Mori Michael Shelomo Bar-Ron

This is the week of TeSawweh (that’s Tetzaveh for the un-initiated in ancient Hebrew pronunciation) – the Torah portion about sacred clothing, the clothing that would distinguish the Kohen-priests, particularly the High Priest, in their sacred duties. It is also the week I was interviewed by Tamar Yonah (a true honor) about the dubious origins and halakhic problems (according to Torah law) with the relatively late, European custom of dressing up in costume for Purim. How fitting it is for me, then, to teach about one of the more poorly-known aspects of Torah: the importance of a distinct, Jewish dress.

Consider one of the fundamental 613 Commandments of the Torah, in Wayyiqra (Lev.) 18:3:

After the doings of the land of Egypt, where you dwelled, you shall not do; and after the doings of the land of Canaan, to where I am bringing you, you shall not do; neither shall you walk in their statutes.

The following is a summary of the Oral Torah (the actual halakhah) on this Divine Commandment from the Mishneh Torah, the Code of Jewish Law (Laws of Idolatry chapter 11:1)

One is not to walk in the statutes of the gentiles, and not to resemble them—not in their dress, and not in their hairstyle, nor in anything else of this sort, as it is written: “neither shall you walk in their statutes.” And it is written, “be careful of yourself, lest you be ensnared after them.” [Deut. 12:30] All this is warning about one thing: That one not resemble them; but rather, that the Israelite be distinguished from them and known in his dress and in his other ways, just as he is distinguished from them in his wisdom and his character. And thus it is written, “and I shall make you distinct from the nations.”

In the miSwath lo-tha`aseh (Torah Prohibition) #30 in Sepher ha-miSwoth, we learn that the prohibition against copying the statutes of the gentiles not only pertains to their present customs, but those of their ancestors as well. Now it is possible that RaMBaM changed his opinion since his youth, when he wrote sefer ha-miSwoth, deliberately leaving this detail out of Mishneh Torah. This way the Hamburg-hatted, frock-coated Hassidim and Lithuanian-style Jews could claim that today they have a distinct Jewish look — certainly now that the Christian clergy have moved on to new modes of dress.

To me, it’s a stretch. I could be mistaken, but I see no reason to fight what seems clear: Jews are not to dress in uniquely gentile dress — neither that of the present, nor that of the past. (Note: Whatever I say about Haredi dress is said with the deepest respect for the Haredim and their [our] fierce dedication to Torah. I am one who personally identifies as a Haredi Jew, living in a Haredi neighborhood with children learning in a fine Haredi institution.)

One friend of mine shared with me an additional insight: The black garbed Polish look and black hats/streimels (and I add to that the modern, tight-fitting Western styles of non-Haredim) make us look foreign to this land. It is hostile clothing to the climate, and we look like aliens, foreign oppressors who don’t belong here, imported from Europe.  The Arabs pick up on it, as does as the rest of the world. Noting our non-native styles, they say, “See?  These Jews came and stole our land. They don’t belong here – go back to Europe!”

What I believe the nations understand subconsciously, somewhere deep in their souls, is something that pains them greatly: This is not the look (and in many cases not the behavior) of the “kingdom of priests” Israel is supposed to be for us. Barukh HaShem (thank God), I see numerous signs of positive change underway.

How, then, are Jews to ideally dress? Believe it or not, the traditions of our unique dress have not all disappeared. We can still learn them from the Jews of the Orient, very few of whom maintain them to this day. From my own great-great-great grandfather HaRav Yehudah Ha-Levi from Dubrovnik, Serbia, to the senior Hakhamim of Baghdad (below [1]) to the Torah teachers of Yemen: formal-wear for Jewish men varied little.

Among our warriors, the style differed. Below is a photograph of YaHia Habbani of blessed memory, close family to Ya`aqov Mosha (Awad bin Brihim), father of the esteemed Aluf Abir, Mori Yehoshua Sofer shlit”a. The late uncle is dressed in classical Habbani style, which goes back millennia.

The Aluf Abir himself, an expert on ancient clothing of the Near East, once taught me in the name of his father (who is presently well over 100 years old, may HaShem preserve him in good health) that a picture of Arabs 100 years ago would be nearly identical to the way Yishmaelites looked one thousand years ago, and so on back to the times of the Tanakh (Bible). It was no different among his own clan, whose distinguished lineage hails back to the times of Dawidh ha-mmelekh (King David). The style varied per activity, including casual styles such as a very long over-shirt over loose, short white pants — much like the breeches of modern Hassidim. Sometimes the large `tallith was worn as a main garment; among the Habbani warriors it could be wrapped to gird up the entire torso like a rope-belt, criss-crossing the body. [2]

Whatever the style, from the Beth Midrash to the battlefield, across the Middle East, we maintained our distinct dress. If we are to receive the lesson from our ancient Oral legends (midrash), this is a matter of no small importance: It was partly in the merit of our steadfast loyalty to our traditional Hebrew dress, that HaShem redeemed us from Egypt. The sages even ordained a special blessing for us to make each morning specifically when we wrap our heads turban-style:  “Blessed are You, HASHEM our God, King of the Universe, who crowns Israel with splendor.”  The Babylonian Talmud (tractate Berakhoth 60b) is clear, and so is Mishneh Torah (Book of Love, Laws of Prayer 7:4) the blessing is made when on “puts his sheet [or cloth] on his head”.  (Note that both Talmud and Mishneh Torah do mention hats in other places.  This blessing appears to be specifically for authentic Israelite headgear.)

Now before you run for your nearest tailor and wager how quickly you are likely to lose your job, your friends, or worse; what is the practical halakhah (Jewish law)? Today, modern dress is standardized all over the world into a basic, universal “human dress”. In our day, most modes of dress that are uniquely gentile, are also outlandish enough to be a Purim costume. Besides that, although we maintained a distinct style, the truth is that Jews though the ages wore what was comfortable to them in their surroundings. My understanding is, according to my training, that for men – on a basic level – so long as one’s clothes are sufficiently modest, the kippah on our head and fringes at our sides give us a clearly unique and distinct look, and satisfy the basic halakhah (practical Jewish law).

However, to my humble understanding (with no disrespect intended towards those who disagree), there may be two common exceptions to this for men: the 3-piece suit and tight pants — particularly tight jeans. Unlike casual suits, the 3-piece suit is a traditional garment also known as the “Sunday’s best.”  Reaching its present form in the last century, it appears to have been — in its original cultural ambient — a special garment set aside by the common gentile for weekly, Sunday idol worship. As for tight pants or jeans, unless they are way oversized so that they sag like the ‘gangbanger’ look (which itself may constitute a distinctly gentile style), this is specifically mentioned in Talmud as prohibited to Jewish men. To my reading, RaMBaM had no need to mention this – would it not be included in the general prohibition of imitating gentile customs?!

As for myself, I am personally unsatisfied with the universal “human dress” code; my soul yearns for more. It doesn’t sit well with me that for over 3,000 years our fathers, our great rabbis, prophets and warriors had distinct Jewish dress styles and haircuts that we can comfortably toss aside in favor of the styles of yuppie-ville and the American mall. In a modern Israel where Buddhist monks, nuns, and Ethiopic Christian priests roam freely in their traditional garbs, must I, a Jew, feel confined to styles out of GQ magazine, that are technically permitted?

Now I rarely delve into mysticism in my articles, but I cannot hold back this time. Tefillin [3], by Aryeh Kaplan, is one of the most inspiring books I ever read as a Jew growing into Torah observance, years ago. In it, Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan of blessed memory writes:

Physical space exists only in the physical world. In the spiritual domain, there is no concept of space as we know it.

But still we speak of things being close or far apart in the spiritual world.   What does this mean?  We cannot be speaking of physical distance, for there is no physical space in the spiritual realm. But in a spiritual sense, closeness involves resemblance.  Two things that resemble each other are spiritually close.  On the other hand, two things that differ are far apart in a spiritual sense.

It follows that if we desire to be spiritually close and similar to the greatest men of all time, Avraham our forefather, Mosha Rabbenu, Dawidh ha-mmelekh, Rabi `Aqivah and so on, we should resemble them as much as possible. That is, of course, first and foremost in our deeds: how we relate to others, how we pray, how we learn and practice Torah, how we fight. But it is so difficult in a mundane world where we are so categorized, labeled and limited by those around us. Yet, as I explained above, we create our image – the way we are perceived – and invite those labels, to a degree, by the way we dress and cut our hair.

The foremost reason why, in the Haredi world, Jews wear black hats and suits, is the foremost reason I try to dress more Hebrew: They know how much clothes make the man of God. When passing by a thumping disco alone, a young teen wearing a black hat and suit will feel and react differently than a young man in jeans with a half-dollar sized kippah on his head. Dressing more Israelite can have the same effect. The difference is that the black galuth (diaspora) garb subliminally gives him the feeling of a European arrival from 60 years ago, an exiled man in his own land. Carefully ironed, restricting clothes meant for air-conditioned rooms and paved sidewalks give us a different sense of what is natural and what is foreign.

Moreover, as I discussed above, any dress besides our ancestral one fits a certain negative stereotype in the eyes of the nations, to whom we are to be “a kingdom of priests.” Whether it is as small a step as wearing a large `talith while relaxing and working at home, wrapping one’s head for prayer for Morning Prayers when one is alone, or making a bigger change such as growing one’s beard and side-locks, I highly recommend it. Should you choose to put on tephillin (phylacteries) even for a short while outside of prayer to learn some Torah, you are actually fulfilling the Torah commandment to strive to be in tephillin throughout the day. If you are living outside of Israel, just wearing a large kippah to distinguish yourself as a Jew can be an awesome step.

May the day come soon when kohen-priests will daily don their priestly garments in a rebuilt Beth ha-miqdash (Holy Temple) and Yisra’el (the rest of the nation) will don ours for all the wonderful activities there are for us to do in our ancestral heritage. In the meantime, let’s increase our awareness of the Godly type of people our traditional clothing can help us aspire to become.

[1] Photograph from ”The Sassoon’s Return Visit to Baghdad: A Diary by Mozelle Sassoon” published in The Scribe: Journal of Babylonian Jewry ISSN 14 74 – 0230, Issue 74 – Autumn 2001, www.thescribe.uk.com.  Posted at  http://www.dangoor.com/TheScribe_74a.pdf.

[2] Special thanks to the Aluf Abir Mori Yehoshua` Sofer shlit”a for the ethnographic data and photograph.

[3] Kaplan, Aryeh, Tefillin, published by NCSY, distributed by Mesorah Publications, 1975. pp. 42-43

A CRISIS OF PRIORITIES

We approach a Passover holiday that should stand out in our memories from all other Passovers in our lifetimes:  The eve of this Passover happens to coincide with a unique astrological event that occurs every 28 years:  According to ancient tradition, it is the beginning of a new sun cycle, in which the sun assumes the position in which it appeared at Creation.  Millions of Jews worldwide will go out in the morning to witness this spectacle and make bless HaShem, who made all Creation. (hil. berakhoth 10:20[18])   

In fact, a great many of religious Jews will wake up before dawn n order to view the sun and make the blessing in a minyan at sunrise—even though there is no legal obligation to do so—, unaware of the great importance the Sages gave to ending the Shema` and beginning the `amidah prayer at that precise time. (hil. Q”Sh 1:12[11], tefillah 7:17)  In fact, the failure to recite the Shema` prayer at its precise time (about 6 minutes before sunrise, leading immediately into the `amidah) is counted in Talmud as one of the reasons for the destruction of the Temple.  But consider the attention being given to the “overriding” sun blessing… There is a whole class being offered locally, and whole books and booklets being published about the significance of this very regular blessing (the beginning of a new sun cycle)… a subject to which RaMBaM devotes half of one halakhah (about 2-3 lines of text). 

It is a sign of the times: what the early sages taught as minor details are blown up into issues of overriding importance, while outright halakhic obligations such as Shema` and prayer—to which RaMBaM devotes whole chapters—are pushed aside as being of minor importance. 

The prophet Yisha`yahu (Isaiah) foresaw a time when the light of the Jewish people itself will “break forth as the morning, and thy healing shall spring forth speedily; and thy righteousness shall go before thee, the glory of the LORD shall be thy rear guard.” (Isaiah 58:8)  We will break out of our stubborn paradigms—such as the belief in fasting from food and drink as an end in and of itself—to pursue what truly matters to HaShem on a fast day:  soul-searching, pursuing justice and deeds of loving-kindness.  In short, it will be a time when we finally get our priorities in order. 

In my neighborhood, I see another priority anomaly among small children… Two weeks before Passover, and with their parents’ full sanction, children are preparing for another holiday altogether… They are ‘beating the rush’ to collect wood for Lag ba’Omer—holiday of the Kabbalah—in another six weeks.  That day and the days from pior, hundreds of thousands of Torah observant Jews will gather to the grave of one of the greatest of the Tannaim, reaffirming their dedication to a book that he is widely believed to have authored–the Zohar. 

Lag Ba’Omer fires burn so high and hot, there is scarcely a year without burn victims, often children.  It is a phenomenon that did not exist in the childhood-days of their no-less pious or kabbalistic-minded parents and grandparents:  Not long ago, Lag ba’Omer was a joyous time for families and friends to enjoy a homely campfire, and sing about the awesome wisdom of Shim’on ben YoHai.  Over the years, it has reached the point where a few years back, the television newscast showed a few misguided pseudo-kabbalists throwing silken sheets on to fires as an offering to demons.  Who would imagine that the Torah’s scathing rebuke (Devarim 32:17) was aimed at our late 58^th century, as much as any other time?

Consider those who weren’t satisfied in praying there to HaShem in the merit of Shim’on ben YoHai, but directed their prayers to the Sadiq himself, which is pure idolatry.  And even that pails in comparison to the creation of a new ‘Jesus’ out of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe Schneerson (if you think I am exaggerating, visit http://www.rebbegod.blogspot.com/.)  Sheer, unabashed idolatry.  HaShem-forbid that we should ascribe such beliefs to all or even most of Chabad, but the silence over this from the Chabad world is deafening.  How can anyone be so blind, reading and hearing the eternal curses for such behavior, year by year, in parashath, BuHuqothai:

DEMONIZING THE ZOHAR:  NOT A SIMPLE EQUATION

News of these things can drive some to the opposite extreme: a camp of those satisfied with only a half-story… those who brand the Zohar itself as a medieval book of idolatry. 

Belief in the authenticity of the Zohar is considered a fundamental tenet of faith in nearly all sectors of the Orthodox Jewish world.  Respected as holy writ by such a geniuses such as the Vilna Gaon and Ben Ish Hai, it has been so in nearly all Jewish communities for centuries.  In my perspective, not only do those who vilify Zohar show imprudence by isolating themselves from the Jewish world, they cultivate a hate for something they don’t truly understand.  Moreover, they do not understand the root of the very real problem they see—which is actually a fundamental mistake that Jews have been making for thousands of years: a crisis of priorities.  That is, an emphasis on the mystical and esoteric studies, as a way out from the harsh reality of the literal Word of HaShem, according to the revealed Oral tradition.   

RaMBaM poignantly describes how this crisis in priorities led to our downfall towards the end of the Second Temple era: 

וזו היא שאבדה מלכותנו והחריבה בית מקדשנו והאריכה גלותינו והגיעתנו עד הלום. שאבותינו חטאו ואינם, לפי שמצאו ספרים רבים באלה הדברים של דברי החוזים בכוכבים, שדברים אלו הם עיקר עבודה זרה, כמו שביארנו בהלכות עבודה זרה, טעו ונהו אחריהן, ודימו שהם חכמות מפוארות ויש בהן תועלת גדולה, ולא נתעסקו בלמידת מלחמה ולא בכיבוש ארצות, אלא דמו שאותן הדברים יועילו להם ולפיכך קראו אותם הנביאים סכלים ואווילים .  ודאי סכלים ואווילים היו, ואחרי התוהו אשר לא יועילו הלכו.  (רמב”ם, איגרת לחכמי קהל עיר מארשילייא, צרפת)

(מנוסח האיגרת המופיע ב-http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/mahshevt/mekorot/igeret-2.htm(

This is why our kingdom was lost and our Temple was destroyed and why we were brought to this; for our fathers sinned and are no more because they found many books dealing with these themes of the star gazers, these things being the root of idolatry, as we have made clear in Laws Concerning Idolatry. They erred and were drawn after them, imagining them to be glorious science and to be of great utility. They did not busy themselves with the art of war or with the conquest of lands, but imagined that those studies would help them. Therefore the prophets called them “fools and dolts” (Jer. 4:22). And truly fools they were, “for they walked after confused things that do not profit” (I Sam. 12:21 and Jer. 2:8).   

(RaMBaM, Epistle to the Sages of Marseilles, France)

Demonizing Zohar-mysticism as medieval and pagan not only misses the point, it is also not as simple an equation as some scholars would have you believe. 

Anti-Zoharists often mention Sepher HaYuHasin, which claims the widow of Rav Moshe de Leon admitted that her late husband had personally authored it, falsely claiming the authorship of Shim’on Ben YoHai in order to sell the work.  However, it is difficult to believe a widow would incriminate her own husband in those times.  It is even harder to believe that an author who sought to forge a work in the name of a Tanna in order to increase its buyership would write it in a difficult dialect of Aramaic that only the most advanced Torah scholars could understand.  Wouldn’t he author in the authentic Hebrew of the Tannaim in the Land of Israel at the time?  That would truly increase its readership by making it understandable to the lay scholar.  Furthermore, the “lie” would be accepted more easily—it being easier to fool lower-level scholars than those who are more advanced.   Even advanced scholars would be impressed:  The Mishnah and Pirqei d’Rabi Eli`ezer demonstrate that Hebrew was the language of the Tannaim in the Land of Israel at the time.  Why would Rav De Leon have chosen to use a language that it was known Ribi Shim’on would not have used? 

Now consider that, by Moshe De Leon’s time, Aramaic had been the language of Torah scholarship for centuries.  If Zohar were an Oral tradition that had been passed down through the golden age in the schools of Bavel, it would likely have been preserved in Aramaic.

The greatest anti-Zoharist work is MithpaHath Sefarim, by Rav Ya`aqov Moshe Emden (1697-1776), the Ya`avetz.  This Torah giant exposes literary inconsistencies in the Zohar: misquoted sections from Talmud and even Scripture.  He cites ritual observances in the Zohar that were ordained by later rabbinical authorities, and a mention of the crusades against the Muslims.  http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=142&letter=Z#409   

But wouldn’t a forger who went to the efforts of inventing such an enormous work as the Zohar be at least careful enough not to misquote, and certainly not to mention later historical events?  On the other hand, an organic Oral tradition written down could have misquotes:  Not an oral tradition of halakhah or midrash in the mouths of thousands of scholars, but an organic, esoteric tradition on the subject of Ma’aseh Merkava (the mysteries of the Divine Chariot) and Ma`aseh B:reshith, passed down orally through a very thin chain of students: it is not unlikely that such a tradition would contain a few misquotes, and include applied references to later events. 

What is considered the most convincing, damning evidence against the Zohar is the use of a 13^th century-Spanish word “esnoga” for synagogue.  How would Shim’on ben YoHai use such a word?  To me, this very point might be evidence for the integrity of the work:  Why on earth would Rav De Leon, writing a work intended to fool the Torah giants of the world, put a contemporary Spanish word and misquotes in Shim’on ben YoHai’s mouth?  In short, this is the same faulty assumption that Bible critics use to attack the authenticity of the Humash—lehavdil.  They assume such a stupidity on the part of the author; as if the author himself was unaware of the ‘problems’ and contradictions.   It doesn’t take great a great linguist to know that “esnoga” is closely derived from “synagoga”, the Greek term from which the English word is derived.  Ever since the Hellenist era, nearly all non-Hebrew Torah literature is peppered with Greek and Roman words that crept into the lexicon.  Is it so hard to believe that a Spanish-Jewish copyist would prefer to write “esnoga” in place of “synagoga”?  

Besides this, people are generally unaware of how words from much later periods can appear in the writings of the Sages from centuries ago.  Our tradition contains many secrets about future times.  HaRav Yonatan Dawid sent me an incredible source from HaRav Abarbanel (500 years ago), quoted by haRav Elbaz:

According to the words of R’ Don Yitzchak Abarbanel, in the future there will be something that will want to harm the world, which the Abarbanel refers to as “אטומתא” (atomta), and this is the flame of black fire which will hang in the sky.

The Abarbanel apparently learns this from the Zohar:

In the year sixty-six the Messiah will appear in the land of Galilee. A star in the east will swallow seven stars in the north, and a flame of black fire will hang in the heaven for sixty days, and there shall be wars towards the north in which two kings shall perish. Then all the nations shall combine together against the daughter of Yaakov in order to drive her from the world. It is of that time that it is written: “And it is a time of trouble unto Yaakov, but out of it he shall be saved” (Jeremiah 30:7).  (Zohar, Wayyera 119a)

Should scholars 700 years from now assume the Abarbanel’s writings were written in our 58^th century, the era of the atom bomb?  Now I haven’t personally seen this in the Abarbanel, and it should be investigated before believed, but if it’s there (and I assume it is), that puts the “esnoga” issue (which is perilously close to the Greek “synagoga”, which goes back 2,000 years) in a different light.

Loyal students of RaMBaM who champion the Ya`avetz’s perspective on forgeries of old books don’t realize how they shoot themselves in the foot:  Rav Emden “maintained that The Guide to the Perplexed could not have been written by Maimonides, as he could not imagine that a pious Jew would write a work accepting and promoting what Emden saw as a non-Jewish theology.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Emden  The chief work that de-legitimizes the Zohar de-legitimizes the Guide for the Perplexed as well.

A key, bottom-line question is, what drove the brilliant Ya`avetz to attack the Zohar?  A very similar and noble drive that has pushed the Yemenite “Dor Da`im” in the direction they took:  A century ago, in the time of Mori YiHia QafiH (grandfather of Mori Yusuph QafiH), there were those who worshipped a stellar constellation as HaShem Himself.  They based their idiocy on a verse in the Zohar.  Similarly, Rav Emden was an ardent and vocal opponent of the followers of Shabbethai Tzvi.  Fittingly, he wanted to prove that the work on which the fake-Messiah based his doctrines, was false. 

We can find the same problem with Talmud:  It is no less than an esoteric teaching in tractate Sanhedrin on which Chabad messianics “prove” that the Messiah can be a resurrected soul from the dead.  The existence of such colorful, strange, and sealed lines in the Talmud, does not bring erudite Torah scholars to dismiss the authenticity and importance of Talmud.  However, it did drive RaMBaM to author a simpler work that he hoped would replace it.  (RaMBaM, Epistle to his student, Rav Yoseph Ben Yehudah)     

In fact, how many false doctrines are based on the Tanakh, using and abusing the words of prophets, lehavdil, which were truly composed for the masses to study? 

It is written in Talmud that Menashe, king of Y:hudah had Yisha`yahu the prophet tried by the Sanhedrin as a false prophet, because he wrote, (Yisha`yahu 6:1):

Likewise, Daniel describes HaShem (7:9) as follows:

How many simpletons have stumbled over such verses and fell through the ages.  Yet we do not turn around and claim these prophets were false, or that the prophecies in their books are not really theirs, HaShem forbid.  Rather, we understand that these verses are allegorical, and not to be understood according to the simple meaning.  Now if this is true regarding the Prophets, whose writings were meant for every Jew to study, and destined to be translated into the 70 languages of the world, how much more so the ‘Torah she-be-Sod’, which was forbidden to be written down in the first place, but taught only to one’s choice student through hints and chapter headings?! 

The Talmud Bavli in Hagigah 15a might itself be teaching the folly of attempting to view the most sublime inner secrets of the Torah according to principles of logic.  It is the well-known story of the the four Tannaim who entered “PaRDeS” (the root of the word “paradise”).  They did so through the highest and most powerful and dangerous meditation.  “PaRDeS” is an acronym for the four levels of Torah understanding: “P`sha`t” (simple meaning), “Remez” (hints) and “D‘rash” (derived meaning), and “Sod”.  It is understood (I cannot recall the source) that each of the four represents a different gate that each entered—four different levels of understanding.  Of the four, Ben Azzai died, Ben Zoma went insane (“nifga`”) and Elisha ben Avuyah (“AHer”) became an apostate.  The only Tanna who entered and left in peace was rabi `Aqivah, who entered through the path of ”Sod.”  Considering what we know about the mystical genius of Rabi `Aqivah (who derived halakhah from the crowns of the letters), this interpretation is solid. 

Now here’s the point:  If the high and pristine Torah knowledge the first three had mastered could not have prepared them for what they would perceive through the eyes of the naked soul in the supernal realms, who is anyone today to assume the ability to judge the authenticity of highly esoteric verses that are only intended for the most mature scholars, who had already mastered the entire Written and Oral Torah–on the basis of halakhic codes that were written for everyone,  including women and children?  For this reason, it is written in the introduction of “`ES haHayyim”, the teachings of the Ar”i z”l, that the Zohar can only be studied after mastering Shas (Talmud) and Posqim (halakhah).  Ashkenazi schools put up further fences: only a married man with children, and after the age of forty.

I am not claiming to know for a fact whether or not the Zohar is an authentic tradition directly from Rabi Shim’on ben YoHai.  There is a middle position taken by Moshe Idel.  I hear that he recognizes the multi-layered nature of the text before us today, but demonstrates that it is based around a core from the era of the Tannaim.  After all, the tradition is that Zohar is an oral tradition that was written down much later, based on an oral tradition—and oral traditions are organic.  I continue to learn and question honestly, to the degree I am able. 

One thing has become clear to me: mocking the Zohar based on shallow arguments is an ignorant thing to do.  Consider another example of illogic used to “prove” the forgery of the Zohar:  The Jewish encyclopedia (see the web source above) claims:

“To determine the country in which the work originated and the time at which its teachings began to develop, it is necessary to ascertain where and when the Jews became intimately acquainted with the Hindu philosophy, which more than any other exercised an influence on the Zohar. As an instance of Hindu teachings in the Zohar may be quoted the following passage:  (Zohar, iii. 9b).

“In the book of Hamnuna the Elder we learn through some extended explanations that the earth turns upon itself in the form of a circle; that some are on top, the others below; that all creatures change in aspect, following the manner of each place, but keeping in the same position. But there are some countries on the earth which are lighted while others are in darkness; and there are countries in which there is constantly day or in which at least the night continues only some instants. . . . These secrets were made known to the men of the secret science, but not to the geographers”

In other words, if Jews had knowledge that only Hindus are known to have had at the time, then the Jews—who never really knew much anyway—must have got it from the Hindus…!  Clearly the “expert” here who wrote this did not consider that the earth as a sphere on which its tiny inhabitants dwell is mentioned in Yisha`yahu 40:

The first recognized references to a spherical earth are the works of Pythagoras (who was familiar with Jewish wisdom) and Aryabhata (India), both of whom lived two centuries after Isaiah.  Does that make the Book of Isaiah a forgery from later times because the Greeks and Indians are supposed to have known this fact first?  In fact the scientific wisdom of the peoples of the East likely originated in none other than our own ancestor, Avraham (see Rashi on Genesis 25:4-5). 

I wonder where the above-mentioned “expert” from the Jewish Encyclopedia would assume the author of the Zohar learned the date the Jewish People would be returning to EreS Yisra’el—(5)708  (1948).  In parashath Behar (Wayiqra 25:10), the word “tashuvu” appears “Haser wow” (lacking a letter “vav”).  The Zohar derives from this, that “tashuvu” (tow–400, shin–300, veth–2, wow–6… = 708) will be the year that the Jewish People would be returned to their ancestral heritage.  Perhaps scholars 700 years from now might suggest the book was written in the last century!

ZOHAR IN THE PROPER PERSPECTIVE

What cannot be emphasized enough is that belief in the Zohar’s authenticity has no practical halakhic implications whatsoever.  The legal traditions that hail from the last Great Courts of the Sanhedrin in Tiberius and the Amoraim in Babylon, codified succinctly in the Mishneh Torah of Maimonidies are the law, regardless of whatever divergent opinions the historical Ribbi Shim`on ben YoHai may have had.     Consider the humility of the great Tanna in an incredible source, found in the Talmud Yerushalmi (Berakhoth 6b):  (1)

ר’ שמעון בן יוחי עבד עובדא בשמיטתא חמא חד מלקט ספיחי שביעית אמר ליה ולית אסור ולאו ספיחין אינון אמרו ליה ולא את הוא שאת מתיר אמר ליה ואין חבירי חולקין עלי וקרי עלוי (קוהלת י) ופורץ גדר ישכנו נחש וכן הות ליה. 

Rabbi Shimon ben YoHai proved a point about Shemittah. One came to pick sephiHin [produce that grows of its own during the Shemittah year--not planted. He had previously ruled it to be permitted to pick these during Shemittah, but the Sanhedrin overruled his opinion].

He [the sage] said, “isn’t it forbidden [what you are doing]?  And aren’t those sephiHin?”

“Yes, but aren’t you [the one] who permits it?!”

“Yes, [the rabbi answered] but didn’t my colleagues disagree with me [and overrule my opinion]?!“  And he recited over him [the verse from Qoheleth/Ecclesiastes 10], ‘he who breaks a fence [of the rabbis], a snake will bite him.’ And so it happened. [HaShem fulfilled the word of the Sadiq, and a snake bit the man.]”

This source is so precious because it proves that Ribbi Shim’on ben YoHai, no matter what he taught and wrote, subjugated himself to the majority opinion of the Sanhedrin.  He may have privately held opinions that veered far from the view his colleagues. But he NEVER would have agreed to future generations relying on his words against the accepted halakhah as it was codified.   Were he alive today, I have little doubt he would have us following the Mishneh Torah of RaMBaM as practical halakhah.  And that requires that we master “the small thing”—the entire halakhah in order to fulfill it—before moving on to “the great thing”—the mysteries of the Creation and the Divine Chariot.

That being the case, I sincerely doubt he would have written those mysteries down, contrary to Sanhedrin legislation.  The Sages instituted great limitations on who could be taught the mysteries of the Creation and the Divine Chariot and how much.  These teachings were and remain utterly forbidden to be written down until today.  Fittingly, what is written in Zohar bothers some Godfearing scholars much less that the fact it was written down in a book for the masses to study and understand however they will… 

This issue is hinted at in one particular teaching from the Torah of Moshe Rabbenu that has been a guiding light in my own relationship with HaShem: 

In the book of Devarim (29), Moshe teaches prophetically of what will be the reaction of non-Jews when they visit the Land—which have will long been left desolate after the people would be exiled from the Land due to their sins.  The non-Jews will be astonished at its desolation, and will be moved to ask:

It will be understood by the straight horse-sense of a non-Jew that the Israelites had abandoned the covenant (the actual laws and statutes of HaShem) for foreign gods, which we know to mean a foreign style of worship, and foreign values and teachings.  Now what is the final, bottom-line moral lesson that Moshe drives home at the end of this—which must be learned from the future failure of the nation (which, from our vantage point today is our past)?

HaShem demands that, after all is said and done, that his laws be fulfilled with goodness of heart.  That is the eternal, authentic Torah message of the prophets which repeats itself continually in Tana”kh (Bible).  Over-emphasis on serving the Divine through the study of holy, esoteric secrets – while minimizing the role of law, legislated ethics and pure goodness of heart – is the very opposite of that approach.  Today it is kabbalistic secrets, while in yesteryear it was beliefs such as in fasting as a magical ritual that automatically catalyzes HaShem’s forgiveness and blessing.  Or the belief in the Temple Service as a magical-ritual that guaranteed HaShem’s protection and blessing.  No matter how great their sins, they were—after all—tending the one and only Temple to HaShem: surely HaShem would not destroy His own Temple!  Both prophets railed against such thinking.   To those who fasted as an end in and of itself, Isaiah railed:

Now we can understand how concentrating on the revealed Will of HaShem—the Commandments of the Written Law according to their authentic codification in Oral Law—is the rectification of our serving our foreign worship.

In other words, it is not an issue of how authentic the Zohar is, versus another ancient aggadic work; but an issue of priority.  Is encouraging the masses of Jewish People to delve into these secrets the answer to our nation’s woes… masses who have no solid grounding in the law? 

Today mystically-minded Jews search for the ultimate “tiqun” (reparation) for their souls.  What they too often fail to discover is that, in the broadest sense, the “tiqun” of our nation after our being exiled from our land, is to leave the secret things to HaShem, and concentrate on the revealed matters—the Written and Oral Torah teachings that have belonged to us forever—that we may actually fulfill all the words of HaShem’s Law.

When this will finally be understood by the masses who yearn for spiritual, mystical teachings, I believe the Name of HaShem will cease to be profaned, and—as Isaiah promised–our light as a nation of priests will shine (“Zoher”) brilliantly.  Moreover, the Temple will be rebuilt, the Shekhinah (the palpable, awesome Presence of HaShem) will return to the Land, and the world will enjoy a spiritual ecstasy it has never known.

Shabboth Shalom and a Hagh PesaH kasher wa-sameyaH,

Michael Shelomo Bar-Ron, Beith Midrash Ohel Moshe

________________________

(Based on O’M 23: “Searching for the Truth about Zohar” from the original Ohel Moshe series, 5767)

(1)  Quotes from Bible and the quote from Talmud Yerushalmi were copied from the manuscript editions found at the ‘Mechon Mamre’ website, www.mechon-mamre.org.  The English translation is original, but close to the electronic text (c) by Larry Nelson.

Rosh ha-Shanah and Yom Kippur present us with the opportunity not merely to return to galuth (exile)-Judaism as it is commonly practiced, but to go further, to return to our Berith –our actual Covenant– with HaShem. That means, or course, His sacred laws according to the authentic living Oral instruction, faithfully passed down through the ages, and codified by our Sages of blessed memory.

In this message, I will present teachings of RaMBaM regarding Rosh ha-Shanah, Yom Kippur, and teshuvah (repentance) in general. They are simple and profound, and they enable us to transform the fear and awe we naturally feel on those days into wise, practical action. Then I will explain the dangers of certain widespread customs that have crept into our Orthodoxy, dragging us down for centuries.

THE REAL MEANING OF TESHUVAH AND HOW IT’S DONE

According to the tradition of Rabbenu ha-RaMBaM (hilkhoth teshuvah 3:6), the righteous are inscribed and sealed for life on Rosh HaShanah; while the wicked are inscribed and sealed for destruction on that very day. It is average people, the “beinonim” whose judgment is postponed until Yom ha-Kippurim, when their judgment is sealed. We take the days between Rosh ha-Shanah and Yom ha-Kippurim with great seriousness, and do our best to repent properly because we do not view ourselves as so righteous: Rather, we are to see ourselves at all times as perfect “beinonim”: that our merits and sins balance each other exactly. At any given moment, we are to view our very next act, be it a miSwah or `averah (sin), as the key factor that will tip the scale for ourselves, for our city, for our country, even for the entire world—either to the side of merit and salvation, or the side of destruction. (ibid. 3:8)

Let us be reminded of what teshuvah really means. Its simplicity is so powerful:

ב,ג [ב] ומה היא התשובה–הוא שיעזוב החוטא חטאו, ויסירנו ממחשבתו ויגמור בליבו שלא יעשהו עוד, שנאמר “יעזוב רשע דרכו, ואיש אוון מחשבותיו” (ישעיהו נה,ז).  וכן יתנחם על שעבר, שנאמר “כי אחרי שובי, ניחמתי, ואחרי היוודעי, ספקתי על ירך” (ירמיהו לא,יח); ויעיד עליו יודע תעלומות שלא ישוב לזה החטא לעולם, שנאמר “ולא נאמר עוד אלוהינו, למעשה ידינו–אשר בך, ירוחם יתום” (הושע יד,ד).  וצריך להתוודות בשפתיו, ולומר עניינות אלו שגמר בליבו.

What is teshuvah? It is that the sinner leaves his sin, and removes it from his thoughts, and concludes in his heart not to do it again, as it is written, “Let the wicked abandon is way, the sinful man his thoughts.” (Yisha`ya 55:7). And so he must regret that he sinned, as it is written, “for after I turned back, I regretted; and after I became aware, I struck my thigh.” (Yirmiyahu 31:18). And [even] the ‘One Who Knows all Hidden Things’ can testify that he will not return to that sin ever again… And he must confess verbally, and say these ideas he has concluded in his heart. (hilkhoth teshuvah 2:3 ¹)

Therefore, on Yom Kippur all the piyutim (poetry and songs in the siddur), all the long standing on our feet, all the spiritual feeling, cannot replace the true `avodah (service) of teshuvah that is so necessary. And that is that each person, having examined his or her ways and done real soul-searching, actually goes through the real ‘teshuvah’ process over his or her actual sins. That involves the following three-step confession before HaShem:

א,ב כיצד מתוודה–אומר אנא ה’ חטאתי עוויתי פשעתי לפניך, ועשיתי כך וכך, והרי ניחמתי ובושתי במעשיי, ולעולם איני חוזר לדבר זה.  זה הוא עיקרו של וידוי; וכל המרבה להתוודות ולהאריך בעניין זה, הרי זה משובח.

How does one confess–he says, [1] “Please HaShem, I have sinned, I have transgressed, I have committed crime before you, [2] and I have done such and such, [3] and behold I regret and am ashamed of my actions, [4] and I will never repeat this thing again. (ibid. 1:2)

In other words, after the opening line of confession, we must state what we did (the more we elaborate, the better). We must then feel and express genuine remorse and shame. (Tears are definitely in order.) Finally we utterly conclude in our hearts never to repeat the sin again.

Note that besides the language of the formal confession that we find in Mishneh Torah, there is no necessity for lengthy poetry and song to “convince” HaShem to forgive us. Rather, it is an internal process that we are to go through. When we seriously follow these instructions, we have done our part. According to the severity of what we have done, we may suffer punishment to fully expiate the sin—but we are ultimately forgiven.

Finally, let’s remember that this teshuvah process is not only for the Days of Awe and Yom ha-Din. Rather, it is something that an observant Jew is expected to do any time he sins against the Torah, be it a small matter or great, throughout the year. This may seem too heavy to some people, and that’s sad, because it’s that an immature attitude that prevents them from getting the most out of their life (ibid. 7:2):

ז,ב לעולם יראה אדם את עצמו כאילו הוא נוטה למות, ושמא ימות בשעתו ונמצא עומד בחטאיו; לפיכך ישוב מחטאיו מיד, ולא יאמר כשאזקין אשוב–שמא ימות קודם שיזקין.  הוא ששלמה אומר בחכמתו “בכל עת, יהיו בגדיך לבנים” (קוהלת ט,ח).

A person should always see himself as though he is about to die, and lest he die at that very hour and remain in his sins; therefore let him turn back in repentance from his sins immediately, and not say, “I’ll repent when I’m older”—lest he die before he becomes older. This is what Shelomo, in his wisdom, said: “At every time, let your clothes be white” (Qoheleth 9:8)

The worst thing is for a person to feel so far gone, so depraved, that he cannot come back to HaShem. Consider the RaMBaM’s teachings on this:

התשובה מקרבת את הרחוקים:  אמש היה זה שנוי לפני המקום, משוקץ ומרוחק ותועבה; והיום הוא אהוב ונחמד, קרוב וידיד…  אמש היה זה מובדל מה’ אלוהי ישראל, שנאמר “עוונותיכם, היו מבדילים, ביניכם, לבין אלוהיכם” (ישעיהו נט,ב).  צועק ואינו נענה, שנאמר “גם כי תרבו תפילה, אינני שומע” (ישעיהו א,טו).  ועושה מצוות וטורפין אותן בפניו, שנאמר “מי ביקש זאת מידכם, רמוס חצריי” (ישעיהו א,יב), “מי גם בכם ויסגור דלתיים” (מלאכי א,י), “עולותיכם ספו על זבחיכם, ואכלו בשר” (ירמיהו ז,כא).  והיום הוא מודבק בשכינה, שנאמר “ואתם, הדבקים, בה’, אלוהיכם” (דברים ד,ד).  צועק ונענה מיד, שנאמר “והיה טרם יקראו, ואני אענה” (ישעיהו סה,כד).  ועושה מצוות ומקבלין אותן בנחת ושמחה, שנאמר “כי כבר, רצה האלוהים את מעשיך” (קוהלת ט,ז).  ולא עוד אלא שמתאווים להם, שנאמר “וערבה, לה’, מנחת יהודה, וירושלים–כימי עולם, וכשנים קדמונייות” (מלאכי ג,ד). (הל’ תשובה ז-ח)

Teshuvah brings near those who are far. Yesterday, he was hated before G-d, despicable and abominable; and today he is beloved and dear, close and a friend… Yesterday he was separated from HaShem G-d of Yisra’el… He would cry out and he wasn’t answered… He would do miSwoth, and they would be torn up in front of him… And today he is attached to the Shekhinah [the Divine Presence]… He does miSwoth and they are accepted with grace and joy… and not only that, but they are greatly desired… (ibid. 7:7-8)

Complete teshuvah requires not only repentance on the part of the individual, but on the part of the nation. Part of cleaning up our own house, the great House of Israel, entails looking beyond the religion as it developed (deteriorated) in ‘galuth’ (exile), to Torath Moshe, our actual ‘Berith’ (Covenant) with the Master of the Universe. And that requires looking honestly at the customs we’ve accumulated of dubious origin.

This year I want to take no chances that people be left unaware of two corrupt customs that have crept into our practice of Rosh HaShanah and Yom ha-Kippurim over the centuries.

PRAYING FOR SUSTENANCE IN THE NAME OF A FOREIGN GOD

Please beware of a frightening custom that has crept into “Orthodox” practice, and spread to nearly every ethnic community of the Jewish People I am aware of: the ‘tefillah la-parnasah’ (prayer for sustenance) before the open ark, in the “merit” of a secret name, whose meaning I will soon reveal. Being the name is not remotely Hebrew, but clearly Spanish, this custom clearly crept into Jewish practice in pre-Inquisition Spain, during the well-documented partnership between pseudo-mequbalim (pseudo-Kabbalists) and the Christian church.

(The following sources are taken from those quoted in Prof. Rabbi Jose Faur’s work, “A Crisis of Categories: Kabbalah and the Rise of Apostasy in Spain.” pp.31 While I do not identify with all the views of the author, some of which I find extreme and unbalanced, the sources he quotes from are greatly important.  Namely, I do not share Rabbi Faur’s blanket attack on mystical kabbalah.  I believe that both confirmed rationalists and mystics see important sides of the same coin.  It is the extremists on both sides of the divide who refuse to consider the other side who frighten me.)

One example of this wicked partnership is seen in the letter written by Rav David Qamhi to Rav Yehudah al-Fakhkhar (d. 1235), the leader of the anti-Maimonideans in Toledo. One of the greatest Hakhamim in Western Europe at the time, he reported on Rav Yonah’s instigation of the burning of RaMBaM’s Book of Knowledge and Guide to the Perplexed. (It must be noted that Rav Yonah spent years in devout teshuvah for evil he’d done. His later remorse is reportedly the inspiration behind his work, “Sha`arei Teshuvah”.) Rav Qamhi wrote:

…he [Rav Yonah] is evil and unlearned…. And became an informer and an enemy collaborator. Because when he realized that the Rabbis in France had rejected him and regarded him as an unlearned person… he turned to the graven images and idol worshipers [i.e. the Church], and implored of them and they consented to help him since he was denouncing the Jews. First he went to the Franciscans telling them: ‘Look, most of our people are heretics and unbelievers, because they were duped by Rav Moshe of Egypt [Maimonides] who wrote heretical books. You exterminate your heretics, exterminate also ours!” Thereafter they ordered to burn those books, which were the Book of Knowledge and the Guide. His uncircumcised heart, however, did not rest until he also told the same words to the Dominicans and the clergy…

This relationship between the church and pseudo-Kabbalists appears to have gone beyond book-burning: The idolatrous concepts of shi`tuf and deification of abstract concepts—hallmarks of Christianity—found their way into “Jewish” thought. The famous mequbal Rav Avraham Abul`afya (1240-1291) remarked:

Accordingly, let me inform you, that the masters of mysticism [and] the sefirot thought to profess the unity of G-d, and escape the doctrine of trinitarianism, and [in fact] they made him ten. In the same fashion that the gentiles say, “He is three and the three are one,” some masters of mysticism say that the divinity is ten sefirot and the ten are one.

Certain quacks from Ashkenzic mystical circles (whose ideas were adopted by mystical quacks from Sefaradi circles) came to believe that the trinity itself represents the truest form of monotheism, Has wa-Shalom (G-d forbid). Rav Solomon ibn Verga (d. ca. 1520) reported on this apostasy, quoting one of their polemics:

But the trinity is not polytheism but simple monotheism to those who understand. And I saw three great men from the Ashkenazic sages and I learned from them in the books of mysticism, and I saw how from there it becomes evident how the trinity is monotheism….

So it should not be too great a surprise that in the ‘tephillah la-parnasah’ (prayer for sustenance) found in about every High Holiday maHzor (prayer book) —Ashkenazi, Sepharadi, even neo-Yemenite— people are praying for sustenance for the coming year in the name of DICARNOSA. Look it up in your maHzor—it’s almost certainly there.  (In some Sefardic siddurim it appears as an optional prayer that may be inserted daily in the Amidah, the standing prayer.)  Now note how the Artscroll siddur instructs you NOT TO SAY THE NAME, just to scan it with the eyes… Since the most sacred Name of HaShem, Y-H-W-H, may not be pronounced except by the High Priest on Yom Kippur in a functioning Holy Temple, most Jews don’t see anything abnormal here.

However, anyone who speaks a Latin-based language would be amazed to consider the meaning:  

*  “Di”, is identical to the Latin “deo”, or in English, “deity”–meaning “God”.

*  “Carne” is Spanish for meat or flesh, to this day. It is the root of the word “carnivore”—a meat-eater.

*  The suffix “-oso” marks “carne” as an adjective, so that it means “meaty”, “fleshy”, or “corpulent.”   This is clear when you see the same suffix in other common Spanish adjectives that end in “oso” or “osa”, such as in “maravilloso” (marvelous), or “delicisioso” (delicious).

In other words, in simple Spanish, DI-CARNOSA simply means, “God in the flesh”.

– The religion that teaches how God Almighty became flesh and lived on earth as a physical man, of course, is Christianity.

– It is the same religion whose tentacles penetrated penetrated European Jewish scholarship, censoring the sacred Oral Torah literature, namely the Talmud and Mishneh Torah. This is well known.  (Besides removing negative references to Jesus, the Church’s agents — usually Jewish scholars who converted — ensured that laws offensive to Christians would become worded as “`ovde kokhavim u-mazaloth”  — star worshippers — removing Christianity from a negative light.)  It is the

– It is the same religion that influenced the spiritual doctrines taught by corrupted Jewish scholars in Spain and France, as we see above.  That is why those who maintained the ancient mutsa`arab prayer tradition — namely Jews of the Andalusian and old Yemenite schools — never recited this prayer of the Franco-Northern Spanish Jews.

All evidence points to DI-CARNOSA being another name for Jesus.

Nearly all evidence, that is.  In fairness to the brilliant scholar, it must be noted that Rabbi Faur understands “Dicarnosa” to be a form of “Dea Cornosa”, meaning “fleshy goddess” in Spanish.  His logic is as follows:  Latin for god is “deus”, not “deo”.  Hence Mozart’s middle name “Amadeus”.  Pre-Christian fertility/grain goddesses were often portrayed as corpulent women.  Therefore he understands “corpulent goddess” to be the origin of the name of the foreign divinity in the prayer for sustenance.

However, considering that this practice hails from the lands where Jews were so greatly intimidated, pressured, scrutinized, and influenced by the powerful Catholic church — and not by pre-Christian pagan cultists — I believe it is “God in the flesh” that penetrated the siddur: not “corpulent goddess.”  

In truth, it makes no difference whatsoever.  Is one of the above possibilities preferable over the other??

Please don’t say this prayer. Besides the well-known, recorded invasion of Christian theology into certain quack rabbinical, mystical circles; it appears nowhere throughout the whole breadth of the Written Torah [Bible] and Oral Torah literature. Even if you still have a doubt — insisting on believing in all innocence that this must be a “sacred Name” that somehow sounds just like “God in the flesh” or “corpulent goddess” — this is no matter on which to be lenient. We’re talking about unwittingly praying to HaShem in the name of a foreign deity.

May HaShem bless Israel with a year of prosperity—but if He does, it will certainly not be in the merit of a name from idolatry. In fact, according to the Rambam, we are not to make special requests for anything on Shabboth and Haggim, outside the prayers instituted by Haza”l (the Talmudic Sages), except for specific, dire emergency situations.

THE CUSTOM OF KAPPAROTH

Another frightening custom, called “kapparoth” is practiced in all innocence by the bulk of the Charedi Jewish world on the eve of Yom Kippur. And they have no clue where it comes from. It is a custom that was repeatedly branded by ruling sages of Israel between the 9^th and 16^th centuries as “the way of the Amorite”, a custom that must be stopped. (This does not mean it was necessarily a tradition from the ancient Amorites; “way of the Amorite” refers to a custom with roots in idolatry.)  Note that I teach this as someone who identifies as Haredi, living comfortably in a Haredi neighborhood. There is nothing hidden about these issues; they are discussed in books studied by all. Consider the teachings of the AHaronim (latter-day sages) on this matter ²:

The following is a quote from commentary of the Beth Yoseph (HaRav Yoseph Karo, zSq”l) on the Tur (written by the grandson of the Rabbenu Asher, “The Rosh”):

יש מקומות שנוהגים לשחוט תרנגול לכפרה וכן יש בתשובת הגאונים המורדכי  ב-מס’ יומא כתב “המנהג הזה וכל מ”שכתוב בסימן זה, הוא בפסקי הראש למס’ יומא” וקצתו למורדכי ומנהג זה כתוב “גם בתשב”ץ וכ’ שם שננוהגים ליקח תרנגול לזכר ותרנגולת לנקבה:  והרשב”א כתב בתשובה בעניין הכפרה שעושין לנערי’ בעי”ה מנהג זה פשוט בערינו אפ על פי ששמעתי מאנשים הגונים מאשכנז שכל ארצם עושים כן.  וגם שמעתי שנשאל רבינו האיי ואמר שכן נהגו עכז’ מנעתי מנהג זה מערינו. וכתוב בא”ח שהרמב”ן אוסרו משום דרכי האמורי.

There are places where they are accustomed to slaughtering a rooster as kapparah [an atonement], and there is a responsum of the Gaonim “The Mordekhite” on tractate Yoma… And the Rashb”a wrote in a responsum on the subject of kapparoth that they do it for children in the holy city [or 'our holy cities']. This custom is spread out throughout our [Spanish] cities, even though I heard from decent men from Germany that all their land does so [too]. And I also heard that it was asked to Rabbenu Hayye [the Gaon], and he said that “this is how they practiced; even so, I have stopped this custom from our cities.” And it is written in the OraH Hayim that the Ramban [Nachmanides] forbade it because [it is one of] the ways of the Amorite.

Note that Rav Hayye Gaon was such a pillar of ancient tradition, that his rulings reached the Spain of HaRav Shmuel haNaggid, and the students of the Rav YiS’Haq Alfasi (the Ri”f), who sent him their queries. When Rabbenu ha-Rambam only heard from sages in the Land of Israel who had seen the t:phillin of Rabbenu Hayye Gaon, he ruled against even his own father’s tradition, the prevailing practice in his times, regarding the preparation of skins for the parchments of tephillin and mezuzoth. In our times today, a noted scholar on the ancient traditions of EreS Yisra’el, HaRav Dawidh Bar Hayim of Makhon Shilo, hails Rabbenu Hayye Gaon as the greatest authority on the pure ancient traditions of EreS Yisrael (the Land of Israel). This Gaon used his power to utterly stop the custom’ of kapparoth in Bavel (Iraq). Likewise, Ramba”n, himself the recognized leader of Spanish Jewry in his day (and quite a mystic and astrologer, I might add) forbade it, declaring it to be an idolatrous custom.

In case Rav Karo’s words still seem a little ‘parve’ (neutral) in the Tur, merely citing various sources, he gives a definitive ruling in the ShulHan ‘Arukh (OraH Hayim, siman tow-resh-heh–705):

מה שנוהגים לעשות כפרה בערב יום כיפורים לשחוט תרנגול על כל בן ולומר עליו פסוקים, יש למנוע המנהג.

What is customarily practiced on the eve of Yom Kippur to slaughter a rooster over every son, and recite verses over it, this custom should be stopped.

There are various later opinions that permit the custom, hailing the custom as ancient and beautiful, claiming it is idolatrous only if done in a particular way.

The mainly Chassidim and Sefaradim (how ironic) who hold on to this custom claim it is not performed as a ‘sacrifice’, but that’s not so simple.  Even in HaRav Moshe Isserles’ gloss on Rav Karo’s words, he explains how one his to lean his hands on the bird, ‘demuth qorban’—for “the appearance of a sacrifice” and after the slaughtering one throws/sprinkles the innards (comparable to the sprinkling of blood). Even the Mishneh Berurah admits that there are those who forbid leaning one’s hands on the bird beforehand, since it has the appearance of offering sacrifices and slaughtering outside the Temple (see the M”B note on 705:8). Other sages who wrote about the importance of the custom in their eyes (such as the Ari ha-qadosh) taught that one must intend that he should see the rooster as a replacement for himself; that he is personally worthy of the four death penalties of the Torah. This is, of course, a qawanah (intention) fitting of a sin-offering. Consider Ramban’s powerful argument with RaMBaM over the true purpose and meaning behind sacrifice (I personally find the Ramban’s reasoning here far more convincing):

צוה השם כי כאשר יחטא ויביא קרבן יסמוך ידיו עליו כנגד המעשה, ויתודה בפיו כנגד הדיבור, וישרוף באש הקרב והכליות שהם כלי המחשבה והתאוה, והכרעים כנגד דמו בנפשו כדי שיחשוב אדם בעשותו כל אלה כי חטא לאלהיו בגופו ובנפשו, וראוי לו שישפוך דמו וישרף גופו לולא חסד הבורא שלקח ממנו תמורה וכופר הקרבן הזה שיהא דמו תחת דמו, נפש תחת נפש, וראשי אברי הקרבן כנגד ראשי אבריו… (רמב”ן על ויקרא 1:9, חלק הראשון)

HaShem Commanded that when one sins, he shall bring an offering, lean his hands on it according to his [wicked] deed, and confess orally… in order that man should think in doing all this that he sinned to G-d with his body and soul, and it would be fitting for his blood to be spilled and for his body to be burned—were it not for the kindness of the Creator who took from a substitute and this ransom offering; that it be its blood instead of his blood, a life for a life, and its body parts for his body parts… (Ramba”n on Wayiqra 1:9)

That is true Jewish sacrifice. Now consider the traditional recitation of Kapparoth (taken from the The Complete Artscroll Machzor Yom Kippur, Rabbi Nosson Scherman, Messorah Publications ltd. 1986). The comparison should make practicing Kapparoth-swingers very concerned:

זה חליפתי, זה תמורתי, זה כפרתי. זה התרנגול ילך למיתה. [זה הכסף ילך לצדקה.] ואני אכנס ואלך לחיים טובים ארוכים ולשלום.

This is my exchange, this is my substitute, this is my atonement. This rooster will go to its death [this money will go to charity] while I will enter and proceed to a good long life, and to peace.

As we see above, in an attempt to avoid the idolatrous element, many Jews use coins for kapparoth instead of fowl. Many Orthodox Jews, Barukh HaShem, avoid it altogether, and this is the practice of most traditional Yemenite Jews, who never had such a custom to begin with. What upsets me, is how the “commentators” (nos’e kelim) on the page of a modern ShulHan `Arukh—whose aim should be to clarify the words of the sage; not to neutralize them when they conflict with their own customs—will not even allow the warnings of Rav Karo, the Ramba”n and HaRav Hayye Gaon to put a doubt in their heart as to the ‘kashruth’ of their custom.

There are a few rabbinical figures who put forth alternative explanations as to what is the “way of the Amorite”; others don’t even bother—they plainly direct the masses to do kapparoth. Now following idolatrous customs is a severe Torah prohibition, a miSwath lo-tha`aseh (a “don’t do” Commandment). We should all know that even in a case of doubt; regarding a Torah Commandment, we must be strict. Isn’t there room here for a little fear of Heaven?

What great mystical effect can people be having on the Heavenly scales on the eve of the awesome Day of Judgment, swinging chickens or money around people, paying no attention to the warnings of some of the greatest sages of post-Temple history…? I understand their values and priorities to be far away from what they should be. Our history remembers an anointed king of a united Kingdom of Yisra’el who lost his dynasty over a similar blunder:

Rather than slaughter the sheep and cattle of `Amaleq (Amalek) per the Commandment of HaShem through Shemu’el (the prophet Samuel), King Shaul (Saul) spared the best of them to be given up as a sacrifice. In other words, he reasoned that he could serve HaShem by transgressing His commandment,,, How fitting to remember his lesson on the week we read the Commandment to remember `Amaleq… These are the words the prophet answered him: words that should echo in our ears forever (1 Shemu’el 15):

Pay attention to the next verse, where we learn that transgressing the laws of sacrifice puts us in the realm of idolatry

Consider how lack of fear for the parameters of proper sacrifice, and failure to obey HaShem‘s Word spelled the end of Shaul’s throne: Accordingly, our Torah leadership today must fear the end of their own ‘reign’ in our day, and help restore us to the proper path.

A clear line of comparison between Shaul and contemporary Torah leaders is the role of public pressure:

So too today: the main argument repeated throughout the commentaries that surround the ShulHan `Arukh today, defending kapparoth, is how popularly widespread and old the custom is—as if that should make a difference… as if old-time idolatrous customs, having had centuries to spread across the Jewish world, have preference over modern ones. It is high time someone admits there is at the very least a ‘sapheq issur de’oraitha’ (a doubt regarding a Torah prohibition) and stands up for Torath Moshe against the stream.

However, although HaShem rejected him as king, Shemu’el agreed to honor the king before the people and the elders. How much more so should we show respect for the only Torah leadership there is until the rise of a true Sanhedrin, may it be speedily in our days:

It is we, the People of Israel, who wickedly demanded a king in order to be like the other nations. HaShem begrudgingly acquiesced. Perhaps if we just begin to clean up house in true teshuvah, to begin the difficult return en masse to authentic Torath Moshe, ready to leave corrupt customs and secular beliefs behind, and demand a king who will remove the bad influence of idolatry on us, who will elevate us to our unique priestly role in the world… A king who will implement the laws of Torah and not fail to wipe out `Amaleq… It might only be then that HaShem will agree, and our mashiaH (messiah-king) will finally be revealed, and the memory of `Amaleq truly wiped out forever.

CONCLUSION

The above are clear examples of how much teshuvah not only we need to do as Jews, but how much Judaism itself must do ‘teshuvah’ to ‘Torath Moshe’, our pure tradition.

For the individual and for the nation, no teshuvah is complete without dedicating ourselves to learning the ‘halakhah’ (Law) properly. It is high time we dedicate ourselves to the study of Mishneh Torah of Rav Moshe ben Maimon in order to fulfill the Law of our Creator, our Father, our King—His unfathomable Oneness.

With Torah Blessings and hope for a safe, healthy year and the defeat of HaShem’s enemies,

Michael Shelomo Bar-Ron, Beith Midrash Ohel Moshe

(A new article based on his articles O”M 32 and O’M 34 of the original Ohel Moshe series)

_______________________________________________________________

¹ Quotes from Bible and Mishneh Torah in this article were copied from the authentic Yemenite manuscript edition posted on www.mechon-mamre.org.  The English translations in my articles are original. The Bible translations often bear influence and borrowings from the JPS Bible based on the electronic text (c) by Larry Nelson, and the The Living Torah: The Five Books of Moses by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, Maznaim Publishing Corporation, New York, 647 pp.

² Sources from the AHaronim were taken from the standard ShulHan `Arukh series Sefer Maghinei EreS: ShulHan `Arukh OraH Hayyim, part three, Brukhman Barukh Inc. 1995, Jerusalem.

FROM THE DAYS OF AVRAHAM UNTIL TODAY

Beth Avraham, the house of Avraham, was a flowering Noahide community.  It was a camp of numerous families of servants and students of the prophet-warlord (Avraham), that must have spread out over a sizeable area.  Surely there were young girls among those families of “ba`alei teshuvah” (returnees to the observance of HaShem‘s commandments) for YiS’Haq to marry.  Yet, incomprehensibly, Avraham had his eyes set on the family he had left behind in Aram Naharayim, who remained with their idolatry and teraphim (which were the product of child sacrifice [murder] according to Sepher ha-yashar).   If Lavan’s behavior is indicative of the values (or lack thereof) of the degenerate family Avraham left behind, they would be no strangers to lying, cheating and theft. 

What then did he see in them?  What  was there in Aram that convinced Avraham that the root of his dynasty could only be found there?  And why is it that, in the same Torah that sums up phases of several decades in the lives of great men in few words, this story is described in vivid detail?  What eternal message does it have for us?

In perspective of all the stories of Lavan, from Avraham’s time to Ya`aqov (Jacob), it becomes clear that the house of Bethuel was a home in which women were not only cared for and protected, but respected as intelligent human beings. 

First, note how Eli`ezer (Avraham’s faithful servant) tells the story of his mission and its miraculous fulfillment to the household of Bethuel (hoping to impress them that the match was clearly from Heaven).  One of the small changes he makes to the story is as follows: 

Before he left, Avraham had told him as follows (B’reshith [Genesis] Chapter 24)¹: 

Avraham knew that his brother’s family would not arrange a marriage for their daughter without her consent.  Eli`ezer, however, expecting a different attitude from the house of Bethuel, related Avraham’s words differently to them:

On the contrary, the family’s nobility in this regard (which again, must have been known to Avraham) comes out loud and clear.  The elders in the family are even willing to put the whole transaction in jeopardy (and this was an agreement that would bring them considerable wealth) in order to keep her home for just another year.  Ultimately, when Eli`ezer presses them, they leave the matter to the girl’s own decision:

Here we see that Rivqah’s intelligence was respected: she was not being treated as a mere object to be married off.  Their parting blessing to her also carries the message of their high regard and hopes for her:

This pattern holds true even through later in the story of RaHel (Rachel) and Leah, and it puts the stormy relationship between Lavan and Ya`aqov in an interesting light:  Pushing Leah into marriage with Ya`aqov might well have been Lavan’s way of saving her from the fate of marrying the wild and G-dless `Esau.  When Lavan pursues and overtakes Ya`aqov in his flight homeward, consider the opening words of Lavan’s scourging attack, and then his parting message to Ya`aqov:

 Blind to his own selfishness and unfairness, Lavan sees in Ya`aqov’s action his worst nightmare: his daughters being carried off as captives of war.  He is deeply emotional about losing them.  Yet, despite his character flaws, I believe that his zealous caring for them is the very quality that made his home the root of the nascent Hebrew nation. 

In order to appreciate how rare that must have been in those times, consider how latent and widespread child abuse is today, in a world infused on certain level with basic Torah values, however diluted, through Christianity and Islam. (The RaMBaM’s teaching regarding the temporary role these two religions are playing in HaShem’s world can be found in ‘hilkhoth Shof’`tim’ [Laws of Judges] 11:11).  One can only imagine how rampant child abuse of every kind was in those times, especially abuse of girls.  To this day, there are traditional societies in which girls are still viewed chiefly as objects of family wealth to married off for a good bride price.

Attitudes such as these do not end with the perpetrators; they are passed on to the victims:  Modern statistics show that children who were abused themselves are far more likely to abuse their own offspring.  Perhaps that is the reason Avraham couldn’t entrust his beloved son to a girl from the families he had converted to the Torah of NoaH and Shem.  In a world where life for most women was “poor, nasty, brutish and short”³ the house of NaHor would have been a special exception.  

This message couldn’t be more critical in our own homes in these times.  In a world culture in open revolt against traditional values, women are objectified in the worst ways.  On the opposite extreme, Orthodox Jewry, seeing the clear dangers in modern feminism, must be very careful about the honor of our wives and daughters as intelligent human beings.  In this regard, loyal students of the Rambam have reason to take great pride in our authentic tradition: In the Mishneh Torah, our heritage of respect for women is no less than codified Law.      

The myth that RaMBaM condoned wife-beating must be done away with.  It is nonsense and a dangerous misunderstanding.  Just as there are instances in which a cruel husband might deserve to be punished with stripes by a court of law, so can a woman in other instances.  However, this can only be in the context of an ordained court, and there is none in our generation.  Never is a husband allowed to strike his wife, G-d forbid!  One need only skim the pertaining laws in hilkhoth Hovel u-maziq (Laws of Injury and Damages) to see an entire system of punishment in place for one who as much as pushes, kicks, or insults another person—no distinction is made between men and women.  In fact, to prevent marital abuse, the sages forbade us to give our daughters in marriage to ignoramuses:

כט  )לב( …ולא ישיא בתו לעם הארץ שכל הנותן בתו לעם הארץ כמי שכפתה ונתנה לפני הארי  מכה ובועל ואין לו בושת פנים.  ולעולם ימכור אדם כל מה שיש לו ויישא בת תלמיד חכמים שאם מת או גלה בניו תלמידי חכמים וכן ישיא בתו לתלמיד חכמים שאין דבר מגונה ולא מריבה בביתו של תלמיד חכמים.

…A man may not marry his daughter to a simpleton, for whoever gives his daughter to a simpleton is like one who binds her and feeds her to the lion:  he strikes [her] and then has sexual relations, and he has no shame.   A person must always [be ready to] sell all he has in order to marry the daughter of a Torah scholar [lit. “a student of the Sages]… And likewise one must marry his daughter to a Torah scholar, for there is nothing improper and no quarreling in the home of a Torah scholar.   –Hilkhoth Biah 21:29 (32)

One key ingredient of that peace in the home is honoring one’s wife (and her honoring her husband as well, of course).  Again, a wife’s honor isn’t an ideal by us; it is law.

יט  וכן ציוו חכמים שיהיה אדם מכבד את אשתו יותר מגופו ואוהבה כגופו ואם יש לו ממון מרבה בטובתה כפי הממון.  ולא יטיל עליה אימה יתרה ויהיה דיבורו עימה בנחת ולא יהיה עצב ולא רוגז.

Likewise, the Sages commanded that a man honor his wife more than himself, and love her has himself.  If he has money, he must increase his provision for her according to her needs.  He must not cause her unnecessary fear.  He should speak gently with her and not be depressed    or angry. (hilkhoth Ishuth 15:19)

The list of supporting sources and quotes goes on and on, and could well be the subject of a whole book. 

  It is clear from Laws of Foundations of Torah 4:21, that RaMBaM viewed the study of halakhah (Jewish Law) by both men and women as an ideal.   Unfortunately, quotes that are (mis)understood out of context upset people needlessly:  In the laws of idolatry, when women are included among the simple folk who tend to believe in magic and superstition, this is not a statement regarding women’s abilities or potential, G-d forbid.  Rather, it is a description of the reality in the RaMBaM’s day.  What offended people don’t realize is that RaMBaM’s opinion of the men of his time was not much higher.  In hilkhoth De`oth 6:2, he makes it clear that, “bizmanenu zeh” –”in our times”, no place in the world he knew of was on the proper path.  He was referring to Jewish communities the world over, which were generally run, of course, by men.   

I will end with the most vivid example of the positive legacy of the house of NaHor.  It remains to this day as codified law in Mishneh Torah and it is an echo of our ancestor’s covenant with Lavan: 

ו  לפיכך ציוו חכמים שלא יישא אדם יותר על ארבע נשים אף על פי שיש לו ממון הרבה כדי שתגיע להן עונה פעם אחת בחודש.

Therefore, the Sages decreed that a man not marry more than four wives even if he has a lot of money, in order that they might enjoy the marital obligation [at least] once a month.  (hilkhoth Ishuth 14:6)

In the merit of our zealous love and honor of our wives and daughters, may we be blessed with success in raising a new generation that will be redeemed as the generation that left Egypt: in the merit of righteous women.

Written by Michael Shelomo Bar-Ron, Beith Midrash Ohel Moshe

Based on his article O”M 6 of the original Ohel Moshe series, parashath Hayye Sarah 5767

_______________________________________________________________

¹ Quotes from Bible are according to the authentic Yemenite manuscript edition posted on www.mechon-mamre.org.  The English translations in my articles are original.  The Bible translations often bear influence and occasional borrowings from the JPS Bible based on the electronic text (c) by Larry Nelson, and the The Living Torah: The Five Books of Moses by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, Maznaim Publishing Corporation, New York, 647 pp.

 ²  Quotes from Mishneh Torah, Mishnah and Talmud are manually copied from the authentic editions posted on www.mechon-mamre.org, without use of their unique punctuation (providing a commentary) or hyperlinks.  The English translations are original. 

³  Borrowed from the words of Thomas Hobbes, written in another context.  From Wikipedia article on Thomas Hobbes  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbes