-If you thought that Obama's approval rating wasn't low enough, here's Matt Towery's take on why it's going to take another nosedive in 2010.
-Apparently, Obama's scientists are sticking for Obama in the fight against global warming. Here's my mystery question of the day: if the book is closed on the global warming argument, why do you need scientists to do research on it? I guess lining your wallets at the expense of the taxpayer is preferable to the scientific method.
-Iran has declared once again that it will not be cooperating with the UN. The psychoticness of Iran doesn't seem to bother Obama. He'd rather head off to Copenhagen next week to fight a fictitious enemy rather than deal with a definable, realistic one.
-Finally, who cares about Tiger Woods' alleged affair?! People need to stop obsessing over this just because it's a celebrity. Adultery is unfortuantely an everyday, common occurrence. Either try to make a positive difference in reducing incidence rates or move on.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Obama Needs a Clue on Afghanistan
Obama just finished giving his speech to West point cadets about why he approved a troop surge of 30,000. After having watched the speech live, I don't know whether to laugh, cry, or be infuriated with Obama's hypocrisy, particularly in light of the fact he promised during his campaign that he wouldn't do anything of the kind.
The President was already off to a terrible start when he invoked 9-11 as the primary reason as to why we should be supportive. For one, at the beginning of the decade, Al Qaeda did indeed have a stronghold in Afghanistan. But since American troops came into Afghanistan, Al Qaeda has retreated into Pakistan and has enjoyed the protection of a relatively stable nation with over 176 million people and nuclear arms. More important, a great majority of 9-11 was not planned in Afghanistan. Most of the planning either happened in Germany and the United States, where they obtained a Western education and learned how to use our technology against us. Using 9-11 to score political points is just dishonest.
My second main issue with his speech was the actual proposal--a 30,000 troop surge that will solve Afghanistan's problems within 18 months. I can understand that setting a deadline will put pressure on the military to get goals done rather than putzing around, but at the same time, this is worse than Herbert Hoover trying to fix the stock market after Black Tuesday, i.e., "too little, too late." 30,000 troops isn't going to cut it! You need way more than that.
Third, Obama's prioritizations are less than reassuring. First of all, if you're really set on eradicating Al Qaeda, why not go after Pakistan? Why are we worrying about nation-building in Afghanistan when have to worry about building up our own nation, that's dealing with double-digit unemployment and the worst recession since the Great Depression? If Obama were truly worried about national security, why doesn't he go after Iran with such zeal? Rather than spend time and effort on a fool's errand, as Rep. David Obey (D-Wisc.) put it, we should just prepare for troop withdrawal and intelligently focus our efforts elsewhere.
The President was already off to a terrible start when he invoked 9-11 as the primary reason as to why we should be supportive. For one, at the beginning of the decade, Al Qaeda did indeed have a stronghold in Afghanistan. But since American troops came into Afghanistan, Al Qaeda has retreated into Pakistan and has enjoyed the protection of a relatively stable nation with over 176 million people and nuclear arms. More important, a great majority of 9-11 was not planned in Afghanistan. Most of the planning either happened in Germany and the United States, where they obtained a Western education and learned how to use our technology against us. Using 9-11 to score political points is just dishonest.
My second main issue with his speech was the actual proposal--a 30,000 troop surge that will solve Afghanistan's problems within 18 months. I can understand that setting a deadline will put pressure on the military to get goals done rather than putzing around, but at the same time, this is worse than Herbert Hoover trying to fix the stock market after Black Tuesday, i.e., "too little, too late." 30,000 troops isn't going to cut it! You need way more than that.
Third, Obama's prioritizations are less than reassuring. First of all, if you're really set on eradicating Al Qaeda, why not go after Pakistan? Why are we worrying about nation-building in Afghanistan when have to worry about building up our own nation, that's dealing with double-digit unemployment and the worst recession since the Great Depression? If Obama were truly worried about national security, why doesn't he go after Iran with such zeal? Rather than spend time and effort on a fool's errand, as Rep. David Obey (D-Wisc.) put it, we should just prepare for troop withdrawal and intelligently focus our efforts elsewhere.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
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:
"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.
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
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.
Friday, November 27, 2009
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!
-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!
Thursday, November 26, 2009
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!
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!
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
"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.
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.
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!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)