Category Archives: Talmud

Whatever happens throughout the year, in actuality, took place on Rosh HaShanah, according to the Baalei Mussar. Looking back at this difficult year, we now know how much is at stake on Rosh Hashana. Rabbi Moshe Bamberger, mashgiach at Lander College for Men/Beis Medrash LTalmud, shares his thoughts and insights on how we should prepare for Yom Hadin.

The year 5780 plagued the world with so much suffering. The Coronavirus pandemic, which brought illness and death of unimaginable proportions, the shuttering of our yeshivos and shuls and the passing of many important Torah personalities, the termination of the way we carry out our normal lives, can be said to have commenced not on Purim, which we commonly peg as its start, but rather a year ago, on Rosh HaShanah.

We got a wakeup call this year that Hashem is truly in charge. All the high-tech, the advances in science and medicine and our feeling of being powerful, healthy, safe and secure, were demonstrated as being but a figment of our imagination. Rosh HaShanah of last year was when Hashem saw fit to send the world this message.

This should be a powerful lesson for us regarding our upcoming Rosh HaShanah. As we see clearly how much hangs in the balance on this Day of Judgment, it reminds us of how much is at stake on this day. We must prepare ourselves for it during the month of Elul, the days of Selichos and Erev Rosh HaShanah. Teshuvah, tefilah and tzedakah these are the weapons we have in our arsenal to rid ourselves of the evil decree of this past year.

We must pray with all the kavanah and sincerity we can that this global virus that claimed close to a million lives worldwide comes to an immediate end, and that we enjoy 5781 as a year filled with yeshuos and refuos, for Klal Yisrael and the entire world.

With heartfelt blessings of K'siva Vachasimah Tova,

Rabbi Moshe Bamberger

Go here to see the original:

The Wake-up Call the World Received in 5780 - Touro College News

opinion

Yossi J. Liebowitz| Special to the Spartanburg Herald-Journal

The Yiddish writer Scholem Aleichem was rightfully called the Jewish Mark Twain. Folksy and wise, humorous and passionate he chronicled the social and political changes afflicting the Jewish people in the late 19thcentury. His stories about Tevye the Milkman eventually found their way to Broadway in the hugely popular musical "Fiddler on the Roof," translated and produced in dozens of countries around the world.

One of Aleichems most famous anecdotes concerned a conversation between three townsmen of the ghetto. After the first argued one point in a debate, Tevye said: Youre right! And then after the other debater argued his point, Tevye also said: Youre right! A fourth man hearing him support the assertions of both townspeople protested, He is right and he is right? How can they both be right? to which Tevye responded; You know, youre also right!

Comical, the dialogue was nevertheless embracing a desperately needed attitude which so eludes our argument culture, a phrase used in the tumultuous 1970s.The encyclopedia of Jewish lore and law called the Talmud celebrates a similar dynamic exhibited by two ancient sages by the names of Hillel and Shammai. Renowned for their differences in which the former was more lenient, they once vigorously debated a point of Jewish tradition. Eventually, as the legend would have it, a Divine voice emerged from the heavens and declared that both viewpoints were both worthy. It thundered from the beyond:These words and those words are the words of the living God, even though Hillels position was ultimately favored.

In the spirit of Aleichem, the sages mused; how was it possible that both positions could be celebrated earning Gods favor. They concluded that the ability of these men to show restraint when affronted by their opponent was what merited the praise of God. More than that, when they later discussed and taught the traditions and cited the dispute, they would teach their opponents views. As we live in a most tribal era in which polarization best defines our political and religious discourse, we would do well to celebrate these ancient teachings.How to, as the saying would have it, disagree without being disagreeable.

At times when I hear a Supreme Court decision promulgated in the news, I am happily struck by the American tradition of citing both the minority and the majority opinions. How our country is in dire need of that kind of spirit which tamps down our verbal pugilism!The name-calling, the labeling, the mockery of others is nothing new in the American experiment. Lincoln was portrayed in cartoons and his speech compared to an ape. Roosevelt was mocked for his programs, some of which took on anti-Semitic tones when the New Deal was called the Jew Deal! As Ecclesiastes once asserted, there is nothing new under the sun." But are these heated expressions nothing new? Our new forms of communication from Facebook to Messenger to emails and other poorly reviewed expressions have only amplified the vitriol.As our tough times are marked by civil strife, economic upheaval and the pain of the pandemic, it is so sad to see how the verbal assaults being hurled. How we yearn for statesmen and stateswomen to embrace the ancient spirit of Hillel and Shammai. I believe that more than anything, such could be the salvation of this nations spirit, and to quote one contemporary writer a reclaiming of the soul of America!

Yossi J. Liebowitz, rabbi of Congregation Bnai Israel in Spartanburg, can be reached at EZRabbi@aol.com.

See the rest here:

Opinion: Why can't we learn to disagree without being disagreeable? - Spartanburg Herald Journal

Among the best-known of any biblical chapter, the six verses of Psalm 23 are commonly recited at funerals and chanted as a meditation. Its mystical words echo in our ears:

Yea though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for You are with me.

But what do they mean?

The classic King James translation of 1611, quoted above, capitalizes the Y in You, meaning that the one doing the walking is human and God is the companion. Robert Alters magisterial 2007 translation agrees. Human beings do not walk alone through lifes travails through the vale of deaths shadow as Alter renders it because God is always present.

Yet other interpreters suggest that the verse might not be pointing to the Divine Presence at all. Consider this teaching from the Talmud:

Rav Yitzak said: What is the meaning of Yea though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for You are with me? This is a person who sleeps in the shadow of a single palm tree, and in the shadow of the moon. But with regard to one who sleeps in the shadow of a single palm tree, we said he is in danger only if the shadow of another palm tree does not fall upon him. However, if the shadow of another palm tree falls upon him, we have no problem with it. (Pesachim 111a)

For Rav Yitzhak, sitting in the shade of a solitary tree can be dangerous, but sitting in the shared shadows of two trees is not. How might we understand this imaginative reinterpretation? Perhaps companionship itself reduces the fear of the dark. In this radical approach, it is not a miraculous appearance of heavenly light that the psalmist imagines, but rather the empathetic connection of kindred darknesses.

Two ancient rabbinic voices go even further in their understanding of who journeys together in the dark:

Rabbi Eleazar of Moda said, In the future, in the world to come, the angels of the nations of the world bring charges against Israel before the Holy Blessed One, saying: Master of the universe! These have served idolatry and these have served idolatry; these have committed sexual sins and these have committed sexual sins; these have spilled blood and these have spilled blood! Why then are You bringing these down to Gehinnom and these are not being brought down? The Holy Blessed One will turn to them and reply, If this is so, then all the peoples with their gods will go down to Gehinnom, as it is written: all the peoples walk each in the names of its gods (Micah 4:5).

In Rabbi Eleazar of Modas telling, God is challenged by the angels who want to know why different peoples of the world are punished differently for committing the same sins. And God replies that the angels are right, essentially telling them: All of the peoples should go to Gehinnom and their gods as well, including me.

The passage continues:

Rabbi Reuben said, If it werent written in the Tanach (Hebrew Bible), how could this ever be spoken: For with fire will God be judged (Isaiah 66:16). God judges is not written but rather will be judged! It is he whom David said through the Holy Spirit: Yea though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for You are with me. (Psalm 23:4). (Shir HaShirim Rabbah on SoS 2:1)

According to Rabbi Reuben, this idea of God being judged and punished along with the people would be unbelievable were it not written in the Bible. But there it is, in Isaiah and Psalm 23. In this rendering, it is God who walks through the valley and is not afraid because we are with God. No people walks without God, and no God worth loving walks without the people. Even God trembles when we suffer.

This revolutionary rereading of the verse brings God into the shadowy journey all human beings endure in this world. Even God experiences the hellish dark by virtue of being connected to those who suffer its pain which is to say, everyone. In those places where people face darkness, God goes as well, linked in sacred relationship to the vulnerability and fear human life often includes.

The 19th-century Hasidic master Rabbi Mordecai Yosef Leiner, also known as the Ishbitzer, expresses this plainly:

Yea though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for You are with me means that one who falls truly falls into their portion of the Holy One. (Pri Tzedek, Naso 15)

What the Ishbitzer is saying is that even if you cant remember to let your darkness touch someone elses darkness, know that when you fall youre falling into God. And maybe God falls into you too. Maybe when we fall into each other, we wont fall apart. Well fall together.

We can be comforted by others when we feel scared. We can be comforted by remembering that God has chosen to walk with us in the valleys of life. And we can be comforted by the knowledge that when we fall, we fall into Gods waiting Presence.

These comforts do not promise a painless tomorrow. Deep faith does not ignore reality. The gift of Psalm 23 is that rather than deny this reality, it reminds us that the best way to prepare for the inevitability of lifes challenges is ready and waiting: strengthening our relationships with others, and walking hand-in-hand with the Divine.

Empower your Jewish discovery, daily

Read the original here:

Psalm 23: Who Walks in the Valley of the Shadow of Death? - My Jewish Learning

Parashat Ki TetzeiDeut. 21:10-25:19

We have now entered the month of Elula month where we do heshbon hanefesh, introspection and reflection, in preparation for the High Holy Days. Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur will be different for all of us this year. This makes the process of preparing for them that much more important. As we conclude the year 5780, a year that has presented more challenges, and brought more tragedy, than any in recent memory, we take stock. How has this year impacted me and my family? Who have I helped? Who has helped me? What else could I do to bring more comfort and hope into the world?

These are not simple questions, but of course we are not living in simple times. We are living in challenging and complicated times, which require more of us. We each need to dig a little deeper to find the strength and compassion to reach out a little more to support our families, our friends, and our community. If we each stretch ourselves to go above and beyond to help others, then we will lift each other up.

Our tradition challenges us to go above and beyond our basic responsibilities to achieve something more. An example of this is found in an interpretation of the opening passage of parashat Ki Tetzei. Here the Torah describes the ben soreh umoreh, the stubborn and rebellious child. (I swear that having my kids home all summer had no impact on my choosing to discuss this passageat least, not consciously). The Torah allows for this child to be punished by death! Long ago, however, our sages mitigated the harshness of this law by effectively legislating it out of existence. They did this by placing all sorts of very specific requirements on its enforcement.

One of these requirements is most curious. The Torah uses the word zolel, glutton, to describe the behavior of a ben soreh umoreh. The Talmud explains that the death penalty is imposed only if the child consumes vast quantities of kosher meat, but if he eats non-kosher meat, then the law doesnt apply. We might think it would be the opposite. That eating non-kosher meat would be the greatest offense in this case. But no, it is eating too much kosher meat that leads to this severe punishment. Why would this be?

Rabbi Yehudah Amital, relying on the great 12th century scholar Nahmonides, provides an answer. He writes, The Torahs imperative, you shall be holy (Lev. 19:2) means that our performance of mitzvot is not sufficient. We are required to aspire to a higher level whose very essence consists of being holy. The Torah limits our consumption of meat because [a person] needs to become more spiritual, to ensure that carnal desires not be the central focus of his life. Even when young, a person must strive for a life that is more spiritual, more moral, more balanced, more pure.

Here we see how our tradition challenges us. While it is essential that we perform specific mitzvot, we also cannot lose sight of the bigger picture, of our greater responsibility that the mitzvot point us towards. This is to be holy, which means that we must try to go above and beyond our responsibilities to help build the better world we seek.

Today even our most basic responsibilities can seem overwhelming. We are all feeling some level of fatigue and frustration with our situation. We must take care of ourselves, and some days doing what we need to do for those closest to us is enough. Still, we are challenged at this time of year to consider how we can do better, and be better, for our own sake and for the sake of our world. What kindness can we perform? What gratitude can we express? What tzedakah can we give? Even small gestures can have a big impact. This is especially true if we each resolve to do a few more of them in the coming year. Then, together, we can lift each other up as we prepare to enter the new year.

The Religion column that appears in each issue of the Voice is presented in cooperation with the Tri- County Board of Jewish Clergy.

Read the rest here:

Together, we can lift each other to a higher level - Jewish Community Voice

Photo Credit: pixabay

The ability to detect a pattern and discern a modus operandi has got to be primary in the arsenal of a crime detective. Likewise, an effective educator needs to be able to pick up on certain behavior and know how it bodes for the student. There really is no limit as to how vital this talent is in countless disciplines, but perhaps nowhere is its importance more obvious than in the realm of psak halachah.

Virtually every monetary question that is presented before a Rav or beis din has not been precisely recorded in the Talmud. Accordingly, an original mind must extrapolate from the underpinnings of the cases presented in the Talmud to current dilemmas. This requires not only expertise and mastery, but also creative thought that is faithful to the intent of the Rabbis.

Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, ztl (1910-95), may have been one of the most outstanding in this regard in the annals of the Jewish people. His ability to adapt arcane, seemingly esoteric Talmudic phrases and rulings and apply them to the modern kitchen is world-famous, resulting in a revolution in Shabbos observance.

With the publication of Shmiras Shabbos Khilchasah in the early 1970s, Shabbos observance was adapted to modern times. Not to detract an iota from its esteemed author, HaRav Yehoshua Noibert, ztl, a close disciple of Reb Shlomo Zalman, the book is based primarily upon the rulings of Rav Shlomo Zalman, and on no page of this path-breaking book will you not find a footnote attributing material to what the author had heard from his master.

Reb Shlomo Zalman was probably the most observant Jew of the 20th century, and there was nothing that he saw that did not immediately undergo his immediate analysis as to how it might impact upon halachah be it something that he read in Torah literature, or an event in the world at large. Every factoid and occurrence was processed in his halachic mental computer, resulting in a steady process of input (facts and information) and output (psak halachah).

Here is a classic, albeit technical, example. In Reb Shlomo Zalmans youth, he overheard Dr. Wallach, the founder of Shaarei Zedek Hospital, mention that not all animals body heat is the same. This tidbit of zoological information brought about a breakthrough in hilchos Shabbos!

The violation of cooking on Shabbos is achieved when a liquid reaches the temperature of yad soleddes bo when a hand will recoil from the heat. In the absence of a thermometer, the Rabbis could not offer a more precise definition. And even these parameters are subjective and not fixed, as one man will recoil his hand at 104 Fahrenheit, whereas another, more sensitive individual will recoil at 100.

As halachah is intended to be a precise science, this gap is problematic. Reb Shlomo Zalman, by applying what he heard about animals varying body heat to what the Talmud teaches in Chulin (8b), was able to close the gap. The Gemara rules that if an animal was slaughtered, and afterward it was discovered that the animal was treif, the knife is not rendered unkosher by virtue of its contact with the treif meat. This law teaches that the body heat of the animal did not exceed yad soleddes, for otherwise it would have rendered the knife treif. Once the temperature is yad soleddes, the heat will transfer and the character of the meat will be absorbed by a knife that comes into contact with it. The very fact that the Gemara instructs that the slaughtering knife that pierced a non-kosher animal is not rendered treif proves that the animal heat is below yad soleddes.

Putting all this together, Reb Shlomo Zalman deduced that the highest body heat of a kosher animal that is slaughtered will be lower than yad soleddes, and below the temperature at which one violates the violation of cooking on Shabbos. Thus, the great mystery as to what precisely is the temperature at which cooking on Shabbos is violated was ascertained by the Reb Shlomo Zalman-esque computer integrating all of the above information. Indeed, in Shmiras Shabbos Khilchasah, the third footnote of hilchos bishul reads that the temperature of yad soleddes is 45 Celsius (113 Farenheit), based on the body heat of a goose (a goose being the kosher animal with the highest body heat.) Even if this particular goose would have had a fever when it was slaughtered, it would still not render the slaughtering knife treif if the goose were to be found to be non-kosher.

To highlight Reb Shlomo Zalmans mastery of halachah and talent for integrating all of the available information into a contemporary ruling sanctioned by the Sages 18 centuries earlier, I will provide one more example.

Once a shopkeeper mistakenly filled an order for sugar with salt. After the customer had finished all her cooking, she discovered that nothing that she had prepared was edible. Any posek would rule that the shopkeeper would have to compensate the customer for the price discrepancy between salt (which is cheaper) and sugar. But is the shopkeeper also responsible for the customers loss in terms of the food that had been rendered inedible as a result of the shopkeepers error?

This precise question does not arise in the Talmud. But young Reb Shlomo Zalman was able to marshal his breadth of knowledge and genius of application to render a most innovative ruling.

A bor, or pit, is one of the primary sources of damage (Babba Kamma 2a), and it is halachically defined as any man-made obstruction which can cause damage from the time it is created. In the case of a bor ha-misgalgel, a traveling pit such as, for example, a stone placed by someone in public property, where it caused no damage to anyone or to anything, but when it was subsequently moved by either man or animal it caused damage in its new location the obligation reverts to the individual who originally created the obstruction.

Reb Shlomo Zalman suggested, based on the principle of bor ha-misgalgel, that the shopkeeper who substituted salt for sugar was obligated to compensate his customer for all the damage that was caused. Who but Reb Shlomo Zalman could have drawn this analogy? For Reb Shlomo Zalman, everything discussed in the Talmud not only was source material for halachic decisions, but had pertinent applicability to everyday life.

The purpose of this column was not to highlight Reb Shlomo Zamans acuity (for that I refer you to my book And From Jerusalem HIS Word), but to prime the reader as to how we all have the ability to harness information from our various disciplines and apply them productively to everyday life, as shall be demonstrated in my next column, G-d willing.

See original here:

Harnessing Information - The Jewish Press - JewishPress.com

By Rabbi Dr. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb

For many of us, the first pieces of wisdom we learned were from nursery rhymes and schoolyard jingles. Sometimes these childish lessons had value, but more often they were off the mark and had the effect of distorting a truer perspective on life.

Take, for example, this ditty: Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never harm me. The implicit message, which had some utility on the playground, is that we can safely ignore insults to our emotions and feelings, and need to only be concerned about physical injury. The truth, however, is quite different.

Obviously, we want to protect ourselves from physical harm. The trauma of bodily injury is something which none of us wishes to bear. But we cannot minimize the harmful effects of psychological trauma, whether it comes in the form of insults, embarrassment, or shame.

During the years I spent as a psychotherapist, I dealt with quite a few victims of domestic violence. I saw the effects that abuse could have upon people, but I noticed that those who suffered emotional abuse were less amenable to successful treatment than those who were physically battered.

Lets face it. Words hurt.

The power that words have to do damage is something which is recognized by our Torah. That emotions can be grievously wounded, reputations ruined, and relationships damaged beyond repair through mere words, is illustrated in biblical narratives, Talmudic tales, and Hassidic stories.

In this weeks parsha, Ki Tetzei, we are instructed to remember what the L-rd your G-d did unto Miriam, on the road out of Egypt. The Torah is referring to the fact that Miriam was punished by a leprous infection.

The full episode of Miriams sin and its consequences appears in an earlier portion of the Torah, at the very end of Parshat Behaalotecha (Bamidbar12:1-16). There we learn that Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of his Cushite wife. They went on to belittle Moses importance, and spoke condescendingly about him.

It seems from the context of the story that Miriam, as the instigator of this critique, did so privately. Nevertheless, the Almighty was angry with her and she was healed, ironically, only because of Moses prayerful intervention.

Thus, our sages understand this command to remember Miriam as an injunction against speaking lashon hara, malicious gossip.

Much closer to our time, at the beginning of the last century, Rabbi Israel Meir Kagan of Radin (the Chofetz Chaim) became convinced that the central evil of modern times was the abuse of words. So confident was he of the certainty of his diagnosis of the social ills of our time that he devoted a major work to the subject of lashon hara. The name of that work is Desirous of Life, after the verse in Psalms, which reads, Who is the person who desires life? Let him guard his tongue against speaking evil.

Recalling Miriams misdeeds, and taking seriously the comprehensive teachings of the author of Chafetz Chaim, is especially valuable today. Because words have become even more powerful and potentially destructive than a rabbi living a hundred years ago could possibly imagine.

Nowadays, through the power of electronic instant communication, words can be sent to millions of people in microseconds. If these words are negative, they can harm individuals instantly, without even the possibility of recourse or recall. The power of words has exponentially increased in scope and effect in our day and age.

Our tradition teaches that using words to offend another human being is akin to a snake and its venom. The snakes venom kills, yet the snake has no benefit from its fiendish action. So too, human beings usually benefit from every other sin imaginable, but gain nothing by harming others verbally. Because of this, lashon hara is the least justifiable of sins.

Not a day goes by when we do not receive e-mails or read Internet reports which damage reputations of individuals, without due process and without the remotest possibility of defending themselves. This goes against both our Jewish heritage and our democratic ideals in a very fundamental way.

It is already the first week of Elul, the last month of the Jewish year. At this time, it behooves us to introspectively examine our faults. It is the season of teshuvah, repentance, which precedes and heralds the imminent High Holidays. We must give thought to how we have offended others with words and with deeds.

Although the unimaginable spread of verbal abuse that postmodern technology has instigated is beyond the capacity for any one of us to correct, we have no option but to try individually to control the way we use words and the words which we use. None of us is innocent of lashon hara, and none of us is exempt from sincerely addressing this weakness.

In conclusion, I call to your attention the rabbinic dictum that the power of Good exceeds the force of Evil manifold. Thus, if words have the ability to harm, they have the infinitely greater ability to soothe and to heal. The way to undo our sins of the negative use of language is to resolve to use language positively.

Imagine if e-mails were limited to complimentary statements and words of praise. Imagine if the blogs and websites were replete with stories of human accomplishment, altruism, and heroism. It would be a happier world for sure.

And it would be a world closer to that which the Almighty intended. Now, less than a month before Rosh Hashanah, is the ideal time for each of us to commit, in a deeply personal way, to bring about that better world.

More:

Words, like sticks and stones, can hurt us - The Jewish Star

A thousand years ago, King Louis IX ordered the Talmud burned in Paris.

O (Talmud), that has been consumed by fire, seek the welfare of those who mourn for you

These searing words were written by Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg (1215-1293), a brilliant Jewish student whod recently travelled from his home in northern Germany to Paris to study a renown yeshiva there, after he witnessed the mass burning of the Talmud in Paris in 1240 on the orders of King Louis IX. A peripatetic king, Louis IX was one of the few Medieval Christian thinkers to willingly engage in debate with Jews - but his legacy is one of pain and suffering for thousands of Jews in France.

He was a splendid knight whose kindness and engaging manner made him popular, the Encyclopedia Britannica describes King Louis IX. Crowned at the age of twelve in 1226, King Louis IX instituted legal reforms across France and often personally judged cases in his magnificent Great Hall in the Palais de la Cite in Paris, where he handed out judgments and punishments to his subjects. A staunchly religious Catholic, King Louis IX was seemingly preoccupied by Jews. He issued the Ordinance of Melun in 1230, forcing Jewish into honest jobs - in reality manual labor. (Forbidden from virtually all professions by the Lateran Council of 1215, life for Frances Jews became more difficult than ever.) He also had an appetite for debating Jews about religion and Judaisms holiest texts.

In the 1230s, King Louis IX finally got his chance to show off his powers of argument and his piety and debate Jews about the very validity of the Jewish faith.

In 1236, Nicholas Donin, a Parisian Jew who had turned his back on the Jewish community and publicly embraced Catholicism, penned a damning letter to Pope Gregory IX. In it, Donin attacked the Talmud, the written discussions of the Oral Law that was given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the Written Law that makes up the Five Books of Moses. He enumerated 35 complaints about the Talmud, including that it attacked the Catholic Church. If there were no more Talmud, Donin asserted, then Jews would be more likely to abandon their Jewish faith and convert to Christianity, as he himself had done.

Pope Gregory IX took Donins letter seriously, and he sent a letter to all Catholic institutions in France demanding that they seize copies of the Talmud from Jewish communities in their midst. Similar letters were sent to Catholic leaders in Italy, Spain and Portugal. The Talmud was going to be put on trial, the Pope announced, and all copies had to be confiscated before this began.

King Louis IX

The date for taking the precious Talmud volumes from synagogues, homes and Jewish schools was set for Shabbat, March 3, 1240. On that day, officials burst into synagogues across Europe where Jews were gathered for Shabbat services, loading volumes of the Talmud that had been painstakingly written by hand, as well as other Jewish books, away. Any Jew who tried to prevent his or her holy books could be killed with impunity.

Two months later, the Talmud was put on trial. King Louis IX oversaw the arrangements: the proceedings were to be public, and he personally promised to guarantee the personal safety of the Jews who were to be charged with defending the Talmud. However, there were strict ground rules that any Jew defending the Talmud had to adhere to: they could not criticize Christianity in any way. Nothing derogative about Christians or Christian belief could be uttered. Blasphemy, as defined by the Catholic Church, would not be tolerated. The conclusion of this infamous trial, or disputation, was a foregone conclusion.

King Louis IX ordered four prominent rabbis to defend the Talmud: Rabbi Yechiel of Paris, Rabbi Moses of Coucy, Rabbi Judah of Melum and Rabbi Samuel ben Solomon of Chateau-Thierry. They faced off against Nicholas Donin, the Christian convert whod initiated the entire dispute.

The trial raged for days. Rabbi Yechiel led the Jewish team, and even his opponents agreed that he argued brilliantly, given the strict limitations on what he was allowed to say. When Donin accused the Talmud of treating Christian figures less than kindly, Rabbi Yechiel responded that it was possible that two people might have the same name, pointing out that not every Louis born in France is king. His flattery seemed designed to sooth the mercurial monarch, who watched every stage of the debate with great interest.

At one point King Louis IXs temper got the better of him as he followed the intricate arguments. Rabbi Yechiel advanced a particularly effective argument and Louis IX became enraged, shouting that instead of discussing matters of faith with a Jew, a good Christian should plunge his sword into him instead. So much for assurances that the rabbis would be safe. Rabbi Yechiel fled for his life, and the three other rabbis continued the dispute without him. Despite the rabbis best efforts, the trial had been decided before it began. The Talmud was found guilty and condemned to be burned.

King Louis IX oversaw the sentence two years later, in 1242. Officials throughout France had scoured the countryside looking for copies of the Talmud and other Hebrew books, taking them by force from Jews across France. Not a single volume of the Talmud remained in Jewish hands. On the morning of June 17, 1242, 24 wagons piled to the top with thousands of volumes of the Talmud and other Jewish books made their way slowly through Paris to the Place de Greve, near Notre Dame Cathedral. The collection was enormous. At a time when every book was painstakingly written by hand, this represented generations of Jewish learning and work. Its estimated that the wagons held about 10,000 books.

One by one, each of the two dozen wagons disgorged their books, dropping the precious texts onto the ground. By the end of the day, an enormous pile of Jewish writings covered the plaza. A crowd gathered to watch the conflagration as Louis IXs officials set the books on fire.

My tears formed a river that reached to the Sinai desert and to the graves of Moshe and Aharon, Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg, who was present at the scene, recalled later about that day. Is there another Torah to replace the Torah which you have taken from us? Sages designated a minor fast day in memory of this tragedy: the Friday before the Torah Portion Chukat is read in synagogue. This years fast day in memory of the Talmuds burning is Friday, July 3, 2020.

The Apotheosis of St. Louis, which stands in front of the St. Louis Art Museum, memorializes the city's namesake.

The fast day this year comes amid renewed attention about King Louis IX. After his death, he became a saint in the Roman Catholic Church. The city of St. Louis is named after him and some people are protesting his statue in that city. In addition to putting the Talmud on trial, King Louis IX also signed legislation to expel Jews from France (this was carried out by his successor King Phillip IV) and led the Seventh and Eighth Crusades, which also targeted Jewish communities. His legacy is a complex one.

Yet, as many people around the world debate Louis IXs legacy, some Jews will recall his reign in a much more personal way, fasting and praying and recalling the Trial of the Talmud that he oversaw, and the incalculable loss of Jewish scholarship that resulted.

View original post here:

When King Louis IX Burned the Talmud - Aish

Right, we have a problem; 500 of us have died of the virus and thats considerably more than should have. Why the disaster, with 500 families in mourning.? The classic Jewish answer is to ask a rabbi; you get an answer a responsa and the rabbi might well quote a Rabbi who died a thousand years ago. there is no time limit to a responsa in Judaism.

So where do we look for an answer to todays problem? How about the 6th century Talmud. You think Im joking. How can a body of laws, 1,500 years old, have relevance today, when were dealing with a previously unknown virus?

Well, we have something like 600 plus laws and over 200 of them are to do with medicine. The Egyptians, the Romans and the heathens believed that if you caught a disease, it was the punishment of the gods and nothing could be done about it. The Biblical Jew, though, set out to find cures and a lot of the doctors were rabbis. Good Queen Bess had three Jewish doctors and popes, emperors and kings followed suit over the years.

How good were they?If you look up the book of Samuel youll find that the Jews were warned that the plague which was hitting the Philistines, was being brought by the rats; they didnt know that in Britain till the early 20th century.

So what are we told to do to avoid something like this virus?

First of all we are told to wash our hands. Sounds familiar? Remember Seder night? Well, were supposed to wash our hands pretty regularly. Most people didnt wash. There was one bathroom and two toilets in the whole of Louis XIVs Palace of Versailles. The Rothschilds had a bath and used to lend it to Kings in Germany, having it trundled through the streets to everybodys surprise. Mostly, though, nobody washed

You could still get a nasty virus. What to do then? The Talmud is clear; you isolate the patient. Sounds familiar again? Isolate them and theres a good chance they wont pass it on to somebody else. Well never know how our 500 victims caught coronavirus, but somebody had to give it to them. Today you can get a test if you have any kind of coronavirus symptom. Do what the Talmud says.

Then there are two further relevant laws in the Talmud. One is dina de malchuta dina. That means that the law of the country in which we Iive is to be the law of the Jews. The government didnt make it a law that everybody should stay home to avoid the R level going over one, but we should have done it because it was as near a law as they could make it.

There is one more law in the Talmud which is particularly valid in the present crisis. Thats pekuach nefesh. That you can break any Jewish law if there is a danger to life. Those people who are taking part in services in the hotel in Bournemouth are breaking pekuach nefesh.

Maybe it wont result in fatalities. Please G-d that will be the case. It might not be, however. Those 500 fatalities caught coronavirus from somebody. If theyd stayed home, they might well have still been with us.

As Jews, weve been accused over the centuries of bringing the plague because we often didnt get it as badly as the neighbours. Jewish houses had to be scrupulously clean; look at getting rid of the hometz before Passover.

As many as 50,000 Brits will have died from this pandemic and, percentagewise, weve lost more of the community than our numbers justify. Is there any doubt that if wed followed the laws in the Talmud we would have done better.

It isnt about what kind of Jew you are; from Charedi to Liberal. Its about a lot of very clever ancestors who came up with the right answers. They went so far as to make it a law that every Biblical Jewish soldier had to be given a spade to bury their effluent. We will not go into what happened at the Palace of Versailles. At Balmoral after the First World War, the Prince of Wales didnt have a bathroom.

Im staying locked down until the virus has disappeared. The vast majority of the Jewish fatalities were over 65.

Derek is an author & former editor of the Jewish Year Book

Read more:

How to beat the virus? It's in the Talmud - Jewish News

The Talmud in Tractate Sotah, asinterpreted by Rashi, makes a startling statement:

It was stated, one who readScripture and studied Mishnah, but did not serve Torah sages, he didnot spend time amongst the scholars in order to decipher the reasoning behindthe commandments. Rabbi Elazar says thathe is considered an ignoramus. Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmeni says that he is a boor, an individual inferior to anignoramus.

Rashi comments:

Did not serve Torah sages: Hedid not study the Talmud, which explains the rationale of the Mishnah. Thisindividual is considered wicked, since his learning is not thorough. One mustnot study from such an individual, since it is specifically the reasoning [thatgives one the ability] to discern what is prohibited and what ispermitted . . . This person is considered bare.

What seems clear is that one mustnot study halachah in a vacuum. Theevolution and rationale of the law are not merely added elements; they areintegral to understanding the law itself. One who studies halachah in isolation will likely err.

Shortly after the completion ofMaimonides Mishneh Torah in 1180,Maimonides faced a wave of criticism on these very grounds. In creating aclear, systematic and comprehensive code of halachah,he seems to be in violation of the Talmud above. He specifically did not wantto confuse or distract his reader with the minutiae of discussion leading tothe final law. He included nothing more and nothing less than clear,straightforward law. As he articulates clearly in his introduction to Mishneh Torah:

I, Moses,the son of Maimon, of Spain . . . contemplated all these textsand sought to compose [a work which would include the conclusions] derived fromall these texts regarding the forbidden and the permitted, the impure and thepure, and the remainder of the Torah's laws, all in clear and concise terms, sothat the entire Oral Law could be organized in each person's mouth withoutquestions or objections.

Instead of[arguments], this one claiming such and another such, [this text will allowfor] clear and correct statements based on the judgments that result from allthe texts and explanations mentioned above . . .

A personwill not need another text at all with regard to any Jewish law. Rather, thistext will be a compilation of the entire Oral Law . . . a personshould first study the Written Law, and then study this text and comprehend theentire Oral Law from it, without having to study any other text between thetwo.

Maimonides' code, as pure,unadulterated law, is seemingly exactly what the Talmud cautioned against.According to Rashi's interpretation of the Talmud, Mishneh Torahwhen studied as intended by the authorwould do moreharm than good.

Indeed, this concern of the Talmud(as understood by Rashi) surfaced a generation later, as evidenced in theresponsa of Rabbeinu Asher, the Rosh. He was responding to a rabbiwho had written to him regarding a mikvahthat had been filled using a questionable technique.

The law is that water used to fill amikvah must be naturally flowing,either rainwater that falls directly into the mikvah or aspring that flows into the mikvah. Inthis case, a mikvah had beenconstructed alongside a spring. In order to fill it, water was added to thespring, causing it to overflow into the mikvah.

The rabbi writing to the Roshassumed that this mikveh was nowinvalid. He based this assumption on (amongst other sources) the followingstatement of Maimonides in Mishneh Torah:When one digs at the side of a spring, as long as the water emerges because ofthe spring, even though at times, its flow is interrupted, but then it flowsagain, it is considered as a spring (i.e., a kosher mikvah). If, however, it ceased flowing entirely, it is consideredas water collected in a pit.

The assumption of the questioningrabbi was that once the water pooled in the mikvah,it would be considered as if it had ceased flowing and therefore beclassified as water collected in a pit and invalid for use as a mikvah.

The Rosh rejects this, pointing outthat this extrapolation stems from a misunderstanding of Maimonides. Maimonides,explains the Rosh, is actually quoting a section of Tosefta. Seeing the full context of the quote precludes theunderstanding of the Roshs questioner.

The Tosefta is discussing the differences between various categories ofwater that may be used as a mikvah.One difference mentioned by the Tosefta isbetween water pooled in a pit and flowing rainwater. Both are kosher, but waterpooled in a pit is of an inferior level and has certain restrictions regardingits use.

With this context in mind, we canunderstand the error called out by the Rosh. When the water is actively flowingto and from the spring, it is considered to be an extension of the spring. If,however, the water pools in a pit, it is now considered pooled water (notflowing rainwater and not an extension of the spring). This is not to say the mikvah is invalid; it is simply aninferior category, but still a kosher mikvah.

Thus, we have clear, documentedevidence of the Talmuds concern: studying laws bereft of their context leadsto mistaken conclusions. This leads the Rosh to caution against deriving anylaw from the text of Mishneh Torah:

Therefore,all who decide law from the Mishneh Torah,without thorough knowledge of the background, are in error. They make what isforbidden permitted and what is permitted forbidden. This is because Maimonidesdid not follow the convention [established by] all other authors, who citeproofs and sources for their conclusions.

This begs the question, who iscorrect? Do we follow the advice of Maimonides in his introduction, where heencourages one to simply read the Written Torah and then move straight to his Mishneh Torah, or do we follow theopinion of the Rosh, who strongly opposed such an approach?

To demystify this, we must firstresolve an apparent difficulty in the Laws of Torah Study, from the Code ofJewish Law (Shulchan Aruch) by RabbiSchneur Zalman of Liadi.

Initially, he seems to side clearlywith the Rosh:

If one doesnot understand the reasoning behind the law, then he will not be able to fullycomprehend the law. He is called a boor.Therefore, there is a prohibition against deciding law, even for oneself,from halachot without the reasoningincluded [alongside.]

However, later in that same chapterhe encourages individuals who have mastered practical halachah, i.e, they are knowledgeable and fluent in halachah pertinent today, to dedicatetime to study areas of laws not applicable today, such as the laws of thesacrifices. And if, he adds, there is insufficient time to master these areasby first studying the Talmud and its commentaries, then one should study thebasic laws as articulated in the mishnayotand in Maimonides' Mishneh Torah.

Now, if we take into account whatwas quoted earlier, we seem to have a problem. Rabbi Schneur Zalman wrote thatif one does not study the reasoning behind the law, he will not be able tofully comprehend the law. He is called a boor.So what is the point? Why study in such a manner if the study is in vain due toa lack of understanding? Surely it would be preferable to study at a slowerpace while incorporating the background of the law, which would enable a properunderstanding?

The Lubavitcher Rebbe, in a talkcommemorating the passing of both Maimonides (on the 20th of Tevet) and ofRabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi (on the 24th of Tevet), addressed this issue. Basedon a close analysis of the exact wording used by Rabbi Schneur Zalman, which isbased on the Sefer Mitzvot Hagadol, hedraws a distinction between two elements within the obligation to study andknow Torah (yediat haTorah). Oneelement of this obligation is to study the mitzvahs in order to acquire thepractical knowledge necessary to fulfill Torahs precepts correctly. A vastamount of knowledge is needed to properly navigate the complexities ofday-to-day halachah. This elementpertains only to the mitzvahs that have a practical application nowadays.

But there is a second element to themitzvah of yediat haTorah: one mustattain the ability to observe all613 mitzvahs in ones heart. One is obligated to acquire the knowledgenecessary to fulfill even mitzvahs that are not applicable nowadays, withoutthe Temple standing in Jerusalem.

With this distinction, we can betterunderstand why Rabbi Schneur Zalman advises that an individual study mishnayot and Mishneh Torah, even if these works do not articulate the reasoningbehind the law. True, such study is not advisable when it serves as the basefor the practical application of law. However, one is also obligated to knowTorah as it pertains to the mitzvahs that have no practical application today.For this study, it is reasonable that a lighter study course is followed, onethat enables the individual to cover all themitzvahs, albeit on a basic level. Since one is not studying to practicallyobserve these mitzvahs, this study is purely theoretical and we are notconcerned about any erroneous application of law.

Earlier, when Rabbi Schneur Zalmanchastised individuals who study the halachotwithout first exploring the relevant sources in the Talmud and itscommentaries, he was referring to a study that would lead to a practicalapplication of law. In such a case, the Roshs concern is valid; an incorrectruling may well be the result. However, when studying for knowledge alone, toobserve the mitzvahs in ones heart, it is preferable to cover allmitzvahsalbeit on a more basic levelthan to study a few in depth. For suchstudy, Mishneh Torah is ideal.

So while Maimonides failed toactualize the complete replacement of the evolutionary processes of halachah as he envisioned in hisintroduction, Mishneh Torah doesserve an extremely valuable purpose as a work to be studied independently. Itis the only comprehensive and approachable work that covers every single areaof halachah. Thus, it is the workfavored for providing a birds-eye view of all areas of Torah law, a keycomponent of the mitzvah to know Torah.

Learn about the Rebbes initiative encouraging all Jews to studyMishneh Torah dailly.

Here is the original post:

Is it Permissible to Study Mishneh Torah as a Stand-Alone Work? - Mishneh Torah In-Depth, Article 1 - Introduction to Mishneh Torah - Chabad.org

A year before Noam Sienna, 30, earned his Ph.D. in Jewish history at the University of Minnesota last month, he had already published a groundbreaking book. A Rainbow Thread: An Anthology of Queer Jewish Texts from the First Century to 1969 collects primary sources by and about queer Jews dating back much further than most people would have thought possible. Some are legal documents, others are poetry. They range from shocking to moving. And many have never been published before.

Sienna, who lives in Minneapolis, will discuss the book on July 6 at a virtual event sponsored by the Jewish Community Library, Afikomen Judaica and Congregation Shaar Zahav.

J.: Why this book, and why now?

Noam Sienna: I wish I had published this book 20 years ago, so I could have read it when I was a kid. I loved learning about Jewish history and Torah and Talmud, but as I got older and increasingly understood myself as a queer person, I felt alienated from the Jewish textual tradition. I hope this book is opening a door for Jewish LGBTQ people to connect to the Jewish tradition in some way. Its not a narrative that you read cover to cover. Its a tool box that people can open to find pieces that will help them understand themselves within Jewish history.

You exclude biblical texts because theyve already been extensively mined for queerness. The texts you do include are all over the map poetry, Talmud, journalism, personal diaries and many of them have never gotten attention before. How did you find them?

Some of these sources are very well known Talmud, Maimonides, certain literary texts. But those texts havent always been read through the lens of the LGBTQ experience, so Im inviting people to read them in a new way.

Some texts are documentary sources that have been excavated by scholars of queer history, but havent yet been seen for their relevance in Jewish history. For example, the first gay bar in Paris was run by an Algerian Jew. French historians dug up that story, and what they all note in a small way is that the owner of the bar was a Jew. But theyre not Jewish historians, so they didnt stop to think what it tells us about Jewish history. The end of his story is tragic, as I discovered: In the late 30s he was arrested and sent to Auschwitz where he was murdered. I was in contact with a French historian who was working on this, and he had no idea that he was murdered in Auschwitz. He had never thought to ask, whats the end of that story of a Jew in France at that time.

There are also sources from within the Jewish community talking to the Jewish community, and those have only started to be looked at in the last 10 or 15 years. For example, sources on Jewish same-sex relationships in the Ottoman Empire. Ive tried to take these sources and present them in an accessible English translation that is open to anyone someone in eighth grade in Omaha could pick this up and read the text and feel invited into this history.

About one-third of the sources in this book have never appeared in English before. So thats exciting to me to say, heres raw historical material that is now open for engagement and analysis for people who arent going through original archives themselves. Its collating work by myself and other scholars and putting it in one place for the general public.

Who is this book for?

Its already being used in a number of college classes on gender, sex, religion and Jewish studies. A number of high school teachers have been working with it, and synagogue and camp educators are working with the material. And the texts are also being used by Jewish artists and thinkers as jumping-off points for their own creative work. The play Indecent, which has won numerous awards, is based on the Yiddish play God of Vengeance, which is excerpted in this book. It excites modern audiences, but its based on a historical story on the intersection of Jewish and LGBTQ identities. I think there are more Broadway plays to come from this book. Or graphic novels or PJ Library books or contemporary dance. And I hope theres more of that.

Whats one example of a text that really surprised you?

The story of Ben Rosenstein, a Jewish immigrant who comes to the U.S. in the early 20th century and works in a factory on the Lower East Side, and he marries another Jewish immigrant, Pauline up to that point its a very typical immigrant story. But he gets tuberculosis and a HIAS doctor comes to see him and discovers that he was born and raised as a woman but was now living as a man. He died shortly after. The story was leaked to the papers, and it was front-page news in Chicago in 1915. I was able to find corroborating documents, including Ben Rosensteins death certificate, which lists him under his birth name as female, but his census record from 1910 lists him as male and married to a woman. Finding that census record, it was a huge relief because I was so moved to know that this person had chosen a way to live that felt right to them and they stuck to it. If the doctor hadnt taken his story to the paper, this person might have had a long life as a man, and just slipped through history without leaving a record of their life. How many more people lived like this?

Why the time frame of the first century to 1969?

I started with Hellenistic Jewish literature, written in Greek around the 1st century C.E. its a black hole of Jewish history that people forget about. People jump from the Bible to the Talmud, forgetting that there are five centuries in between. The very first source is a literary text that compares a homoerotic poem by Sappho to the Torah. In the first century, Jews are reading this homoerotic poetry and appreciating it in the same breath with the Torah!

I wanted to end with 1969 because of Stonewall, which is often seen as the catalyst for the gay rights movement; people start the story of LGBTQ issues there, as if in 1969 gay people were invented and Jews tried to figure out what to do with them. But I knew there was material to show Jewish LGBTQ life from before 1969. So the last text is actually about Sappho! It is by this German Jewish classicist named Vera Lachmann. In 1967, she goes on this pilgrimage to the island of Lesbos, the birthplace of Sappho and the origin of the word lesbian. She later published some poetry about her trip. So I wanted to end with this Jew writing about Sappho, just as we started with a Jew writing about Sappho.

I assume theres some Bay Area-relevant material in the book?

Oh yes. For example, in 1961 Rabbi Alvin Fine at Temple Emanu-El in San Francisco, a Reform rabbi, appeared on TV and made the following statement: Judaism today takes a different view from its Biblical and post-Biblical edicts on homosexuals Such persons are not criminals and should not have punitive action as atonement Judaism believes that the psychological approach is the answer. In 1961, no American rabbi had made anything close to this public statement. It was so radical that it immediately provoked an official response from the Reform movement emphasizing that Rabbi Fine was not speaking as a representative of the Reform movement.

What will people hear about if they tune into your July 6 discussion?

Well look at and read some of these texts and see what they can bring to contemporary LGBTQ Jewish life, and well have an opportunity to put the texts from the book to work and chew over where do we go from here.

Read more:

A treasure trove of LGBTQ texts from two millennia of Jewish history - The Jewish News of Northern California