Just Got that Galus Feeling

I'm interested in traveling to Spain, so I called up the local Chabad rabbi for a word on the Ortho situation in the land of piyyut and exile.

He: Oh yes, you. Sorry I didn't respond to your email. I just have one question: why do you want to visit Galus?
Me: um, Er, what?
He: Go somewhere else. They kicked us out five centuries ago and believe me, the place hasn't recovered. It's Galus sh'b'Galus.

Pretty heavy, eh? Then I spoke with someone at the Bet Jacab shul:

Me: English?
He: um, Er, . . . Espanol? No? . . .um, Ivrit?
Me: Ivrit!

We proceeded to have a lovely convo in the most eloquent of pidgin Hebrew. With those Ivrit words, I felt a connection with the entirety of Exile Jewry. I became a merchant in Fez, a sermonist in Cordoba, and a sailor in Gibraltar. Spread out across the Earth's great expanse, diverse in land, culture, and social mores, we communicated past our exotic differences with the language, law, and land that unites us. I felt as if I had reaffirmed a secret covenant, not between man and God, but between a nation, its communal history, and the tiring beauty of wander. Indeed, a brit between man and the Shkhina That Went Out In Exile.

Is this a uniquely Jewish (actually: Galus Jewish) sensation? Granted, plenty of people find themselves relying on a secondary, somewhat shaky shared tongue. But its a completely different experience when the second language is actually the first- when each word is a prayer, a memory, a deceased relative, an undying tradition. No, no I say - I don't think any other people can glean the same sensation from something as simple, and so poorly conjugated, as "o.k., efshar l'chayot k'yehudi ortodoxi b'sfarad shel hayom?"

Temurah 16a

אמר רב בשעה שנפטר משה רבינו לגן עדן אמר לו ליהושע שאל ממני כל ספיקות שיש לך אמר לו רבי כלום הנחתיך שעה אחת והלכתי למקום אחר לא כך כתבת בי (שמות לג) ומשרתו יהושע בן נון נער לא ימיש מתוך האהל מיד תשש כחו של יהושע ונשתכחו ממנו שלש מאות הלכות ונולדו לו שבע מאות ספיקות ועמדו כל ישראל להרגו אמר לו הקב"ה לומר לך אי אפשר לך וטורדן במלחמה שנאמר (יהושוע א) ויהי אחרי מות משה עבד ה' ויאמר ה' וגו

When Moses died and entered Gan Eden, he said to Yehoshua, "ask me all of your safeks (Halakhic uncertainties)." Yehoshua responded: "Rebbe, there are none. Have I ever left your side, even for a moment? You have written about me, 'and his assistant, the young Yehoshua, did not stir from the Ohel Moed.' " Immediately, Yehoshua's strength waned - he forgot 300 points of Halakha and 700 Safeks were born to him. So all of Israel gathered to kill Yehoshua. God said to Yehoshua: you cannot allow Me to remind you of the Halakhot. Instead, distract Israel with war, as it says, "and it was, after Moshe died . . . God said, 'Go and cross the Jordan' ."

Chazal deal with a troubling, but central question: if Moshe really received the Oral Torah (or even general rules about it), why is the current state of Torah sh'Baal Pe one humongous safek? (If this bothered Chazal, it certainly bothered Tzaddukim, early Christians, etc.) What exactly happened between Moses and Mar, and what good is an unbroken Mesorah if it remains obviously distorted, corrupted, and confused?

Points of interest in Chazal's approach to this question:

1. The Gemara attributes gaping holes in the Halakha to the earliest of generations.
2. In fact, they were put there through Divine providence ("Yehoshua's strength waned").
3. These safek-gaps are not "integral parts of the system", but Divinely ordained corruptions.
4. Bnei Yisrael never accepted this Torah! We thought we were getting something relatively complete, which Yehoshua ruined!
5. This Aggadata plays off of the Gan Eden story. There we experienced an all too perfect, innocent, pre-historical existence. A minor flaw, however, led to corruption, expulsion, and the frustrating imperfections of typical life. The ideal Torah of the idyllic Midbar was likewise perfect, innocent, and symbolic of a Jewish pre-history. Yehoshua's misstep signals safek, emigration, and the realpolitik of Canaan conquest. Just when Moshe enters the "Garden", Bnei Yisrael step out of it.

An Archeological Dig through YU

In one of Steven Fine's more memorable assignments, students were asked to explain the historical significance of a fictional, but wonderfully ancient artifact uncovered on YU's grounds.

Well, its happened in real life - kinda.

The YU Caf serves as a store house for crazy whacked-out benchers. (L'dugma: the Chabad birkon with a HaRakhaman TO the Rebbe.) This bencher, Shaarei Zimra, is chock full of fun stuff.

Birkat HaMazon l'Nashim
I've never even heard of this, let alone seen it in a bencher. The heading offers some hilarity:

"Women are obligated from the Torah in Birkat HaMazon, but, out of sin, many eat without making a bracha, either out of ignorance or laziness. Therefore, they should at least bench with this shortened text, if they are not able to say the principle one."

(I don't mean to impugn the concept or its author. Its not the only example of a shortened prayer in Halakha. It just sounds funny. Also, I believe that proper dikduk demands tivrachna in place of yivarkhu. Julian, help me out here?)

The first line of the prayer, roughly translated, is the Talmudic equivalent of "rub a dub dub, thanks for the grub."





(Click on the thumbnail for the complete text.)

A Cutting Edge Piyyut
Shaarei Zimra also includes some wonderful piyyutim, like this poetic little number on the occasion of circumcision.

My Hebrew is not exemplary, but in the stanza beginning "Adon", does the author imply that Mila lessens sexual desire? (The third phrase of "Marom" likewise fits this pattern.)










Very Difficult Hebrew
Or fairly regular Judeo-Arabic. That's my best guess for this zemer.



















Exhibit B: A Tanakh for Jewish Soldiers and Sailors
Pretty cool, eh? Presumably, that's FDR's signature, but the Roosevelt could use a little tidying up.


Highlights:
1. The "God Bless You" of Chap. Upton (Christian chaplain?).
2. The "Best Of" page, i.e. Suggested Readings.
3. The dramatic finish: THE END.
4. Do you know your chaplain?: "A soldier who knows the Word of God and honestly tries to observe His laws is a man of power and influence among his fellows and exalts hi military service to the high level of religious faith, courage and loyalty." Gosh, I should do Machal already.




















Exhibit C: Add to your R. Schachter Gadol Card Collection
I actually found this in my house. Just a cool pic of a younger Rosh Kollel.

Shavuot

Shavuot at UCLA only re-confirmed how badly I want to leave YU. A certain small percent of the college experience should be something like summer camp. At YU, that percentage is 0%.

Anyhoo, for the evening's learning I chose Ruth Rabbah. I got through the introductory Midrashim (petikhot) and the glosses on the first Perek. Some of the pieces were truly moving and dramatic, reminders of Hazal's finely honed reading skills and well-attuned sense of the tragically beautiful. I came away with some cool stuff - here's my favorite: (in five bite size parts)

1. What's Bothering me about Rashi?
Remember that romantic scene at the well, when Yaakov heroically rolls away a rock for his beloved Rachel? After he finally gets a good look at her, Yaakov kisses Rachel and cries. (Breishit 29:11)

The moment is one of Breishit's most dramatic, but also most ambiguous: afterall, what sort of tears dost Yaakov shed? Are these drops of joy for finding that perfect shidduch; sobs of sorrow, as he realizes how quickly he fell from favored son to exiled tramp; welps of wanting, for the beautiful Rachel remains out of his financial reach? The reader has plenty of viable options.

So why does Rashi go out on a limb and offer such a strange explanation? He quotes from Breishit Rabba: "For he saw in Ruach HaKodesh that she wouldn't be buried with him." What the heck?! Ruach HaKodesh?! Burial?!

Honestly, I've always read this Rashi as a conscious attempt to undo what should be a wonderfully romantic moment . . . to de-humanize a beautifully human moment.

2. Smooching Salutations
Remember this as we roll over to Ruth.

There are two acts of kissing in Ruth 1. The first time around, Naomi kisses her daughters-in-law and then they "lift up their voice and cry." (1:9) The second time, they once again raise their voices and weep, after which Orpah kisses Naomi, but Ruth chooses to remain with her mother-in-law. (1:14)

It seems like these Biblical pecks are "goodbye kisses." Naomi's original kiss is what triggers the women's emotional breakdown - it signals the break-up of their trio. Similarly, the final act between Naomi and Orpah is a kiss. Ruth, who vows to never leave her aged friend, chooses to not return Naomi's kiss.

3. The Midrash is no Fool
Ruth Rabbah picks up on the symbolism. It states that there are three types of Torah-endorsed kisses (the rest are licentious): kissing a person in high office, like Shmuel kissing David; the kiss of a reunion, like Moshe and Aharon; and the kiss of departing, like Naomi and Orpah.

A second opinion is offered, which presents a fourth grounds for canoodling: the kiss between relatives, like Yaakov and Rachel. (Who were related through Rivka.)

4. A New View of Yaakov's Locking Lips
Why is a second opinion needed to validate Yaakov's kiss? How did the first opinion interpret Yaakov's action?

Presumably, that their smooch fits into one of the original three categories. Obviously, it does not relate to high office or reunion, but perhaps it can be read as a kiss of departure.

In fact, there's a wonderful textual hint linking the kiss of Yaakov with that foundational goodbye peck found in Ruth 1. Compare Breishit 29:11

וַיִּשַּׁק יַעֲקֹב, לְרָחֵל; וַיִּשָּׂא אֶת-קֹלוֹ, וַיֵּבְךְּ.
And Yaakov kissed Rachel, and he lifted up his voice, and he cried

with Ruth 1:9

וַתִּשַּׁק לָהֶן, וַתִּשֶּׂאנָה קוֹלָן וַתִּבְכֶּינָה
And she kissed them, and they lifted up their voices, and they cried

At their very moment of meeting, Yaakov kisses Rachel goodbye.

5. From Kissing to Crying
The Midrash quoted by Rashi ("For he saw in Ruach HaKodesh that she wouldn't be buried with him") communicates just this point. In its view, Yaakov's "kiss of departure" is followed by a cry of goodbye, with Yaakov sobbing over both Rachel's early death and their eternal separation.

The focus on unshared burial grounds is not coincidental. Of all the moments of frustration and disappointment in the Rachel-Yaakov relationship, burial plays a particularly symbolic role. It echoes Ruth's primary, climactic example of shared togetherness:

בַּאֲשֶׁר תָּמוּתִי אָמוּת, וְשָׁם אֶקָּבֵר
Where you die, I will die, and there I shall be buried

The Midrash knows full well the parallel between Ruth and Breishit. It sets up a tragic contrast between Ruth-Naomi, the model of faithful devotion, and Yaakov-Rachel, a potentially perfect romance constantly marred by schism and incompleteness. At the peak of Yaakov's glorious return to Israel, Rachel dies. Where she is buried, he never returns.

6. Midrashic Pshat
So: was Yaakov actually saying goodbye when Rachel was hearing hello? Is this "pshat" in any sense?

Its unlikely that these specific thoughts actually fluttered through Yaakov's conscious, but, on a literary level, it adds a nice touch. It creates an awesome example of foreshadowing, as if, per horror movies, a bolt of lightning struck just as they experienced their first kiss.

Their relationship, is, after all doomed. The list of tragedy is almost endless: he labors seven years for her (unlike his father or grandfather), receives Leah in her stead, and then works another seven to earn Rachel. In the end, she is barren, angers Yaakov, and imperils him by stealing Lavan's idols (perhaps betraying her loyalty to Avodah Zarah.) He inadvertently curses his beloved, she passes whilst young, and he forever lives with the guilt. He loses Yosef, that one souvenir of the woman he loved, and for a moment, even his precious Binyamin is torn out of his arms. In the end, the Shvatim transport his mummified body all the way to Israel, only to bury him alongside Leah.

So, if at that initial meeting, Yaakov withdrew his lips, looked just slightly askance at Rachel and though, "I think I'm in love, but there was something strange about that kiss . . . ," it would certainly imbue the story with an ironic touch.

And that's what Rashi had in mind. (Maybe.)

Damn it Feels Good to be a Gangster

It also feels special to help your mother cook for Shabbos, which is what I did.

I've always harbored a mint fetish (Grrr! Can't find the photo of Ezra W. and I harvesting mint in Israel), so do be warned: my Garlic-Mint Lamb Chops will knock your socks off, totally. (As they say in NorCal: I believe my Lamp Chops cause tremors in your stockings thoroughly.)

Shedding the School Skin

Sure, finals were two weeks ago - but my summer just started. Since, I've been slaving over my paper for "13th Century Jewish-Christian Polemic", a fascinating course with Dr. David Berger.

It took me about eight days to write and, if nothing more, I got on first name basis with the librarians at UCLA and UJ. (The UCLA library is as boxish and stacky as YU's, but with natural lighting and quiet readers. Halleluyah.)

My topic was anti-Christian polemic in our very own Pesach Haggada. The finished product is fourteen pages long (ninety one sexy looking footnotes!), so to save you some time and insure at least someone reads this, I present a summary of the cool parts.

First, you have to understand the setting. Pesach was very different with the Beis HaMikdash around. Instead of a family-based meal, with a "seder"-ed order, a set text, and the Exodus story at its center, Jews left their homes, joined other large groups, and enjoyed a feast with the paschal sacrifice playing the lead role. The Hurban and the advent of Christianity meant that Pesach needed to be transformed. Jews slowly developed the Haggadah, where the focus of the evening was retelling the Exodus redemption narrative. Christians/Judeo-Christians spoke of another deliverance: that of Jesus' death and his second coming.

Eventually, these variant approaches to Passover split into two independent holidays (i.e. Easter.) But for several generations, the line between Jew and Christian was fairly blurry. To a degree, the different Pesachs competed against each other, and it only makes sense that Rabbinic Jews would lash out against or respond to Christianity in their Seder.

There are many similarities between the Haggadah and early Christian texts, as if Jews were "playing off of" or reacting to Christian practices. It is very difficult to tell who is reacting to whom, or if these similarities are just coincidental. However, below are POTENTIAL cases of anti-Christian polemic.

(Warning: This should not effect your spiritual well-being. Hazal were more than capable of composing texts with multiple layers of meaning. One of those layers is in response to Christianity, which in and of itself is a fairly worthy endeavor. Likewise, some of the "satires" that emerge are impressively clever.)

• The Haggadah's Bnei Brak story is very similar to an ancient Christian tale. Both relate how students got together on Passover night, spent the whole night engaged in conversation, until they were forced to part at cockcrow/time for Shema. The Christian version has a different topic of conversation (a.k.a. a different interpretation of Pesach): Jesus' death. Added bonus: The tannaim mentioned in the Bnei Brak story were all involved in anti-Christian and polemical behavior.
• There's a good amount of evidence to suggest that Ben Zoma was partly Judeo-Christian or was at least sympathetic to their cause. In the Haggadah, he darshens the pasuk to teach that Yetziat Mitzraim must be remembered at day and night, but no more. When the Hakhamim respond, "actually, it must be said even after the Messiah has come" they may be attacking how Christians celebrated Pesach. No, even after your Messiah has come, don't replace Y.M. with J.C.
  
• The Four Sons' questions have many parallels to Mark 12 and Matthew 24: the number of questions, their various types, one case of "aino yodeah lishol", muzzling of teeth, etc. Furthermore, it seems like the Rasha question was a later addition which does not refer to an "evil" or "wicked" child, but a heretical one! In fact, the phrase "dull his teeth" appears twice more in Rabbinic literature, both anti-Christian passages.
• The wise son receives a strange answer: "So teach him the laws of Pesach: 'we do not conclude with an Afikomen.' " Why is this the center of his education! (FYI: the afikomen that we do today developed later and is just great for concluding the Seder.) There is good reason to believe that afikomen was a once Jewish practice that slowly became overly Christianized. It may have been a discussion about Mashiach (which then became Jesus) or it may have been the matza eating ceremony that eventually turned into the Christian Eucharist and/or Missa. Our words to the wise son are an opportunity to lash out against Christian rituals.
• Why are we doreish Arami Oveid Avi? Why not darshen the actual Exodus story, Shemot 12?! An early Christian text, Peri Pascha, provides evidence that Judeo-Christians had built a complex Christiological homily around Exodus 12, where Moshe became Jesus, the lamb represented the Passion, etc. This "Christian Midrash" was at the center of the early Christian Passover-Easter. Thus, Hazal chose to darshen Arami Oveid Avi - without the Christian undertone, lacking mention of Moshe and lambs! Indeed, our Rabbis were clever: the Midrash plays off of Matthew 2, where Herod seeks the death of child Jesus and an angel compels his parents to temporarily flee to Egypt. The Midrash reads the Pesukim - against pshat - as follows: Lavan seeks the death of Yaakov, who, compelled by God, goes down temporarily to Egypt.
  
• Peri Pascha includes questions like, "What is the Pesach? Well, it symbolizes . . . " When Rabban Gamliel codifies the symbolic meaning of Pesach, Matza, and Marror - and states that any other explanation invalidates a Seder! - he is likely responding to alternative, Christian explanations.
• Several early Christian texts proclaim, "O the Jews! They are so ungrateful. They did not appreciate leaving Egypt, they did not appreciate the manna, etc." Dayeinu - a perfect Jewish response - contains the same number of verses.

A similarity between Jewish and Christian texts doesn't prove that the Jewish one represents a later response. However, some of the above examples are stronger than others and no doubt a few represent authentic polemic.

One last point: the article on Ben Zoma being a Judeo-Christian is amazing. At times rational, at times Da Vinci Code-esque, the author claims not only that Hazal knew of Ben Zoma's problematic theology, but so did Rishonim and R. Yosef Kairo!

It can be found at “Ben Zoma, the Sages, and Passover” Journal of Reform Judaism 28b (1981): 33-40.

Time to Put on the Summer Skin

O Summer! Long days - and longer nights. I turned down a figurative cornucopia of summer ideas - camps, Beit Medrash programs, Ethiopia trips that went sour, internships, etc - for the blessing of three months free time. That blessing, however, quickly turns curse if its not used appropriately. The path is before me, yet littered with dastardly destroyers: amusing magazines, afternoon naps, and the gravest fiend of them all - an endless stream of email.

I need your help. I need your encouragement. I need this opportunity to write about myself.