The shul was running early by Neilah. Shofar blowing was scheduled for 7:37, but it was 7:10 and we were closing in on the end of Chazaras HaShatz. The Shliach Tzibur slowed down his recitation. We recited the entire Avinu Malkeinu responsively (instead of just the customary nine lines). As it turned out, that was quite a moving experience. We were on an emotional high at the close of the holiest day of the year. We all sang the last Avinu Malkenu together, beseeching God to grant us favor despite our lack of merits and asking Him for His charity and kindness.
And yet, when we finished, we were still five minutes too early. So the Rav told the Shliach Tzibur to wait five minutes before we started Sh'ma Yisroel.
We all had five minutes at this emotional and spiritual high point. 300 seconds. Some patiently waited. Some read or learned. Some took the opportunity to pray. I was one of the latter group.
I had 300 seconds of unscripted, improvisitional prayer time at this most unique part of the year. I had 300 more seconds to pray for whatever I wanted, not just what was printed in the machzor. 300 final seconds to pour out my heart to God above.
Some of the things I prayed for were selfish. I prayed that my family and I enjoy good health and happiness during the coming year. I prayed that we have good parnassah. I prayed that Walter do well in his new school and continue to grow in Torah. I prayed that George overcome his social issues and find happiness and friends. I prayed that Wilma continue to be the sweet, loveable girl that she is becoming. I prayed that Fred (the collective name for our kids) grow up to be people who are involved in Torah and Mitzvos their entire lives and be people that everyone in K'lal Yisroel can be proud of. I prayed that Eeees and I both have success in graduate school.
I also prayed that a wonderful single girl whom Eeees and I know finally finds her chosson. I also prayed that those who are waiting for children finally be granted them. I prayed that specific people who suffer from various physical ailments be granted a complete recovery; along with all the other people who need a complete recovery.
At some point, I moved on to things that were beyond the realm of my own circle. I prayed that this year there should be peace in K'lal Yisroel; that the various factions should stop fighting with one another. I prayed that it should be a year of greater understanding between the members of our seemingly hopelessly fractured nation. I prayed that this should be a year in which poverty and crime should be unknown among our people. I prayed that it should be a year in which everyone's prayers should be answered in the best way possible.
And I finished by praying that it should be a year in which we finally see the coming of Moshiach.
And just as I finished, the chazzan called out "Sh'ma Yisroel..." My 300 special seconds were up.
The Wolf
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Quick Question About Shabbos, Yom Kippur and Avinu Malkeinu
Normally, on Yom Kippur, we say Avinu Malkeinu (Our Father, Our King) after each of the services. This year, however, because Yom Kippur comes out on Shabbos, it will be omitted (as the prayer is always omitted on Shabbos). Nonetheless, it *will* be recited following the last service, Neilah, at the close of the day.
My question, very simply, is why?
I came up with two hypotheses:
1. Since it is after shkiah (sunset) and it is only a safek (doubt) as to whether it is really Shabbos or not (depending on whether the day begins at shkiah or tzais hakochavim [when the stars appear]), we say it.
2. Neilah, being the last prayer of the day, is meant to end on a spiritual and emotional high note, and so the prayer is recited anyway, *despite* the fact that it is Shabbos.
Of course, the real answer could be a combination of these, or neither of the above.
Anyone have any thoughts?
The Wolf
My question, very simply, is why?
I came up with two hypotheses:
1. Since it is after shkiah (sunset) and it is only a safek (doubt) as to whether it is really Shabbos or not (depending on whether the day begins at shkiah or tzais hakochavim [when the stars appear]), we say it.
2. Neilah, being the last prayer of the day, is meant to end on a spiritual and emotional high note, and so the prayer is recited anyway, *despite* the fact that it is Shabbos.
Of course, the real answer could be a combination of these, or neither of the above.
Anyone have any thoughts?
The Wolf
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Menachem Boas -- Is He Still Working?
There is an artist named Menachem Boas, who specializes in the art of micography (also called microcalligraphy). This is an art form where words are used to form pictures.
There are many micographists in the Jewish community. Menachem Boas, however, is generally regarded as the best of the bunch. While most micographists work in black and white, he works in color.
I first came across his works about twenty years ago, when I visited my aunt and uncle in Baltimore. On their wall, they had a Boas print. It was a picture of Mordechai leading Haman around on a horse in Shushan. The text consisted of the entire book of Esther.
When I saw it, I fell in love with the art form. I thought it was both beautiful and clever, both stunning and ingenious (maybe that's why I like Escher as well). While I wouldn't say that I obsessed over it, I always looked forward to the day when I'd be able to get a copy of that print for myself.
That day eventually came when Eeees
bought it for me early in our marriage. It now proudly hangs on our wall.
Over the years, I found other prints of his as well, including one of the Splitting of the Sea (the text of Sh'mos), the seige of Jericho (text of Joshua) and the skyline of Jerusalem (text of T'hillim/Psalms).
However, I've noticed that at least some of his stuff is becoming harder to find. Yesterday, a reader wrote to me asking me about my Joshua print, stating that she couldn't find it anywhere on the web and asking if mine was for sale. I told her that mine wasn't for sale (I love it too much) but I did spend some time looking for it online. Oddly enough, the only picture I found of it online was the one that was on my blog about two years ago. I could not find a copy of the Esther print at all either.
Which leads me to wonder if he is still active in the field, and if he is, why doesn't he set up a website? I'm willing to bet that there is enough of a demand for his work to warrant putting one up. I know that I would probably buy more works from him. I'd love to find out for sure if he's still working in this field and what new works he has.
While we're at it, there is another artist that I happen to like in this field as well. Ellen Miller Braun works in Israel and makes some very nice micographic works (she'll also customize one for you for a bar mitzvah or the like). When Eeees and I were in Eretz Yisroel, we discovered her works and bought her Shir HaShirim. You can order them over the web (at the link above) and she'll even ship to the US.
Any other micography fans out there? Let me hear from you.
The Wolf
There are many micographists in the Jewish community. Menachem Boas, however, is generally regarded as the best of the bunch. While most micographists work in black and white, he works in color.
I first came across his works about twenty years ago, when I visited my aunt and uncle in Baltimore. On their wall, they had a Boas print. It was a picture of Mordechai leading Haman around on a horse in Shushan. The text consisted of the entire book of Esther.
When I saw it, I fell in love with the art form. I thought it was both beautiful and clever, both stunning and ingenious (maybe that's why I like Escher as well). While I wouldn't say that I obsessed over it, I always looked forward to the day when I'd be able to get a copy of that print for myself.
That day eventually came when Eeees
bought it for me early in our marriage. It now proudly hangs on our wall.Over the years, I found other prints of his as well, including one of the Splitting of the Sea (the text of Sh'mos), the seige of Jericho (text of Joshua) and the skyline of Jerusalem (text of T'hillim/Psalms).
However, I've noticed that at least some of his stuff is becoming harder to find. Yesterday, a reader wrote to me asking me about my Joshua print, stating that she couldn't find it anywhere on the web and asking if mine was for sale. I told her that mine wasn't for sale (I love it too much) but I did spend some time looking for it online. Oddly enough, the only picture I found of it online was the one that was on my blog about two years ago. I could not find a copy of the Esther print at all either.
Which leads me to wonder if he is still active in the field, and if he is, why doesn't he set up a website? I'm willing to bet that there is enough of a demand for his work to warrant putting one up. I know that I would probably buy more works from him. I'd love to find out for sure if he's still working in this field and what new works he has.
While we're at it, there is another artist that I happen to like in this field as well. Ellen Miller Braun works in Israel and makes some very nice micographic works (she'll also customize one for you for a bar mitzvah or the like). When Eeees and I were in Eretz Yisroel, we discovered her works and bought her Shir HaShirim. You can order them over the web (at the link above) and she'll even ship to the US.
Any other micography fans out there? Let me hear from you.
The Wolf
Monday, September 10, 2007
Diversity
Yesterday was a busy day for Eeees and myself. In the morning, we had an opportunity to sit in our Walter's shiur (Gemara class). We got to meet the Rebbe and I got to see some of the kids who are in his Masmidim (Honors) class.
Firstly, I like the rebbe very much. He's a young clean-shaven guy (can't be much older than I am) who really connects with the kids and makes the learning enjoyable for them. He involves them in the class and, instead of just teaching them the Gemara, is instead teaching them *how* to learn the Gemara on their own. Of course, at the ninth grade level, they're not ready to sit and make a laining (preparation of the text of the Gemara) just yet, but he has clearly got them started on the right path. He talks to the kids, instead of talking down at them and involves them in the discussion at all times. Of course, the fact that Walter likes him as a rebbe is also very encouraging. (He even makes reference to topics the kids can relate to -- at one point, he mentioned the Riddler and the fact that he is OCD.)
However, what also impressed me was the diversity in the student body and in the class. Here was a class of boys that didn't all look like clones of each other. The boys all wore button-down shirts (as required by the dress code), but of all different colors. The yarmulkes ranged from knitted, to leather, to suede to velvet and in different sizes. Some were all black, others had designs and logos. There were kids from all different extractions -- Ashkenazim, Sefardim, (some who looked) Yemenite and probably from different levels of observance as well. It was quite a difference from the school where he came from, where all the kids were Ashkenazim (there may have been the occassional Sefardi in the school, but they were few and far between -- I think there was one in Walter's class), all wore white shirts/dark slacks, all wore the same yarmulkes and all, for the most part, had the same backgrounds and behaviors (or so we thought, anyway). This, I feel is a good thing. I would like Walter to understand that there are different types of people in the world and that not everyone has to be "just like him" to be a good person and that he shouldn't turn up his nose at someone just because they dress differently, have a different hashkafah or different ethnic background. I'm hoping that over the next four years, he learns the valuable lesson of accepting people despite their differences, rather than attacking them for being different from yourself (as we've seen in the news lately).
Later on in the day, Eeees and I went to a reunion. When we were both in college, we both served on the Emergency Medical Squad in the college. Yesterday, there was a reunion of the members of the squad, going back to its founding 30 years ago. We got to meet with old friends, reminisce and swap stories with the old members, catch up on what was happening with their lives (Mike married Mary Kay??!!) and have a wonderful time. Since many members of the squad over the years were Orthodox, all the food was kosher.
In many ways, I consider the time I spent in the squad the most valuable time that I spent in college -- in many cases, even more valuable than my class time. Having come from a high school much like Walter's elementary school (only much more so, if you can truly believe it), I never had much exposure to non-Orthodox Jews (except for family members) and non-Jews. As such, while I certainly a lot more tolerant of other people than my classmates in high school, it was here, in the squad, that I learned to form friendships with people from other backgrounds. It was here that I had the first opportunity to socialize with people who weren't strictly from "my own type." And it was here that I learned, for the first time, to accept people for who they are -- not for what minhagim they observe, or which religion they practice, how they dress or what they think about evolution or the origin of the world. When you're working with a team to save lives, you don't really care what religion the EMT next to you is. When you ask the dispatcher for the status of local hospitals, you don't really care whether or not she's dressed in a completely tznius fashion. You focus on one goal -- saving lives. And even when you're not actively involved in the saving of lives -- even if you're just hanging around in the office waiting for a call to come in -- you realize that you can work together and get along with and even be friends with people with whom you have no religious connection -- people who may be Jewish and non-Orthodox, people who may be devout Christians, Muslims or Hindus, or even those that are completely non-religious. *This* was what I learned in my time in the Emergency Medical Squad (along with lifesaving skills, teamwork skills, etc.) and, in many respects, that was far more valuable than the coursework that I took.
The Wolf
Firstly, I like the rebbe very much. He's a young clean-shaven guy (can't be much older than I am) who really connects with the kids and makes the learning enjoyable for them. He involves them in the class and, instead of just teaching them the Gemara, is instead teaching them *how* to learn the Gemara on their own. Of course, at the ninth grade level, they're not ready to sit and make a laining (preparation of the text of the Gemara) just yet, but he has clearly got them started on the right path. He talks to the kids, instead of talking down at them and involves them in the discussion at all times. Of course, the fact that Walter likes him as a rebbe is also very encouraging. (He even makes reference to topics the kids can relate to -- at one point, he mentioned the Riddler and the fact that he is OCD.)
However, what also impressed me was the diversity in the student body and in the class. Here was a class of boys that didn't all look like clones of each other. The boys all wore button-down shirts (as required by the dress code), but of all different colors. The yarmulkes ranged from knitted, to leather, to suede to velvet and in different sizes. Some were all black, others had designs and logos. There were kids from all different extractions -- Ashkenazim, Sefardim, (some who looked) Yemenite and probably from different levels of observance as well. It was quite a difference from the school where he came from, where all the kids were Ashkenazim (there may have been the occassional Sefardi in the school, but they were few and far between -- I think there was one in Walter's class), all wore white shirts/dark slacks, all wore the same yarmulkes and all, for the most part, had the same backgrounds and behaviors (or so we thought, anyway). This, I feel is a good thing. I would like Walter to understand that there are different types of people in the world and that not everyone has to be "just like him" to be a good person and that he shouldn't turn up his nose at someone just because they dress differently, have a different hashkafah or different ethnic background. I'm hoping that over the next four years, he learns the valuable lesson of accepting people despite their differences, rather than attacking them for being different from yourself (as we've seen in the news lately).
Later on in the day, Eeees and I went to a reunion. When we were both in college, we both served on the Emergency Medical Squad in the college. Yesterday, there was a reunion of the members of the squad, going back to its founding 30 years ago. We got to meet with old friends, reminisce and swap stories with the old members, catch up on what was happening with their lives (Mike married Mary Kay??!!) and have a wonderful time. Since many members of the squad over the years were Orthodox, all the food was kosher.
In many ways, I consider the time I spent in the squad the most valuable time that I spent in college -- in many cases, even more valuable than my class time. Having come from a high school much like Walter's elementary school (only much more so, if you can truly believe it), I never had much exposure to non-Orthodox Jews (except for family members) and non-Jews. As such, while I certainly a lot more tolerant of other people than my classmates in high school, it was here, in the squad, that I learned to form friendships with people from other backgrounds. It was here that I had the first opportunity to socialize with people who weren't strictly from "my own type." And it was here that I learned, for the first time, to accept people for who they are -- not for what minhagim they observe, or which religion they practice, how they dress or what they think about evolution or the origin of the world. When you're working with a team to save lives, you don't really care what religion the EMT next to you is. When you ask the dispatcher for the status of local hospitals, you don't really care whether or not she's dressed in a completely tznius fashion. You focus on one goal -- saving lives. And even when you're not actively involved in the saving of lives -- even if you're just hanging around in the office waiting for a call to come in -- you realize that you can work together and get along with and even be friends with people with whom you have no religious connection -- people who may be Jewish and non-Orthodox, people who may be devout Christians, Muslims or Hindus, or even those that are completely non-religious. *This* was what I learned in my time in the Emergency Medical Squad (along with lifesaving skills, teamwork skills, etc.) and, in many respects, that was far more valuable than the coursework that I took.
The Wolf
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Rabbi Eli Teitelbaum: Kids Need To Have Fun
Rabbi Eli Teitelbaum wrote an article which appeared in The Yeshiva World today. In it, he decries how it has become standard operating procedure to ban anything that is remotely fun. Concerts, trips, sports and other youth activities which are, in varying degrees, banned in our communities, should be allowed and encouraged in a kosher environment. He correctly points out that kids need an outlet for their energies (aside from learning) and that if one removes all such outlets, kids will find other outlets... and they will be far worse. If you don't allow kids to participate in sports or cultural activities and the like, then they will be gathering in pool halls in the Catskills. Or, as he succinctly puts it:
When sports and concerts are forbidden, and all forms of kosher entertainment are off limits, we are asking for trouble. If our kids can’t find a place to vent their energy within a kosher environment, then they will find it elsewhere.
Amen.
In his article, he gives examples of times that he organized youth activities and met with resistance. In one case, he tried to have the boys in his Pirchei organization put on a play based on the book Family Aguilar. When people tried to have the play banned, the matter ended up being escalated to R. Moshe Feinstein. Instead of issuing a ban, R. Moshe gave it his blessing.
In another example, he arranged for a two-day trip to Washington at low cost for boys. The trip was going to be taken on the two days that the yeshivos gave off for Channukah. One Rosh Yeshiva wrote R. Teitelbaum a nasty letter accusing him of encouraging bittul Torah. Fortunately, R. Teitelbaum was able to fend him off.
It's very interesting that the difference between R. Teitelbaum's point of view and the point of view of others in our community is brought to my attention right now. Walter just began high school this week and it looks like he's going to have a great time there. He's encouraged about the learning programs, the secular education and the extracurricular activities. Indeed, when we went looking for a school, we purposely went looking for a place that had all three of these elements -- we wanted a school that had a great learning program that would keep him challenged and interested; we wanted a school with a quality secular studies department that would show him the possibilities that exist in our world, and a school that had supervised extracurricular activities for him to be able to channel his creative energies. I purposely didn't want to send him to a high school such as that I went to: where the learning was boring and uninteresting, where the secular studies were a joke, and the word "extracurricular" didn't exist because the school day went from 7:30 in the morning to 9:30 at night every day without variation; where the word "trip" didn't exist and the word "activity" might as well have been in Mongolian. In my old school, if it didn't involve learning, it shouldn't be done (although I suppose they did allow for some recreation -- boys were allowed to play basketball during recess). In looking for the type of school for Walter that recognizes that kids are kids and need kosher extracurricular activities, I find that I have explicitly rejected the opinions of the "banners" and embraced the opinion of R. Teitelbaum.
I can only be thankful that there are rabbis out there, like Rabbi Teitelbaum, who have not forgotten what it is to be a kid and to need an outlet for youthful energies.
The Wolf
When sports and concerts are forbidden, and all forms of kosher entertainment are off limits, we are asking for trouble. If our kids can’t find a place to vent their energy within a kosher environment, then they will find it elsewhere.
Amen.
In his article, he gives examples of times that he organized youth activities and met with resistance. In one case, he tried to have the boys in his Pirchei organization put on a play based on the book Family Aguilar. When people tried to have the play banned, the matter ended up being escalated to R. Moshe Feinstein. Instead of issuing a ban, R. Moshe gave it his blessing.
In another example, he arranged for a two-day trip to Washington at low cost for boys. The trip was going to be taken on the two days that the yeshivos gave off for Channukah. One Rosh Yeshiva wrote R. Teitelbaum a nasty letter accusing him of encouraging bittul Torah. Fortunately, R. Teitelbaum was able to fend him off.
It's very interesting that the difference between R. Teitelbaum's point of view and the point of view of others in our community is brought to my attention right now. Walter just began high school this week and it looks like he's going to have a great time there. He's encouraged about the learning programs, the secular education and the extracurricular activities. Indeed, when we went looking for a school, we purposely went looking for a place that had all three of these elements -- we wanted a school that had a great learning program that would keep him challenged and interested; we wanted a school with a quality secular studies department that would show him the possibilities that exist in our world, and a school that had supervised extracurricular activities for him to be able to channel his creative energies. I purposely didn't want to send him to a high school such as that I went to: where the learning was boring and uninteresting, where the secular studies were a joke, and the word "extracurricular" didn't exist because the school day went from 7:30 in the morning to 9:30 at night every day without variation; where the word "trip" didn't exist and the word "activity" might as well have been in Mongolian. In my old school, if it didn't involve learning, it shouldn't be done (although I suppose they did allow for some recreation -- boys were allowed to play basketball during recess). In looking for the type of school for Walter that recognizes that kids are kids and need kosher extracurricular activities, I find that I have explicitly rejected the opinions of the "banners" and embraced the opinion of R. Teitelbaum.
I can only be thankful that there are rabbis out there, like Rabbi Teitelbaum, who have not forgotten what it is to be a kid and to need an outlet for youthful energies.
The Wolf
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Singles -- Learn to Think For Yourselves!
I think that Cheryl Kupfer is rapidly becoming one of my favorite columnists over at The Jewish Press. Her column today (again about shidduchim) hit a nerve with me.
In this week's column, she relates the story of a not-so-young woman in her 30s (and closer to 40) who was still single. Her friend, a shadchan (matchmaker), redt her (proposed a date) to a never-been-married man. Although she wasn't exactly what he was looking for, he apparently thought that there might be some possibility there agreed to see her. Once he agreed, the shadchan approached the woman about the date. What happened next? Ms. Kupfer tells us:
Once this “girl’ was told that this young man was interested, she got in touch with a mentor who is involved in a shidduch group and who, no doubt had been looking out for her. This woman, however, after being given the boy’s information “just didn’t see it” and suggested to this almost 40-year-old not go out with him. She turned down the shidduch.
What was the reaction from the shadchan?
“Do you know how many people I never thought to set up because ‘I didn’t see it’ are now happily married?” my friend exclaimed, visibly agitated. “What would it have hurt if she just met with him? What did she have to lose?”
Lest you think that this is an isolated case, I can tell you that it is not. I have seen similar cases with my own eyes. I know of a woman who is in her early 30s and will not date someone unless her mentor (a man whom I know and who really does have her best interests in mind) checks him out and gives the OK.
Whenever I hear cases like these, I always ask myself the following questions:
1. It's a date, not a marriage proposal! As long as you're reasonably sure he's not an axe-murderer or a rapist, why not go on a date? What (aside from an evening) have you got to lose?
2. Don't you think you're old enough to decide for yourself whether or not a particular gentleman is right for you? Assuming that you are a mature, responsible adult, you are fully capable of deciding what qualities you need in a mate and asking the pertinent questions yourself.
3. At your age, you can't afford to be too choosy. If your goal is, indeed, to get married, realize that after the age of 30, there will be fewer and fewer men knocking at your door. Take every opportunity you get to go out.
Now, I'll admit that maybe I'm not seeing the problem from the singles' point of view. Thank God, I've been happily married for a long time and never had to put up with the "shidduch dating" scene. So, maybe there is a side of this that I am missing. If anyone is aware of it, please feel free to write in and educate me. But I've always been a firm believer in doing everything possible to get unmarried men and women together to meet and marry. I believe that we should be doing everything we can to facilitate meetings, not block them. Unless you find out that the guy or girl have some *serious* defect (polygamist, etc.) what's the harm in just going out on the date? The worst that can happen is that you have a lousy time and the evening was a waste. But with the potential upside is so great, I don't see how you can *not* go.
Ms. Kupfer ends her column with a similar story of another older single who lost a potential chance because* someone else* thought the shidduch wasn't good enough.
I am reminded of a phone call I made many years ago that was intercepted by the mother of an older single (still unmarried) who I wanted to set up with a divorced father of one. She, too, was in her late 30s. Her mother asked why I was calling, and being polite and a bit stupid, I told her that I had a shidduch for her daughter.
When she heard that the man was divorced with a child, SHE nixed it, with an indignant tone in her voice that I would even think of setting up her child with such a man. She too, like the mentor above, was wearing rose-colored glasses that had been dipped in the skewed waters of Denial.
How about letting her decide? True, maybe she wasn't looking for someone with a child, but perhaps she might have liked the man enough anyway? Would it have been so bad to even suggest a date and that she find out? How could she know that this man might not have been perfect for her daughter?
Personally, I think that we need to make some changes. We need to have older singles begin to think for themselves. We need to show them that they are perfectly capable of evaluating whether or not to go out on a date with someone. They don't require anyone's permission.
Secondly, we need to instruct mentors and parents of older singles to simply stay out of the way. Unless there is some really, really, really solid reason why the match wouldn't work, then they should advise them to go out and have fun. Older singles don't need a gatekeeper anymore -- they can make their own decisions.
The Wolf
In this week's column, she relates the story of a not-so-young woman in her 30s (and closer to 40) who was still single. Her friend, a shadchan (matchmaker), redt her (proposed a date) to a never-been-married man. Although she wasn't exactly what he was looking for, he apparently thought that there might be some possibility there agreed to see her. Once he agreed, the shadchan approached the woman about the date. What happened next? Ms. Kupfer tells us:
Once this “girl’ was told that this young man was interested, she got in touch with a mentor who is involved in a shidduch group and who, no doubt had been looking out for her. This woman, however, after being given the boy’s information “just didn’t see it” and suggested to this almost 40-year-old not go out with him. She turned down the shidduch.
What was the reaction from the shadchan?
“Do you know how many people I never thought to set up because ‘I didn’t see it’ are now happily married?” my friend exclaimed, visibly agitated. “What would it have hurt if she just met with him? What did she have to lose?”
Lest you think that this is an isolated case, I can tell you that it is not. I have seen similar cases with my own eyes. I know of a woman who is in her early 30s and will not date someone unless her mentor (a man whom I know and who really does have her best interests in mind) checks him out and gives the OK.
Whenever I hear cases like these, I always ask myself the following questions:
1. It's a date, not a marriage proposal! As long as you're reasonably sure he's not an axe-murderer or a rapist, why not go on a date? What (aside from an evening) have you got to lose?
2. Don't you think you're old enough to decide for yourself whether or not a particular gentleman is right for you? Assuming that you are a mature, responsible adult, you are fully capable of deciding what qualities you need in a mate and asking the pertinent questions yourself.
3. At your age, you can't afford to be too choosy. If your goal is, indeed, to get married, realize that after the age of 30, there will be fewer and fewer men knocking at your door. Take every opportunity you get to go out.
Now, I'll admit that maybe I'm not seeing the problem from the singles' point of view. Thank God, I've been happily married for a long time and never had to put up with the "shidduch dating" scene. So, maybe there is a side of this that I am missing. If anyone is aware of it, please feel free to write in and educate me. But I've always been a firm believer in doing everything possible to get unmarried men and women together to meet and marry. I believe that we should be doing everything we can to facilitate meetings, not block them. Unless you find out that the guy or girl have some *serious* defect (polygamist, etc.) what's the harm in just going out on the date? The worst that can happen is that you have a lousy time and the evening was a waste. But with the potential upside is so great, I don't see how you can *not* go.
Ms. Kupfer ends her column with a similar story of another older single who lost a potential chance because* someone else* thought the shidduch wasn't good enough.
I am reminded of a phone call I made many years ago that was intercepted by the mother of an older single (still unmarried) who I wanted to set up with a divorced father of one. She, too, was in her late 30s. Her mother asked why I was calling, and being polite and a bit stupid, I told her that I had a shidduch for her daughter.
When she heard that the man was divorced with a child, SHE nixed it, with an indignant tone in her voice that I would even think of setting up her child with such a man. She too, like the mentor above, was wearing rose-colored glasses that had been dipped in the skewed waters of Denial.
How about letting her decide? True, maybe she wasn't looking for someone with a child, but perhaps she might have liked the man enough anyway? Would it have been so bad to even suggest a date and that she find out? How could she know that this man might not have been perfect for her daughter?
Personally, I think that we need to make some changes. We need to have older singles begin to think for themselves. We need to show them that they are perfectly capable of evaluating whether or not to go out on a date with someone. They don't require anyone's permission.
Secondly, we need to instruct mentors and parents of older singles to simply stay out of the way. Unless there is some really, really, really solid reason why the match wouldn't work, then they should advise them to go out and have fun. Older singles don't need a gatekeeper anymore -- they can make their own decisions.
The Wolf
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
How To Prevent A Breech Birth? -- Part II
Back in May, I posted about a friend who was expecting and the baby was in a breech position. One of the things that was recommended to her was to make sure the seforim (Judaica books) in the house were turned in the upright position. At that time, I asked if anyone had a source for this "segulah" or if it was simply an old-wives tale.
Well, it seems that we now have an answer: according to Rafi, the segulah is attributed to Rav Chaim Kanievsky, the son of the Steipler. Interestingly, he also brings another... odd... segulah for turning the baby as well from Rav Yisrael Yaakov Fisher .
He (supposedly) said regarding a breech baby: the husband and wife have to stroll down to Lifta (a natural spring at the entrance to Jerusalem) or Moza (the site of another natural spring, just outside Jerusalem) -
Note: I assume this means any natural spring would work, but he mentioned those two. Or maybe he was specific to these two, so do not hold me responsible if you try it elsewhere and it does not work.
the husband then have to get some spring water into your mouth and put it directly into the wife's mouth.. 3 times! I think she has to drink the water, but the person telling me was not clear on that..
according to R' Fisher - if that doesn't work the baby wasn't meant to turn... and it is dangerous for it to turn.. (hmmm...that means it is not the segulah not working, but it was not meant to be. so you never know if the segulah really works or not.)
The Wolf
Well, it seems that we now have an answer: according to Rafi, the segulah is attributed to Rav Chaim Kanievsky, the son of the Steipler. Interestingly, he also brings another... odd... segulah for turning the baby as well from Rav Yisrael Yaakov Fisher .
He (supposedly) said regarding a breech baby: the husband and wife have to stroll down to Lifta (a natural spring at the entrance to Jerusalem) or Moza (the site of another natural spring, just outside Jerusalem) -
Note: I assume this means any natural spring would work, but he mentioned those two. Or maybe he was specific to these two, so do not hold me responsible if you try it elsewhere and it does not work.
the husband then have to get some spring water into your mouth and put it directly into the wife's mouth.. 3 times! I think she has to drink the water, but the person telling me was not clear on that..
according to R' Fisher - if that doesn't work the baby wasn't meant to turn... and it is dangerous for it to turn.. (hmmm...that means it is not the segulah not working, but it was not meant to be. so you never know if the segulah really works or not.)
The Wolf
Monday, August 27, 2007
Kol Koreh Against Heter Mechira
Yeshiva World is reporting that Rav Eliyashiv (and others) has signed a Kol Koreh against the use of a Heter Mechira (temporarily selling land in Israel to a non-Jew) in the coming Shvi'is year. As per YW:
The Kol Koreh states that the Heter Mechira leads to the desecration of the “holy and precious” Mitzvah of Shmita.
Now, I'll be the first to admit that I don't have the scholarship to know whether the Heter Mechira is a "solid" heter, or if the use of it should really be abandoned. However, one thing is clear, Rav Eliyashiv believes that we should not use the heter and keep the mitzvah of shvi'is (not working the land in the sabbatical year).
My question is this -- if using a Heter Mechira leads to the "desecration of the holy and precious mitzvah" of shvi'is, why doesn't the use of a prozbul lead to the "desecration of the holy and precious" of the mitzvah of shmitas k'safim (cancellation of debts)?
The Wolf
The Kol Koreh states that the Heter Mechira leads to the desecration of the “holy and precious” Mitzvah of Shmita.
Now, I'll be the first to admit that I don't have the scholarship to know whether the Heter Mechira is a "solid" heter, or if the use of it should really be abandoned. However, one thing is clear, Rav Eliyashiv believes that we should not use the heter and keep the mitzvah of shvi'is (not working the land in the sabbatical year).
My question is this -- if using a Heter Mechira leads to the "desecration of the holy and precious mitzvah" of shvi'is, why doesn't the use of a prozbul lead to the "desecration of the holy and precious" of the mitzvah of shmitas k'safim (cancellation of debts)?
The Wolf
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
We All Need A Laugh: Proof That Moshe Was a Satmar.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Science and Torah (again) in the Jewish Press
A letter to the editor in today's Jewish Press (last one on the page) regarding Rabbi Slifkin's new book caught my attention.
In the letter, a person (a doctor, by the title in his name) takes Rabbi Slifkin to task for accepting science over Torah (which is not necessarily what he does... but we'll leave that point alone for the moment). He writes:
It’s a simple matter to present various midrashim and Talmudic dictums which seemingly do not jibe with modern science and then suggest that our rabbinic teachings must therefore be flawed. The fly in Slifkin’s ointment is that science – yes, “holy science” – is by no means infallible. In fact, scientific information is subject to constant change.
In this last point, he is certainly correct. Science does change and, in fact, never presents itself as being infallable. Indeed, a hypotheses that is not falsifiable is not a scientific hypothesis. Science relies upon peer review and demands that if a new hypothesis is put forward, that it be tested and an attempt to disprove it be made.
He then continues:
I am no prophet, but I can predict with certainty that within twenty years most of what the scientific community presently believes will be relegated to the dustbin of history.
Really? Within twenty years most of the science that we know is going to be disproven (I'm assuming that's what he means by "be relegated to the dustbin of history")? Somehow, I find this statement highly unlikely. While there will certainly be some things that change, I'm positive that the most basic scientific facts that we know of -- that are the bedrock of future advances in science -- are not going to change in the next hundred years, let alone in the next twenty.
The fact that the letter writer (assuming he is a medical doctor -- he could be a Doctor of Divinity or hold some other non-scientific doctorate) is a doctor is all the more scary. Yes, medical science is changing at a rapid pace as we learn more about the human body, genetics and the like. But the basic underpinnings of the things that are taught in the medical schools today are not likely to change anytime soon.
He continues onward:
It’s the height of foolishness to abandon the truths given by Hashem to Moshe Rabbeinu more than three thousand years ago, and faithfully recorded by our Sages in the Talmud and midrashim, because of slavish belief in scientific notions that will not survive their adherents.
And, I suppose, this is a sticky point: If you maintain that the midrashim and everything contained in the Talmud was given to Moshe at Sinai and faithfully transmitted down, unaltered in any way from one generation to the next (something that I find highly unlikely and possibly the subject of a future post) and that they are literally God-given truth, then you would probably take this view. However, you don't have to posit this at all. You can certainly posit that midrashim either don't have to be taken 100% literally, or else that they can be viewed as embellishments on existing legends (not to be taken to mean falsehoods) that are used to teach valuable moral lessons. You can view the scientific statements in the Talmud as being a reflection of the science and folklore of the day, and not as God-given truths. When viewed this way, I don't have to worry about the Gemara losing it's validity because the sun doesn't go behind a curtain at night or because half-earthen mice don't exist.
The good doctor's last point (that the scientific principles currently espoused won't survive their adherents) is very interesting. I'm fairly certain that the Church said the same thing about Galileo, Darwin and other people whose scientific statements have been validated throughout the years.
The Wolf
In the letter, a person (a doctor, by the title in his name) takes Rabbi Slifkin to task for accepting science over Torah (which is not necessarily what he does... but we'll leave that point alone for the moment). He writes:
It’s a simple matter to present various midrashim and Talmudic dictums which seemingly do not jibe with modern science and then suggest that our rabbinic teachings must therefore be flawed. The fly in Slifkin’s ointment is that science – yes, “holy science” – is by no means infallible. In fact, scientific information is subject to constant change.
In this last point, he is certainly correct. Science does change and, in fact, never presents itself as being infallable. Indeed, a hypotheses that is not falsifiable is not a scientific hypothesis. Science relies upon peer review and demands that if a new hypothesis is put forward, that it be tested and an attempt to disprove it be made.
He then continues:
I am no prophet, but I can predict with certainty that within twenty years most of what the scientific community presently believes will be relegated to the dustbin of history.
Really? Within twenty years most of the science that we know is going to be disproven (I'm assuming that's what he means by "be relegated to the dustbin of history")? Somehow, I find this statement highly unlikely. While there will certainly be some things that change, I'm positive that the most basic scientific facts that we know of -- that are the bedrock of future advances in science -- are not going to change in the next hundred years, let alone in the next twenty.
- The age of the universe is not going to suddenly be reduced to 6000 years in the next twenty years.
- The studies of archeology, geology, genetics, chemistry, biology, zoology and many other disciplines which show the earth (and life upon it) to be more than 6000 years old are not going to disappear in the next twenty years.
- The four basic forces in the universe are not going to disappear in the next twenty years.
- Einstein's theories of relativity, the Laws of Thermodynamics and many other scientific theories are not going to disappear for a long, long, time -- and even if they are changed, the changes will certainly only be minor tweakings -- not wholesale revolutions.
The fact that the letter writer (assuming he is a medical doctor -- he could be a Doctor of Divinity or hold some other non-scientific doctorate) is a doctor is all the more scary. Yes, medical science is changing at a rapid pace as we learn more about the human body, genetics and the like. But the basic underpinnings of the things that are taught in the medical schools today are not likely to change anytime soon.
He continues onward:
It’s the height of foolishness to abandon the truths given by Hashem to Moshe Rabbeinu more than three thousand years ago, and faithfully recorded by our Sages in the Talmud and midrashim, because of slavish belief in scientific notions that will not survive their adherents.
And, I suppose, this is a sticky point: If you maintain that the midrashim and everything contained in the Talmud was given to Moshe at Sinai and faithfully transmitted down, unaltered in any way from one generation to the next (something that I find highly unlikely and possibly the subject of a future post) and that they are literally God-given truth, then you would probably take this view. However, you don't have to posit this at all. You can certainly posit that midrashim either don't have to be taken 100% literally, or else that they can be viewed as embellishments on existing legends (not to be taken to mean falsehoods) that are used to teach valuable moral lessons. You can view the scientific statements in the Talmud as being a reflection of the science and folklore of the day, and not as God-given truths. When viewed this way, I don't have to worry about the Gemara losing it's validity because the sun doesn't go behind a curtain at night or because half-earthen mice don't exist.
The good doctor's last point (that the scientific principles currently espoused won't survive their adherents) is very interesting. I'm fairly certain that the Church said the same thing about Galileo, Darwin and other people whose scientific statements have been validated throughout the years.
The Wolf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)