This is going to sound stupid.
Katrina, your friendly neighborhood (Upper West Side of New York, natch) kashrut monster, has discovered the latest, greatest danger to people who keep "hekhsher" kosher. Keeping "heksher" kosher is insisting that the food you buy actually has a reliable (not touching with ten-foot pole right now) symbol of kosher certification (i.e. a heksher) as opposed to, e.g. reading the label and being satisfied if none of the ingredients are obviously unkosher.
That danger is . . .
(Wait for it)
DAIRY TEA.
Yes! Dairy tea? Did you know that there is such a thing? If you look at your boxes of tea, you might find that some of them are labelled kosher dairy. How can tea be dairy? I frankly have no idea, and perhaps what is labelled dairy is only considered so because of some insane chumrah (strict legal interpretation), but since I don't have time to research it, I'll have to take the kashrut agency's word for it.
So why is it such a problem?
Because one doesn't expect tea to be dairy, of course.
This problem was first brought to my attention by BFF, who once noticed that the tea she bought was dairy. She figured, " I will just only drink it after dairy meals." Then, when she was bringing out all of the teas after a meat meal, she forgot, drank the tea in a china cup from her wedding, and ended up having to put that cup away for a year before using it again.
Since my wedding and the china cups it brought into my life, I have been really nervous about making the same mistake. Part of the reason is that I am anal and crazy about stuff like this. But I think that it can be a problem. Here is a case in point:
Recently, I was at an academic conference that served kosher food to everyone for lunch. The administrative assistant in charge of the conference is not a kashrut expert, but it's not rocket science: the kosher deli brings in its platters of meat wrapped in about 10 layers of plastic, the assistant puts the platters out and unseals/uncovers them with the help of the jaws of life, and then the conference participants eat the food. Bottles of soda, urns of coffee and hot water, and a box of tea were put out, too. With my new obsession with dairy tea, I looked at all the tea bags to see if any of the tea was dairy. And it was! There were four bags of Celestial Seasonings cinnamon (or apple cinnamon, I don't remember) tea that were marked dairy! People could have drunk the tea by accident. Since many of the participants were Israeli da'ti'im (literally, religious people, but closest to American modern Orthodox), I doubt it would even occur to them to look to see if the tea was dairy.
So I hid the four bags of tea in my briefcase. I had one of teabags with breakfast at the conference the next morning, and I still have the rest.
Yes, it sounds really stupid, and I'm not proud of it, but I couldn't think of another option. I didn't want to leave them there, and if I had made an announcement, the secular Israelis and non-observant American Jews would have thought that I was insane. When I ordered a kosher meal at dinner one night after the conference, I had to listen to a rant from one of the secular Israelis on the evils of the Israelis Charedi kashrut establishment, as though I am somehow implicated in their shenanigans. (For the record, I support religion-state separation in Israel; if Israelis want kosher food, they can pay extra for it, just like we in the good old US of A do).
So, if you keep kosher, please make sure your tea is pareve (neither meat nor dairy). If it has a kosher symbol and is NOT marked dairy, it's pareve. I find myself actually siding with the Star-K, one of the more, shall we say, strict (insane) kashering agencies, because they no longer certify dairy tea as kosher, based on the principle, "You shall not put a stumbling block before the blind" (Leviticus 19:14). In this case, I think they are on target, although I'm still not checking my lettuce with a fluorescent light box.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
The Denominational Smackdown Continues
I'm pretty pissed off. I just saw this article in the Forward online. The article is short, so of course you can just read it, but please allow me to give a summary of what I think it is saying:
"Liberal" Jews, defined as Reform or Conservative Jews, or, more specifically, their leaders, need to "frame" the way that they talk about religious observance. Ben Dreyfus, the author, compares religious to political framing. Just as Republicans have managed to "frame" much of the domestic debate in the US over the past 12 years, so that even Democrats who win often have to use Republican-coined terms, such as "tax relief," he argues, liberal Jews have gotten into the habit of using words such as "religious" or "observant" to describe their members' beliefs or practices. This is especially the case when their members are observing more halakhot (Jewish ritual laws) than is the norm in that movement. The result is a "scale from zero to Orthodox" that lets people outside each movement define the movement's terms. The leaders, both lay and professional, of Reform and Conservative Judaism, should try to find different ways to frame discussions of their members' religious lives.
I sympathize with Dreyfus, aka BZ, aka the writer of the blog Mah Rabu. I have a really hard time categorizing my observance, and it's frustrating. I use the word Conservadox b/c it's the best word I have, not because I particularly like it. But is is darn helpful, because Jews who ask me about it generally know what I mean by "Conservadox." And if not, they generally have ideas about what "Conservative" and Orthodox" mean that help them to see what I mean.
And that's one of my problems with Dreyfus's article. One could be quite impressed with the way that he sets out the problem. Here is an effective paragraph: "Consider this phrase: 'I’m not shomer Shabbat: Every week I light candles after sundown and then drive to synagogue.' The speaker obviously observes Shabbat but is allowing someone else to define what Shabbat observance means." But he doesn't offer any solutions, aside from the vague imperative that the movements reframe. What would that look like? I notice that he didn't actually suggest a way to reword the sentence about Shabbat observance without using the word "observe," which he uses at the end of the sentence! Words are HELPFUL because they aid people who share a common language in understanding each other.
Here are some other concerns I have:
--the article's point of departure is the argument of "cognitive linguist George Lakoff" about framing. Lakoff's book Don't Think of An Elephant was a big best-seller among Democratic leaders after Kerry's 2004 defeat. But not long afterwards, certain people in the party suggested that maybe the Democrats should get some new ideas, rather than thinking about how to reframe bad ones. I am not comparing either liberal Jewish movement to the Democratic party. I'm just saying that the framing thing may not hold much water.
--What about history? The idea of what Shabbat observance is has been influenced, to a large degree, by what it meant in the past. Of course, you may say, but Katrina, what about all of these crazy Orthodox people who pile chumrah upon chumrah in their Shabbat observance? They
don't care about history either. But that's precisely what offends Shomer Shabbos people such as I and half the J-Blogosphere about the crazy Orthos. The Jewish people do have a sense of what "Sabbath observance" means. If the liberal movements want to change the way that they talk about Shabbat, they will likely have more, rather than less, success, if they don't trample on concepts that people understand and may even be attached to.
--That leads me to my next point, that there is a difference between being a very smart person with a lot of think-outside-the-box ideas and between being a religious leader with a job and, more importantly, a constituency. Regular people who come to synagogue don't want to talk about how they frame their Judaism. They want to talk about how to live it.
-- I have sat in Reform synagogues on the High Holidays and heard rabbis talk about their approaches to Shabbat in a way clearly intended for a Reform audience. One female rabbi talked about how her family makes Shabbat special, or something of the sort, by turning off electronic appliances and abstaining from shopping. The word "observance" didn't even come up. This is just anecdotal, but because the Reform movement in particular does not have to strangle itself on the premise that it follows halakhah, many of its leaders have talked about age-old mitzvot in new ways.
--This article reminded me of the independent minyan movement, which drives me up a tree. I think that it was laudable for the founders of the movement to try to create great environments for meaningfuldavening (praying) when they couldn't find it elsewhere. Then their heads got a little big when various philanthropists and journalists (including in the Forward) said they were the living end. But the bottom line is, AN INDEPENDENT MINYAN IS A SHUL. Hadar just opened its own yeshivah, for pete's sake. Its founders are having kids, and those kids will need Hebrew schools and bnei mitzvah and the like. Then they will buy buildings, or at least more permanent spaces, and basically provide all of the same services as shuls, possibly without rabbis, but Hadar has had rabbinic figures as well. And some small shuls in the Midwest and so forth don't have rabbis. So what is a shul, really?
I rarely write such a long post and then throw it up without at least some editing. But I am tired, and I wanted to get this out. I have work tomorrow. Please pillory or ignore me as you usually do. Toodles.
"Liberal" Jews, defined as Reform or Conservative Jews, or, more specifically, their leaders, need to "frame" the way that they talk about religious observance. Ben Dreyfus, the author, compares religious to political framing. Just as Republicans have managed to "frame" much of the domestic debate in the US over the past 12 years, so that even Democrats who win often have to use Republican-coined terms, such as "tax relief," he argues, liberal Jews have gotten into the habit of using words such as "religious" or "observant" to describe their members' beliefs or practices. This is especially the case when their members are observing more halakhot (Jewish ritual laws) than is the norm in that movement. The result is a "scale from zero to Orthodox" that lets people outside each movement define the movement's terms. The leaders, both lay and professional, of Reform and Conservative Judaism, should try to find different ways to frame discussions of their members' religious lives.
I sympathize with Dreyfus, aka BZ, aka the writer of the blog Mah Rabu. I have a really hard time categorizing my observance, and it's frustrating. I use the word Conservadox b/c it's the best word I have, not because I particularly like it. But is is darn helpful, because Jews who ask me about it generally know what I mean by "Conservadox." And if not, they generally have ideas about what "Conservative" and Orthodox" mean that help them to see what I mean.
And that's one of my problems with Dreyfus's article. One could be quite impressed with the way that he sets out the problem. Here is an effective paragraph: "Consider this phrase: 'I’m not shomer Shabbat: Every week I light candles after sundown and then drive to synagogue.' The speaker obviously observes Shabbat but is allowing someone else to define what Shabbat observance means." But he doesn't offer any solutions, aside from the vague imperative that the movements reframe. What would that look like? I notice that he didn't actually suggest a way to reword the sentence about Shabbat observance without using the word "observe," which he uses at the end of the sentence! Words are HELPFUL because they aid people who share a common language in understanding each other.
Here are some other concerns I have:
--the article's point of departure is the argument of "cognitive linguist George Lakoff" about framing. Lakoff's book Don't Think of An Elephant was a big best-seller among Democratic leaders after Kerry's 2004 defeat. But not long afterwards, certain people in the party suggested that maybe the Democrats should get some new ideas, rather than thinking about how to reframe bad ones. I am not comparing either liberal Jewish movement to the Democratic party. I'm just saying that the framing thing may not hold much water.
--What about history? The idea of what Shabbat observance is has been influenced, to a large degree, by what it meant in the past. Of course, you may say, but Katrina, what about all of these crazy Orthodox people who pile chumrah upon chumrah in their Shabbat observance? They
don't care about history either. But that's precisely what offends Shomer Shabbos people such as I and half the J-Blogosphere about the crazy Orthos. The Jewish people do have a sense of what "Sabbath observance" means. If the liberal movements want to change the way that they talk about Shabbat, they will likely have more, rather than less, success, if they don't trample on concepts that people understand and may even be attached to.
--That leads me to my next point, that there is a difference between being a very smart person with a lot of think-outside-the-box ideas and between being a religious leader with a job and, more importantly, a constituency. Regular people who come to synagogue don't want to talk about how they frame their Judaism. They want to talk about how to live it.
-- I have sat in Reform synagogues on the High Holidays and heard rabbis talk about their approaches to Shabbat in a way clearly intended for a Reform audience. One female rabbi talked about how her family makes Shabbat special, or something of the sort, by turning off electronic appliances and abstaining from shopping. The word "observance" didn't even come up. This is just anecdotal, but because the Reform movement in particular does not have to strangle itself on the premise that it follows halakhah, many of its leaders have talked about age-old mitzvot in new ways.
--This article reminded me of the independent minyan movement, which drives me up a tree. I think that it was laudable for the founders of the movement to try to create great environments for meaningfuldavening (praying) when they couldn't find it elsewhere. Then their heads got a little big when various philanthropists and journalists (including in the Forward) said they were the living end. But the bottom line is, AN INDEPENDENT MINYAN IS A SHUL. Hadar just opened its own yeshivah, for pete's sake. Its founders are having kids, and those kids will need Hebrew schools and bnei mitzvah and the like. Then they will buy buildings, or at least more permanent spaces, and basically provide all of the same services as shuls, possibly without rabbis, but Hadar has had rabbinic figures as well. And some small shuls in the Midwest and so forth don't have rabbis. So what is a shul, really?
I rarely write such a long post and then throw it up without at least some editing. But I am tired, and I wanted to get this out. I have work tomorrow. Please pillory or ignore me as you usually do. Toodles.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Lessons from 2 Months of Marriage
I have been married to TH for 2 months now, so of course I am now a crystal-clear front of wisdom on any number of things. I have decided to share them with you, since I am such a nice person. These things are mostly about me, but when you get married, you could have similar revelations:
-- I did not become a domestic goddess simply because I now have a buttload of expensive pots, but I do get dinner on the table most of the time
--No kitchen in New York City is big enough to hold three sets of dishes, expensive pots, silverware, Cuisinarts, etc.
--I didn't really need 2 Cuisinarts, not because I have relaxed about kashrut, but because of the aforementioned lack of domestic goddness-ness (I haven't used either one yet)
--It's hard to believe that I will ever relax about kashrut
--Groceries in Manhattan are SO EXPENSIVE
--BFF still knows me better than TH, which will change over time
--I can't believe I didn't anticipate the above; the realization slammed into me like a brick on Monday
--Even though I'm married, I still really enjoy Bad for Shidduchim, although my current favorite blog is Mommy Wants Vodka
--TiVo really is as awesome as they say, especially when a TV-watching-fanatic (me) marries someone practically indifferent to TV (TH), and we would rather hang out and talk at night than watch TV anyway
--I don't care that much about the wedding album anymore
--I may have gone into the wrong academic field
--Being employed is so much better than not being employed
-- I did not become a domestic goddess simply because I now have a buttload of expensive pots, but I do get dinner on the table most of the time
--No kitchen in New York City is big enough to hold three sets of dishes, expensive pots, silverware, Cuisinarts, etc.
--I didn't really need 2 Cuisinarts, not because I have relaxed about kashrut, but because of the aforementioned lack of domestic goddness-ness (I haven't used either one yet)
--It's hard to believe that I will ever relax about kashrut
--Groceries in Manhattan are SO EXPENSIVE
--BFF still knows me better than TH, which will change over time
--I can't believe I didn't anticipate the above; the realization slammed into me like a brick on Monday
--Even though I'm married, I still really enjoy Bad for Shidduchim, although my current favorite blog is Mommy Wants Vodka
--TiVo really is as awesome as they say, especially when a TV-watching-fanatic (me) marries someone practically indifferent to TV (TH), and we would rather hang out and talk at night than watch TV anyway
--I don't care that much about the wedding album anymore
--I may have gone into the wrong academic field
--Being employed is so much better than not being employed
Friday, September 18, 2009
Shanah Tovah!
To my readers:
Shanah Tovah tikatevu v'teichateimu (may you be written and inscribed for a good year). Chag sameach (a happy holiday) to all!
Love,
Katrina
Shanah Tovah tikatevu v'teichateimu (may you be written and inscribed for a good year). Chag sameach (a happy holiday) to all!
Love,
Katrina
Friday, September 4, 2009
Katrina Gets Married, Moves to NYC, Has Hilarious Kashrut Experiences
***DISCLAIMER***--This post is meant as SATIRE. It is NOT meant to state or imply that any of the bagels at H&H are not kosher. As far as I know, EVERY BAGEL AT H&H IS CERTIFIED KOSHER BY THE STAR-K. Please DO NOT start internet rumors to the contrary. Thank you.
As one or two people who actually know me have pointed out, I need a new blog name. I am now Conservadox (or whatever) and married. TH (The Husband) works in New York, and I moved in with him after the wedding.
I will probably blog more in the future about married life, and I will almost definitely blog more about New York and what a shock it is (even though I am from the nearby 'burbs) after the comparatively civilized place where I used to live. But I'm kind of busy.
Something happened to me today, nevertheless, that was so hilarious that I felt I had to share it with y'all.
But first some background. TH loves bagels. Before I came into the apartment and kashered it, he used to buy his bagels in a supermarket about 20 feet from our apartment. I didn't know too much about kosher bagel places around here, so he has been going without for about 2 weeks. I decided to have rachmanus (mercy) on him today and go to the H&H Bagels that I recently discovered is not too far away.
As those who know me know, I am a kashrut freak. I pack chumras (stringencies) on top of chumras. I'm not proud of this. I blame it on my first roommate after colllege, a lovely young woman from London who was a completely insane kashrut monster. My parents keep kosher, but with a "well, that got treifed up, just wash it and put it back in the drawer" kind of attitude, and I knew I wanted to do more. But I didn't have a great role model, and I haven't been able to shake many of her customs. So, even though I know H&H is kosher, I decided to double-check by looking at the kashrut certificate, aka te'udah.
For those new to this, a te'udah just normally says that the place is kosher and is certified by X Kashering Agency. When I saw a paper on the wall saying "Kosher Certificate" and saw the Star-K emblem (they are out of Baltimore, FYI), I was about to walk away and order my bagels.
Then I saw the subtitles.
Instead of merely saying that H&H is kosher, the Star-K had a list of which items were kosher! And it wasn't a short list. I think it probably encompassed nearly every single bagel in the place (at first glance, I did not see the regular garlic bagels on there, which should not be confused with the garlic bagel twists, which of course are kosher, you numbskull).
Why do that??? Have we gone completely mad??????? (Yes). After comparing the te'udah's list with the flavors TH likes most, I decided to order a half-dozen of one kind of bagel and a half-dozen of another. Then the woman at the counter told me that I got a free bagel. What kind would I like.
Of course, I was completely paralyzed. I wanted to get cinnamon raisin, but was it on the list? The certificate was all the way across the room, and there were people behind me. Finally, I just decided to get another of the bagels I had already decided to buy.
Only in New York.
As one or two people who actually know me have pointed out, I need a new blog name. I am now Conservadox (or whatever) and married. TH (The Husband) works in New York, and I moved in with him after the wedding.
I will probably blog more in the future about married life, and I will almost definitely blog more about New York and what a shock it is (even though I am from the nearby 'burbs) after the comparatively civilized place where I used to live. But I'm kind of busy.
Something happened to me today, nevertheless, that was so hilarious that I felt I had to share it with y'all.
But first some background. TH loves bagels. Before I came into the apartment and kashered it, he used to buy his bagels in a supermarket about 20 feet from our apartment. I didn't know too much about kosher bagel places around here, so he has been going without for about 2 weeks. I decided to have rachmanus (mercy) on him today and go to the H&H Bagels that I recently discovered is not too far away.
As those who know me know, I am a kashrut freak. I pack chumras (stringencies) on top of chumras. I'm not proud of this. I blame it on my first roommate after colllege, a lovely young woman from London who was a completely insane kashrut monster. My parents keep kosher, but with a "well, that got treifed up, just wash it and put it back in the drawer" kind of attitude, and I knew I wanted to do more. But I didn't have a great role model, and I haven't been able to shake many of her customs. So, even though I know H&H is kosher, I decided to double-check by looking at the kashrut certificate, aka te'udah.
For those new to this, a te'udah just normally says that the place is kosher and is certified by X Kashering Agency. When I saw a paper on the wall saying "Kosher Certificate" and saw the Star-K emblem (they are out of Baltimore, FYI), I was about to walk away and order my bagels.
Then I saw the subtitles.
Instead of merely saying that H&H is kosher, the Star-K had a list of which items were kosher! And it wasn't a short list. I think it probably encompassed nearly every single bagel in the place (at first glance, I did not see the regular garlic bagels on there, which should not be confused with the garlic bagel twists, which of course are kosher, you numbskull).
Why do that??? Have we gone completely mad??????? (Yes). After comparing the te'udah's list with the flavors TH likes most, I decided to order a half-dozen of one kind of bagel and a half-dozen of another. Then the woman at the counter told me that I got a free bagel. What kind would I like.
Of course, I was completely paralyzed. I wanted to get cinnamon raisin, but was it on the list? The certificate was all the way across the room, and there were people behind me. Finally, I just decided to get another of the bagels I had already decided to buy.
Only in New York.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
What Is "Sinat Chinam," Anyway?
Well, it's the "Nine Days" again, and again I am freaking confused about what I am supposed to be thinking and doing. I know that I am supposed to be feeling bad about the destructions of the First and Second Temples, as well as any number of other tragedies throughout Jewish history dated to 9 Av. Even though I am a total dorkmonger who actually finds some kinot (mournful hymns, recited on Tisha b'Av and other solemn occasions) meaningful, I find this really difficult. I do believe that the destructions of the Temples (the first, because it ended direct Divine revelation; the second, because it ended for good Judaism as it was originally practiced) were the greatest tragedies in Jewish history. But it's hard to hold onto that and make it meaningful in the twenty-first century. Even on Tisha b'Av itself, I have an easier time making myself feel depressed by reading first-person Holocaust accounts.
The community (read: Orthodox community, mainly) approach to the Nine Days is no help, really. It's all about things you are not supposed to do (eat meat, drink wine, bathe [don't worry, lukewarm showers are generally allowed, and I certainly take them], listen to live [some also add recorded] music, go to weddings, etc.). This is based on the principle "Mishenichnas Av, me'ma'atim b'simchah" (When Av begins, we diminish our joy), a deliberate parallel in the Gemara to "When Adar enters, we increase our joy." But, as often happens with me (I am SO Orthoprax, in addition to Conservadox and googleplex), I get caught up in the doing/not doing and the feeling guilty that I am not doing/refraining from doing enough. So I feel like crap a lot, but not for the right reasons.
What really pisses me off, though, is the traditional way of talking about "sinat chinam." According to the Gemara in somewhere, the Temple was destroyed because of "sinat chinam," which is usually translated as "baseless hatred." That we should all refrain from "baseless hatred" so that the third Temple can be rebuilt, or so that we can live in a redeemed world, or whatever, is held out as a goal for the Jewish people. Fights between and within different Jewish denominations are often given as examples of sinat chinam.
But what does that mean, exactly?
Don't the different denominations hate each other pretty much past the point of no return?
As someone who travels across the denominations, I have been surprised at the level of rancor between the Orthodox and the non-Orthodox. It comes from both sides. And blogging has introduced me to the Modern Orthodox--Chareidi smackdown (see especially the comment thread). Very admirable, guys.
Is it sinat chinam to hate the rabbis (including at least one rosh yeshivah) who got arrested today for money laundering (and, in one case, selling kidneys)?
Is it sinat chinam to hate the Israeli Chareidim who set their own neighborhoods on fire last week because the police arrested a Chareidi woman for starving her son? And what is the order of remove? Can I hate the bloggers who explain that the Israeli secular police are to blame; the Chareidim only riot because oppressive state policies make them feel "backed into a corner"?
Is it sinat chinam to hate American Jewish "leaders" (Chareidi, most often, but not only them) who are apologists for abusers of children and spouses?
Refraining from sinah (hate) doesn't seem to be an option in our messed-up Jewish world today. There seems to be so much on which to base the hatred.
Baseless hatred is one thing, but what about hatred with a basis? What to do about that during the nine days?
For reactions to the kind of pathetic/criminal/chillul Hashem behavior that our brethren have been engaging in recently, I turn, instead, to a verse in the Torah: Leviticus 19:17. In the King James Version, the first part of the verse says, "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart." In interpreting that part, Chazal (our Sages) look to the second half of the verse: "thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him. " Chazal say that if one man sees another sinning, it does neither of them any good if the first man keeps silent. Silence leads to the continuation of the sin by the second person, and results in sin for the first one, who did not intervene. Instead, the first man should admonish his neighbor (in private, so as to avoid public embarrassment) and urge him not to continue to sin.
So, my fellow Jews, if we want to make the world a better place, a place worthy of being redeemed, then, during these nine days until Tisha b'Av, I propose that, rather than feel ashamed of our hatred, we should use it constructively. We should make it clear to the Jewish community and to the rest of the world that sinning--not only sins bein Adam la'Makom (between man and God), but also those bein Adam l'chaveiro (between people) is unacceptable. It does not represent the Jewish ideal, no matter what the dress or reputation of the sinner. We should rebuke not out of joy or a feeling of superiority. Our concern should be our survival as a "light unto the nations."
The community (read: Orthodox community, mainly) approach to the Nine Days is no help, really. It's all about things you are not supposed to do (eat meat, drink wine, bathe [don't worry, lukewarm showers are generally allowed, and I certainly take them], listen to live [some also add recorded] music, go to weddings, etc.). This is based on the principle "Mishenichnas Av, me'ma'atim b'simchah" (When Av begins, we diminish our joy), a deliberate parallel in the Gemara to "When Adar enters, we increase our joy." But, as often happens with me (I am SO Orthoprax, in addition to Conservadox and googleplex), I get caught up in the doing/not doing and the feeling guilty that I am not doing/refraining from doing enough. So I feel like crap a lot, but not for the right reasons.
What really pisses me off, though, is the traditional way of talking about "sinat chinam." According to the Gemara in somewhere, the Temple was destroyed because of "sinat chinam," which is usually translated as "baseless hatred." That we should all refrain from "baseless hatred" so that the third Temple can be rebuilt, or so that we can live in a redeemed world, or whatever, is held out as a goal for the Jewish people. Fights between and within different Jewish denominations are often given as examples of sinat chinam.
But what does that mean, exactly?
Don't the different denominations hate each other pretty much past the point of no return?
As someone who travels across the denominations, I have been surprised at the level of rancor between the Orthodox and the non-Orthodox. It comes from both sides. And blogging has introduced me to the Modern Orthodox--Chareidi smackdown (see especially the comment thread). Very admirable, guys.
Is it sinat chinam to hate the rabbis (including at least one rosh yeshivah) who got arrested today for money laundering (and, in one case, selling kidneys)?
Is it sinat chinam to hate the Israeli Chareidim who set their own neighborhoods on fire last week because the police arrested a Chareidi woman for starving her son? And what is the order of remove? Can I hate the bloggers who explain that the Israeli secular police are to blame; the Chareidim only riot because oppressive state policies make them feel "backed into a corner"?
Is it sinat chinam to hate American Jewish "leaders" (Chareidi, most often, but not only them) who are apologists for abusers of children and spouses?
Refraining from sinah (hate) doesn't seem to be an option in our messed-up Jewish world today. There seems to be so much on which to base the hatred.
Baseless hatred is one thing, but what about hatred with a basis? What to do about that during the nine days?
For reactions to the kind of pathetic/criminal/chillul Hashem behavior that our brethren have been engaging in recently, I turn, instead, to a verse in the Torah: Leviticus 19:17. In the King James Version, the first part of the verse says, "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart." In interpreting that part, Chazal (our Sages) look to the second half of the verse: "thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him. " Chazal say that if one man sees another sinning, it does neither of them any good if the first man keeps silent. Silence leads to the continuation of the sin by the second person, and results in sin for the first one, who did not intervene. Instead, the first man should admonish his neighbor (in private, so as to avoid public embarrassment) and urge him not to continue to sin.
So, my fellow Jews, if we want to make the world a better place, a place worthy of being redeemed, then, during these nine days until Tisha b'Av, I propose that, rather than feel ashamed of our hatred, we should use it constructively. We should make it clear to the Jewish community and to the rest of the world that sinning--not only sins bein Adam la'Makom (between man and God), but also those bein Adam l'chaveiro (between people) is unacceptable. It does not represent the Jewish ideal, no matter what the dress or reputation of the sinner. We should rebuke not out of joy or a feeling of superiority. Our concern should be our survival as a "light unto the nations."
Friday, July 17, 2009
Katrina's Deep Thought of the Week
A "Bridezilla" is just a woman who repeatedly is told by others what she wants, needs, and desires for her wedding, even though said other people have no idea. Then she loses it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
