Playing Musical Instruments on Shabbat

This posting will be just be one of many controversial ones regarding Jewish law.  Most of my Orthodox friends won't like it because it defies their concept of "normative Jewish practice," and what makes it more menacing will be my usage of halacha to counter it.

I'm a clarinetist at heart.  I've played the clarinet since the fifth grade, and I'd be lying if I say I didn't truly enjoy playing clarinet.  As a matter of fact, I enjoy it so much where I'd personally say that one of the most meaningful acts in Judaism for me is klezmer clarinet, which, ironically enough is not religious in origin.  That being said, I cannot help but wonder why denying such a joy on Shabbos could possibly enhance anything.  The prohibition, I have been told, can be divided into three reasons:

1: Concern out of repairing the instrument if it breaks, as it violates the concept of doing work on Shabbos (Beitzah 36b). 

2: Producing sound is prohibited (Eruvin 104a).

3: The Talmud states that we are mourning for the destruction of the Second Temple (Gittin 7a), and as such, music is not allowed to be played in a state of mourning.

Given what we have, I find this traditionalist prohibition to be poorly based for a few reasons.

Repairing an instrument: Back in the days of yore, instruments were highly simplistic creations.  Modern instruments don't merit such a description.  For argument's sake, let's take the example of the clarinet, which was invented early eighteenth century. Has anybody seen how complex a clarinet is?!  There are so many keys, pads, and screws where if something, G-d forbid, would happen to my clarinet, I wouldn't have the foggiest idea of how to repair it; I'd have to take it to a repairman.  This leads me to the question of "how can I be tempted to do something I am quite literally unable to do?"  Since most clarinetists such as myself do not know how to repair our instruments, due to the complexity, the law becomes moot.  I'm just glad that Tosafot agrees with me on this one (Beitza 30a)!  As for smaller "repairs," such as a broken reed, there already is a precedent set for the permissibility of replacing a broken string (Tosefta Eruvin 8:19).  Not even the tuning of an instrument is mentioned in Jewish law, thereby making it permissible.

Tehillim 92 and 150: Psalm 92 is known as the Psalm for the Sabbath. The following caught my eye:

לְהַגִּיד בַּבֹּקֶר חַסְדֶּךָ; וֶאֱמוּנָתְךָ, בַּלֵּילוֹת.עֲלֵי-עָשׂוֹר, וַעֲלֵי-נָבֶל; עֲלֵי הִגָּיוֹן בְּכִנּוֹר.

"To declare Thy lovingkindness in the morning, and Thy faithfulness in the night seasons, with an instrument of ten strings, and with the psaltery; with a solemn sound upon the harp." -Psalm 92:3:4

"Declaring Thy lovingkindness with a lute and harp." I read this verse every Shabbos, and I ask myself, "If David HaMelech brought in Shabbos with musical instruments, why can't I?" This verse means one of two things: either he was a blatant violator of Shabbos and should have been stoned to death, or the more likely answer is that playing a musical instrument doesn't violate any melacha of Shabbos.  If you need any more convincing of musical instruments being used for praising HaShem, read Psalm 150.

Now, I'm sure my Orthodox friends would retort by saying this analysis is all well and good, but this was before the destruction of the Temple, and this brings me to my next point...


Reverence for Beit Mikdash: Prior to the falling of the Second Temple, musical instruments were an integral part of temple services. (This also means that prohibiting it on the basis of "imitating the Gentile" is also refuted)  Afterwards, the Jewish people [supposedly] went in a state of mourning by putting up this prohibition (Gittin 7a), which is codified and expanded upon by Rambam (Hilchot Ta’aniyot 5:14) and Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 560:3).  There are two basic flaws within this prohibition.  The first is that it applies to every day of the week, not just Shabbos.  It doesn't matter if it's Sunday, Wednesday, or Friday evening, you cannot play.  Second, and more importantly, this applies to ALL music!  Just to re-iterate, it doesn't matter if it's vocal or instrumental, ALL music production is prohibited. (NOTE: the prohibition of vocal music has been ignored from the get-go).  This implication is profound, particularly for Chassids who sing niggunim at the Shabbos dinner table.  Either they're incosistent for not allowing instrumental music on Shabbos or they're hypocritical for singing their songs of joy.  You can't have it both ways, even though you'd like to!  It's safe to say that this prohibition is not widely followed, if at all.  If you make a concession with vocal music, you have to make it with instrumental music as well.

Producing noise: This Talmudic prohibition (Eruvin 104a) is beyond ridiculous, mostly because nobody practices it.  Jews sing and bang the table on Shabbos.  Our voices, by definition, produce noise.  If we weren't able to produce noise, Shabbos wouldn't be much of a joyous occassion, now would it?  Even if you go with the Rishonim that believe that producing noise is limited to music, like Rambam does (Hilchot Shabbat 23:4), then you still have to deal with the aforementioned inconsistencies.

Bringing Joy to the Sabbath: Numbers 10:10 states that "[O]n your joyous occasions, your fixed festivals and your new moon days, you shall sound the trumpets over your burnt offerings and your sacrifices of well being.” The Sabbath, by definition, is a fixed festival, not to mention a joyous occassion.  I would like to point out that the supposed prohibition of musical instruments is in junction with the prohibition of clapping and dancing on Shabbos (Beitzah 36b), something which Chassids are infamous for doing. If the purpose of clapping and dancing are to bring joy to Shabbos, then, in the name of consistency, the same should be done for musical instruments.  It's also worth pointing out that HaMeiri already noted the fact that Nachmanides' students played instruments during Shabbat (Meiri, Sefer Magen Avot 10).  Hearing Shalom Aleichem on the violin or Eishes Chayil on the clarinet would not only preserve the spirit of the holiday (particularly since there's no real basis for the prohibition), but also enhance its celebration.

11/27 Hodgepodge

It's the day after Thanksgiving, and surprisingly enough, there's sufficient news to pull off a hodgepodge:

-The Jerusalem Post puts out a great editorial outlining why this Israeli-Palestinian conflict has never had anything to do with land claims, but about the Arabs not recognizing Israeli as a legitimate state.

-I don't agree with a troop surge in Afghanistan because this is the most inefficient war we have seen in a long while.  It will end up being "Obama's quagmire."  However, I do think it's hilarious that liberals are "vowing to 'spank' Obama if he approves a troop surge."  

- Dubai's debt issues caused a bit of a drop in the stock market.  Experts are perplexed as to how it could affect the economy so much.  Here's a clue--oil money!  If America could become more energy independent, such as, I don't know, try drilling on our own shores, or better yet, nuclear power.  If only our politicians had a brain amongst them....

-Finally, my prayers go out to Tiger Woods.  May he have a speedy recovery!

One Year After Mumbai

On November 26, 2008, Islamic terrorists attacked Mumbai, killing over one hundred.  Yesterday, one day before the first-year anniversary of the terrorist attack, seven men of the Lashkar-e-Taiba, an Islamic extremist party, had been charged with the attacks.  I remember the carnage I saw on television, hearing the horrible stories, the grief, the anguish, the anger.  What was most perturbing about these attacks was that of all places in Mumbai, these monsters happened to attack a Chabad Lubatavich house.  Considering the fact that Jews in India are not "even a blip on the screen," why go after the Chabad House? 

I have two theories about this, both of which may have a degree of overlap.  The first is that these Islamic terrorists, like all other Islamic terrorists, hate Jews.  That would make sense, given the fact that there are more than a sufficient number of Qu'ranic verses supporting that notion.  The other theory is that these people hate goodness in the world.  I think the actions of the Islamic world speak for themselves.  There are a small percentage of Muslims (i.e., 10%) who actually commit these heinous acts, but even a smaller amount actively do something to counter that.  It might be hyperbolic to say I can count them on one hand, but the lack of outrage from the Muslim community as a whole has to make me wonder if the silent majority results from fear or accord with what such terrorists do.  The threat of Radical Islam is one about which I have spoken before, and this anniversary all the more reminds me of how egregious such disregard for life can be.

How does one fight such evil?  By doing good.  It's the reason why these terrorists went after the Chabad House.  They hated what Rabbi Gavriel and Rivkah Holtzberg stood for: being a light unto nations, a beacon of hope and goodness for the world to see.  That is why mitzvot are now more imperative in this world than ever before.  Every Jew needs to do mitzvot and acts of gemilut chasidim to counter such terror.  This evil won't be vanquished solely with military power, although it will help.  We have to show these terrorists that goodness prevails, that kindness and joy are the way to G-d, not blowing up people in the name of Allah.  On Thanksgiving Day, I am thankful to G-d that He gives me a purpose--to be a good Jew.  What does that purpose entail?  Making people aware of His oneness, but more importantly, show the world that the way to "walk in His ways" is to emulate His goodness: feed the hungry, bury the dead, give tzedakah, show hospitality, in short, treat all human beings as if they were created in His image.  Not only would that mentality defeat this innately evil ideology, but will also merit the coming of HaMoshiach, and may Moshiach come soon!

"Public Option": The Obstacle Towards Passing the Bugger

Last weekend, the Senate overcame the filibuster needed to stifle debate on the health care issue.  The debate has begun on the issue, and the process to pass health care reform through Congress continues.  However, the provision for a public option is a bit of an issue because Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-VT) is being a thorn in the Democratic bloc's side.  Unfortunately for the Democratic Party, Lieberman cannot be ignored simply because they need his vote in order to have the bill passed. Although he has a great desire to see health care reform pass in America, his vehement opposition to the public option supercedes that wish. Why would Lieberman be staunchly against a government option?  As Cato Institute scholar Michael Cannon points out, the government is inept when it comes to eliminating wasteful spending (since they are culpable of that every waking moment of every day), and that doesn't count the fact government doesn't know the first thing about controlling costs.  Although Lieberman's view isn't that overtly critical of bureaucratic inefficiencies, he does realize that the free markets are the best way at relieving the issues at hand.

Prediction at this point: If the public option stays in the bill, the bill won't pass.  Lieberman's not the only that is flustered by the provision.  Harry Reid is even having trouble selling his pitch to a few other moderate Democrats.  If Reid wants the bill to pass, he'll lose the public option.  Presuming that he does chuck it out the window, odds are that the bill won't get passed before Christmas time.  And when they're back in session, the moderate Democrats have to worry about pleasing their constituents (for once!) as the 2010 elections will be in plain sight for the American people.  Although it still is possible that the bill could pass, I think a populist outrage for certain congressional districts will most likely block its passage.

Can a Jew Celebrate Thanksgiving?

Thanksgiving--one of those quintessentially American moments.  Having a huge meal featuring a turkey, having family over for a day, and being thankful for what you have.  It sounds magical and all, but can a Jew partake in this celebration?  Like any other halachic discussion, many factors need to be analyzed before coming to a final conclusion.  In this case, the three most important factors are the following: is Thanksgiving idolatry, is it an example of imitating Gentiles, and finally, where do we get the chuptzah to add holidays on the Jewish calendar?

Idolatry: It is the Second Commandment of the Decalogue (Exodus 20:3, Deut. 5:7).  Approximately ten percent of the 613 mitzvot have to do with idolatry!  Worshiping false deities is no small laughing matter in Judaism.  Not committing idolatry is so grave that in Jewish tradition, it is one of the three situations in which a Jew must give up his life (Sanhedrin 74a).  Needless to say, one has to be cautious with being idolatrous, and inquiring about Thanksgiving is no exception. The most objective way of coming up with an answer to this objection is to look at the history of Thanksgiving. Is it pagan or religious in its origin?  If yes, then it's forbidden.  If no, then it's permitted.  The origin of this holiday is when the Pilgrims arrived at Plymouth in 1621.  The Pilgrims were thanking the Almighty for having the local Native Americans bring them a sufficient amount of food in a time of resource scarcity and poor weather conditions. Plus, if it were a strictly religious affair, the Pilgrims would have never invited "those heathen [fill in the blank with an obscenity]" to break bread. President George Washington made the first Thanksgiving Proclamation in 1789, albeit with Deist undertones.  Abraham Lincoln declared that the fourth Thursday of every November would be for Thanksgiving, although it was under the FDR administration that it was established as a federal holiday in 1941.  Since the Constitution has an amendment for the federal government not to establish religion, followed by the Fourtheenth Amendment extending that to state government, a declaration such as this cannot, by definition, be considered religious in nature.  That is bolstered by the fact that neither the Thanksgiving meal nor the American football games watched on that day can be considered religious in nature or origin.  Even R. Moshe Feinstein, z"tl, admits in his 1980 teshuva that Thanksgiving has no religious origins. In Igrot Moshe, YD 4:11, he states that even if some people throw in some religious ritual (i.e., a Grace before Meals with the word "Jesus" in it), it does not become prohibited.  Therefore, Thanksgiving cannot be considered an idolatrous practice.

Imitating the Gentile: Leviticus 18:3 states the prohibition of imitating Gentile customs.  What that means is up for debate, and I thank HaShem for Talmudic commentary because it helps define some of these questions.  According to Tosafot (Avodah Zara 11a), "imitating the Gentile" consists of two things:  idolatrous customs and foolish customs from the Gentile world, regardless of their origins. I previously discussed how Thanksgiving is not an idolatrous practice, so that eliminates the first category.  The second category is not so clear. The Vilna Gaon (YD 178:7) was ultra-stringent in his ruling when he stated that any custom without a Jewish basis should be avoided.  Rabbeinu Nissim's commentary, on the other hand, states that only the idolatrous customs are under consideration for Leviticus 18:3.  Even if they're apparently foolish, as long as they have a reasonable explanation, they are permissible.  The Rama (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 178:1) even agrees, and uses the example of a physician who wears a special garment to define himself as such.    The more lenient ruling, which has more pragmatism in light of the Rama's insight, would allow the celebration of Thanksgiving to be permissible.

A little more prodding into the customs themselves.  The first is the one of eating turkey.  It is believed that turkey being served at the first Thanksgiving meal is a myth.  If you take the middle ground approach of "stupid customs are out," then turkey has to go.  I'm vegetarian, so that facet is a moot point for me personally.  Family gatherings aren't pagan or religious in nature--it's what humans do.  And as for giving thanks, I'll elaborate on that in my final paragraph.

A Jewish Holiday?: Adding a holiday to the calendar is controversial enough when one considers a fully Jewish holiday such as Yom Ha'atzmaut. If Israeli Independence Day can cause this much tension, just think what kind of heated debate you can get into with adding a holiday with secular origins.  Thanksgiving status and origin bar it from ever becoming a religiously Jewish holiday.  The only exception, of course, would be if it became a [universal] minhag, and I don't see that happening anytime soon.  Therefore, it cannot be considered a religious obligation to celebrate it or put it on the Jewish calendar.  Since Thanksgiving has the status of permissibility, rather than obligation, Rabbi Yehuda Kerzl Henkin suggests that Thanksgiving be occasionally skipped (Benai Banim 2:30), just to reinforce that notion.  This accomodates Feinstein's middle-ground view, as well, since he prohibited the establishment of Thanksgiving as an obligation, while at the same time permitted its voluntary celebration.

What's a Jew to Do?:  Since it's not a religious obligation, not celebrating Thanksgiving wouldn't damper one's Yiddishkeit.  This affirmation makes it all the easier to say "Do what's within your comfort zone."  If you're not comfortable with it because you're worried about the slippery slope, then don't do it.  On the other hand, there is more than ample halachic permissibility to do so, as long as your mentality isn't "I'm doing it to keep up with the Joneses" or "It's a mitzvah to have turkey on the fourth Thursday of every November." (There's so much wrong with that latter statement, but I won't go into it)

As a Jew who tends towards inclusiveness, I would encourage that American Jews spend at least a few of these Thanksgiving Days celebrating.  I've heard the clever one-liner of "In Judaism, every day is a Thanksgiving Day."  I won't dispute that--observant Jews pray thrice daily to give thanks to HaShem, not to mention the myriad of other daily blessings in a Jew's life.  It seems pointless to have a day solely dedicated to giving thanks.  After all, shouldn't we have repentance on our minds daily?  Yet we have Yom Kippur built into our calendars.  Same goes with freedom and Pesach, as well as the joy of Torah and Simchat Torah.  Thanksgiving is a stop along the crazy road called life.  It's not merely a day off of work, although that is an added benefit.  The reason I voluntarily, rather than obligatorily, enjoy Thanksgiving is because I get to focus on an important middah--hakarat ha'tov, or gratitude.  I would love to go on and on about how wonderful Mussar is, especially in this context, but I just want to comment on the essence of gratitude in a Jewish context.  It is a cornerstone of Jewish thought and practice, so much so that a Jew is supposed to say one hundred blessings a day!  (That would be one blessing every 14.4 minutes)  Judaism is predicated on what HaShem provides for us, and that each day we should be thankful for all that He provides us.  It's no accident that if you forget to say a bracha (blessing) before eating food, it's as if you have stolen from the Almighty (Brachot 34a).  Without a sense of gratitude, one ultimately turns to idolatry and self-indulgence. 

One more point I would like to make: If there is any beautiful teaching I have learned from Chasidism, it is that things that are neither inherently evil nor holy, but are considered kelipat nogah (neutral non-holiness), have the potential to be used in the service of HaShem and elevated to level of holiness.  In its state of permisibility, I inherently view Thanksgiving Day, as celebrated in America, as kelipat nogah.  Here we have a secular celebration of giving thanks [to a "higher power"].  Rather than have scorn upon such a lenient ruling and dismiss Thanksgiving as pointless, I view it not only as an opportunity to fuse together secularism with Judaism, a concept that R. Samson Hirsch called 'Mensch-Yisrael,' but also to raise a religiously neutral moment and turn it into something holy.  Granted, I won't have a kosher turkey on my table, but I'll be sure that meatless slab of hickory-flavored ribs will be in accordance with Jewish dietary laws. As a follower of Mussar studies, I will focus on the middah of hakarat ha'tov and find ways in which I can be more thankful in the future.  I will take time out my day off to study the Talmud tractate of Brachot, or even pull out my siddur and analyze a few prayers.  Even from the viewpoint of being an American citizen, I will also be thankful that America is a great country simply because its Constitution has granted unprecedented freedom that has not been seen in the Diaspora.  In the past, circumcision and kosher slaughtering, just to name a couple of Jewish practices, have been outlawed.  But I thank HaShem that I live in a country that allows me to freely practice Judaism.

Overall, Thanksgiving Day for a Jew should be focus on how to make blessings and prayers a more intricate part of one's daily life.  It should be a day to realize all the blessings that are in one's life come from HaShem, and that we should be thankful for each and every one. 

יְבָרֶכְךָ יְהוָה, וְיִשְׁמְרֶךָ

יָאֵר יְהוָה פָּנָיו אֵלֶיךָ, וִיחֻנֶּךָּ

יִשָּׂא יְהוָה פָּנָיו אֵלֶיךָ, וְיָשֵׂם לְךָ שָׁלוֹם

"May HaShem bless you and watch over you.

May He shine His face toward you and show you favor.

May He be favorably disposed toward you, and may He grant you peace."

A Happy and Meaningful Thanksgiving to All!

Is Hunting Kosher?

It's that time of year in Wisconsin--hunting season.  Aside from the Green Bay Packers, cheese, and beer, I can't think of anything that would excite a Wisconsinite more than hunting season.  It almost seems as if going hunting were a rite of passage of Wisconsin citizenship.  That set aside, I've had people up here ask me why I don't go hunting.  There's always that feeling of discomfort when I give them the answer that it's not morally justifiable.  Naturally, a degree of righteous indignation comes about, but at the same time, a more detailed answer is merited.

יוֹדֵעַ צַדִּיק, נֶפֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּוֹ.

                           "The righteous man considers the life of his animal." -Proverbs 12:10 

This brings up a dimension of Jewish ethics which is called tza'ar ba'lei chayim, or not being cruel to animals (Talmud, Baba Metzia 32b), comes into play.  Although there is the argument that man was to have dominion over the natural world (Genesis 1:26), it is also amazing how stewardship and compassion also play a(n) [even bigger] role in Jewish thought.  Just as a little tidbit, there are more statutes in Torah regarding treatment of animals than there are for something as holy as Shabbos.  But in any event, here's a short, but certainly not exhausted and inclusive, list of examples in Jewish law where compassion is shown to animals:

1) One cannot slaughter an animal and its young on the same day (Leviticus 22:28).  Rambam states that "[t]here is no differnce between the pain of humans and the pain of animals in this case, for the love of a mother and her compassion upon a child does not depend on the intellect, but rather upon the power of emotion, which is found with most animals, just as it is found in man" (The Guide for the Perplexed 3:48).  Rambam was not only an exceptionally learned man, but a rationalist à l'extrême.  To have such a man realize the importance of tza'ar baylei chayim in this case is phenomenal.

2) There are three occassions where the Bible forbids the cooking of an animals in its mother's milk (Exodus 23:19, 34:26, and Deut. 14:21).  Nachmanides, commenting on Deut. 14:21, realized that if Jews lowered themselves by doing so, they would become a cruel nation. 

3) Even if you dislike someone, you are forbidden to take it out on their animals, which is is why when you see your enemy's donkey with a burden, you should help it out (Exodus 23:5).  There's a scenario in the Talmud (Baba Metzia 32b) which states that if your friend needs help loading up a donkey or your enemy needs help unloading his donkey, you help out the enemy simply to alleviate the suffering of the donkey.

4) In more modern law, R. Moshe Feinstein, z"tl, believed that raising veal calves in such a cruel environment is not kosher (Igrot Moshe, Even HaEzer, Vol. 4, responsa 92).

The point I try to bring here is considering the suffering of the animal and showing compassion towards an animal is one of the cornerstones of Judaism.  It's even one of the seven Noachide laws!  The question at hand is whether or not I, as a Jew, could go out for hunting season with my non-Jewish friends.  One has to keep in mind the context of the hunt--it's for sport.  Although Rambam gives an emphatically negative answer, I'll quote Sefer HaChinnuch: "To kill them [the animals] without any benefit involves wanton destruction and is called bloodshed.  And even though it is not like the bloodshed of a person, due to the superiority of a human and the inferiority of an animal, it is still called bloodshed (commandment 186)." 

A "bottom-line" ruling: I don't need a rabbinic ordination to figure this one out.  The only time in the world where hunting would be considered kosher would be for pikuah nefesh, or preservation of life, which, by the way, trumps almost every other Jewish value.  So, let's say you're in a plane and, G-d forbid, it crashes in the middle of a forest.  You're not going to get out for at least a few days.  The only way to survive is to hunt a deer or rabbit.  In this extreme life-or-death scenario, going hunting would be perfectly acceptable, given the circumstances.  Short of the necessity to live another day, hunting is forbidden under Jewish law, and any animal hunted in such a manner is deemed treif.  I have no problem saying this because it's true: When hunting is done for sport, which in most cases it is, it is an act that de-humanizes a man because, as Rabbi Tzvi Hirsch Kaidanover puts it, "it is certain that those who shoot arrows after birds and beasts for no purpose at all other than to learn archery, and kill animals for no reason, are destined to stand in judgement for it; for it is not the way of the compassionate to commit evil to any creature for no reason."  The Talmud (Yevamot 79a) states that the Jewish people possess three characteristics: [that they are] merciful, modest, and perform deeds of kindness.  With this in mind, it's safe to say that I'm not going hunting this weekend with my friends.

Palestine, A State? Good One!

This past weekend, Palestine declared that it's going to try to pressure the UN to recognize Palestinian statehood.  This chutzpah made me think of something significant.  Here I thought that we were already dealing with a [nation-]state.  I then had to think of what qualified one to be considered a state or nation-state.  Whether there is a homogenous people within the given borders is immaterial in this discussion.  (Side note: The Kurds are a nation, but have no state).  In terms of being considered a modern state in the 21st century, aside from having borders, one needs two things: international recognition and sovereingty.  By the Palestinians declaring that they're going to force the UN to recognize them, this already implies that their statehood is not recognized.  As for sovereignty, Yaakov Katz highlighted this very well in his recent Jerusalem Post article entitled "PA Cannot Cope as an Independent State."  Palestine does not have the infrastructure to function as a state--it wouldn't even last a day!  It doesn't have a capital, currency, heck, it doesn't even have a centralized government because it's divided between Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip and Fatah-controlled West Bank.  They can try to claim East Jerusalem as its capital, but that claim is so fallacious because there is no historical backing for that.  Essentially, they're dependent on Israel, as Katz outlines.  Furthermore, if Palestine does indeed go this route, Israel will have no choice but to act.  And do you think they're going to remove the barriers between Gaza and West Bank at that point?!  I don't think so!  They're essential for Israeli security because it blocks out terrorists from blowing up innocent Jews.  It's election time in the PA, so I can understand why they feel the need to blow off some steam.  In all probability, this won't go anywhere.  But if they do, it will blow in their faces because they will end up with less land.  Historically speaking, that's an accurate statement.  They had quite a bit of land in the Peel Commission of 1937, and still had a sizable amount in the UN Resolution 181 back in 1947.  [I just want to point out that the UN internationally recognized Israel and its right to exist back in 1947, not to mention other moments where it has been internationally declared that it has the right to exist.  I guess no international body wants recognize Palestine.  C'est la vie!]  But again, Palestinians are frustrated because they still haven't made any progress on their ultimate goal of exterminating the Zionist entity, so I can see why the elections aren't helping with any of that angst.