The Evolving Jew

My wife and I went to see the new Star Wars movie yesterday. And while I definitely enjoyed it, I also saw some plot holes that could have interfered with my pleasure. I won't mention those plot holes here, so as not to reveal any spoilers to readers. But what about me? I noticed those plot holes while I was watching the movie itself, and while they couldn't serve as spoilers in the classic sense, since I now know the plot and outcome, they definitely could have acted as spoilers in the sense that had I let them, they could have harmed my viewing pleasure. But they didn't. I noted the issues as they arose, but then tucked them away and just let the narrative carry me along. I didn't let small things destroy a wonderful experience. I immersed myself in the wonder of a modern myth legend of heroes and villains, and the of the epic quest romance adventure that once again, (after the disappointing prequels), represents Star Wars. Over the years, I've co...

According to R Alderstein, it's better for a woman to bring her taharat hamishpacha questions to a rabbi rather than a yoetzet . Why? "A yoetzes course of study cannot hold a candle to years (or more!) of immersion in serious learning." R Alderstein doesn't seem to have any idea how rigorous the course of study for yoatzot is. But leaving that aside, he seems to be saying that a yoetzet simply don't have the level of learning neccesary to give an accurate psak. I am absolutely sure that he's not suggesting anything so blatantly sexist as the idea that women don't have the necessary intellectual skills to master the halachot. So it must be that he feels that studying for smicha itself, and the actual conferral of smicha, is what makes one truly qualified to rule on taharat hamishpacha. Therefore, I am left with only one conclusion. Clearly R Alderstein feels that the yoetzet course is insufficient, and that women should be granted smicha so that th...

When you think about the plight of the Syrian refugees, remember that we are Jews, and remember this pasuk: כאזרח מכם יהיה לכם הגר הגר אתכם ואהבת לו כמוך כי גרים הייתם בארץ מצרים ויקרא יט:לד

On July 22, 1946, the Irgun bombed the King David hotel in the center of Jerusalem. 91 innocent people were killed. In response, the US declared that they would no longer allow any of the hundreds of thousands of desperate Jewish refugees into the US, because any of them could be terrorists. Except that's not what happened. President Truman realized the deep human crisis of the countless survivors in the DP camps and the many thousands of others fleeing virulent anti-Semitism. So over the next few years, the US raised the quotas higher and higher, allowing homeless and hopeless Jewish refugees homes and hope, a place to rebuild their lives. Will Paris really make us forget the lessons of history and cause us to abandon our compassion? Yes, I know it's not an exact parallel. But the lesson should stand, nonetheless. Punishing desperate refugees who are fleeing murder and hate, because of the actions of a few, is immoral and we, as Jews, should know this better than anyone...

It's become an accepted fact among most Orthodox Jews that Obama is "the most anti-Israel president ever" and perhaps even an "anti-Semite" I'm not here to argue whether his policies on Israel are damaging to Israel or not, nor whether the Iran deal was smart. That could be, and has been, argued ad nauseum. What I do want to say is this. Given current trends of increasing international isolation of Israel, it's possible that in the future, say 20 years down the road, the US may very well have a president who is actually anti-Israel, one who cuts off aid to Israel, votes against Israel at the UN, imposes sanctions on Israel, and perhaps even threatens military action. THAT would be what an actual anti-Israel president would look like. Calling Obama anti-Israel is beyond preposterous.

As much as we are all horrified by every terror attack, we aren't shocked by the fact of the attacks. We know those terrorists want to kill Jews. Evil is evil. But I must admit to being shocked by the lynching (yes, that's what it was) of the Eritrean man in Be'er Sheva last night. I'm trying to avoid passing judgement on the lynch mob. After all, they were terrified, they'd just been subject to an attack, and they genuinely thought the man was a terrorist as well. Still, it's horrific that people blocked police access to a man who was already down and yelling "Mavet LaAravim!" beat him, threw benches and chairs at him, kicked him, spat on him and cursed at him. Shouldn't we be better than that mob mentality? Aren't we better than the terrorists? I'm sitting here in the US, safe and sound. As much as I fear for my family and friends, I have't been personally subjected to the existential fear that Israelis are going through day after...

Avodah Zara 10a-b discusses the friendship between Antoninus (אנטונינוס), who seems to be the Roman emperor, and Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi. The gemara even describes how Antoninus built a tunnel from his home to R Yehuda Hanasi's home. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that this has at least some historical basis, and look at the attempts to identify Antoninus. The most obvious candidate would be Antoninus Pius, emperor from 138 to 161 CE. Soncino reports that that was the view of someone named "S.J. Rappaport". Does anyone know who that is? Here is the Soncino comment . The gemara also reports that Antoninus had a son named Asvirus and a daughter named Gira. None of the children of Antoninus Pius match those names even closely, at least according to Wikipedia's list of his children , though Gira MIGHT be Annia Galeria Faustina Minor. The Soncino also cites Rappaport's (IMO fanciful) theory about the identity of Asvirus: "Asverus is his adopted so...