I Guess This Is Why Ibn-Caspi Is Not Well Known Today

As I've previously stated, this year I'm reading Ibn-Caspi on the parasha. I was quite surprised by what he had to say regarding this weeks parasha

Basically Ibn-Caspi states that he doesn't feel a need to explain parashat "Vayera" or the next few Parshiot since it is "well known that Moshe Rabenu was forced to write them" since God isn't really interested in sacrifices, and that it was an accomedation for  that generation. Therefore there is little harm at not knowing these parashas at all.

The view that sacrifices were the lesser evil is a well known Ramabamic view. However I've never seen anyone take it so far, as "therefore I won't bother explaining them". Its these kind of views that explain why a really brilliant commentator is almost unheard of in the modern Jewish life. 

Black Hat = Good Father?

So my daughter (2 years old) is going to be "Imma shel Shabbat" at Gan. Basically every week a girl and boy pretend they are the parents in the kindergarten, and light shabbos candles, hand out grape juice etc etc. All of this is really sweet, but what bothers me is that they dress the kids up as Haredim. The father gets to wear a nice big black hat, and a "suit" and the mother wears a big head-covering. This is a Dati-Leumi Gan. I'm worried my lil girl is learning that good fathers must wear black hats!

Has A Line Been Drawn?

More and more Rabbanim of the Dati-Leumi fold are coming out openly against those Rabbanim who signed in support of Katzav. This incident has brought forward into the open the schism that all members of the Dati-Leumi movement have long felt - Basically the Haral (initals of Haredi-Leumi) and Dati-Leumi factions.


Here are some quick summaries of the more interesting writers:


Harav Beni Lou,'s article in Ynet is probably the most talked about call to arms. The article titled "We have established in Israel the Kingdom of Hardal)" attacked Harav Aviner strongly for his letter of support of Katzav, and stated that it appears that Harav Aviner has adopted an ideology of glorifying the state, but demonizing its institutions. This is interpreted as an ideology leading to segregation - and in essence being a Haredi ideology. The article ends  (My own translation ):

"You can't in the name of "the state" destroy the little we have. We must gather the forces of the Dati-Leumi public that wishes to free itself from the world of these Rabbanim. This is the moment that the religious leadership that wishes to connect the Zionist movment to its' Jewish roots - must shake off this sect and lead the vision of redemtion to an earthly sphere, where vision meets the Israeli reality at a realistic level." אי-אפשר בשם "המדינה" להחריב את המעט שיש לנו. מוכרחים לרכז כוחות של ציבור דתי-ציוני שמבקש להשתחרר מעוּלם של רבנים אלו. זה הרגע שבו ההנהגה הדתית, המבקשת לחבר את הציונות אל שורשיה היהודיים - צריכה להתנער מהכת הזו, ולהוביל את חזון הגאולה אל מחוזות ארציים, שבהם ייפגש החזון עם המציאות הישראלית בגובהה האמיתי. 

Harav Yoel Ben Nun follows the same line stating that anyone who claims that the Israeli Courts are "Courts of Goyim" (I.e a halachic concept meaning courts that don't follow Halacha - and where justice isn't done - and therefore can be ignored) does not see the state in a positive religious status (Malchut) regardless of whether he says Hallel on Independence day. In another article Harav Yoel calls for parents to stop sending their children to institutions that identify the state as a problem 

"On the day when most of the parents of children in "Bnei Akiva" (Lit: the tribe) that defining the state and its institutions as a threat and enemy is worse then possibly becoming Hiloni (because it involves Hilul Hashem), and that it is very dangerous to our children - then the change will begin. "
ביום שיבינו רוב ההורים בשבט, שהגדרת המדינה ומוסדותיה כאיום וכאויב, חמורה יותר מפריקת עול חילונית (כי יש בה גם חילול השם), והיא מסוכנת לילדינו מאד, יתחיל השינוי. 

Harav Yoel continues and states that Bnei Akiva has been taken over by "Midreshet Harova". I.E that it is led by an ideology of the Hardal camp. He though does not go as far as Prof Avi Sagi, who recently published an article where he called on abandoning the drowning ship of Bnei Akiva - for much of the same reasons. Harav Yoel just calls for a retaking of Bnei Akiva.  


Following similar lines, Harav Piron openly accuses the Hardal camp of bringing a Haredi normative reality into the Dati-Leumi fold. He even states that he preferres allowing Haredi Rabbanim to teach in the Dati-Leumi schools, then allowing Rabbanim of the Hardal disposition to teach there - because the Haredi ones are at least open about what they believe, and are clearly "Not us". 


I'm happy that so many leaders have awoken due to the last two "Rabbanim Letters". It seems that if nothing else, the Rabbanim who signed those letters have succeeded in brining out into the open the schism that is developing within the Dati-Leumi community. This division has been growing more and more obvious - with the spreading of Yeshivot that teach no secular education, and with the slow spread of influence of Rabbanim as Poskim in political matters. The old Mizrachi ideals, are starting to review the spread of the influence of the Merkaz Harav teachings and leadership.




Source: Most of the articles mentioned were collected in this Srugim article. 

Alabama vs Shariah extrapolated to Halacha

Opinio Juris posted this story:

So, you’re a state senator in the deep South.  You love freedom, which is why you’re a Republican.  You know that Shariah (aka Shari’ah) is the enemy of freedom.  You also know that, although Shariah currently plays no role in the law of your state, it will eventually supplant the Constitution (sometime in the next four decades, you estimate) unless you stop it.  So you decide to sponsor a bill that would prohibit  judges from relying on Shariah (and that icky freedom-hating international law) when making legal decisions.  There’s only one problem — how should you define Shariah?  After all, Muslim jurists have been struggling over a definition for centuries.  Then it hits you: the answer is obvious.  There is only one source that you can truly trust.
Wikipedia, of course:
Allen is the sole sponsor of SB 62, a bill that would ban Alabama courts from using Shariah law or international law in making legal decisions.
The bill defines Shariah as “a form of religious law derived from two primary sources of Islamic law: The divine revelations set forth in the Qur’an and the example set by the Islamic Prophet Muhammad.”
That definition is the same, almost word for word, as wording in the Wikipedia entry on Shariah law as it appeared Thursday. Allen said the wording was drafted by Legislative staff. A source on the staff at the Legislature confirmed that the definition was in fact pulled from Wikipedia.
Allen could not readily define Shariah in an interview Thursday. “I don’t have my file in front of me,” he said. “I wish I could answer you better.”
The good citizens of Alabama will sleep better tonight knowing that Gerald Allen’s watching out for them.

Just for those of you wondering. Wikipedia entry on Halacha, reads:

Halakha (Hebrew: הלכה‎) — also transliteratedHalocho (Ashkenazic Hebrew pronunciation), orHalacha— is the collective body of Jewish law, including biblical law (the 613 mitzvot) and latertalmudic and rabbinic law, as well as customs and traditions.

So if senator Allen was to try and ban the court's use of Halacha, we might just find that chicken soup is no longer allowed in the good old state of Alabama (custom). 

 

Jews Who Have No Historical Perspective

Somehow I knew I would get to write this post in a matter of days. Last week the pope published in a book that the Jews did not kill Jesus. Many fine editorials gushing over this were written, and on a whole it was well received. However I knew it would take only days until some rabbi or another would feel hard done by. How dare those Christians take away from us the killing of Jesus?

Harav Baruch Efrati - who I've never heard of, answered a question posed to him:

" The pope wrote in his book that the Jews did not kill Jesus! Is this a chance for new relations with the Christians? How does Daat Torah respond to this?"

And of course instead of giving a nice balanced answer - He immediately claims that yes the Jews did kill Jesus, and yes we should be proud of it.(quoting a midrash that got censored) He then goes on to outline what the Christian religion needs to do to make "teshuva" over their 2000 or so years of Jewish persecution.

 Read the full answer here. 

I'm not even going to try and answer him per say - basically because I've encountered this Israeli attitude before, and his answer is just too pompous to take seriously. Some religious Israelis seem to take a pride in stating "We killed Jesus" - normally with a "Galut Jews are too scared to admit the truth, but us sabras are real men, with hair on our chest" kind of attitude. It drives me insane. I'm even more irritated because when I do try and talk to them, they almost always turn out to be ignorant of almost all things Christian (what you mean there are protestants and catholics?). Making a point out of a claim that led to so much Jewish blood being spilt isn't manly - its just ignorant. They are missing the whole perspective of blaming the entire Jewish race for a metaphysical killing.

I hate all Israeli talk of the difference between Galut Jews, and the Israeli Jews. In religious circles it has become known as "Torat Eretz Yisrael" as opposed to "Pilpul Galuti". However it seems that the term "Torat Eretz Yisrael" is being used for abandoning logic, tradition and everything else, and justifying whatever crackpot alpha male strutting some rabbi is currently encouraging. 

This is a twofold shame. Firstly - the abandonment of anything with a "Galut" smell to it, is really just finding an excuse to leave tradition, and mostly to be ignorant of it. Secondly - "Torat Eretz Yisrael" is actually a real concept developed by Rav Kook with some real insights (Harav Sherlo had an excellent article about it). Its current usage is a real crime against Harav Kook.

ZION 2012

Iran has complained that the London 2012 Olympic logo has the word ZION in it - and ergo is racist.

I'll Admit that once it is pointed out - you can imagine how a mind so warped to believe that em Elders of Zion are behind everything would read the logo. The "2" is the "Z" with an "I" below it, the zero being the "o" and the final 2 looking like a weird "N". Personally if you would have asked me what the logo spells out I would have answered "ZOK". Regardless I am sure people are going to start to print out "ZION 2012" shirts any day now.

Why are there 8,500 Less Yeshivah Bachurs This Year?

No No, it isn't because they decided to go work, or some other reason. It seems that since the Ministry of Education caught that "Fake Yeshivah" a few months back, they have been much much stricter with all the Yeshivot in counting the number of students.

According to "Hadrei Haredim" they now:

1. Do surprise visits.
2. Don't allow people to enter once they arrived. It seems in the past the second their inspectors showed up, people would call all the people claiming to learn in the yeshiva and they would run over. This has now ended.
3. Actually check the I.D to see that honest yeshiva boy is who he claims to be.

And so the number of registered Yeshivah students fell by 8,500 students. Weirdly enough instead of thanking the ministry of Education, for clearing the yeshivot from people only pretending to learn - the Roshei Yeshivot are furious and declaring this a death stroke against the Torah.

There is something seriously wrong in the mentality that encourages Torah learning all day - Supported by people lying to get funding. Forget the moral question - I just honestly don't understand what the Rabbanim are telling their students. How are they explaining this two faced morality?

Lets Stop Claiming That Dati-Leumi Rabbanim Are Better

Tali Farkash who normally writes quite senseless stuff in Ynet, has finally got a good point. All of those people who keep fighting to make more Dati Leumi  Danyanim in the Rabbinical Courts might as well stop. The assumption that Dati-Leumi Rabbanim are going to be more connected to reality - I.E more sympathetic to women is plainly false. The proof? That now infamous Rabbanim letter of support to Katzav.

Close Encounters of the Burqa Kind

I've been writing about it long enough without having witnessed it myself, and so I'm happy I can finally write about the topic as an eyewitness. Today as I was sitting on the bus, a woman dressed in a Burqua, with a young daughter in toe, got on the bus, and sat at the row opposite me. To be honest, for the first minute I thought she was a nun. Her face was not covered, but she wore from head to toe a black robe reminiscent of a nun's outfit. It was only when she started talking in Hebrew to her daughter, that I was finally sure this was not a nun.
 The daughter who looked to be roughly 8 was wearing clothing similar to a poncho - and it did not stand out as that unusual. Only once I realised that this was a representative of the burqa cult, and started looking at the girl, did I realise that she was clearly wearing many layers of clothing - and yes a Poncho is not that common in Israel.