Campell's Soup Sucks, but I've Got Their Back

As a  kosher-eating Jew, I'm deeply concerned about the latest wingnut war against Campell soup. Here's a sample:

Creeping Sharia has come to a grocery aisle near you. Campbell’s soups have come out with a line of 15 halal-certified soups which comply with the dietary regulations of the two percent of the American population that follows Islam. …The next time you pop open a can of Campbell’s vegetarian soup, you’ll have the comfort of knowing that you are consuming jihadi-sanctified food. … What more people will find offensive is that the person carrying out the killing must recite a Koranic verse while the lifeblood of the animal drains away, thus dedicating the animal and the meat that comes from it to Allah. … The prayer? “Bismillah Allah-hu-Akbar”, which means “In the name of Allah, who is the greatest.”

This nonsense is a little too-close for comfort to the things crazy wingnuts say about kosher, isn't it? If Halal certification is dangerous, anti-American and a sign that the Muslims are taking over, how exactly is kosher certification different? It lunatics are campaigning against Halal certification, what's our assurance they won't next rally against kosher certification on precisely the same ground?

Furthermore, let's count the crazy, shall we:
1) The soups are only  available for sale in Canada; therefore only Americans who are panicked about Sharia and also in possession of  poor geography skills need to be concerned.
2) The soups with Halal certification are all vegetarian. So the pre-slaughter prayer doesn't seem like much of a problem here. No scary Arabic words are said over vegetables.
3) And why exactly are the Arabic words frightening? Would the wingnuts object if a Rabbi were to say "Yehai Shmai Raba Mivorah Liolam U'liOlmay Omaya" near their food? Bismillah Allah-hu-Akbar expresses a nearly identical sentiment and about the same deity.
4) Have the wingnuts forgotten that they stand for free markets? Campbell isn't endorsing Islam. Its trying to appeal to new customers and make some money. Since when do wingnuts oppose that?

---

Search for more information about [topic] at 4torah.com.

Headline of the day (Nope, not about me)

And Dov turns into a bear!

BY GARY BUISO

The Brooklyn Paper

Read it

HT: Jameel

---

Search for more information about [topic] at 4torah.com.

Why DovBear isn't a heretic

My answer to those who accuse me of heresy, or of undermining the mesorah is best summarized as follows:

• The world, like the Torah, is divine revelation. 
• If something is true, it's not heresy, even if Chazal weren't aware of it. 
• It's not heresy to say that Chazal were unaware of a fact about the natural world. The Geonim and Rishonim said it first. 
• It's not heresy to say that the statements Chazal made about the natural world aren't part of the Mesorah. The Geonim and Rishonim said it first. 
• The policy of the Sages, the Geonim, and the Rishonim was to respond honestly to facts about the natural world as they understood them. They ran into trouble only because some of those facts were wrong.
• Its no insult to Chazal to say they were working with bad facts; some of the Geonim, Rishonim and Achronim have already said it. 
• If we can say that Chazal made mistakes because they were working with bad facts about the natural world, we can say the same about the Rishonim and Achronim.
• The error people make is assuming that Chazal and Razal reached irreproachable conclusions about the natural world, when all they were really doing was responding honestly to the truth as they knew it.
• Now that old facts about the natural world have been defeated, and replaced with new facts...
•  the right thing to do is to respond honestly to them, as Chazal and Razal did in their own time; whereas
• the wrong thing to do is to cling to old results which were based on bad facts, or to cling to the bad facts themselves.
• If this sounds like heresy to you, there are two possible reasons:
• You're not aware of what Razal said on the subject
• You're not aware that old facts have been defeated, or that new facts have been discovered

Perhaps one day, I'll expand this into an essay.

---

Search for more information about [topic] at 4torah.com.

...but money answereth all things

Have you always suspected that a separate set of rules exists for Jews with money and connections? Well, here's a letter from a yeshiva that nonchalantly confirms it.

And kids, next time a well-meaning adult tells you that to get ahead all you need to do is work hard and play fair be sure to laugh directly in their face.

Edited 3:15 p.m. to remove names 

Doffing of the head gear to Amshi

Some more words
In this post, I've merely reported that this school has removed the veil, and confesses what more discerning people already knew: The nice things we say to ourselves about Orthodox Jewish exceptional-ism, and the superiority of our culture are at best exaggerations. Our culture is like any other. No better no worse. Sometimes good behavior wins, but more often it doesn't, just like in the world at large.

---

Search for more information about how Jews are no better, and perhaps worse, than everyone else at 4torah.com.

The heresy antidote

The other night, my teenaged son came to me with a question about Talmud. He had come across an "ika "d'amri" and he was puzzled. Here's the passage:

R. Mari said: For what reason did the Rabbis maintain that the river-bank does not constitute an identification mark? Because we say to him: As it happened to you, so it may have happened to your neighbour. Some have another version [ika d'amri]: R. Mari said: For what reason did the Rabbis maintain that the place constitutes no identification mark? Because we say to him: As it happened to you in this place, so it may have happened to your neighbor in this [same] place

What, my son wanted to know, did Rav Mari actually say? Did he speak about river-banks, in particular or about all places, in general? And if, my son continued, the scholar-to-student tradition of what Rav Mari said existed in two different versions, is it possible that other versions of other statements also once existed but were lost? And didn't it all come directly from Sinai?

You might say the gates of heresy had begun to open beneath his feet, only he's fortunate enough to have me for a father. In our house, recognizing the truth is no crises. This is because I've always taken care to ensure my children never became invested in the lies.

Here's the thing, I told him, the Gemarah is a compilation of various teachings about various subjects that came together slowly over hundreds of years. As time goes by, its only natural for details to be forgotten or modified. The same thing happened here. There's nothing shameful about that. Its how things go. As a result, no one really knows what Rav Mari taught. Some of his students remembered the teaching one way; others remembered it differently. Years later, when the time came to write things down, both possibilities were preserved.

In other houses (and I know, because I've heard the stories) my son's questions would have been met with anger, ignorance or indifference. A questioning child who encounters any of those three responses is immediately discouraged. What does the anger hide, he wonders. Why doesn't my father know how to address this?  Is it possible the whole things a fraud?

Alternatively, I could have given my son the traditional answer, the answer I was given, and told him that there's really no disagreement between the two versions of Rav Mari, only to our limited intellects they seem to contradict. I could have reinforced the notion that the whole Talmud was known to Moshe, and passed down uncorrupted to our hands. But once a child knows there is no Santa Claus, what's the point in continuing the charade? He knows the score. He's started to think like an adult, and now has nothing but disdain for childish thinking. If you don't acknowledge his new insight and his new ability you'll only fall in the child's esteem. Kids have a nose for B.S. They know when someone is condescending to them.

By admitting what he already knows to be true, the door remains open to more conversation. If he knows I won't lie, he'll trust me when I have more important things to say about the value of upholding traditions, and celebrating our heritage, and the rest. Honesty, after all, begets trust.

---

Search for more information about kids at 4torah.com.

Why Charedim Don't Fight in the IDF According to Rabbi Orlofsky

A Guest Post By E. Fink

Rabbi Orlofsky was asked why charedim don't fight for Israel in the IDF. The question was posed as a matter of pikuach nefesh or even milchemes mitzva and by looking at Tanach we clearly see that young Jewish men fought in the army. The letter ends with: "It is a matter of responsibility for every member of the nation to do their part. How can I understand the seeming shirking of duty?"

Rabbi Orlofsky first goes after the tone of the letter. (Arguing Pro-Tip: When you have nothing smart to say ALWAYS complain about tone.) RO complains about the tone of using the words "shirking of duty". After a brief mussar shmooze RO says that since the Gedolim prohibited Charedim from joining the IDF (some 60 years ago) that is sufficient reason not to join the IDF. Then RO finally answers the question with a variant of "Torah is protecting the Land of Israel at least as much as soldiers".

Here is the problem: The heter to avoid the IDF is for those who are truly learning and it can be argued that their learning is protecting the Land of Israel. However, as currently constructed, the heter is a blanket heter that applies equally to masmidim and batlanim. There is no accountability and no assurance that the young man is studying at all. Issuing catch-all heterim can create a lazy attitude toward observance. And indeed it has.

Also, just because the Gedolim gave the heter does not mean that it is assur to ask why. Why is always a good question and it is a question that deserves more respect than "because I said so".

There may be plenty reasons that charedim should not join the IDF, but it would have been nice it RO would have mentioned that Maran Rav Shteinmen is in favor of the Nachal Charedi and old habits die hard, but soon more charedim may join the IDF. Perhaps that would have been a better answer to the question...

(Link: http://www.jemsem.org/pearls/dama.html, HT: @rabbigreen)

---

Search for more information about [topic] at 4torah.com.

Paladino Putdowns

John Stewart, a great American, last night helped shovel some dirt on the lifeless corpse of unhinged candidate for governor Carl Padino. After playing a clip of Paladino telling a room full of anachronistically attired Rabbis that he does not want children brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is a successful option, Stewart said:

So he's making the case to orthodox religious folk, that gay people will brainwash their children into dressing and acting in an unconventional manner. Gay people.

After another clip, in which Paladino snarls that Cuomo proved himself "outside of the box" on family values because he allowed two of his daughters to accompany him to a Gay Pride parade, Stewart lowered the boom on Mister Clueless Hypocrite.

"That's Carl Paladino making the case that he is the 'family values' candidate Because he would never take either one of his two simultaneous families to a gay pride parade.

As Ben at Politico said the other day, this kind of crazy doesn't play in New York. Even Republicans are disgusted.

---

Search for more information about the bottom of the barrel candidates the GOP is running for Governor at 4torah.com.

ArtScroll Censors the Mesorah

So, I checked my new ArtScroll translation of Deuteronomy, and to my surprise I discovered that the nasty passages in which we're ordered to kill every single descendant of Amalek have been excluded.

How strange.

Since when does Artscroll care about perceptions?

I thought their whole purpose was to provide the English speaking public with the Torah Truth (TM). Genocide may be unpopular in the 20th century, but the Torah's values are timeless. If the world at large today has a problem with genocide, what concern is that of ours? We Jews should tell the truth, as we know it, consequences be damned. If our Torah, or our Rabbis said or did something, we conceal it at our own peril.

~ ~

As some of you may have realized, the preceding passage is a parody, inspired by S's startling discovery. In what follows, I've taken my tongue out of my cheek, and rewritten the passage to reflect what has actually occurred . I think the larger point remains valid.

~ ~

So, I checked my new ArtScroll translation of Oznayim L'Torah, a classic work written by R. Zalman Sorotzkin, one of the giants of the last century, and to my surprise I discovered that the passages in which R. Sorotzkin expresses his admiration for Daniel Defoes's Robinson Caruso, and derives lessons from it have been excluded. 

How strange. 

Since when does Artscroll care about perceptions? 

I thought their whole purpose was to provide the English speaking public with the Torah Truth (TM). Secular novels may be unpopular in the contemporary yeshiva world, but the Torah's values are timeless. If the zealots and know-nothings of today have a problem with secular novels or the fact that our Gedolim used to read them, what concern is that of ours? We Jews should tell the truth, as we know it, consequences be damned.  If our Torah, or our Rabbis said or did something, we conceal it at our own peril.

---

Search for more information about the screaming hypocrites who work at ArtScroll at 4torah.com.

Three Points on the NYT Mag Article on Basil

A Guest Post By E. Fink

In yesterday's New York Time Magazine (and on NYT.com last week) an interesting article about a diverse kosher restaurant in Crown Heights appeared. (Keeping It Kosher) In my opinion the article made three basic points.

1) It is possible for a diverse, upscale kosher restaurant to exist and operate successfully.

2) The community in Crown Heights is not diverse and suffers tensions with its non-Jewish neighbors.

3) The kosher supervision of the restaurant oversees the status of the food and also tries to control the way the clientele behave and dress while in the restaurant.

Point number one is correct. There are other upscale kosher restaurants that cater to all sorts of people and I for one, would like to see more places a kashrus observant business person could take non-kashrus observant friends, clients, partners and bosses without apologizing for subpar food, service and ambiance.

Point number two is not limited by any means to Crown Heights. I have noticed that the more insular a community becomes, the less tolerant they become of others. Perhaps it is more ironic in Crown Heights because of the international (probably soon to be intergalactic) reputation that Chabad shluchim have earned as being open and welcoming to all people.

But it is not a problem specific to Chabad. All Jewish neighborhoods that limit interactions to people that are overwhelmingly similar to one another suffer from a nearsighted view of humanity. It is not just between Jews and non-Jew, it is perhaps even more profound when the differences between Jew and Jew and even more minute differences between Orthodox Jews create closed communities that shun outsiders.

For 500 years we tried to get out of the ghetto. Now that we are out all we want to do retreat into our own self-made ghettos...

Point number three is the most egregious. It is egregious on account of orthodox kashrus organizations claiming for years that they do not monitor "anything besides kashrus". Animal cruelty? "Not our department." Undocumented laborors? "The meat is still kosher". Underage workers? "Hey, no one is forcing them to work...". In short, kashrus organizations as a whole have taken a laissez faire approach to non-kashrus issues when it comes to their supervision. (I (kind of) support this approach. Let the consumers decide what the market will bear as far as non-kashrus concerns. The market has spoken. No one cares...)

But when it comes to regulating the way people, who may or may not be orthodox or religious or Jewish at all behave in a kosher establishment all of the sudden the kashrus organizations are eager to get video tape surveilance to make sure the dresses are not too short or too low or too provocative.

The hypocrisy is annoying, but it gets even worse. It gets worse because animal cruelty can involve a Torah prohibition of Tzaar Baalei Chaim. Dina D'malchusa Dina can also create a Torah (or at the very least Rabbinic) prohibition. Hiring minors to do the work of adults can also entail a Torah prohibition. Yet, all those potential problems are swept under the carpet. But when it comes to tzniyus (ie telling women how to dress) and public displays of affection, neither of which are Torah prohibitions and perhaps not even Rabbinic prohibitions and certainly the store owner is not violating any prohibition and if you don't want to see provocatively dressed women or PDAs - don't look! - there it is perfectly within the purview of the kashrus supervisor to violate the privacy of every patron and spend hours poring over video tape to make sure that everyone conforms to the standard of his personal community. Hypocrisy is bad, when combined with misplaced priorities it becomes egregious.

(Note / Disclaimer: I am aware that the kashrus agencies in question are not the same. One agency with its rabbis supervise the slaughter houses and another agency with its own rabbis observes the restaurants. The point still stands.)

---

Search for more information about egregious hypocrisy at 4torah.com.

Carl Paladino gets used, out-smarted and embaressed by Yehuda Levin

Here's the video of  Carl Paladino speaking to small group of Rabbis. This is the gay-bashing performance that has earned Paladino nothing but anger and disapprobation from thinking people across the region.  He came out of it looking like a fool.

Originally, I though this pathetic performance was an instance of pandering. Upon learning that the speech was written for him by Yehuda Levin, the insane, evil, clueless, dangerous moron who is not taken seriously by serious people, I see something far more disturbing has occurred.

Watch the video. You'll see that Paladino stumbles on every third world. Either he's got a preschooler's reading skills, or he's seeing the speech for the very first time. And along with gay-bashing, listen to what Carl says about the rebbes. Remarkably, he bashes them, too. Those remarks about the rebbes are fighting words, but they aren't Paladino's: They're Levin's. Paladino, it seems, allowed himself to be marched out like a ventriloquist's dummy, and to read anything Levin put in front of him.

In other words, Paladino was used as a tool in Levin's battle with the rebbes for prestige within the community. He allowed himself to be embarrassed and outsmarted by an idiot. Sorry, but anyone dumb enough to be manipulated by a shmuck like Levin deserves an automatic disqualification from serious consideration for high office.

---

Search for more information about [topic] at 4torah.com.

Pandering to the Jews

What a strange world we live in.

Carl Paladino and a supporter
discuss a possible visit to the local mikva

Reading from a prepared address, GOP-Jerk Carl Palladio, the candidate for NY governor with an alleged fondness for images of  bestiality, a mistress, and a love child, panders to an audience of Williamsburg Hasidim by gay baiting:

“That’s not how God created us,” he said, reading from a prepared address. “I just think my children and your children would be much better off and much more successful getting married and raising a family, and I don’t want them brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is an equally valid and successful option — it isn’t.”

And then, to applause at Congregation Shaarei Chaim, he said: “I didn’t march in the gay parade this year — the gay pride parade this year. My opponent did, and that’s not the example we should be showing our children.”

Newsday.com reported that Mr. Paladino’s prepared text had included the sentence: “There is nothing to be proud of in being a dysfunctional homosexual.” But Mr. Paladino omitted that statement when he gave the speech.

I, for one, am deeply embarrassed that candidates for high office imagine they can impress us by acting like cavemen. As for the Williamsburg Hasidim, well, wouldn't they have booed a gay candidate off the stage? So why the cheering and drooling over a fellow that cheats on his wife and distributes porn via email?

---

Search for more information about Carl Paladino at 4torah.com.

The New York Times has its way with Borough Park

The famous Jewish  neighborhood was featured in the Times' 10/8 Real Estate section. I saw nothing in the writing that was offensive to reason or decency, and also nothing that might disturb overly sensitive Orthodox Jewish media critics.

Those of you who enjoy the gotcha game, and revel in perceiving injustices and crimes against humanity in the paper's reportage will  be disappointed by this article.

---

Search for more information about whine whine whine at 4torah.com.

Israel's "Office"

This clip introduces "Leah", the Angela character on Israel's "Office". I see what the writers are trying to do here, but I'm not yet sure they've done it well. Angela is overtly Christian, and overly strict but she has an attractive vulnerability; though she can be cruel she isn't petty. Angela is also something of a sexual dynamo. Leah, on the other hand, is a charedi who opposes army service. Her concerns about food and kosher certifications seem small while the husband suggested by her pregnancy would seem to rule out the extra circular activities that redeem Angela (as a fictional creation) and make her an interesting, conflicted character.

OTHER CONCERNS
:: What kind of Charedi is Leah? The objection to army service suggests she's from the kollel community, but the clothing and jewelry don't fit. If she's meant to be chardal (which seems more likely) perhaps she's not objecting to army service in general, but merely saying that she, as a woman, would never dream of serving. The former seems more likely but the latter offers better comedic opportunities. Micheal Scott vs, a kolel wife would be pure gold.

:: On Twitter, some are arguing that the Leah character is a cheap stab at the religious community. I'm not sure. Though we'll know more after the character and series have been given a chance to develop, its important to remember that the U.K and U.S Office are both about damaged, maladaptive people. The U.S version has a damaged and maladaptive Christian, and at least two damaged and maladaptive hedonists (Creed and Meredith) so what's out of order about a damaged, maladaptive Charedi in the Israeli version? Moreover, its essential to remember that "Leah" is an invention, a fictional character. She doesn't have to be "accurate". She's not real. A depiction of a fictional character who happens to be charedi should not be understood as a claim about all (or any) real haredim. (Thought some will perhaps take offense at the suggestion that a charedi might be anything but perfect. See, when you're part of the perfect community and perfectly following God's perfect laws, a damaged and maladaptive personality isn't a possible outcome.)

---

Search for more information about [topic] at 4torah.com.

This just in: Earth Round

Matt Yglesias visits Israel for the first time and makes a startling discovery:

I've arrived at my hotel in Jerusalem, exhausted as one tends to be after a ten-hour flight featuring many screaming babies. It's of course difficult to achieve really deep insights on a brief trip, but one thing travel does help you do is recognize things that should have been obvious but are nonetheless easy to overlook. For example, I found myself shocked in the passport control line at Ben Gurion Airport by the enormous quantity of Christians on the line. In my mind, Israel is a place that Jews and people interested in politics visit--but there I was face to face with an enormous group of elderly Italians with crucifixes around their neck.

It makes perfect sense, of course, when you think about it for a minute. But in general I hadn't.,

Ye Gods! Christians? In Israel?? Who'dathunk!

Well, give the guy credit, at least, for admitting he was previously a blind, narrow-thinking moron, and also for confessing that it took him a full minute to overcome his earlier delusion.

---

Search for more information about blogging at 4torah.com.

What was the significance of the dove's olive leaf?

There's a not-nearly-well-known-enough opinion in the Talmud that says the flood waters didn't reach Israel. Some take this to mean that the world was flooded, but an invisible wall kept the water away from the Holy Land; others see this as suggesting that Israel was the flood's southern, or western boundary, and that nothing to the south or west of Israel was flooded.

A supporting opinion in the Talmud says the leaf the dove brought back came from Israel - which fits: if the world was flooded, with everything destroyed, where else might the dove have discovered vegetation(1)? It had to have come from Israel, the only land that wasn't touched by the flood. The problem, then, is why did Noah find the leaf significant? Israel hadn't been flooded, and the leaf came from Israel so what, as they say, was the raya the the waters had receded? They hadn't reached Israel in the first place.

The passages reads:

When he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground. 9 But the dove could find no place to set its feet because there was water over all the surface of the earth; so it returned to Noah in the ark. He reached out his hand and took the dove and brought it back to himself in the ark. 10 He waited seven more days and again sent out the dove from the ark. 11 When the dove returned to him in the evening, there in its beak was a freshly plucked olive leaf! Then Noah knew that the water had receded from the earth.

Note that we are told "the dove could find no place to rest its feet." Why? Perhaps because the dove was traveling from the ark in Turkey to Israel. On the first trip it came back empty-beaked, because it couldn't get to Israel. The journey was too far for the dove to complete without resting; the waters hadn't receded so there was "no place to rest its feet." By the time the dove was sent a week later, the waters had receded enough to provide it with resting spots, and it was able to reach Israel where there was vegetation.

According to this understanding, the leaf the dove brought back was proof that it had finally been able to reach Israel, and not evidence that plants in the rest of the world had started to bloom.

Heard 15 years ago in yeshiva.

NOTE
(1) One understanding is that everything was destroyed, including the seeds. Just as the earth had to be repopulated by Noah and the animals on his ark, it had to be replanted as well with seeds Noah took along. Also, trees and plants take months to germinate and bloom. On the dove's first trip there was nothing - not even a place to rest its feet. How could there have been plant life just a a week later?

---

Search for more information about leafs at 4torah.com.

Do the rituals require God?

The argument has been made, ineffectively, that performing the rituals becomes ridiculous absent a belief in God. [I believe in God, by the way]

As I've tried to explain, we perform any number of secular rituals in our daily life that aren't connected to any belief in God. (1) We perform these rituals because we see them as significant (for any number of different reasons) or because they provide us with some kind of payoff.

I've argued that religious rituals are performed for the same reasons. (2)

Now a commenter named "Benjamin" has raised an interesting point. He suggests that there is justification in for my argument in the Torah and midrash. As he writes:

Just to clarify here - do people really believe that the Torah is completely nonsensical and ridiculous without God? I feel like it's more common to think otherwise. How does that make sense with lots of things, such as:

A. We have very, very few entirely arbitrary commandments (even if God commanded matza, e.g., it still has communal/historical significance and definite meaning in multiple ways described even by the Torah).
B. The well-known midrash that has God lamenting that if only His people had forgotten Him but kept his Torah - God Himself seems to think it would not be arbitrary to follow [commandments] without Him, according to this midrash.
C. The Torah itself, which claims that upon seeing Judaism in practice, other nations would say, "רק עם חכם ונבון הגוי הגדול הזה!"[This nation is nothing but wise and discerning]  - a clear self-description that it believes it is admirable from a third-party perspective.

These are all excellent points. The Torah itself acknowledges that eating matzo, among most other rituals, derives at least some of its value and significance because of the connection it creates between the matzo eater and his community, or the matzo-eater and his ancestors.  Likewise, the Torah itself asserts that Israel will be recognized as wise and discerning, presumably because the act of performing the rituals offers some secular value (3) and the author of the midrash seems to confirm this understanding.

NOTES
(1) The pledge of allegiance at ball games; a hot cup of cocoa before bed; formal attire; knocking on wood; 4th of July barbecue; setting the table with the fork on the right, and the knife on the left, etc., etc., etc.
(2) If you believe in God, and think obeying Him is important you're performing the act because you find it significant. If you expect a reward, in this life or the next, you're performing the act for the sake of the payoff. All believers in God, Jewish and non-Jewish believers alike, perform rituals for one of these two general reasons.
(3) For instance, the nations will recognize the resting from work is a great idea, not because it makes God happy, or because it offers invisible miztva points, but because they can see tangible real world benefits. This also confirms that the author of the verse (ie God) recognizes that performing the rituals are valuable in of themselves.

---

Search for more information about [topic] at 4torah.com.