh. My. Gawd!

2010-04-15T13:01:00.001+02:00

Hat tip: Failed Messiah.

Yom Hashoah Tribute: Marthe Cohn

2010-04-12T00:25:00.000+02:00

Last Friday night, I finished reading an inspiring book, a book you will find hard to put down once you started reading it. The story is about a remarkable lady called Marthe Hoffnung, a most courageous woman, who was a spy for the French during WWII.

A synopsis as provided by Barnes & Noble):

Marthe Cohn was a beautiful young Jewish woman living just across the German border in France when Hitler rose to power. Her family sheltered Jews fleeing the Nazis, including Jewish children sent away by their terrified parents. But soon her homeland was also under Nazi rule. As the Nazi occupation escalated, Marthe’s sister was arrested and sent to Auschwitz. The rest of her family was forced to flee to the south of France. Always a fighter, Marthe joined the French Army.

As a member of the intelligence service of the French First Army, Marthe fought valiantly to retrieve needed inside information about Nazi troop movements by slipping behind enemy lines, utilizing her perfect German accent and blond hair to pose as a young German nurse who was desperately trying to obtain word of a fictional fiancé. By traveling throughout the countryside and approaching troops sympathetic to her plight, risking death every time she did so, she learned where they were going next and was able to alert Allied commanders.

When, at the age of eighty, Marthe Cohn was awarded France’s highest military honor, the Médaille Militaire, not even her children knew to what extent this modest woman had faced death daily while helping defeat the Nazi empire. At its heart, this remarkable memoir is the tale of an ordinary human being who, under extraordinary circumstances, became the hero her country needed her to be.

I can not imagine the horrors people had to go through in WWII. I can not imagine how evil people can become as soon as they dehumanized others. But I was provided a glimpse. This book does not get into unnecessary gory details of war, but nevertheless makes you feel like you are right in the story with her, so that you can feel her angsts.

Some side remarks:

Marthe comes from a religious family but did not live a frum life.
Her grandfather was a Rabbi. He did not approve of her lifestyle but let her do her thing and always walked out of the room at the time she should have made a brochah, not to cause any inconveniences.
She and some siblings dated non-Jews.
She was a person of high intelligence, courage and integrity, a real role model for the rest of humanity. And she managed to keep her past secret from her family for most of her life.

Avadim Anachnu…

2010-03-29T07:11:00.001+02:00

Today, I still feel like a slave when:

getting dressed and still putting on tzitzis and a kippah
on the way to work, I meet people asking me where I davven
at work, I walk around with a kippah and feel like an idiot
I have to be careful nobody sees me when buying my treif lunch
my child asks me about Hashem and I need to give an evasive answer
leading the Seder for 40 people and not believing the story happened anyway (or at least not the way it is written in the Torah)
leading in prayers when I don’t even know if I believe in the concept of a God (at least not the biblical God)
I am not supposed to shave on Chol haMoed although I feel it goes against the festive spirit
doing bitul chometz (who cares about the damn crumbs anyway?)

Dear fellow undercover kofers, my wish for the holiday season is: This year we are slaves, but next year we shall be free people!

Things to Reconsider before Frumming Out

2010-03-25T22:49:00.001+01:00

I was asked by someone to compile a list of things one might want to contemplate before becoming orthodox. Here is my shortlist:

The loss of freedom. Once you are frum, you have to get married (no sex allowed before marriage), God dictates what you are allowed to believe, think and do, you lose your identity (changing your name, wasting your talents), the Rabbis decide on important and unimportant matters.
The role of the woman. Women are second degree citizens: they are not allowed to testify or to become a judge, their singing is considered 'nudity', what a woman owns belongs to her husband, only sons can inherit from their parents, man can have multiple women but not the other way around, etc. (More here.)
Non-Jews. ‘Goyim’ are to be despised: the only reason why you should save them on Shabbat is because otherwise it might desecrate the name of God. And non-Jews don't have a neshama (Godly soul). (More here.)
Apostates. People who rebel against orthodoxy can't be judges or bear testimony, going to secular courts is a sin, he should be buried only on the side of the graveyard, no kaddish is said for them. (More here.)
Science. Jews have to believe that mankind was only created less than 6000 years ago and that the Torah was written by God, directly contradicting science that claims that modern humans are between 40'000-50'000 years old (see here) and that the Torah is a collection of edited human manuscripts (see here).
Homosexuality. Homosexuality is an 'abomination' in the eyes of God, despite the fact that "The current literature and most scholars in the field agree that an individual's sexual orientation is not a matter of choice".
BTs. Even after people become orthodox ('baalei teshuvah’ or BTs), they often have problems finding a right shidduch (date) since they come from a non-frum background and will almost without exception will continue to be treated as 2nd class co-religionists.

Have you got something to add? Let me know in the comments.

Rabbi Slifkin’s Wake-up Call

2010-03-23T12:17:00.001+01:00

Kol hakavod for Rabbi Slifkin for admitting that gedolim are out of touch with reality in his latest blog post (something most rational people already knew, of course):

I write this post with a heavy heart.
Over the last decade, the Gedolim of the Charedi world have done many things that, in the opinion of many, did not reflect well on their judgment. The ban on Making Of A Godol, the ban on my books, the financially devastating ban on the Lipa concert and subsequent abrupt reversal, etc.
While I maintain that serious wrongs were committed in these cases, I tried my best to explain the Gedolims' point of view to people. Hence my essay, "In Defense of my Opponents."
Then came Troppergate, which eclipsed them all. Where the real chillul Hashem was not that this menuval did what he did, but that this man, who was known for decades to be a menuval and manipulator, was given so much power and honor, and even after being publicly exposed was not publicly condemned, because of the millions of dollars that he gave to the yeshivos.
And nor was there any investigation into what improprieties (signatures on pashkevillim, false conversions, and who knows what else) were arranged by his money.
But now there is something that makes Troppergate look positively mild.
Rabbi Elior Chen of Beitar was indicted for some of the worst child abuse allegations ever. He fled to Brazil but was extradited back to Israel where he will stand trial. According to prosecution officials, the evidence against Chen is so overwhelming that there is absolutely no doubt that he will be convicted.
But recently, a letter appeared, signed by several of the Gedolim, asserting that they know Elior Chen to be a marbitz Torah and a righteous person and thus innocent of all charges, and asking people to support him!
At first, I did not post about this, because I couldn't bring myself to believe that these signatures of the Gedolim were authentic. As much as I had seen what I believed to be improprieties in the Gedolim affixing their names to things, surely they couldn't do this. I was inclined to agree with all the commentators at the afore-posted link who insisted that the signatures must have been faked. People close to the Gedolim insisted that the letter was not authentic.
But then a neighbor of mine wrote to Rav Chaim Kanievsky, asking him why he signed it. He received the following reply:

על כתב שרבותי חתומים גם אני חותם
"On a letter that my rabbis are signed on to, I also sign."
The implications of this sentence are so appalling that I can't even think of how to write about it in a way that will do justice to it.
I have always tried to write respectfully about the Gedolim, even when disagreeing with them strongly. But now I am honestly not sure if one should be respectful about the signing of this letter, especially when it is defended on the grounds that other rabbis signed it. The best limmud zechus I can think of is that, due to their intense dedication to staying in the Beis HaMidrash, the Gedolim are simply naive about the world and/or easily manipulated. But if that is the case, and it results in them signing letters such as this, then how are they suited for leadership positions? The fundamental belief of charedi society, that total dedication to Torah is what makes the ideal leader, is thereby exposed as hopelessly wrong. And even with this limmud zechus, one has to wonder how a Rav could attest with certainty to the innocence of someone who has been indicted for such terrible crimes, with one child suffering permanent brain damage and in a vegetative state for the rest of his life, merely because other rabbis say that he is innocent.
With the publication of the letter supporting Elior Chen, is there any way to justify the system of leadership in the charedi world?

One of the more interesting things of this post is Rabbi Slifkin wanting to believe that gedolim are infallible, until the point comes that this philosophy becomes so absurd that he finally gets it. This cognitive dissonance is also apparent in his other writings, where he tries to reconcile science with Judaism.
I can only hope that, when the moment comes that Rabbi Slifkin finally realizes that OJ is irrational as well, he will be as honest about it as he has been with regards to our ‘gedolim’.

Moral Musings

2010-03-22T18:08:00.001+01:00

OK, so I don’t give a shit about kosher anymore (not really true, I am still uncomfortable eating pork / shrimp, although I tried it all before). Now how do I behave at home?

I still would like our household to be strictly kosher so that all my family and friends could still eat at my place. I am assuming that most of them would still eat at our home since my wife will probably remain orthodox.

But what happens if I make a mistake? If I would wash the milchig with the fleishig sponge? Or if I would spill the proverbial milk in the chicken soup? Will I call up my LOR? Or will I just hide?

Now, this is a real exercise of morality: I have no commander-in-chief threatening me to burn me in hell, to cut me off from my people or make my life miserable with his Supernatural Powers™.

So why should I care?

Moral decision: I have decided out of respect for my family and friends to remain makpid as before. However, in cases that I clearly know that there is no problem (e.g. not hot, soap used, etc.), I will exercise my right for sanity.

But there are plenty of other questions: If I don’t wear tzitzis, should I criticize my son for not wearing them? I decided not to. But what do I tell him if he asks me why I am not wearing them?

Would be curious to know about your OTD moral dilemmas.

Coming Out to my Kofer Work Colleague

2010-03-17T00:36:00.000+01:00

After years, I finally outed myself to L., an Israeli colleague at work who originally told me about the Daat Emet site. He did not seem to be totally surprised and we had a great conversation today about it.

Although L. grew up non-religious, he does sometimes go to shul and he wants some basic Jewish education for his children. His wife converted and they do keep some standard of kosher at home. I admire his candid approach: he doesn't believe in the theology and halacha, whereas he does value the beauty of certain traditions Judaism has to offer. I could perhaps fit him in the mesorati corner, however, he doesn't seem to be the guy who would appreciate labels (like me).

I hope to post more about our discussions in the course of time, today we discussed 'chinuch'.

L. confided to me that it was very difficult for him that his son does not want to sing Ma Nishtana on Pesach, whereas he enjoys singing Christian nursery rhymes at home. For people kofering out, the question of how you would like to raise your kids is enormously important.

The way things are looking now, I will definitely not send my children to a haredi school (although my oldest son currently goes to a haredi kindergarten). But I don't want them to be 'Ameratzes' either. The alternatives would either be the local 'officially religious but not really' school (not much acclaimed for its academical or Jewish studies standards) or a non-Jewish school and make sure to educate the kids after school time.

However, both options would have as a prerequisite that I'd come out of the closet to not just my wife and some people in my closest circle, but to the rest of the outside world as well.

Nu, that day will hopefully come in due time, 'im yirtzeh Hashem'!

Quote of the (Sun)day

2010-03-14T22:50:00.000+01:00

"Any god that forbids masturbating, is a wanker himself" - Undercover Kofer.

In other news, I just brought my frum friend to the hospital, after he took an overdose of sleeping pills (amongst others).

If anyone ever tells me again that being frum makes one happy, I may have to tell him / her to prepare getting used to a handicapped parking spot.

Blogger rocks!

2010-03-12T10:09:00.001+01:00

Blogger rolled out new features and templates. So how do you like the new layout?

My Wife’s Radio Silence

2010-03-10T00:41:00.001+01:00

Since I have ‘outed’ to my wife a few months ago, there has been almost total radio silence on the issue of me losing my faith. I did not tell her about me eating treif outdoors (and indoors somewhat, but I don’t want to treif up the kitchen) and I guess that would be hard for her. but I also don’t want her to hear through someone else.

So I am wondering why she does not want to talk about this important issue.

I can think of some answers:

She has to much on her head with the household, the kids, her 50% job, all sorts of other worries.
She is happy for things to be a little less frum (remember, I was always the ‘shvartzer’ of the two).
She is afraid that talking about it may make things worse.
She just wants me to be happy. But then again, she knows it is a cause of unhappiness for me to live in both worlds.
…

What do you, dear readers, think?

And Now For Something Completely Different…

2010-03-07T22:24:00.001+01:00

I received an e-mail from a young lady whose brother is ‘flipping out™’. Her parents, trying to understand what is going on in their son’s mind, would like to get into contact with someone who can explain this BT phenomenon to them in their own secular terminology.

The primary idea is not to convince their son to leave the OJ idea, but how to deal with their son and to understand ‘WTF is going on’.

Her parents live in Orange County, California. Since I live in Europe (time difference) and since I can’t talk at work or home about these issues, I am looking for volunteers to lend an ear to these people and possibly advise them in some areas.

If you are interested and kind enough to help out, please contact me at undercoverkofer (at) gmail.com.

Shoalin veDorshin

2010-03-06T22:43:00.001+01:00

30 days before Chag haPesach, let’s take a candid look at the historicity of Yetziat Mitzrayim:

I think I know the answer…

Maaseh Shelo Haya

2010-03-05T13:20:00.001+01:00

What are the chances of this story being true?

An Orthodox Jew from New Jersey was involved in a car accident and accidently killed an old non-Jewish man. Although the courts found the Jewish man not guilty, he could not carry the the pains of the guilt that he killed an old man. It gave him no peace and it caused him to lose his appetite and was unable to sleep for weeks.

He decided to seek counsel from the revered sage, Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky Shlita of Bnei Brak, and wrote him a letter asking the Rav what tikun can he do because he accidently killed a non-Jew.

The Rav wrote him an answer that included one word, "Amalek".

The Jew did not understand this answer and continued suffering with sleepless nights. At some point he decided to move away from his town to begin a new life. He began searching for a new house and found a house that appealed to him. The owners of the apartment told him that they are eager to get rid of this house because they inherited from their dead father that was killed in a car accident.

After short investigation, turns out the apartment belonged to the non-Jew who was accidentaly killed by the Jew. In the basement of the house, the Orthodox Jew found materials belonging to the old non-Jew man. He was shocked to find a picture of the old man during his youth proudly wearing an SS uniform, standing next to Hitler, yimach shemo.

It turned out that this old man was an SS officer in the Nazi army and after the war, he came to the United States and hid his past. The SS Nazi Officer also kept other documents, including all the names of the Jews he personally murdered.

When he read the names of the Jewish people that were murdered, he found both of his parent's name on this list.

HaShem avenged their blood.

It was then that he understood Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky Shlita's answer that contained one word, "AMALEK".

Why you should be skeptical:

It looks like this was printed in a frum newspaper. That should already be enough.
The story is not even brought as an item by itself, just as an anecdote.
No names and real details are mentioned.

I imagine that the frum readers will learn from this (besides the obvious emunas chachomim propaganda) is a confirmation of their beliefs that all non-Jews are out there to get us.