Moshiach & immorality I

Bereishis Rabbah (51:8): There is not a man in the world – Lot’s daughters thought that the whole population had been destroyed as it was from the Flood. Let us keep alive the seed of our father.Shmuel said that they didn’t say they wanted a child from their father but rather they wanted to preserve the seed of their father. Thus they were referring to the seed that comes from a different source i.e., they wanted to preserve a child who would be born from their descendants - Moshiach… There are dots on the word “she left” – which alludes to the fact that Lot did not know when she lay down but he did know when she left. …R’ Yehuda ben Shimon said that the wine was a sign of the Messianic Era as it states in Yoel 4:18): And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down sweet wine.

Yashar (upright) vs Tzadik (righteous)

Malbim (Mishlei 11:3): There is a distinction between yesharim (uprightness) and tzadikim (righteous). The yashar is one who naturally goes on the upright path – whether it is in religious thought or matters of understanding. That is because the majority of issues concerning yashar involve understanding (binah) or moral traits and deeds that are rooted in wisdom (chochma). Therefore when it comes to matters of wisdom (chochma) the yashar is distinguished from the tzadik in that the yashar naturally has the inclination in his heart to do good because of the uprightness which is implanted in him. In contrast the tzadik's conduct is based upon having learnt what righteous behavior is and constantly practicing it until the tzadik conquers his baser drives and trains himself to do the opposite of his nature. The yashar is simply expressing his nature. Furthermore the yashar is not concerned with the letter of the law but is concerned with the spirit of the law - until he conducts himself beyond that which the law actually requires…. Therefore in order to go in the good path it is needed that 1) his path is yashar and 2) that he is aided in going in that path. … Thus one who is not yashar, his path is not yashara and he needs help from Above to straighten his path. Even though the yashar conducts himself in the manner of uprightness because of his inner nature, nevertheless his physical needs sometimes cause him to deviate from that path. But if he has the additional aspect of temimus (purity) he will be totally consistent in his conduct of uprightness and not deviate from it because of physical needs….

Hikind objects to Aguda's views on abuse

VINS Assemblyman Hikind

New York - On behalf of the countless sexual abuse victims – those whose stories of personal anguish still resonate with me, and those who still have yet to come forward – I respectfully urge you to reconsider your position regarding the statute of limitations bill containing a window provision which is currently before the Legislature.

I assure you it is not the intention of this legislation to bankrupt or otherwise jeopardize “vital communal institutions,” for we all recognize that the existence of yeshivas and the continuity of the Jewish future are irrefutably tied. Indeed, I believe it is our very commitment to providing our children with a solid Jewish education which has sustained us as a people for generations.

Tragically, however, many of our children, our most precious resource, have been sexually violated in a variety of contexts, and for numerous years, these victims were left without any remedy. Their pursuit of justice has, until now, been filled with endless days of shame, silence, and frustration. We are all guilty of not doing more to alleviate their suffering. You have stated that you have, “no objection to legislation designed to give victims of abuse greater recourse against perpetrators." In this regard, we are of the same heart and mindset.

While your concerns are valid, I implore you to reassess your decision about this bill, to take a closer look, and work toward achieving a satisfactory and equitable compromise on the one year window provision. There are potential alternatives to the bill in its present form which may be more amenable to you. Creating a cap on a litigant’s financial award or on the contingency fees collected by attorneys are just two possibilities which may prove viable.

Achieving justice for the victims need not come about as a result of the financial demise of our greatest institutions. But neither can we forsake those who have already sacrificed far too much.

Holocaust - describing the undescribable

NYTimes

JERUSALEM — In the Ukrainian town of Berdichev, Jewish women were forced to swim across a wide river until they drowned. In Telsiai, Lithuania, children were thrown alive into pits filled with their murdered parents. In Liozno, Belarus, Jews were herded into a locked barn where many froze to death.

Holocaust deniers aside, the world is not ignorant of the systematic Nazi slaughter of some six million Jews in World War II. People know of Auschwitz and Bergen-Belsen; many have heard of the tens of thousands shot dead in the Ukrainian ravine of Babi Yar. But little has been known about the hundreds, perhaps thousands, of smaller killing fields across the former Soviet Union where some 1.5 million Jews met their deaths.

That is now changing. Over the past few years, the Yad Vashem Holocaust museum and research center in Israel has been investigating those sites, comparing Soviet, German, local and Jewish accounts, crosschecking numbers and methods. The work, gathered under the title “The Untold Stories,” is far from over. But to honor Holocaust Remembrance Day, which starts Monday evening, the research is being made public on the institution’s Web site. [...]

Baalei Teshuva - a reality check

LazerA (guest post) - a comment to "Killing with self-righteous criticism - Tznius & p...":

mekubal said... "I am left to wonder why the FFB world feels the need to so often blame the ills of Chareidi society on the BT. ... It is attitudes like this that leave me astounded that the BT movement rolls on as well as it does.

"Obviously, there are many different kinds of people who become frum for many different reasons. Baalei teshuva are people who, assuming they were well-adjusted individuals to begin with, have chosen to uproot their lives for the sake of Hashem. As such, they are, broadly speaking, a very positive influence in the frum world. At the same time, this not mean that they arrive without any negative baggage, and this reality should be recognized by both the baalei teshuva themselves and the broader community. There clearly are problems that are more common among baalei teshuva than the general community. This, of course, does not justify any kind of broad discriminatory attitudes or practices. We should treat people as individuals, not as members of a category.

mekubal said further... It also leaves me to think that those involved in kiruv are heinous criminals. They are cons selling an illusion. For if we are honest with the potential BT ... then I doubt that so many would be sold on the program...

As a child of parents from non-religious backgrounds, and a person who has worked "professionally" in kiruv, I have to disagree with this assessment.

First of all, while there certainly is discrimination against baalei teshuva (and their children) it simply isn't as bad as mekubal is describing. Under normal circumstances, the children of baalei teshuva are accepted in frum schools, though perhaps not always the exact school that the parents desired (this happens to many frum parents as well). Baalei teshuva can have difficulty getting married (as do any number of frum singles as well) for a wide range of issues. Honestly, in many cases they are best off marrying other baalei teshuva. Their children may have some difficulty, but unless they fall into the common trap of seeking a "prestige" shidduch, they will almost always find a fine frum young man or woman to marry. (Frankly, those families that are most likely to have a strong bias against baalei teshuva are, in any event, very unlikely to provide an appropriate shidduch for a baal teshuva or his children.)

Secondly, the idea that sincere baalei teshuva would not have accepted the truth of the Torah and their obligation to follow the mitzvos if they had been aware of the social difficulties that they would face in the frum community shows a deep disregard for the sincerity and sacrifices that baalei teshuva are making. These are serious people! They aren't "joining" because they like the social scene; they are "returning" to Hashem because they are convinced that this is their moral duty.

Finally, I can't speak for other kiruv "professionals", but when I have worked with families in the process of becoming observant, I have always been careful to be sure that they went into religious observance with their eyes open, aware of the various social issues they would face. My concern was to properly prepare them for the difficulties they would face and to advise them on steps they can take to mitigate, to some degree, some of these difficulties.

Michoel said... "Baalei T'shuvah tend to ... timidity and lack of independent thought and action.

"People who choose to move away from the societal norm and become religious Jews are clearly capable of independent thought and action. At the same time, baalei teshuva are late-comers to Judaism and, by necessity, need to receive a greater degree of guidance than a person who was raised in a frum household and received a Torah education from childhood (at least initially). This does not indicate an inherent tendency towards timidity or lack of independence.

Life after false imprisonment

CBS News

At 51, Beverly Monroe was practically central casting for an accomplished middle class mom:

"I had a great life, absolutely great life," she said. "I had a super job, career. I had my own home. I was financially secure. My daughter Katie had just finished law school, my youngest daughter Shannon was a senior at William and Mary. My son was living with me and going to college.

"Things could not have been better."

"And then this happens," Cobiella said.

"Yes."

In March of 1992 Monroe found her longtime companion Roger de la Burde dead in his Virginia home, a bullet in his head, a pistol by his side.

By all appearances, it was a suicide. But the police told Beverly Monroe she was suspected of murder …
.
"I had no experience, no thought of ever being accused of anything," she told Cobiella. "I mean, it's incomprehensible."

It was equally incomprehensible to Beverly's daughter. But, as a young lawyer beginning a new job, Kate Monroe also knew that "incomprehensible" did not make her mother's conviction impossible.

"I think I understood immediately when Mom was charged that she could be convicted," Kate said. "And I understood when then she was convicted that she might never come home."

It turns out she was half-right. In October of 1992, a jury believed not her mother but the prosecutor. Beverly Monroe was sentenced to 22 years in prison.

"I was convicted on not only no evidence, but just sheer speculation," Beverly said.

Lawyer Kate Monroe quit her job and spent the next six years searching for proof of her mother's innocence.

She found it in 1999. Prosecutors, she discovered, had withheld evidence showing that the likely cause of Roger de la Burde's death was suicide, not murder.

Seven years after her conviction, Beverly Monroe was released.[...]

Treating abuse - Neve Michael Home

YNEt

Some 180 children and youth at risk reside at the Neve Michael Children's Home after they have been removed from their own homes. Here they face the daily challenge of coping, and getting over traumas and years of abuse [...]

Marriage - definition

Shulchan Aruch(E.H. 26:1): A woman is not considered married unless there is a proper Kiddushin. However if the man has intercourse with her in the manner of fornication and not for the sake of marriage – it is nothing. Even if he has intercourse with her for the sake of marriage – but it is a secret – she is not considered married even if she has an exclusive relationship with him. Not only are they not married but we force him to send her from his home. Rema The reason is that she will definitely be embarrassed to go to mikva and therefore he will have intercourse with her when she is a nidah. However if he sets aside a woman and she goes to mikve then some people say that she is permitted to him and this is called pilegesh (concubine) which is mentioned in the Torah (Ravad). Others (Rambam, Rosh and Tur) say that this is prohibited and the punishment is lashes because of the Torah prohibition (Devarim 23:18) of not having a prostitute (kadesha).

Important women - perception or reality?

Igros Moshe(O.C. 5:20): …The Beis Yosef brings the Ri in the name of Tosfos that all of our women are important and therefore need to recline at the Seder. (The Bach raises the question according to the view of Rashbam that women don’t recline because the fear of their husbands is supposed to be upon them – and it follow therefore that also important women need to have the fear of their husbands? However I don’t understand his question. Was it really the will and the command of the Sages that the fear of her hsuband exist even for those things which aren’t relevant to him and even when it nullifies a mitzva? Furthermore it is not good that the husband be so fussy about this wife. We see that for many hundreds of years that husband have not been concerned about requiring this as we see in the Beis Yosef who brings the Ri in the name of Tosfos – and he states that all of our women are important and need to recline at the Seder. Also the Mordechai brings this view. In addition it can’t be understood that all these women objectively became important - so that the husband needs to honor them even according to the rules of secular society. Obviously it was because the husbands came to recognize over time that they have no reason to feel superior to their wives. And similarly the wives recognized the great need that the men have for them. The small amount of genuinely important woman that have been found in all ages were those that the husband perceived their superiority – just as they had need for their husbands. They recognized that even their husbands knew this)

Obama's "Rabbi"

NYTimes

Rabbi Capers Funnye celebrated Martin Luther King Day this year in New York City at the Stephen Wise Free Synagogue, a mainstream Reform congregation, in the company of about 700 fellow Jews — many of them black. The organizers of the event had reached out to four of New York’s Black Jewish synagogues in the hope of promoting Jewish diversity, and they weren’t disappointed. African-American Jews, largely from Brooklyn, the Bronx and Queens, many of whom had never been in a predominantly white synagogue, made up about a quarter of the audience. Most of the visiting women wore traditional African garb; the men stood out because, though it was a secular occasion, most kept their heads covered. But even with your eyes closed you could tell who was who: the black Jews and the white Jews clapped to the music on different beats.

Funnye, the chief rabbi of the Beth Shalom B’nai Zaken Ethiopian Hebrew Congregation in Chicago, one of the largest black synagogues in America, was a featured speaker that night. The overflowing audience came out in a snowstorm to hear his thoughts about two men: the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Barack Obama. King is Funnye’s hero. Obama, whose inauguration was to take place the following day in Washington, is family — the man who married Funnye’s cousin Michelle.

A compact, serious-looking man in his late 50s, Funnye (pronounced fu-NAY) wore a dark business suit and a large gray knit skullcap. He sat expressionless, collecting his thoughts, as Joshua Nelson and his Kosher Gospel Band steamed through their sanctified rendition of the Hebrew hymn “Adon Olam.” Nelson, a black Jew, was raised in two Jewish worlds — a white Reform temple in New Jersey and a Black Jewish synagogue in Brooklyn — and he borrows from both. The first time the Rev. Al Sharpton heard a recording of Nelson’s “Adon Olam,” he said, “I can hear that’s Mahalia Jackson, but what language is she singing in?” [...]

Yad Moshe - Topic Listing

Yad Moshe - Index to Igros Moshe

2 Page Sample Yadmoshe

Daas Torah - Index & Introduction

Daas Torah Pages 1-42

We were slaves to Pharaoh - Women's status

Ramban(Bereishis 3:16): And to you husband will be your desire - for sexual intercourse. Even so she should not have the arrogance to ask for it directly. Rather he should rule over you that everything is from him and not from the wife. This is Rashi’s explanation. But it is not correct. This verse is in fact a praise of the wife as it says in Eiruvin (100b) that this is a beautiful characteristic of women. The Ibn Ezra says that the expression “your desire will be to your husband’ means that she will obey all that he says, because the woman is in the domain of the husband to do all that he wishes. However I have found no instance where this language of “desire” means obedience – it always means passion or lust. It appears correct to me that she was punished that she would have very strong desire for her husband and she would not be concerned with the associated suffering of pregnancy and birth and the fact that the husband treats her as a slave. It is not normal that a slave should desire to have a master but rather he wants to escape to freedom. However this is measure for measure because Eve gave the fruit to Adam and commanded him to eat it. Therefore she was punished that she would no longer be his boss but that he would boss her according to his wishes.

Torah Temima(Bereishis 3:16):And he will rule over you - we learn from this that a woman asks for intercourse through her actions while the man asks for it directly and this is a good trait for women (Eiruvin 100b). Even though the trait of modesty is a good trait, nevertheless it is a curse that she can’t openly express her desires to her husband. It should be noted that this doesn’t explain the language “And he will rule over you” in terms of its literal meaning of having a master… Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezar (Chapter 14) notes that this is one of the curses of a woman and she should have her ear bored as a permanent slave and as a maidservant. The Radal says that this teaches that it has been decreed that a woman always has to pay attention to the words of her husband. It is logical that the reason for the practice of piercing a woman’s ears for jewelry is an allusion to the fact that she is enslaved to her husband as is noted in Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezar. If so then why isn’t the expression in this verse “He shall rule over you” explained according to this understanding [and instead the gemora says it means that she can’t asked openly for intercourse]? … Nevertheless it definitely would appear that the verse doesn’t lose its literal meaning and that is also meant. Therefore in terms of the relationship of a husband and wife, the wife is obligated to accepted the authority of her husband as we find in the Rambam (Hilchos Ishus 15:20): “Our Sages have commanded that the wife view her husband as a king and lord.” Aside from the language of this verse this idea of ruler ship can also be seen in the Sifre…that a woman does not have permission to speak before her husband. This is also possibly the source that Pesachim (108a) that a woman does not have to recline at the Pesach Seder in the presence of her husband. The reason being that he rules over her. She is exempt in the same way that a student is in the presence of his teacher. He cannot recline in the manner of freedom because of his fear and respect of his teacher. It is logical that this is the reason that a woman who does not fulfill the wishes of her husband is called a moredes (rebel). Since it is an obligation to accept him as king and lord [as stated in Rambam] therefore when she does the opposite - it as if she had rebelled against the kingdom. …

Eternal Jewish Family - Modern Orthodox view

RaP writes:

Understanding the Modern Orthodox perspective and reactions to the attacks upon them.

Rabbi Nochum (Norman) Eisenstein faces criticism from a new direction as a former friend from Skokie attacks his association with EJF and work with conversions

A Modern Orthodox perspective on the attacks against it by Rabbis Eisenstein, Tropper and EJF

A notable and respected Jewish blog owner, Modern Orthodox Rabbi Harry Maryles of Chicago, Illinois, who is an old friend and acquaintance of Rabbi Nochum Eisenstein of Vaad HaOlami Leninyanei Giur, the fickle ally of Rabbi Tropper of EJF.

Maryles's popular blog "Emes Ve-Emunah: A Forum for Orthodox Jewish thought on Halacha, Hashkafa, and sociological issues of our time" is at haemtza.blogspot.com and resembles this blog of Rabbi Dr. Eidensohn/da'as torah just that Rabbi Maryles's blog speaks from a Skokie-style Modern Orthodox perspective, with its hashkofa based on: Rabbi Aaron Soloveichik, Rabbi Dr. Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Dr. Norman Lamm and Torah U’Mada, Dr. Eliezer Berkovits, the Hebrew Theological College, Rabbi Yaakov Perlow and Rabbi Mordechai Rogov.

What is of relevance to this blog is that Rabbi Maryles claims to have the personal insight to speak about Rabbi Nochum Eichenstein, whose English first name was Norman and was known as "Normy" to his childhood friends. [.... rest of post is comment to Rabbi Bomzer's ban signatories - retract":]