Cut The Mayor Some Slack....

From the New York Times. So silly:-).

Tests of courage are found in unexpected places.

On Tuesday night, Mayor Bill de Blasio attended a gala for Agudath Israel of America, a premier event for the black-hat leaders of the ultra-Orthodox Jews of New York. The mayor is a gregarious fellow and ... he chatted and joked on the dais with numerous rabbis, some of whom endorsed his mayoral campaign.  [Would he not have chatted and joked with them had they not endorsed him. Is he trying to get them to endorse him again? He is already firmly in office...]

Let’s assume the best. [Ahhh - limmud zchus!!] Perhaps the mayor was enjoying himself too much to listen as Rabbi Yaakov Perlow, a top rabbi with Agudath Israel, delivered keynote remarks laced with Yiddish and Hebrew words. [Give him a break. Why should a goy like de Blasio care to hear divrei hisorerus from a gadol in Torah like the Novominsker.... I know a lot of Jews who would tune him out as well. It is a matter of what is important to you. The readers of this blog would listen intently.]

Rabbi Perlow offered a shower of condemnation for Reform and Conservative Jews, who he said were among those who “subvert and destroy the eternal values of our people.” These movements, he said, “have disintegrated themselves, become oblivious, fallen into an abyss of intermarriage and assimilation.”

“They will be relegated,” he added, “to the dustbins of Jewish history.”

This was a striking statement because a majority of the Jews in this city identify as non-Orthodox.

[Why is Rabbi Perlow obligated to believe in what the majority of the Jews in the city believe?? He clearly knows more Torah than ALL OF THEM PUT TOGETHER. Did the author of this article ever study Jewish theology, philosophy or history in order to realize that what the good Rov was saying was a no-brainer that every Torah scholar worth his salt knows well. Why do journalists express opinions on matters of which they are ignorant??]

The mayor himself proudly celebrates his own mixed-race marriage. [Rabbi Perlow has nothing against a white goy marrying a black goya. They should be zoche to build a bayis neeman in Manhattan! He also has no problem with a black Jew marrying a white Jew. In his own family, I am told, there is a ger of Japanese descent who married in and he was in favor - despite oppostion from others...]

When Mr. de Blasio stood to speak a minute later, he offered no whisper of demurral. [Why should he? Why should a Gentile politician express opinions on internal Jewish matters of hashkafa?? Did he ever learn Moreh Nevuchim?]

The mayor praised the growth of the ultra-Orthodox “community” and said he had crafted his universal prekindergarten program so that yeshivas would receive taxpayer dollars. [Why is "community" in quotes?? It also seems that there is a insinuation that the "ultras" are taking money they don't deserve. They pay taxes, too...]

“Our pre-k program is going to have a strong yeshivot element, and I am proud of that fact,” he noted. [Halevai that the Israeli government should be so positive about furthering Jewish education...]

There is other bad stuff in the article.

Conclusion - better not to read the Times......:-)

Your Morning Cup Of Coffee

From Forbes.com

[Note: I am not a personal fan of coffee. I had a few cups over to decades ago and haven't touched it since. I am still a happy person B"H...:-)].

Drinking a cup of coffee first thing in the morning blunts the energy-boosting effects of caffeine and may lead to increased tolerance of the stimulant. This counterintuitive fact is explained in by Ryoko Iwata [what a shayne yiddishe name!!:-)], "a Japanese coffee-lover living in Seattle" on her appropriately titled blog, I Love Coffee. Iwata based her post on research gathered by Steven Miller, a Ph.D. candidate at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda.

Everybody is different, of course, but we are all guided by the 24-hour hormonal cycle referred to as the circadian clock. These basic rhythms are preprogrammed into us genetically and although we can mess with our cycles through lifestyle habits, the major factor in their regulation is sunlight. One of the things that this clock controls in humans is the release of the a hormone called cortisol which makes us feel alert and awake.

Here’s the thing. The peak production of cortisol occurs between 8–9 am (under normal circumstances.) This means that at the time that many people are having their first cup of coffee on the way to work, their bodies are actually “naturally caffeinating” the most effectively! According to Iwata, the effects of caffeine consumption at times of peak cortisol levels actually diminishes the effectiveness of the additional stimulation. Worse still, “By consuming caffeine when it is not needed, your body will build a faster tolerance to it, and the buzz you get will greatly diminish.”
Cortisol is also considered a stress-related hormone and consumption of caffeine has been shown to increase the production of cortisol when timed at periods of peak cortisol levels. An increased tolerance for caffeine can therefore lead to heightened cortisol levels which can disturb circadian rhythms and have other deleterious effects on your health.

The times of peak cortisol levels in most people are between 8-9 am, 12-1 pm and 5:30-6:30 pm. Therefore, timing your “coffee breaks” (an apt term) between 9:30-11:30 and 1:30 and 5:00 takes advantage of the dips in your cortisol levels when you need a boost the most.

A Faithful Servant

The gemara says that Moshe couldn't see the tzaraas of Miriam and declare her impure because he was not a kohen and Aharon couldn't see the tzaraas because he was a relative and was therefore disqualified. Everyone asks - Moshe was also a relative so why didn't the gemara use that explanation as it did for Aharon?

Answers the Kotzker: Only in dinei nefashos is a relative is absolutely disqualified as a judge because Hashem is the baal din and nobody has the right to overrule Him. In monetary matters, however, a relative MAY judge if the two parties agree because they are the baalei din and have the right to accept anyone they choose as judge. A baal din can accept a normally disqualified judge.

The Torah says about Moshe "בכל ביתי נאמן הוא" - He was completely faithful to Hashem. This being the case he was not disqualified as a relative in dinei nefashos because a relative is a valid judge where the baal din trusts him. Hashem completely trusted Moshe making him a kosher judge even for dinei nefashos [and tzaraas].

That is why the gemara was compelled to say that Moshe was disqualified not as a relative but as a non-kohen....

New Articles

This weeks sugya on the Parsha - Moshe as the Sanhedrin and the nature of his nevuah, here.

Some mareh mekomos for a shver Rashi-  here.

Article from Shavuos on Inyanei Kavod HaTorah and Bikkurim - here.

Praying In Times Of Crisis

From the Virtual Beit Medrash [the website of the Yeshivat Har Etzion]:

47 Omer - Sunday,  3 Sivan 5774 – June 1, 2014             

          

             The Torah in Parashat Behaalotekha speaks of the chatzotzerot (trumpets) which are to be sounded under certain situations, including times of war (10:9).  The Rambam, in the beginning of Hilkhot Ta’aniyot, famously cites this verse as the source of a more general Biblical command to appeal to God during times of crisis.  He defines this mitzva as requiring that we respond to any dire crisis with prayer and sounding the chatzotzerot (“li-z’ok u-le’hari’a ba-chatzotzerot”). 

           

             It is well-known that the Ramban, in his critique of the Ramban’s Sefer Ha-mitzvot (asei 5), cites this verse as the source for what he believes to be the Biblical command of prayer.  Whereas the Rambam maintains that the Torah requires daily prayer, the Ramban was of the opinion that the obligation of daily prayer was enacted by Chazal.  As far as Torah law is concerned, one is required to pray only “bi-sh’at tzara” – during times of crisis, as indicated by the mitzva of chatzotzerot. 

 

                        The question arises as to how to understand the relationship between these two obligations according to the Rambam.  As mentioned, the Rambam regards these two mitzvot – daily prayer and prayer in crisis situations – as Biblical commands.  Seemingly, then, there must be a fundamental, substantive difference between the two obligations.  Otherwise, why would the Torah command praying during times of crisis if we in any event are required to pray to God each day? 

 

                        The difference between the two obligations can be easily understood by considering the different terminologies used by the Rambam in these contexts.  The Rambam refers to daily prayer as “avoda she-be’leiv.”  The term “avoda,” which immediately conjures an association with the service in the Beit Ha-mikdash, suggests formality and procedure.  Indeed, in Hilkhot Tefila, the Rambam defines the obligation of daily prayer as requiring a fixed format of shevach, bakasha and hoda’a (praise of God, submitting requests, and expressing gratitude).  This mitzva requires approaching God and formally “serving” Him by following a set procedure, similar to the formal rituals performed in the Beit Ha-mikdash.  The obligation derived from the chatzotzerot, by contrast, requires “li-z’ok” – that we cry and beg for help during times of crisis.  This is not formal worship, but rather an outburst of genuine emotion.  And thus this mitzva is associated with the sounding of the chatzotzerot, which may be seen as a kind of wordless prayer, speaking to God through the expression of raw emotion, without articulating any particular text.  This is not an avoda; here we are commanded to cry and beg the Almighty for assistance, not approach Him with a formal protocol.  (We speak here on the level of Torah obligation; as we know from Masekhet Ta’anit, Chazal instituted a formal structure of fasting and prayer during times of crisis.)  In short, these two mitzvot require two very different forms of prayer. 

 

                        This analysis will affect the way the Rambam views the case of a crisis that surfaces after one has already prayed that day.  There is a view among the Acharonim (cited in the name of Rav Yosef Rappaport) that in such a case, the Rambam would not require one to pray, at least not on the level of Torah obligation.  Since the person had already prayed that day, he has fulfilled the day’s Biblical obligation of prayer even if a crisis suddenly arises.  According to what we have seen, however, this would not seem to be correct.  The requirement to pray in crisis situations is a completely different mitzva from daily prayer, and thus one must pray in response to crisis even if he had already recited the daily prayers earlier in the day. 

 

                        Another ramification of this distinction is the issue of kavana (concentration) during prayer.  The obligation of daily prayer is fulfilled even if one prays without concentrating on the meaning of the words, as long as he concentrates during the first berakha of the Amida.  (Rav Chayim of Brisk famously asserted that throughout the rest of the Amida, one must pray with an awareness that he stands before God, even if he does not concentrate on the words’ meaning.)  It stands to reason, however, that the obligation of prayer in times of crisis requires concentration and feeling throughout the entire of the prayer.  This obligation requires not formal prayer – which can technically be performed even without any mental or emotional component – but rather ze’aka, crying and pleading with God.  By definition, it would seem, this requires genuine feeling, and merely mouthing words would not suffice. 

 

(See Rav Ally Ehrman’s article, Ze’aka Ve-hara’a Ba-chatzotzerot) 

 

Rav David Silverberg  

Be Happy With Your Lot

"And the nation acted as complainers" [Bamidbar 11:1]. The key word in this verse, "mit'onenim," has been explained in many different ways. Some say that it is related to the word "avon," a sin. Others say it has to do with sorrow, or that it means a complaint.

 

Rabbi Shimshon Rafael Hirsh suggested a novel commentary, that the word denotes mourning, from the root "on." That is, the people were in mourning, "they saw themselves as if they had already died, and they mourned for themselves... The Clouds of Honor and the Ark of the Covenant of G-d which guided them in the desert merely gave them a feeling that they were isolated from the rest of the world... And the compensation that they received – their unique relationship with G-d, the fact that they had a Temple of G-d in their midst, the Divine mission which was their goal – all of this did not appear to them to be worth the cost. They did not feel that their lives were at a higher level, full of joy and satiated with happiness, and they felt as if they were in a coffin, so they mourned for themselves." The momentous events of Mount Sinai were difficult for them, and they wanted to be freed from their obligations. "'They traveled from the mountain of G-d' – like a child who flees from school." [Rashi, Bamidbar 10:33]. Some commentators bring a proof of this idea from the fact that it is written, "They traveled..." without mentioning any specific goal, as if to say, we don't care where we go as long as we leave the mountain of G-d, so that He will not be able to burden us with more mitzvot.

 

One of the reasons for the depressing attitude was the difficulty the people had with their lives, which required them to maintain a high level of faith and security. With reference to the manna, it is written, "The people went out to gather every day" [Shemot 16:4], gathering one Omer per person. Following the instructions of G-d requires the people to make do with a moderate portion and not to worry about the next day. "Who is wealthy? It is one who is satisfied with his portion." [Avot 4:1]. This can be contrasted to a pauper ("evyon" – related to "ta'ev," with a strong desire) – who always wants more. If he has a hundred he wants two hundred, and then his desire grows to four hundred. His desire always increases. He is thus never satisfied with what he has, he always has a feeling that something is lacking.

 

An unborn child in his mother's womb is linked to her through the umbilical cord – "He eats what the mother eats and drinks what the mother drinks" [Nidda 30b]. The Maharal explains that a fetus is the ideal model of a human being, who does not eat for pleasure but only what is necessary for his existence (Sermon for Shabbat Shuva). We enjoy our food through our palate, but he eats only for his health and therefore receives his sustenance through the umbilical cord. He has faith that his needs will be fulfilled, that his nourishment won't be stolen by anybody else. This is how a person should learn to behave in his own life.

     * * * * * *

 

Chassidic literature tells about a Chassid who asked from his rabbi how to be satisfied with a limited portion. The rabbi told him to search for a happy man and ask to wear his cloak. In this way the desired trait would be passed on to him. The Chassid journeyed all over the world, searching among rich and poor, among the weak and the strong, and could not find anybody who was happy and satisfied with his lot.

 

Finally, he found one man who testified that he was indeed happy – but the man did not own a cloak...

A Nazir-Kohen Gadol

The gemara talks about a Nazir who is also a Kohen Gadol. Asked the Rebbe Shlita - How is it possible to be both a Kohen Gadol and a Nazir? A Nazir may not cut his hair for 30 days while a Kohen Gadol must cut his hair once a week??