Reporting on mayoral primaries distorts Jewish tradition

NY Times   While the Democratic field remained unsettled, Mr. Lhota was moving on Thursday to reach out to potential supporters. In the morning, he visited the Queens burial site of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who was the revered leader of Lubavitch Hasidim. 

Flanked by rabbis, one of whom addressed him as “Mr. Mayor,” Mr. Lhota asked for, and received, a gift of honey cake, following a Jewish tradition associated with the Lubavitcher rebbe, as Rabbi Schneerson was known. 

Mr. Lhota, wearing a black skullcap, brought a note to the rebbe’s grave site, tore it and cast it onto a pile of other torn notes, in accordance with another Jewish custom. 

Asked whether his note was about the election, he said only, “It’s all about the future of New York City.” 

Read More

Rav Shlomo Fisher - The halachic significance of public acceptance by the masses

Addded additonal material 9/16/13. The following is a very fascinating and provocative essay by Rav Shomo Fisher explaining the authority of something accepted by the masses - even just as behavior without explicit acceptance. [It is 8 pages long  - this is just the first page.] It is  in his Beis Yishai (chapter 15). In brief he is explaining that halachic authority and creativity can arise from the actions of the masses and not just from the Torah or rabbis. The consequences of this thesis are very significant

-----------------------

The Torah has a legal characteristic which is based on the concept of bris (covenant). In fact the Rishonim were very interested as to why it was necessary for G‑d to establish a bris with the Jews for them to accept the observance of mitzvos. If there hadn't been a bris would that have meant that no one would have to obey G‑d? If you want to say in fact that they would not have been obligated to keep mitzvos without a bris   - then what is the purpose of the bris?  What in reality requires them to fulfill that which they have accepted to do? Isn't it simply because that is G‑d's will and He wanted the Torah to have a legal character and it is known that law is based on bris? In other words bris is based on the acceptance of the community. This idea that a legal system is dependent on the acceptance of the governed is expressed by the Rashbam (Bava Basra 54b). He explained that Shmuel's principle of dina d'malchusa dina (the law of the land is halachically binding) means that all the members of the kingdom willing accept the decrees of the king and his laws. In other words the individual's forcing himself to accept is the foundation of the acceptance. (I discuss this in greater length is my drasha to Shabbos Nachamu as to why G‑d saw fit to give the Torah in a legal manner.)

Let's explore the halachic significance of the acceptance of the community

We find that the Kesef Mishna (Hilchos Mamrim 2:1) writes, "What is the reason that an Amora doesn't dispute the words of a Tanna...? We can suggest that from the time of the finishing of the Mishna it was accepted that later generations would not be able to disagree with the Mishna. This was also done when the Talmud was finished that it was agreed that no one from then on had the right to disagree with it."

Rav Elchonon Wasserman comments on this Kesef Mishna, "This requires further thought to make understandable the nature of this acceptance. Why should it have the power to prevent any disagreement including the rejecting of the acceptance itself while if there was no acceptance they would have been able to disagree with it?" He answers that finishing of the Mishna was with the gathering of all the Sages of Israel or at least the majority. And this happened also with the finishing of the Talmud. And it is possible that at the finishing of the Talmud they in fact had the power to disagree with the Mishna..."

However look at the Rif at the end of Eiruvin where he writes, "The Babylonian Talmud is more authoritative then the Jerusalem Talmud because it is more recent." It would seem that there is no need for this explanation for the authority of the Babylonian Talmud. It should be sufficient that the Babylonian Talmud was finished with the gathering of all the Sages and therefore it has the status of Sanhedrin. In contrast the Jerusalem Talmud where there is no mention that it was finished with a gather of the Sages of Israel – does not have the power of Sanhedrin. [See my derasha where I attempt to answer this]. 

I don't know who revealed to them what happened historically when there is no evidence. In fact the Kesef Mishna is correct. [Similarly Rabbeinu Yona's [beginning of Avos] historical claims regarding the writing of the Oral Law and the prohibition of adding or subtracting from it is also problematic.] 

The basis of the authority of public acceptance is stated by the Rivash (#399) in the name of the Ramban. "All acceptance by the masses for the sake of a protective fence to the Torah is like the acceptance of the Torah itself and it becomes obligatory not only for those who accepted it but also their descendants forever. This is true even if they did not actually agree to keep it but merely conducted themselves as if they accepted it - as a fence to the Torah. This principle that the acceptance of the masses itself obligates future generations is explicit in the Torah and commentaries and is if it were divinely given....

Look at Rav Elochon Wasserman's Divrei Sofrim (1:14) where he says, It would appear from the Ramban (Comments to Sefer HaMitzvos) that he disagrees with the Rambam in two points 1) regarding the verses of "You should do everything they tell you" and "don't deviate from what they tell you" It seems that the Rambam says these verses apply to rabbinic mitzvos and prohibitions... It also seems from the Ramban's pointing out that rabbinic halachos are less severe than Torah prohibitions that they can not be based on the Torah at all. ... If the Ramban was only disagreeing with the Ramban regarding the significance of the verse lo sasur (don't deviate)  but that he agreed that obeying the words of the Sages is a Torah obligation whether from a verse, logic or halacha l'Moshe - then the question he asks of the Ramban why Rabbinic laws are less severe would also apply to him. What difference what the Torah sources of Rabbinic laws because they would all require that in a case of doubt that one should be machmir. Therefore one is forced to say that the Ramban's view is that there is absolutely no Torah command to obey the Sages. But this is an astounding view! If there is no Torah source for listening to the Sages what is the reason that we are obligated to listen to them and not violate there words since there is absolutely no verse, halacha or sevora (common sense)? Because even if you say it is a servora then the question of why rabbinic halacha is less severe than Torah laws reappears. this is because we see in many places in the Talmud the principle "What needs is there for a verse since there is a sevora." That clearly shows that there is no difference in whether a halacha is generated from a verse or servora.

In fact Rav Elchonon Wasserman writes that he asked Rav Shimon Shkop about this Ramban. He replied that the Ramban hold that the obligation to listen to the Sages is because of sevora... While he initially questioned this view he changed his mind as seen by what he wrote in Divrei Sofrim. Nevertheless the views of Rav Shimon Shkop are prohibited to listen to and it is very surprising that Rav Elchonon praised them.

The Mabit in fact accepts the view that the Ramban believes that there is no source in the Torah to listen to  the Sages and that the verse is simply an asmachta. This would apparently greatly reduce the signficance of rabbinic laws! However it appears from the Mabit that the source of authority is from tradition (kabbala) and G-d gave them the right to make changes which they based on understanding hints in the verses... The Mabit says that they have a tradition to make protective measures..  This is also the language of the Ramban. This idea that their authority is based on G-d's authorization is discussed in detail in the sefer Yesod Havodah....

However all of these assertions that rabbinic authority is from G-d has no basis. In particular to make up an assertion that there was a halacha l'Moshe for their authority is simply incredible. In fact the basis of rabbinical authority is the fact that the entire Jewish people accepted their authority on themselves. This is what was cited before from the Rivash in the name of the Ramban.... In other words, the principle is that the acceptance by the masses of rabbinic authority is what makes it obligatory for all generations. This is explicit in the Torah, Neviim ad in Kesubim in many places. The obligation is the consequence of the acceptance on themselves of the Jewish people. The reason that rabbinic law is less severe than Torah law is simply because they didn't accept it to have the same severity as Torah law but rather to be lenient in cases of doubt etc. This in fact is the view of the Kesef Mishneh when he said that from the day of the finishing of the Mishneh  it was accepted that the later generations could not argue with the earlier generations. And this was true also with the finsihing of the Talmud...
[to be continued]

Read More

Simon Sinek : "It is not what you do but why you do it"

A critical contribution to social understanding. He presents the thesis that behavior is best driven by focus on why we doing things rather than what we do. Related to child abuse - it is not enough to create laws to punish abuse and provide rules to avoid situations where abuse can occur. It is not enough to get people to report abuse. It is important that everyone understand that abusing others causes pain - and we need to value not hurting others.

Read More

Is Emotional Intelligence critical for academic success as well as success in life?

NY Times [...] Wade’s approach — used schoolwide at Garfield Elementary, in Oakland, Calif. — is part of a strategy known as social-emotional learning, which is based on the idea that emotional skills are crucial to academic performance. 

“Something we now know, from doing dozens of studies, is that emotions can either enhance or hinder your ability to learn,” Marc Brackett, a senior research scientist in psychology at Yale University, told a crowd of educators at a conference last June. “They affect our attention and our memory. If you’re very anxious about something, or agitated, how well can you focus on what’s being taught?” 

Once a small corner of education theory, S.E.L. has gained traction in recent years, driven in part by concerns over school violence, bullying and teen suicide. But while prevention programs tend to focus on a single problem, the goal of social-emotional learning is grander: to instill a deep psychological intelligence that will help children regulate their emotions. 

For children, Brackett notes, school is an emotional caldron: a constant stream of academic and social challenges that can generate feelings ranging from loneliness to euphoria. Educators and parents have long assumed that a child’s ability to cope with such stresses is either innate — a matter of temperament — or else acquired “along the way,” in the rough and tumble of ordinary interaction. But in practice, Brackett says, many children never develop those crucial skills. “It’s like saying that a child doesn’t need to study English because she talks with her parents at home,” Brackett told me last spring. “Emotional skills are the same. A teacher might say, ‘Calm down!’ — but how exactly do you calm down when you’re feeling anxious? Where do you learn the skills to manage those feelings?” 

A growing number of educators and psychologists now believe that the answer to that question is in school. George Lucas’s Edutopia foundation has lobbied for the teaching of social and emotional skills for the past decade; the State of Illinois passed a bill in 2003 making “social and emotional learning” a part of school curriculums. Thousands of schools now use one of the several dozen programs, including Brackett’s own, that have been approved as “evidence-based” by the Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning, a Chicago-based nonprofit. All told, there are now tens of thousands of emotional-literacy programs running in cities nationwide. 

The theory that kids need to learn to manage their emotions in order to reach their potential grew out of the research of a pair of psychology professors — John Mayer, at the University of New Hampshire, and Peter Salovey, at Yale. In the 1980s, Mayer and Salovey became curious about the ways in which emotions communicate information, and why some people seem more able to take advantage of those messages than others. While outlining the set of skills that defined this “emotional intelligence,” Salovey realized that it might be even more influential than he had originally suspected, affecting everything from problem solving to job satisfaction: “It was like, this is predictive!” 

In the years since, a number of studies have supported this view. So-called noncognitive skills — attributes like self-restraint, persistence and self-awareness — might actually be better predictors of a person’s life trajectory than standard academic measures. A 2011 study using data collected on 17,000 British infants followed over 50 years found that a child’s level of mental well-being correlated strongly with future success. Similar studies have found that kids who develop these skills are not only more likely to do well at work but also to have longer marriages and to suffer less from depression and anxiety. Some evidence even shows that they will be physically healthier.

Read More

Yom Kippur, Tel Aviv style

Times of Israel   Yom Kippur – the Day of Atonement – begins this Friday evening. Many people know Jews don’t eat or drink for 25 hours (sundown to sundown) but few know what actually happens on Yom Kippur in modern, non-religious, Israel.

When I arrived, just over four years ago, Yom Kippur in Tel Aviv took me by complete surprise.

Practically all cars and motor transport will stop. Just not go anywhere. Almost no planes, trains or automobiles will move until Saturday night. [...]

From sundown to sundown the streets are full of people strolling or cycling; on suburban streets or along 10 lane highways, the only thing you have to watch out for are kids on speeding bicycles. Non observant people figure out how, for just one day a year, not to drive except for dire emergencies.

I will allow my 4 year old child to pedal furiously down a 6 lane divided highway in whichever direction he prefers. [...]

So why is being Jewish so different when you’re in Israel? There has never, in my recollection, been a Jew outside of Israel who’s publicly got upset by anyone eating, even in front of him, on Yom Kippur. 

Jews have never, and will never, ask you to stop driving for a day in your country. It just won’t happen. Even in our own country this isn’t a law, it’s just something the vast majority of Jews want to do because, over here, in Jewish Israel, it feels right.

That is the difference between living as a Jew outside Israel and as a Jew in Israel: here we can just BE Jewish and the calendar and the customs and the norms of behavior push us into being culturally Jewish even if we don’t want to study Torah for nine hours a day.[...]

Read More

Visiting the Lubavitcher Rebbe's grave

NY Times    [...] In the nearly 20 years since the death of the rebbe, as Rabbi Schneerson was known, what began as a spontaneous pilgrimage has evolved into a spiritual touchstone of the religious movement he spawned, complete with its own rituals, controversies and supplicants from all corners of the globe. 

And, perhaps in a nod to the famously sleepless city where the rebbe lived, preached and died, his grave site is open night and day.[...]

The pilgrimage to Cambria Heights, a largely black, middle-class neighborhood, has faced some challenges. Large celebratory crowds have frustrated neighbors, and efforts at expansion — most recently, a proposal for a more permanent structure than the tentlike ohel — have been met with opposition by the local community board. The center has made efforts to streamline parking, and in June, delivered bottles of wine to neighbors on surrounding streets, Rabbi Refson said. The number of visitors commemorating the rebbe’s death now tops 30,000. 

Read More

Girl’s Suicide Points to Rise in Apps Used by Cyberbullies

NY Times    The clues were buried in her bedroom. Before leaving for school on Monday morning, Rebecca Ann Sedwick had hidden her schoolbooks under a pile of clothes and left her cellphone behind, a rare lapse for a 12-year-old girl. 

Inside her phone’s virtual world, she had changed her user name on Kik Messenger, a cellphone application, to “That Dead Girl” and delivered a message to two friends, saying goodbye forever. Then she climbed a platform at an abandoned cement plant near her home in the Central Florida city of Lakeland and leaped to the ground, the Polk County sheriff said.

In jumping, Rebecca became one of the youngest members of a growing list of children and teenagers apparently driven to suicide, at least in part, after being maligned, threatened and taunted online, mostly through a new collection of texting and photo-sharing cellphone applications. Her suicide raises new questions about the proliferation and popularity of these applications and Web sites among children and the ability of parents to keep up with their children’s online relationships. 

For more than a year, Rebecca, pretty and smart, was cyberbullied by a coterie of 15 middle-school children who urged her to kill herself, her mother said. The Polk County sheriff’s office is investigating the role of cyberbullying in the suicide and considering filing charges against the middle-school students who apparently barraged Rebecca with hostile text messages. Florida passed a law this year making it easier to bring felony charges in online bullying cases.[...] 

Read More