Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel

The frum world (a.k.a., the Orthodox world) is experiencing a healthy dose of adolescent rebellion. More and more frum kids are observing what’s called, “Half-Shabbos” Evidently, teens love text-messaging one another-even if it happens to be the Sabbath!! Parents be careful how you deal with this problem. If you come down hard, I can promise you your kids will rebel in other religious areas, e.g., dining out, free love-you name it. Follow the path of Hillel instead of Shammai and offer unconditional love-or suffer the consequences.

The halacha regarding electronic writing is quite fascinating. It is debatable whether electronic writing on the Sabbath is even forbidden. Consider the following illustration. Ask yourself according to Halacha, is erasing God’s Name permitted or forbidden to do on a computer screen? You would be surprised to know that erasing God’s Name is not considered a crime. In fact, my Bar Ilan Torah database allows me to remove God’s Name from the text!! To use another analogy, is writing on a steam-covered mirror considered writing? Not really, because the act of writing must be permanent to be considered writing. Now, in the case of a computer, once the writing is printed-then it is a different matter…

In one conversation I had with some congregants about this subject, I mentioned that the Orthodox ought to consider following the approach of the Amish, who allow their young people to experiment with the world before making a formal commitment to become a member of their community. Oddly enough, most return to that lifestyle. I do think that the more we put pressure to religiously conform, the more we are encouraging our kids to leave their faith. Take my Uncle Sam (no relation to the picture above), who was the son of Orthodox immigrants. As a young boy he loved playing baseball, but his parents were so frum and told him that he was forbidden to play. Well, after he became an adult, he never went back to a synagogue for the next 60+ years. When my students tell me they wish to do something on the Shabbat, e.g., playing ball, or date-I always tell them to have a great time. Judaism-regardless of the denomination-must never become a straight-jacket.

In Freudian terms, the adolescent (this applies even to the pre-adolescent) looks at the parent and realizes, “I am not my parent, I am ME.” This budding awareness of self-realization marks the beginning of a life-long journey toward individuation, and becoming a whole person. The more parents try to force their kids to become “Mini-Me’s,” to quote the movie hero, Austin Powers, the more frustrated parents will become. A very large percentage of the Orthodox world is made up of ba’ale teshuva--”born-again-Jews” to Orthodoxy. Just as most of them rebelled against their parents form of Judaism, it is quite possible the next generation will rebel against their parents’ religiosity, which they may feel is either too austere, or too hypocritical.

The early 20th century philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein observed that all language is really a game. Like a game, language has rules, e.g.. syntax, and a goal: to communicate ideas in a free and unfettered way. Truthfully, the entire Halachic enterprise is also a language game-however, the players can often change the rules of the game. In fact, that’s what adults do all the time. Whenever I play Scrabble, I love to modify the rules a little bit with my partners-just to make the game a bit more interesting. Why can’t we do the same with Halachic discourse? The mechanism is there, and much of the Responsa literature proves that Halachah is seldom ever fixed.

Permit me to illustrate this last point with the following example: I would argue that electricity resembles water more than it does fire. Turning on an electrical switch is not much different from turning on a water faucet. Liberalization of Halacha would make everyone’s life much easier and less neurotic.

Can we do better? With a loving heart and broad-minded attitude, you might be surprised.

The articles I read on the subject neglected to mention something important-most single Orthodox people I know not only text, they also bend the Shabbat rules in other ways too. Continue Reading

Delta’s newest agreement with Saudi Arabia has been one of the more explosive (pardon the pun!) stories to hit the airwaves in recent years. Now, in partnership with Saudi Arabian Airlines, Delta Airlines has made a deal—no Jews, Bibles, crosses are allowed to be on board whenever Delta destined flight is flying over the Saudi Arabian airspace—even if the Jewish passengers remain on-board in transit.

I can just imagine hearing, “Ladies and Gentlemen, as we are now approaching Saudi Arabia, our Captain has turned on the no Jews light . . .”

Delta executives claim that they are merely following the laws of the country and their right to determine which citizens it wishes to accept into their country. Thus, “If a passenger travels without proper documents, the passenger may be denied entry into that country and our airline may be fined. Delta assumes responsibility for ensuring that each passenger boarding our aircraft has the proper documents for travel to their ticketed destination.”

I also wonder what Delta would say if the host country said, “We don’t allow homosexuals, or Negroes in our country.” Would Delta say, “Sure, that’s fine with us!” What if the KKK wanted to exclude blacks on their flight to Crackerville, what would Delta say?

How would the gay and lesbian communities react? What would Afro-Americans say if such a policy was in force by Delta?

What if a foreign government said, “We welcome everyone except for Hispanics!” Would Delta say, “We will gladly comply with your rules . . .”?

What about if someone said, “All Asians are banned from our flight . . .,” what then?

At what point does a corporation say, “Enough is enough already. We prefer to keep you out of our partnership until you decide to become more tolerant toward other ethnic and religious groups”? Plain and simple, isn’t it? It seems that Delta has doing business in Saudi Arabia for decades, why not tell the Saudis, “We do not wish for you to be a part of our SkyTeam for now . . .”

The more I was thinking about this development, the thought occurred to m that this material is really suitable for Saturday Night Live. I wondered, “What is Delta going to do if someone in the middle of the flight announces, ‘My Saudi brothers and sisters, I AM JEW!” ? Are they going to throw the Jew off the plane?’” Perhaps we can look to the singer Ella Fitzgerald for some inspiration:

I can just imagine the Saudi and Delta authorities during mid-flight singing in unison, Continue Reading

The Origin of the Seven Noahide Precepts in Rabbinical Literature

The concept of law is basic to the functioning of any responsible society. Ancient rabbis understood that the Ten Commandments and the rest of the biblical laws were not given in a cultural vacuum. This fact is attested throughout the ancient Near Eastern world.

Nevertheless, the rabbis in their own unique way, wanted to formulate principles that would help guide a pagan world toward ethical monotheism. The classical rabbinic text dealing with these precepts is found in BT Sanhedrin 56a, which quotes a barraita (this is a special rabbinic text that was not included in the formulation of the Mishnah back in the 3^rd century).

The Rabbis taught: Seven commandments were given to the descendants of Noah: [to establish] a legal order, [and to refrain from] blasphemy, idolatry, incest, bloodshed, robbery; and eating flesh of a live animal.

These seven laws are just general categories much like the Decalogue represents only the general categories of biblical law. Nachmanides (ca. 13^th century) notes that the seven Noahide laws pertaining to theft include other legal proscriptions, e.g., extortion, overcharging, paying workers in a timely manner, torts, personal damages—essentially most of the ethical laws that governs Israel.

I often tell my students, “Love Talmud, but love truth more!” The Talmudic selection of the “Noahide” laws is far from complete; the Sages should have included the Sabbath and honoring parents; actually in the first chapter of the Jerusalem Talmudic tractate of Pe’ah, the Sages give numerous illustrations how the non-Jews of their time honored their parents! By the same token, the Sabbath is mentioned in the beginning of the creation narrative in order to teach that God envisioned this day as a sacred holiday for all humanity. Acts of charity and love of neighbor should have also been included, but weren’t.

Applying the “Noahide” Label to “Questionable” Jews?

With this little introduction, permit me to bring a problem that has come my way involving emissaries of the Chabad movement. Evidently, the Chabad rabbis have been telling people who happen to be non-Halachic Jews (children of an intermarriage where the mother may not have undergone an Orthodox conversion), that they should not consider themselves as “Jews” but as “Noahides”!

At least two families I have encountered here in Chula Vista expressed to me how the local Lubavitcher rabbis in Chula Vista and Tijuana told them, “By considering yourselves Noahides, you don’t have to worry about observing all the mitzvahs!”

Think for a minute: Is this revelation supposed to make the family feel great! Should they respond, “Oy ve, I want to say baruch HaShem for not making me a Jew?!” Actually, the people I have met feel as if they were being disenfranchised and alienated from their paternal heritage. In spiritual terms, this is malpractice and the theft of a wonderful spiritual heritage-Judaism. In Tijuana alone, there is a “Noahide” synagogue of 60 families! If these people knew that the rabbi was practicing religious apartheid, they would never allow themselves to effectively become so marginalized. Chabad is creating Crypto-Jews. Chabad’s attitude is worse than their practice of encouraging intermarried families to get divorced.

Some of my congregants have informed me they have to “prove” their Jewishness to the local Chabad Rabbi. I told them the next time the rabbi asks for “proof,” they should ask him to produce “proof” that he is Jewish as well! I know of at least three cases in Colombia where the Jewish persons in question are not allowed to even enter a synagogue!! Chabad realizes they could never get away with such a policy in the United States, but Latin America is different! One man I recently met, whose father was a Holocaust survivor, was very irate because the Chabad rabbi told him that he was a Noahide since his mother had a “Conservative” Jewish conversion! Hispanic-Jews have been historically scarred by centuries of religious persecution, must we continue this evil legacy?

Needless to say, the Chabad approach violates many Halachic antecedents that deal with the importance of outreach (kiruv). Rabbi Moshe Feinstein—by no means, a friend to non-Orthodox Judaism—felt that when it came to giving the children of patrilineal families a Jewish education, he urged that every day school in the country do what it can to welcome these children to traditional Judaism! In fact, many rabbinical scholars rule that the acceptance of the mitzvoth is not a requirement for children, ergo—the rabbis were encouraged to convert the children.[1]

The Origin of the Problem-The Rebbe’s Hidden Agenda

Toward the end of his life, in the 1980s Rabbi M.M. Schnersohn started a new and bizarre “mitzvah” campaign that differed considerably from the other projects the Rebbe had promoted. His goal: teach gentiles about the importance of observing the Seven Noahide Laws. At the time I wondered, “Doesn’t the Rebbe have enough projects to do?” It struck me as weird, but I had already long disaffiliated with the movement because of its cultic behavior

Still and all, did the Rebbe really care whether the gentiles observe the Noahide commandments or not? I have strong doubts; it seems the campaign was a ploy to keep anyone they deemed questionably “Jewish” out of the Jewish fold; if they could convince these “quasi-Jews” that they were not really “Jewish,” then they could guarantee that intermarriage would not take place between this new class of people who think they are “Jewish,” but they are not really!

This is a sleight-of-hand technique and it is being utilized wherever there are Chabad Hasidim doing “kiruv.”

Throughout Latin American countries, Orthodox and Chabad rabbis are doing everything in their power to promote “Noahide synagogues” that is intended to keep the children of patrilineal or non-Orthodox conversions apart from the mainstream synagogues, not to mention non-Orthodox synagogues.

I strongly urge everyone to make this a public issue of debate for your Jewish community. No movement can claim it is for “all Jews” and get away with this kind of outrageous behavior.

If any of you readers have experienced this kind of rabbinical malpractice with any rabbi, please contact me at my website, rabbimichaelsamuel.com and leave a note. Your letter will not appear on my website.

When reading about the tales of sexism that is so prevalent in much of the religious worlds of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, we tend to think of this development as a modern phenomenon. Actually, it is not.

Two thousand years ago, the Jewish community had an entire class of people who delighted in such feats of piety.

The Jerusalem Talmud writes, “Who is a man of piety that is a fool? “He, for example, who, if a woman is drowning, says, ‘It is unseemly for me to look at her, and therefore, I cannot rescue her. . . . Who is the pious fool? He who sees a child struggling in the water, and says, ‘When I have taken off my phylacteries, I will go and save him.’ By the time he arrives to rescue him, the child has already expired. Who is the crafty scoundrel? R. Huna says, ‘He is the man who behaves leniently toward himself, while teaching others only the strictest rules.’”[1]

“Our Rabbis have taught: There are seven types of Pharisees: the ostentatious Pharisee[2], the Pharisee who knocks his feet together and walks with exaggerated humility[3], the Pharisee is one who knocks his face against the wall rather than gaze at a woman[4] The Pharisee who feigns religious piety while constantly exclaiming, ‘What is my duty that I may perform it?’”[5]

Actually, these rabbinic passages support Jesus’ criticism of the Pharisees for their ostentatious show of religious piety (cf. Mat. 6:1-4). Of course, not all the Pharisees behaved in such a weird and strange way, but a number of them did! In every generation there are people who are genuinely pious; and then we have the imitators . . . like we see today.

The foolish Pharisees inspired their Christian cousins too. Will Durant explains in his Story of Civilization, in his volume on “The Age of Faith” writes about the ascetics of the 4^th century, who did their best to escape temptation; they used to punish their bodies and live a hermetic life. The extremes to which they went in their attempts to deny gratification of “physical lusts” are by modern standards, quite incredible.

For example, St. Ascepsimas wore so many chains that he had to crawl around on hands and knees. A monk named “Besarion,” would not even give in to his body’s desire for restful sleep—for forty years he would not lie down while sleeping.

Macarius the Younger sat naked in a swamp for six months until mosquito bites made him look like a victim of leprosy.

St. Marion spent eleven years living in a hollowed-out tree trunk. Others lived in caves, dens of beasts, dry wells—even tombs.

Is cleanliness the closet thing to godliness? Well, this attitude was not always historically the case. Durant points out that the early Christian saints suffered the discomfort of filth, stench, worms, and maggots were considered to be spiritually beneficial and a sign of victory over the body . . .

Some of the most celebrated saints of this era were Simeon the Stylite of Syria and Daniel the Stylite of Constantinople. Simeon spent 37 years on different pillars, each one loftier and narrower than the last. The last pillar was 66 feet high. He died in 460, aged 72.[6] Frankly, I am amazed he managed to live such a long life and not get struck by lightning.

Not to be outdone, Daniel lived 33 years on a pillar, and was not infrequently nearly blown off by the storms from Thrace. He died in 494. I am unsure how long he lived; he might not have been as luck as his colleague, Simeon.

Alfred Tennyson wrote a poem on Simeon Stylites, “Simeon of the Pillar” by surname-Stylites among men—”was the watcher of the column till the end.”

Closed religious societies often create greater social barriers to keep their followers from discovering the outside world.

Despite Weird Al Yankovic’s musical parody, “Amish Paradise,” the Amish actually have a much more enlightened approach for dealing with the threats posed by the outside world. They allow their young people to go out and explore the outside world; more often than not, after seeing the outside world of modernity, they usually return and resume their roles as Amish believers. The Square Hasidim would never adopt a policy like that because the degree of social dysfunction is so malignant, they know full and well that their followers would never return. It takes a brave soul to leave the Hassidic cults of New York and Israel.

With the Internet and telecommunications, it is inevitable that these communities will do anything within their power to micro-manage the lives of their followers. Many years ago, at the Lubavitcher Yeshiva in Israel, I recall how issues of Time Magazine were confiscated because it had pictures of women in bathing suits. In the Haredi and Hassidic communities, all pictures of women are expunged or defaced. Recently, a scandal occurred when the Hasidim erased Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s face from appearing in the newspaper.

If you think that Ultra-Orthodoxy suffers from OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder), you would most certainly be correct. I am certain that if Maimonides and the Vilna Gaon were living today, they would declare the Square Rebbe and his foolish Hasidim as certifiably “meshuga” (nuts!).

And now you know the rest of the story . . .

Notes

[1] JT Sotah 3:4, f. 19a, line 13.

[2] He behaves like Shechem, who circumcised himself for an unworthy purpose (Gen. 34) The J. Talmud explains: anyone who carries his religious duties upon his shoulder (shekem), i.e., ostentatiously (BT Ber. 14b).

[3] He walks with exaggerated humility. According to the Jerusalem Talmud: He says: Spare me a moment that I may perform a commandment.

[4] The Jerusalem Talmud explains: a calculating Pharisee, i.e., he performs a good deed and then a bad deed, setting one off against the other.

[5] He behaves as if he has fulfilled every religious obligation.

[6] Will Durant, “The age of faith: a history of Medieval Civilization -Christian, Islamic, and Judaic - from Constantine to Dante: A.D. 325-1300″ (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1950), 204.

As a child, I loved reading Superman comic books; I can remember running around as a six-year old boy with a red towel tied around my neck, imagining as if I were flying through the air, just like Superman. Comics played an important part of my intellectual and ethical evolution; I learned how to read from comics.

One of the characters I remember reading about was a strange being known as Bizarro, who was the mirror image of Superman; in Jungian terms, you could say he was Superman’s shadow. Imagine a world where the wheel is square instead of round, a place that is so weird—reality is totally distorted and nothing looks normal at all.

Welcome to Bizarro World.

Of course, you and I realize that Bizarro World is fiction; such places do not exist in real life . . . or do they?

The gender barriers that exist in Saudi Arabia (and in Iran) are well-known; women’s movements are carefully prescribed. They cannot be seen riding a camel, or driving a car. A woman who is raped could very easily be stoned for “dishonoring her family,” and if she is married, she could be stoned for “adultery.” We are not surprised by this social phenomenon.

Now, close your eyes and imagine you are now in New York.

Picture a rural community about one hour north of New York’s famous Time Square. Hassidic members of the New Square community have very rigid social rules governing their society. Like their Abrahamic cousins in Saudi Arabia, New Square residents must walk down streets that are strictly divided by gender, with women on one side and men on the other. Yiddish signs posted on telephone poles serve as markers.

Are the rabbis of New Square afraid that men and women walking on the same side of the street might lead to mixed dancing, like a scene taken from Kevin Bacon’s “Footloose”? Some of my students told me about such spontaneous dancing known as “Flash Mob.” People dance all over the street-no matter where they may be! Could the Skvere Rebbe be afraid of Flash-mobs breaking out amongst the Hasidim of New Square? Inquiring minds want to know! If Doby Gillis Show (an old 6o’s TV program) were filming this community today, they would probably say the Skvere Rebbe “is a real square!” (i.e., not “hip,” kids ask your parents what that means.)

But wait, the lunacy does not end here. Even more remarkable is the fact that women are not allowed to drive a car or ride a bicycle. Any student wishing to go outside the city’s parameters must persuade their spiritual mentors to grant them permission. Saturday Night Live or Mad TV could do a great skit on these social phenomena.

Well, just how serious are they about these rules? Anyone failing to observe these restrictions could face physical retaliation for defying the Rebbe’s authority. One man had his house torched for not attending the local minyan (prayer service) while he was in it! Over 50% of his body was burnt.

Well, some people will do anything to get a minyan!

Really now, the New Square resident Aron Rottenberg spoke from his hospital bed in an interview on May 29 exclusively obtained by CBS 2.

In the interview conducted with an investigator working for his lawyer one week after the May 22 attack , Rottenberg said he blames the leaders of a Hasidic sect for creating the intolerant atmosphere that led to his injuries.

Continue Reading

Over the past few weeks, a number of activists from the United States, Canada, Spain, Switzerland, and Ireland announced that they were sending an armada of boats to break the Gaza blockade.

What is especially noticeable about this entourage are three things: (1) there will be a number of Jewish participants, (2) One of the participants will be a Holocaust survivor (3) the former Pulitzer Prize writer, Alice Walker, author of “The Color Purple” will be participating as well.

They come in support of the Palestinian people and liken their mission to the Freedom Riders who rode on buses in the South to challenge the policy of racial segregation that was rampant in the Southern states.

A KAFKAESQUE METAPHOR

The planned armada sounds more like a novelette written by Kafka, “The Metamorphosis.” In this surreal narrative, the protagonist Gregor wakes up to find out he has been transformed into a cockroach!

Well, the idea that Jews would join hands with enemies who look to destroy her, along with a a Holocaust survivor, and Alice Walker—well, that is about as weird as waking up and discovering that you are now a cockroach! Gregor’s backstabbing family also brings an interesting literary parallel to our situation. As is often the case, the worst enemies of the Jewish people have historically been-THE JEWS!

The activists remain steadfast and determined to misrepresent Israel as a country that is preventing the Palestinians from creating a prosperous society. Ask yourself, “Is this assertion really true?” Hardly. Egypt and Israel together are working to keep Gaza intact by providing Gazans with their daily amount of gas, electric, food, and building supplies.

Frankly, I think Israel should send Gaza nothing, and tell them to get their basic staples from their own Arab brethren.

Can you imagine the British sending food supplies to the German people during WWII?

CHOOSING DEATH RATHER THAN LIFE . . .

There is little good to say anything about a society where its warriors routinely hide behind baby carriages and women’s skirts whenever carrying out an attack. Yet, the people of Gaza love Hamas. Alice, people usually get the kind of government they deserve, and not necessarily the government they really need (Oy, that applies to our country as well!). Palestinians in Gaza ought to deserve a better fate, but I suspect life will get worse before it gets better. Sooner or later, they must take responsibility for creating and engineering their own collective misery.

Unlike the West Bank, which thanks to Israel is beginning to show signs of economic relief and prosperity, the entire infra-structure of Gaza supports a network of war and terror–that is their national industry.

A point of interest: Singapore has the same population density and landmass as the people of Gaza. Yet, look what Singapore has accomplished! Now contrast that with the kind of society Gazans have created. Despite owning the very best real estate in the Middle East, Hamas and the Palestinian people choose scarcity instead of abundance and economic prosperity. Shouldn’t the people of Gaza be held responsible for this mess they have created?

Amazingly, Gaza always has enough money to purchase the newest and most improved weapons money can buy with the help of the Iranians, who would gladly sacrifice Palestinians to destroy Israel. As an American, I am outraged our government and President have not put economic conditions on the Palestinian government to abandon terror as a pre-condition to receiving any kind of foreign aid. Every dollar spent is creating more weaponry, as the people continue to live in squalor.

The real tragedy is that Gazans would rather explode bombs in Israel than build a healthy economy for their citizens.

LET’S ASK A REAL OBVIOUS QUESTION . . .

With all the changes taking place in the Middle East, one wonders why these flotillas are not traveling to places like Syria, where Assad has killed over 1600 protestors; these brave people are truly fighting for freedom but are being murdered by their own government. I wish President Obama would demand that Assad step down; a man who butcher’s his people is not a peace partner for anybody. A true leader would use the presidential bully pulpit much more effectively. However, I really think President Obama imagines that both Iran and Syria can be persuaded to see the light of reason. So far, this approach has not worked, nor has it yielded any positive fruit.

Still and all, I strongly urge the President to speak out against Assad’s tyranny, as he did with Mubarak of Egypt. Even as we speak, entire towns near the Turkish border are fleeing to Turkey because they are afraid for their lives.

Just a historical note worth remembering: When Gaza shot 7,000 missiles to Israeli population centers, where were these protestors? Why didn’t they send flotillas to confront the Hamas thugocracy and say, “We demand you stop shooting missiles at the Israelis.” Did the world protest? I am reminded of the old story about a teenager who murdered his parents and at the trial, went up to the judge and said, “Have mercy on me Your Honor, I am an orphan!” The judge would say, “If you do the crime, you must do the time.” In other words, no nation can attack a neighboring country and not expect the besieged country to take steps in defending itself.

MY ADVICE TO THE FLOTILLA GANG

If these would-be blockade busters really want to make a statement, why not go to where the action really is—and face the real dangers that free people are willing to confront? One would think they would have considered traveling to North Korea, Darfur, Egypt or Tunisia—and especially Iran, where women and minorities live in fear—not to mention the rest of the oppressed and enslaved population.

One doesn’t have to be a genius to see why this is not the case.

Alice Walker and her band of fawning devotees really know the awful truth—and so do we: They don’t want to be killed nor have their private parts mutilated like that poor boy in Syria. Readers might be surprised to know that only in Gaza, do the citizens go for a leisurely tour to the local museums that celebrate suicide bombers with grizzly artistic depictions of human body parts of slain Israelis who traveled to work in their Egged buses. Summer camps teach children the joys of becoming a suicide bomber with chants–Allah Akbar!

Alice Walker and her friends know that Israelis soldiers will be annoyed, but they will be safe from harm’s way. On the other hand, challenging religious fascists is not a popular pastime for activists—it is much too dangerous. Continue Reading

A recent article appeared in the Israeli newspapers about a stray dog that was hanging out in the Mea Shearim district of Jerusalem. For those unfamiliar with Mea Shearim, this vicinity is inhabited by Jerusalem’s most Ultra-Orthodox Hassidic Jews.

The story is a peculiar one, and what exactly happened remains to be clarified. But here are two versions as to what happened.

First version:

Some rabbis of a local rabbinical court met and decided to talk about the problem of the straying dog. Rather than call the SPCA to take the animal to the local animal shelter, the rabbis remembered a certain attorney to be reincarnated as a dog for having sued the rabbis in a secular court! The fact the dog walked by the entrance of the esteemed rabbinic court could only mean that God had indeed punished the deceased attorney! They then issued a rule that the local children should stone the animal to death because this would allow the soul to find a “tikkun” a “spiritual correction” for the evil this former attorney committed while he was alive.

One reason why I think this version may be correct is because it is simply to weird for a normal person to make up. Lurianic Kabbalah in particular is replete with this kind of superstition and folklore . For example, people who use God’s Name in vain are reincarnated as cats, while anyone cutting off his side-curls (peyot), will be incarnated as an ox. Those guilty of homosexuality are incarnated as bats, while those guilty of making love by candlelight, will be reincarnated as a female goat. Luria believed that black dogs are especially viewed as demonic beings-and the dog the children attacked was a black dog! (See Y. Luria’s Shaar HaGilgalim). Of course this is all errant nonsense, but the people who live in Mea Shearim really take Lurianic superstition quite seriously!

The grandiosity and arrogance of the rabbis disturbs us. The Torah emphatically teaches us to respect the spiritual limits of our knowledge, “Secret things belong to the LORD our God, but those that are revealed belong to us and our descendants forever, so that we might obey all the words of this law” (Deut 29:29), i.e., worry about what you can do to better our world now first! Do not obsess about the hidden and metaphysical ways of God, which no mortal can ever expect to truly know-not even a famous Kabbalist like Rabbi Isaac Luria!!

Second Version:

A different version of the story asserts that Rabbi Levin never made such a claim; it was mere hearsay. Nobody told the children to stone the dog, but they did. Fortunately, the dog managed to escape. Is the rabbi lying? Inquiring minds really wanna know!

Regardless of how the story unfolded, stoning a dog is certainly a violation tsa’r ba’ale hayim (preventing cruelty toward animals). The bottom line is very simple: Children will not learn compassion, unless their parents start teaching them. Had these parents reared their children with a loving pet, I think such violent incidents might not have ever occurred.

Possible Philosophical Antecedents for Discussion

There is an ancient fragment of a philosophical teaching of the great pre-Socratic philosopher known as Xenophanes that invites comparison to the Mea Shearim story. Fragment 7 records how the celebrated philosopher Pythagoras, who believed in reincarnation, once found somebody beating a puppy and ordered him to stop. He said to the assailant, “Stop! Do not strike it, for it is the soul of a man who is dear to me. I recognized it when I heard it screaming.”

The story is intriguing. It would appear that Pythagoras felt that the belief in reincarnation ought to teach people how to avoid displays of cruelty—especially since one never knows whether that animal might be a former best friend! Pythagoras considered all animals as brothers and sisters of humankind. Accordingly, a young pup deserves kindness for no reason other than the fact it is a sentient being like we are, then surely all animals ought to be treated with sentience and respect. Frankly, this seems to be the most plausible explanation.

The whole point is merely to illustrate that the belief in reincarnation need not make people act more cruelly toward the pathetic creature, quite the opposite!

Philo and Maimonides: Animal Sentience as a Basis for Human Empathy

Philo of Alexandria explains that the Mosaic proscription prohibiting the boiling of a kid in its mother’s milk aims to teach Israel that mercy and self-restraint should govern people’s relations with animals no less than with each other.[1] According to biblical law, a person may not satisfy his or her appetite with disregard for the feelings of animals, especially where mothers and their young are concerned. A worshiper in ancient times, for example, is barred from sacrificing a newborn animal until it is at least eight days old (Exod. 22:28–29; Lev 22:27).

The rational for this precept is obvious, “Nothing could be more brutal,” writes Philo, “than to add to the mother’s birth pangs the pain of being separated from her young immediately after giving birth, for it is at this time that her maternal instincts are strongest.” In other respects, too, the Law calls for self-restraint. Thus, it would be an act of unnatural excess, Philo argues, to cook a young animal in the very substance with which nature intended it to be sustained. In a similar vein, the Law prohibits one from sacrificing an animal together with its young (Lev 22:28), since this would again involve an unnatural combination of that which gives life and that which receives it.[2]

Pursuing a similar approach found in Philo, Maimonides comments on a number of biblical precepts dealing with preventing cruelty towards animals in his Guide:

“It is also prohibited to kill an animal with its young on the same day (Lev. 22:28), the reason being, is so that people should be restrained and prevented from killing the two together in such a manner that the young is slain in plain sight of the mother; the pain of the animals under such circumstances is very great. There can be no difference in this case between the pain of man and the pain of other sentient beings, since the love and tenderness of the mother for her young ones is not produced by reasoning, but is a matter determined by instinct and this faculty exists not only in man but in most living beings. This law applies only to ox and lamb, because of the domestic animals used as food these alone are permitted to us, and in these cases the mother recognizes her young. . . . If the Torah provides that such grief should not be caused to cattle or birds, how much more careful must we be that we should not cause grief to our fellow human beings!“[3] Continue Reading

Yes Virginia, San Francisco behaves like a city obsessed with foreskin. The latest attempt to legally ban infant and minor children’s circumcision is creating a storm of controversy all over the state and country. Santa Monica has a similar ballot issue slated for the next election. Lest we think the entire city has gone mad, it is important to keep in mind that the anti-circumcision group gathered only 12,000 signatories among a city of over 800,000 inhabitants.

Freudian analysis would probably suggest that the fear of circumcision stems from what Freud dubbed as “the castration complex.” The fear of castration is primal for many men in all cultures; for this reason, the men in primitive societies wear loincloths because this part of the male anatomy leaves the male exposed and vulnerable. Since the beginning of human history, men have focused upon the symbol of their virility—the phallus. Even today, the pharmaceutical industry has invested billions of dollars in creating new drugs designed to enhance male virility. When seen from this perspective, the anti-circumcision crowd’s neurotic behavior is quite understandable.

Anthropologists and historians of religion refer to this obsession with the penis as “phallic worship” and it seems to me that the worship of this male organ of potency is still very much alive in San Francisco.

THE GREEK BAN ON JEWISH CIRCUMCISION

Whenever a topic like this comes up, it is important to examine the history of circumcision as practiced in Jewish history. While the cartoonist enjoys depicting Jewish tradition as barbaric custom, he shows an ignorance and antipathy toward Jewish tradition that is alarming.

After Alexander conquered the Western world, one of the new innovations he introduced to his conquered peoples was the gymnasium, which derives from the Greek word γυμνάζω gumnázō, “to train naked.” Greek athletes extolled the beauty of the male body, and when young Jewish men became interested in the gymnasium, they suddenly felt very uneasy and embarrassed about being circumcised.

Josephus records how two assimilated Jews, Menelaus and the sons of Tobias, went to King Antiochus and informed him of their desire to embrace Hellenism and wanted to build a gymnasium in Jerusalem, “And when he had given them leave they also hid the circumcision of their genitals, that even when they were naked they might appear to be Greeks.

Accordingly, they left off all the customs that belonged to their own country, and imitated the practices of the other nations” (Antiquities, 12:239-241). Another ancient text adds that Antiochus criminalized the act of circumcision and remained determined to prohibit its practice for good (1 Macc. 1:48, 60, 2:46). Note also that the worst enemies of the Jews have almost invariably been Jews who have utilized gentiles to combat Jewish tradition and continuity.

Evidently, the ancient Jews did not completely remove their foreskin, for it was possible to cut and pull forward the loose skin of the penis (a,k.a., “epispasm”), which in turned gave an artificial appearance of being a partial foreskin. Eventually, rabbinic tradition insisted that more of the foreskin be completely removed so that the Jewish young men would never be able to surgically create the appearance of having a foreskin.

PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA AND HIS DEFENSE OF CIRCUMCISION

Among the explanations given for circumcision, the first century Jewish philosopher explains that there are health benefits to being circumcised; it prevents a bacterial disease known as “carbuncle” and that this disease was much more common among uncircumcised males than those who have gone through the rite of circumcision.

In philosophical terms, Philo then argues that circumcision befits a body that befits a priestly people. Among the Egyptian priests, they too practiced circumcision. The circumcised phallus resembles the human heart—the seat of passions “for the breath contained within the heart is generative of thoughts, and the generative organ itself is productive of living beings.” By the same token, Philo asserts that the foreskin serves as a metaphor for arrogance—the kind of which causes a person to forget about God.[1]

Most importantly, the act of circumcising represents a spiritual act in that it is a visible reminder that a man must learn to keep is libido in check—especially since when human sexuality when left unbridled, it is capable of causing terrible harm in the world. Maimonides too, concurs that circumcision is meant to help curtail the human appetite for sex, since the foreskin is said to add some degree of extra pleasure in the act of coitus. Whether Maimonides’ view is correct is debatable—at least from a medical perspective. Some studies show that the data can support an opposite view, but ultimately sexual satisfaction has a profound psychological dimension and besides, most of my Jewish friends can honestly say the impact is nil.

A MODERN STORY ABOUT CIRCUMCISION

One of the most moving stories involving a female mohelet occurs in a concentration camp. In Yaffa Eliach’s “Hasidic Tales of the Holocaust,” she narrates an incident at the Janowska concentration camp where, Jewish children were brought (apparently by their parents) from the surrounding areas to be killed.

In her book, one of the great heroes, whose stories she records was that of Rabbi Israel Spira. Years later, he tells the story of what unfolded. “I heard the voice of a woman. “Jews have mercy upon me and give me a knife”. In front of us was standing a woman, pale as a sheet. Only her eyes were burning with a strange fire. I thought that she wanted to commit suicide. … “Give me that pocket knife !” she ordered the German [guard standing by] in a commanding voice. The German, taken by surprise, handed the knife to the woman. … With a steady hand she opened the pocket knife and circumcised the baby. … “God of the Universe, you have given me a healthy child. I am returning to you a kosher child.” She walked over to the German, gave him back his blood-stained knife, and handed him her baby on his snow-white pillow. Amidst a veil of tears, I said to myself that this mother’s circumcision will probably shake the foundations of heaven and earth.” [2]

The religious values associated with circumcision were considered so important that Jews felt a commitment to die for the right to observe their ancestral faith. The mark of circumcision represented a living covenant with the God of Abraham that has bonded generations together since our beginnings.

IN PRAISE OF CIRCUMCISION

Numerous medical studies have demonstrated that male circumcision has played a dramatic role in decreasing the risk for HIV transmission. Without going into too much detail, I will mention some of the salient details found in this valuable medical report:

“Compared with the dry external skin surface, the inner mucosa of the foreskin has less keratinization (deposition of fibrous protein), a higher density of target cells for HIV infection (Langerhans cells), and is more susceptible to HIV infection than other penile tissue in laboratory studies [2].

The foreskin may also have greater susceptibility to traumatic epithelial disruptions (tears) during intercourse, providing a portal of entry for pathogens, including HIV [3]. In addition, the microenvironment in the preputial sac between the unretracted foreskin and the glans penis may be conducive to viral survival [1]. Finally, the higher rates of sexually transmitted genital ulcerative disease, such as syphilis, observed in uncircumcised men may also increase susceptibility to HIV infection [4].

International Observational Studies

A systematic review and meta-analysis that focused on male circumcision and heterosexual transmission of HIV in Africa was published in 2000 [5]. It included 19 cross-sectional studies, 5 case-control studies, 3 cohort studies, and 1 partner study. A substantial protective effect of male circumcision on risk for HIV infection was noted, along with a reduced risk for genital ulcer disease. After adjustment for confounding factors in the population-based studies, the relative risk for HIV infection was 44% lower in circumcised men. The strongest association was seen in men at high risk, such as patients at sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinics, for whom the adjusted relative risk was 71% lower for circumcised men.

Another review that included stringent assessment of 10 potential confounding factors and was stratified by study type or study population was published in 2003 [6]. Most of the studies were from Africa. Of the 35 observational studies in the review, the 16 in the general population had inconsistent results. The one large prospective cohort study in this group showed a significant protective effect: the odds of infection were 42% lower for circumcised men [7]. The remaining 19 studies were conducted in populations at high risk. These studies found a consistent, substantial protective effect, which increased with adjustment for confounding. Four of these were cohort studies: all demonstrated a protective effect, with two being statistically significant.

Ecologic studies also indicate a strong association between lack of male circumcision and HIV infection at the population level. Although links between circumcision, culture, religion, and risk behavior may account for some of the differences in HIV infection prevalence, the countries in Africa and Asia with prevalence of male circumcision of less than 20% have HIV infection prevalences several times higher than those in countries in these regions where more than 80% of men are circumcised.[3]

For example: circumcision of newborns used to be fairly common at American hospitals until 1971. The American Academy of pediatrics then decided to discontinue the practice except for religious reasons. Years later, however, after surveys at several hospitals, it was discovered that uncircumcised boys were ten times more likely to suffer from urinary tract and kidney infections than circumcised boys. Dr. Thomas Wiswell, of Walter Reed Hospital, who had previously opposed the practice, changed his mind after studying statistics that showed unmistakable proof that circumcision provides a high degree of protection against penile cancer. Only .02 percent of 50,000 cases of such cancer had been circumcised. Other studies from the past few years show that women whose sexual partners have been circumcised have a lower incidence of cervical cancer and lower rates of acute and chronic infections.[4]”

THOUGHTS ABOUT FORESKIN MAN

As Philo observed earlier, if the foreskin is a metaphor for human arrogance, then the writer of this anti-Semitic rag has an abundance of it. Note how blond and Aryan the hero happens to be. It is surprising to see that even in an enlightened city like San Francisco, anti-Semitism is running-well-eh-amok (pun intended). Continue Reading