Were our sages wrong about science? Yes! Get over it!

If there is one thing to make the top rabbis of our generation look an ickle bit silly (okay, a lot silly) is their very late-in-the-day and Christian-fundamentalist-like attitude towards science and particularly evolution. Late-in-the-day because rabbis of hundred years ago didn't seem to be having the problems contemporary rabbis have suddenlt discovered; and Christian-fundamentalist-like because of an ill-conceived battle that has little to do with religion or science. If you are one of those who think people in 'high places' should not be subject to legitimate criticism, you should probably stop reading. Please note that this is not a question of their integrity, moral standing or general intelligence. It's just about how an encounter with secular culture has led them to make pronouncements about the limits of Judaism which are not only 'not the only possible view' but just plain incorrect. That is surely grounds for just complaint.

Of course, the problem isn't their ignorance about science, per se. Who cares about that? Of course, whoever is making halakhic decisions, should know about the intricacies of the area they are dealing with. However, in terms weltanschauung/ hashkafa/ belief, the positive results of science have very little bearing. Or at least that's my opinion. Obviously our gedolim disagree, and think that science is so fundamentally relevant and antithetical to our beliefs that they will fight tooth and nail against it. As far as I'm concerned, the fundamental and eternal paramaters of Jewish faith in relation to science remain the same as they always have been. Science, under whatever theory, sees us as natural beings differing from other organic creatures only in degree and not in kind. Religion, under whatever interpretation, sees us as somehow 'transcendent', as unique, as made in the image of G-d. That, and only that, is the issue [Now the Jewish answer, as I will explain another time, is to accept both horns of the dilemma. We are both 'dust of the earth' and 'the breath of life']

No... their ignorance has got nothing to with their lack of knowledge of evolution or science. It is their (seeming) ignorance of vast swathes of Jewish philosophy and theology as passed down through millenia of our tradition. In relation to the very simple and obvious fact that the sages have made mistakes about science; it has never been a fundamental part of our belief system that they haven't. What the implications are of this is for another time; but that this is a view cannot be stated more clearly. As can be seen from the list below comple by R' Nosson Slifkin, the view that sages were wrong about certain aspects of science is not only legitimate but could be considered the majority opinion. Why the all the book-bannings can take place against those who are quite ready to accept evolution, on the basis that this is disrespectful to our sages or because it undermines the 'truth' of the Torah is quite beyond me. There may be other grounds, but those grounds just show a lack of knowledge of the mesorah.

Now whilst the main aim of yeshivot is 'Talmud Torah' and mastery of the halakhic literature, and indeed this should be their main focus; it is still a bewilderment that they don't the hashkafic underpinnings of that from tanach, midrash, philosophy, mysticism et al. But again... an actual discussion of the issues is for another time as to what a Jewish 'hashkafa' is, and not that I can state to know much. This post isn't about any attempted integration between evolution and science (which I am none too keen on), or to debate what it is to be 'in the image of G-d' or why the Torah talks 'in the language of man' or about the use of drash, stories and mythology, or why the Torah is none too interested (or concerned either way) in the results of disciplines like science or history but instead focuses on action. No.. this is just about a point of detail. It's just a point of detail that I simply can't believe some of our current gedolim can read and still maintain their positions. That is all. Nothing profound. Just simple undeniable detail.

Read and weep.....

1. Rav Sherira Gaon states that some of the Sages’ medical advice may be wrong and even harmful (Otzar HaGeonim, Gittin 68, #376).
2. Rabbi Yehudah ben Barzilai states that Rav Yochanan made a mathematical error (Sefer Ha-Itim #113).
3. Rabbi Eliezer of Metz states that Chazal erred in stating that the sun travels behind the firmament at night (Sefer Yere’im #52). This is with regard to the discussion in Pesachim 94b where Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi concludes that the opinion of the non-Jewish scholars, that the sun travels behind the earth at night, was correct. While Maharal interprets this metaphorically, Rabbi Eliezer of Metz and countless other authorities take the Gemara at face value and explain that Chazal were mistaken; even Rabbeinu Tam, who claims that the Jewish scholars were actually correct and that the sun travels behind the sky at night, disputes the Maharal and takes the Gemara at face value.
4. Rambam states that the Sages knowledge of astronomy was not based on tradition and was sometimes errant (Guide for the Perplexed 2:8 and 3:14).
5. Tosefos Rid states that the Sages erred concerning where the sun goes at night (Tosefos Rid, Shabbos 34b, s.v. Eizehu) and expresses surprise that Rabbi Yochanan and the judges of Caesarea erred in a simple mathematical matter (but by implication it is not impossible to err in other scientific matters) (Commentary to Eruvin 76b).
6. Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam states that the statements of the Sages in medicine, science and astronomy were based on their own investigations and were sometimes incorrect. (I know that Rabbi Moshe Shapiro has repeatedly claimed that this is a fraudulent work that was falsely attributed to Rabbeinu Avraham by the maskilim. However the manuscript experts that I consulted dismissed this theory. Fragments of the
   original Arabic, dating probably from the 14th century, were discovered in the Cairo Geniza. The treatise has been printed in the Ein Yaakov for over 100 years without anyone challenging it as being heretical, and Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach accepted it as an authentic view.)
7. Ramban presents the opinion of the Greek philosophers regarding conception as an alternative to that of the Sages (Commentary to Leviticus 12:2). He also suggests that the dispute between the Sages concerning terefos may be based on a scientific dispute – where one side would be correct and one incorrect (Chullin 42a).
8. Tosafos states that Rabbi Yochanan and the Gemara in Sukkah erred in a simple mathematical matter (Eruvin 76b). (The Vilna Gaon is appalled at the idea that they could have erred in such a simple matter; but he does not deny that Tosafos is of this opinion.)
9. Rashba states that Rabbi Yochanan and the judges of Caesarea erred in a mathematical matter (Commentary to Eruvin 76b).
10. Rosh states that Rabbi Yochanan and the judges of Caesarea erred in a mathematical matter (Tosefos HaRosh, Eruvin 76b and Sukkah 8b). He also endorses the view of Rabbi
    Eliezer of Metz that the Sages erred concerning where the sun goes at night (Pesachim 2:30; She’eilos U’Teshuvos HaRosh, Kelal 14, #2).
11. Sefer Mitzvos HaGadol endorses the view of Rabbi Eliezer of Metz that the Sages erred concerning where the sun goes at night (Lo Ta’aseh #79).
12. Rabbeinu Manoach states that the Sages erred concerning where the sun goes at night (Commentary to Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Chametz U-Matzah 5:11, s.v. Ela bemayim
    shelanu).
13. Meiri indicates that the Sages’ knowledge of human anatomy was inaccurate (Commentary to Niddah 17b).
14. Ritva indicates that the Sages erred concerning where the sun goes at night (Commentary on the Haggadah, s.v. Matzah zo she’anu ochlim).
15. Rabbeinu Bechaya ben Asher presents the opinion of scientists regarding conception as a legitimate alternative to that of the Sages (Commentary to Leviticus 12:2).
16. Rabbeinu Yerucham ben Meshullam endorses the view of Rabbi Eliezer of Metz that the Sages erred concerning where the sun goes at night (Toldos Adam VeChavah, Nesiv V, Part 3).
17. Ralbag states that Ezekiel received a mistaken scientific fact in one of his prophecies (Genesis 15:4, Beiur Divrei Hasipur, and Job 38:18-20, Beiurei Divrei Hama’aneh).
18. Ran expresses surprise that Rabbi Yochanan erred in a simple mathematical matter
    (Eruvin 76b).
19. Rabbi Yitzchak Arama states that the Sages erred concerning the motion of the stars (Akeidas Yitzchak, Parashas Bo 37).
20. Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrachi states that the Sages had a scientific dispute with the non-Jews concerning where the sun goes at night and that Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi decided in favor of the gentile scholars (Responsum #57).
21. Maharam Alashkar states that the Sages erred concerning where the sun goes at night
    (Responsum #96).
22. Rabbi Shem Tov ben Yosef endorses Rambam’s view that the Sages erred in matters of
    astronomy (Shem Tov commentary to The Guide for the Perplexed 2:8:2)
23. Radvaz states that the Sages erred concerning where the sun goes at night (She’eilos Uteshuvos Radvaz, Part IV, #282).
24. Lechem Mishneh states that the Sages erred concerning where the sun goes at night (Lechem Mishneh to Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Shabbos 5:4).
25. Maharsha states that the Sages had a dispute concerning rainfall which is to be understood literally as a scientific dispute (and hence one side is wrong) (Ta’anis 9b).
26. Minchas Kohen states that the Sages erred concerning where the sun goes at night (Sefer Mevo Hashemesh 10).
27. Rabbi Yosef Shlomo Delmedigo states that the Sages erred in various matters of astronomy (Elim, Ma’ayan Chastum #67).
28. Rabbi Binyamin Mussafia states that the Sages erred regarding their belief in the salamander being generated in fire and living in it (Mussaf Ha-Aruch, erech Salamandra).
29. Chavos Ya’ir states that the Sages erred in various matters of astronomy and endorses Rambam’s view on this matter (She’eilos UTeshuvos Chavos Ya’ir #210).
30. Pri Chadash states that Rabbi Dosa, whose view was adopted in the Shulchan Aruch, erred in a zoological matter concerning whether a non-kosher animal can have horns (Pri
    Chadash, Yoreh De’ah 80:2).
31. Rabbi Yitzchak Lampronti suggests that the Sages may have been mistaken about lice spontaneously generating, just as they were mistaken about where the sun goes at night (Pachad Yitzchak, erech tzeidah). (Note that even his teacher Rav Brill, who disagrees with him, admits that the Sages themselves thought themselves mistaken in their dispute with
    the non-Jewish scholars.)
32. Rabbi Aviad Sar-Shalom Basilea states that “one does not compromise his faith in the least by disagreeing with a given statement of Chazal as long as it is clear that Chazal based that statement not on received tradition but on their own reasoning” (Sefer Emunas Chachamim, Chap. 5) – he adds that if Chazal were unanimous on something then they must have been correct due to their superior intellect, which would presumably not apply
    to scientific data that was received from the empirical investigations of others.
33. Korban Nesanel states that Rabbi Yochanan and the judges of Caesarea erred in a mathematical matter (Eruvin 76b).
34. Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch states that the Sages relied on the scientific knowledge of their era which was sometimes mistaken (Letter to Rabbi Hile Wechsler). (I know that Rav Moshe Shapiro shlita has repeatedly claimed that this letter is not from Rav Hirsch, and his disciple’s work Afikei Mayim claims that it is merely a collection of Azariyah de Rossi’s ideas, but there is irrefutable evidence that it is from Rav Hirsch – we have Rabbi Wechsler’s original letters to Rav Hirsch containing his questions and reactions to the letters.)
35. Maharam Schick states that certain matters in the Talmud were not part of the Sinaitic
    tradition but rather were assessments that are potentially errant (Responsum #7).
36. Rabbi Dovid Friedmann (Karliner) states that the Sages’ knowledge of many scientific things did not stem from Sinaitic tradition but rather from their own knowledge and things that they learned from non-Jews (letter quoted in Rabbi Moshe Pirutinsky, Sefer Habris 264:7:11).
37. Rabbi Yitzchak Herzog states that he adopts the position of Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam that the Sages were not infallible in their pronouncements about science (Judaism: Law & Ethics, p. 152).
38. Rabbi Eliyahu Dessler states that the Sages sometimes gave mistaken explanations of halachos that were based on the scientific knowledge of their time (Michtav Me-Eliyahu IV p. 355).

I don't often eat dinner but when I do...

I think I should go on masterchef; I really should. I think I have a natural talent for taste combination and I'm quite pretentious.

The only problem is I never cook. I'm a Shabbat- eater really, eating Friday and Saturday means I don't have to eat dinner the rest of the week. To be honest, I just can't be bothered. I don't mind cooking for four hours for Shabbat because we then take four hours to eat, with company. But there is no point spending 50 minutes to cook when it takes 5 minutes to eat by myself. It's not as if I'm really hungry anyway; I rarely feel the need for food. If it's there I'll eat it; if not, I won't. Simple. I'm a 'picker'... if there is food in front of me I cannot stop eating. The worst is crisps at parties or roast potatoes just staring at me from the bowl. But if there is no food around, I don't miss it.

However, tonight my hand was rather forced. I had to use up the scraps of food that I do own in time for Pesach. So it all started quite orthodoxly with the quorn 'chicken-style' pieces going in the pan. Out came the cherry tomatoes, nicely and (almost) neatly chopped and into the saucepan. I was going to stop there but it felt a bit empty.

Then out from the lovely plastic Sainsbury's container provacatively peeped the plums (and alliterated at me). So yes, they got chopped up and put in the saucepan too. But I thought that was a bit boring, it's just quorn with a bit of fruit (slightly hot fruit at that). What was really needed was a sauce... so out came the orange juice (!) and into the pan it went. Now of course this may just taste like fruit salad (slightly hot fruit salad) with quorn randomly stuck in. It needed a bit of cohesion and a balance of taste.

So, and this was the killer touch (killer with a 'ph'- you know like 'phat')- a grand dollop of honey smeared over the quorn. This blended everything together. The tomatoes seeped juice into the orange juice, and in that direction the honey did venture of its own accord. This fruity sauce was born, fitting perfectly with the sweet quorn. It didn't taste like orange juice anymore. But, like... [and at this point I would have to baptize a new word]

Sound disgusting? I assure thee that it was not so. I impress myself sometimes with my own genius. I write this note as a public service announcement. If I have achieved nothing else in my life (and I haven't achieved much else of note) I leave this as my legacy. I have in the past made concoctions that whilst edible, and comparably pleasant, I wouldn't put in the 'outstanding success' column on life's balance sheet. But this actually tasted nice! Actually. Literally. Substantially. I dare you to try it.

The real element of success though........... was NOT adding chilli powder (I was tempted)

Were our matriachs and patriachs saints? Chas Ve-Shalom!

I’ve come across a beautiful passage from Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, the coolest guy this side of Christendom. It is one of the quotes that manages to articulate something so fundamental and yet so rarely said. Something so inspiring and something that there is a desperate need to internalise. It focuses on the very core of Jewish philosophy, the Biblical narrative and the people we are called on to be.

But first, let’s consider that fundamental tenet of Judaism: man is not G-d! Moreover, it is the most beautiful message of Judaism that need not (nay, should not) aspire to be so. Neither is man an angel. All man can aspire to be is man and that is enough! There is no being perfect or transcending our status as men (our soul escaping our body, so to speak); there is only living up to, as best we can, our potential as human beings. Yes- human beings, homo sapiens, humans animals. “Perhaps more than man-as-divine-person, man-as-an-animal needs religious faith and commitment to a higher authority. G-d takes man-animal into His confidence and reveals to him His moral will” (Soloveitchik).

Judaism does not see man as divine-person torn by satanic revolt, falling away from his G-d-Father. There is no Original Sin whereby our very nature precludes us from having a relationship with G-d. No… it is man as an animal, with his animal drives, pleasures and instincts that is called upon to serve G-d. Just consider that it is the very same things that constitute our evil inclination, are the very same things that are our ‘good inclination’. If we sin, that says absolutely nothing about our nature, and everything about the sin.

“Man’s haughtiness becomes for Christianity the metaphysical pride of an allegedly unconditioned existence. Jewish biblical pride signifies only overemphasis upon man’s abilities and power.” (Soloveitchik)

If our nature is not other-worldly, then we are not at fault for not being so. The problem is that we are not being properly and morally this-worldly. Note that we- physical beings- are tzelem Elokim: in the image of G-d. Does this mean being the same spiritual ‘stuff’ as G-d? Of course not. It means precisely being an image, a reflection, a receptacle of G-dliness on earth. This means we are commanded to ‘walk in G-d’s ways’: to visit the sick, to help the poor, to be a creator of worlds etc. We are commanded to find G-d a makom (a place) on earth. And through our actions, we are that makom. G-d’s presence rests ‘within the four cubits of halakha’: i.e. with mans’ actions on earth. To be tzelem Elokim is to be the opposite of other-wordly. Not to be G-d but the image of G-d i.e. do what you have to be quintessentially human.

Judaism’s notion of man-as-animal is the great leveller. Of course, we aren’t (or better, don’t need to be) just man-as-animal. We, if we so choose, can be an animal but have a soul. Or if we want we can just be man as a random example of the species homo sapien. But the fact that, as philosophers would say, we are all ontically the same (the same in essence) means we all start from the same place and can all reach the same heights:

As it says in Judges, “I call heaven and earth to witness, be a man a Jew or a non-Jew, man or woman, manservant or maidservant, only according to their actions will the spirit of G-d rest upon them”.

This applies, and this is my point in this piece, quite generally. There is no essential difference between Moses and you or the Gedolei Torah and the woman down the local fish-market. They have just the same yezer hara- the same physical drives- as Joe Bloggs, Plonie Ben Plonie and Jane Doe.

Consider the following: The Torah doesn’t tell us where Moses was buried. Why? Our tradition tells us that it is so that no-one will make a pilgrimage to that site or be inclined to make Moses, as such, central to the religion (i.e. he will not turn into an object of worship or an aid to worship). Moses as-such is no different to anyone else. In fact, he points out himself that “I am slow of speech and tongue”. We learn that he is ‘a very humble man, more so than anyone else on the face of the earth’. We see hear that there is no equivalent to the Christian ‘son of G-d’ because his leadership wasn’t based on any specific set of ‘natural’ or ‘supernatural’ qualities. It is not vested in his personal authority, charisma, or essential nature. It is not in the person of Moses (as Christians believe it is in the person of Jesus) but in the message- in the Torah. It is not because of any special attribute of his person that he became leader but because he became a receptacle of G-d’s will and G-d’s word. And that is incumbent on each of us!

There is no need for the Torah to hide Moses’ human nature from us. He sinned. The greatest man (ani ma’amin) that ever lived or will live (contra Chassidus, moshiach will not be at his level), sinned. Fell short. He got punished. He got buried who knows where, outside of the Land of Israel. So, on the one hand, we agree with Nietzsche that we are “human, all too human”. Yet this isn’t a cause for denigration of Moses’ personality or as an excuse to have a ‘will to power’, to assert our dominance and to inanely follow our desires (i.e. the very opposite of Moses). It is not the case that if we cannot live up to an ideal, that it shouldn’t be pursued. No- the story is there to teach us the very opposite. Despite- and maybe because of- his human nature, he was the only person to see G-d ‘face-to-face’. If human-Moses can have that relationship with his fellow men and with G-d, then we can to. It does not need a demi-G-d or son of G-d to do so.

So now the quote from Rav Hirsch:

“Our ancestors were never presented to us as angelic models to emulate in every respect; indeed, had they been presented to us as angelic creatures, their example for us to follow in our own lives would have been far less ideal and instructive than it actually is. If we were to discover no shortcomings in their personalities, they would appear to us like higher beings who, free from all human passions and weaknesses, never had to struggle against sin and were never in need of an incentive to virtue. We could conclude that, given our own human imperfections, any effort on our part to emulate their saintly qualities would be doomed to failure. Precisely by not concealing their shortcomings from us, the Word of G-d has brought our patriachs and matriachs closer to us as human beings, humans like us exposed to the same struggles and temptations. And if, nevertheless, they attained that high sense of morality and loyalty to their calling that made them worthy of G-d’s nearness, they thereby demonstrated the heights that are within our power to obtain, depite our weaknesses and imperfections”

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

This is a message that greatly needs to be ‘eaten up’ in modern times where we do portray Biblical figures as basically blameless (e.g. see the Mussar treatment of ‘the sins of great men’) and where we have hagiographies where gedolim are ‘different kind of people’ who never struggle, who are always right, and are moulded into whatever the writers would like their demi-god to be. It takes us away from the great men they actually are and the reasons why they are such great man. It takes us towards the ‘person’ and away from the message. They are not great because their message is correct (because their Torah learning is great) but their message is right just because they say it (G-d forbid). Something is not seen as forbidden because it is not the right way to live but invoking the authority and charisma of the gedolim (and bending or manipulating what they actually say) to ban what they (i.e. not what the gedolim) want banned. An example of this is the following written by Rabbi Moshe Tendler (son in law of Rabbi Moshe Feinstein):

"Occasionally intentional falsehoods are included [in biographies of gedolim] to pervert the truths of their lives. . . . By [a biography of my father-in-law, Rabbi Feinstein] perpetuating such falsehoods as Reb Moshe never reading the newspapers when in fact he read them “cover to cover” daily, they sought to remake him into their perverted image of what a gadol should be. The fact that neither I nor my wife or children were interviewed by them nor shown the galleys confirms the intentional plan to present a fraudulent life story for some less than honorable purposes.

[Instead R. Moshe:] read the newspaper every morning at the breakfast table, whatever newspaper it might be—the socialistic Forward, or the Tag, or the Morning Journal and then the Algemeiner Journal.

Consider the following from an interview with R' Nosson Sherman:

---

How do you respond to critics who accuse ArtScroll biographies of whitewashing history by characterizing great rabbis as saints without faults?

Our goal is to increase Torah learning and yiras shamayim. If somebody can be inspired by a gadol b’yisrael, then let him be inspired. Is it necessary to say that he had shortcomings? Does that help you become a better person? What about lashon hara? You know in today’s world, lashon hara is a mitzvah. Character assassination sells papers. That’s not what Klal Yisrael is all about.

---

Does this fit with what R’Hirsch said? Does yirat shamayim (fear of heaven) come from being inspired by an ideal figure? Are we to be inspired to become a better person by their charisma, or to come to G-d through them? Is it really character assassination to say people had shortcomings and they played a part in their decisions? I don’t think so, let’s look at the great people our gedolim really are and maybe we can follow their example and walk in G-d’s ways. Maybe, just maybe we, like them can be “human, all too human”.

Were our patriachs saints? Chas ve-Shalom!

Urinating on the motorway, Arabs, environment, Israel and the Palestinians, prostitutes and water buffallo.

Just a few completely random points about urinating on the motorway, Arabs, environment, Israel and the Palestinians, prostitutes and water buffallo.

---------

IF YOU ARE AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT, DON’T PISS ON THE HARD SHOULDER OF A MOTORWAY. Apparently it’s illegal, but it’s probably not the worst crime in the world. Obviously you are putting yourself at risk, but then driving when you desperately need to go, can’t be much better. You know… when you get to that point where you have to keep moving otherwise it’s unbearable?!?!?

But if you are illegally here and without a driving license, you don’t want to be found out because you needed the toilet. That’s what happened in ‘Traffic Cops’ last night which I was watching for want of anything better to do (you know, one of those filler programmed for Wednesday nights. Why do they put rubbish programmes on, on Wednesdays?). You know, you’d think they would want to keep their heads down or if you are going to get deported, you might as well go out in style.

But when nature calls…

------

An interesting note by Rav Hirsch (from the 19^th century) on the positive qualities of Arabs. Funnily enough, it was in article on Jewish women.

“The monotheism of Abraham, the Hamitic sensuality and thirst for freedom that stamped the personality of Hagar, and the virtual fanatic belief in the providence of Almighty G-d, drawn, as it were, by Hagar from the ‘well of the Living One Who sees me’- this mixture of qualities has shaped the traits for which the Arabs are known to this day and with which they have made their own contribution, in the form of poetry and scholarship, to the spiritual symposium of humanity”

‘Nuff said

------

I got the overwhelming desire today to buy a car. Why? So I can conscientiously not use it! I hate it when people (and I don’t know why, but specifically Jews do it) drive to university when it is less than 15 minutes walk away. It’s disgraceful. Apart from being horrendously lazy, it’s horrific for the environment.

Now when environmental protestors say that people shouldn’t fly or say that horrendous taxes should be put on it, that’s just stupid. Some people need to fly, others want to fly but only do so occasionally, and those who are filthy rich… well… they are going to fly anyway. Stopping flying is not only something that you cannot achieve, it might not be desirable to achieve.

What really matters for the environment is these small things that you can do stuff about. Yes I know it would take a hell of a lot of not going by car to make up for one plane journey. However, firstly there are a lot of people that can ‘not go by car’. It is practical and unless your are bone-idle, there is no reason not to walk. Thirdly, going by car for a short journey bespeaks a whole attitude and if you won’t drive if necessary, you wont do other things either.

Now I’m probably guilty too. I do accept lifts to morning service. It’s too early and I don’t have the wherewithal to move, let alone put up a principled stand. But regardless of whether I get in the car, the car will be driven anyway. I would never ask for there to be a lift if there wasn’t one already going. And that’s why I want a car, so that if no-one else is going, I can in principle refuse to take people!

An expensive gesture, buying a car for that reason!

-----

Good news of sorts. Following a decision from Ehud Barak, travel restrictions are being eased for Palestinians in the West Bank, and the PA police (or at least a loyal subsection of them) are getting new equipment. This is following on from continued negotiations between PA and Israel. Also, talks between Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas continue. This can only be good news if it helps the lives of Palestinian civilians, and increased Paelstinian compliance in aiding Israel’s security. It’s a shame that it is primarily motivated by one-upmanship against Hamas. Rather than (by either side involved) a real concern for peace or the lives of civilians, it is trying to score political points against Hamas in Gaza. Bloody politics. Please G-d, they find a way to help the humanitarian situation in Gaza without having to give political credence to Hamas.

Although one of my points is proved. Criticism from a friend is far more effective than criticism from someone that hates your guts! The good news in part arose from criticism of Ehud Barak by Condoleeza Rice. The Americans overall (and rightly so) agree with Israel about things. As such, Israel has an incentive to listen to them. Where criticism is needed, it should be given (and probably doesn’t happen enough). Criticism from Palestinian groups, on the other hand, is ineffectual and shows that they don’t really have the interests of Palestinians at heart or if they do, they are very misguided. When you justify suicide bombings, deny Israel’s right to exist (however you dress it up) and will criticise Israel come what may, the criticisms will be as effective as a one-legged chair. When you preach immoral things, your valid criticisms will not be listened to.

----

The following incident reminded me of situations with ‘money boxes’ designed to stop people swearing (i.e. put 50p in if you say **** etc) where the child swears, gets told off and says “I’m not ******* swearing, ok?”. This is what Rabbi Ezekial Landau said in court:

"Everyone should know that the wife of the Chief Rabbi is a prostitute and there is a fine, 100 adumim for each utterace that she is a prostitute, and you should also all know that if I had more money I would call her a prostitute again, however I currently do not have the money I will have to satisfy myself with the fact that I have already called her a prostitute."

The following reminded me of when certain Catholics will defend to the hilt not wearing condoms because that is what the Pope decrees, but are quite happy to have sex before marriage (which I’m sure he’s not too fond of):

A Latin document records a troubling incident from 1404 where, "a German speaking Jew visited a non-Jewish prostitute on Shabbat and he refused to pay her, he explained that he could not pay her as it would violate the Shabbat."

It’s fun reading about prostitution!

----

Last but not least, I have decided I am a filthy animal. I was watching the ‘One Show’ where they were looking at a reservation park with water buffalo in. They happened to mention that they had cloven hoofs. All I could think about “I wonder if they are kosher!” I couldn’t get it out of my head. I’m a bad man!

The MP3, the list of questions and an orgiatsic experience (Alternatively titled: Moroccan Jewry)

Shal-oh-m. It’s 2.37 in the morning and I have just finished a shiur (“lesson”/ lecture) that has got me all excited. It’s certainly a good shiur, and how can you tell? Because I started listening at midnight, it’s 1 hour and 9 minutes long, and I have just finished it. Anyone who knows a friend, who knows a friend that does maths, or even lives in a country where mathematicians are present will know that, it doesn’t add up. I live with a Mathematician, ask him!

[I on the other hand, am a philosopher, and should be able to cast doubt on the most simple assertion. Last year, when my housemate arrived home from drinking and found me reading a book with ‘68 + 57 = ?’ on the front, he confidently asserted ‘125’. Of course (so I explained) the book was arguing that there is no fact of the matter as to whether by ‘+’ we meant addition rather than a different mathematical function. As such, you couldn’t castigate me for saying the answer to the question was ‘5’ (or you could, but not on the grounds that 125 is the addition to 68 + 57, which we both agree on). To this he went furious. It turned his mathematical world upside down and was questioning everything he held dear.]

That is [so I will confidently assert on this occasion] I was listening to the shiur for 88 minutes longer than it lasted! Magic, I hear you ask? Practical Kabbalah? A faulty watch? No, I’m afraid. Just having to pause it every five minutes to argue, to pace, to jump up in delight, to kvetch, to relive the point, to go to the toilet, to rewind and relisten to parts.

And what was this wonder? It was by Rabbi Dr. Marc Shapiro on “A Non-Orthodox Traditional Approach: Reflections on the Authority of the Moroccan Rabbinate.” And what was so brilliant? Well, it was worth listening just to the Americanisms: ‘Shal-oh-m’, ‘P-oh-skim’, ‘Takan-oh-t’. ‘A takan-oh-t that if he deflowered a virgin, he had to marry her.’ Ha! Deflowered, I haven’t heard that term since the last virgin who tried to bed me and wed me (/ an episode of ‘Friends’ with fat Monica). And the slightly funny comments like the following:

[Disclaimer: I put ‘slightly’ despite the fact that it was definitely a LOL moment. However, those who wonder why I laugh in synagogue very loudly, and wonder what was so hilarious are less impressed when I point to Rabbi Hertz’s commentary on the first line of Shema. But there you go… some people laugh at Friends, so there really is no accounting for taste]

“Today you go to the Bet Din, they can do whatever they want because they don’t have to adapt to the community because it is all voluntary… Now if the rabbis in America issues Takonot, no-one who wasn’t Orthodox would care, that’s for sure. And even among the Orthodox if the Aguna rabbis issued them, the Chassidim wouldn’t care; and if the Chassidim issued Takanot, the Aguna wouldn’t care; and if the Modern Orthodox issue Takanot, no-one would care, not even the Modern Orthodox.”

But witticism aside… this shiur raised such fundamental questions that had my head turning (‘literally turning’ as a misuse of English language might be heard to proclaim’). These are such fundamental issues that I just want to write about now if it wasn’t for the fact I have to be up in 4 and a half hours to daven, hear the megillah and go to Manchester to see my old Rav. The art of the blog is to write briefly but I have not an artistic bone in my body. See how long this is turning out to be and I’m not even writing seriously or putting my incisive, multi-faceted intelligence to (say I). But yeh… ever wondered about:-

• the nature of Jewish belief: dogma versus ‘just a set of laws’.
• the role of the Rabbi: to forbid the permitted versus permitting the forbidden.
• the ‘Chumra’ (stringency) culture versus ‘lets all go have sex' culture.
• the place of religion in Modern Israel: religious Zionism versus Zionism + Religion.
• Conversion in Judaism: ‘get lost unless you are a saint’ versus ‘we don’t want the kids to be non-Jewish, so let’s get you quickly converted, no questions asked’
• Halakhic ‘change’ versus the hegemony of the Shulchan Aruch (and more specifically the Mishna Berura).
• Why Askenazim have such a thing as ‘Orthodox’ or ‘Conservative’ or ‘Progressive’ denominations where (parts of) the Sephardi world have none
• The immorality of secular culture, the stupidity of Modern Orthodoxy, the terrifying and ridiculous (in no particular order) nature of Charedi world.
• Judaism as ‘sect’ (/religion) versus Judaism as a code for society at large

And more. Oh yes. The stuff was positively- I wouldn’t say orgiastic, okay I would- orgiastic. [‘Orgiastic’ is a word that Rav Soloveitchik repeatedly uses in a chapter of ‘The Emergence of Ethical Man’. Now, I’m sure he doesn’t mean it in the sense that the dictionary definition gives it : ‘pertaining to orgies’. But, I think we can understand the word in context]. So much so, I cannot talk about it now, but I had to write something! It will be on my pile of things to write about: I’m already in the middle of writing blog articles which I need to finish including “Chassidism without mysticism?”, “Easy religion”, “Is I Orthodox? Innit”. I get so inspired by things; the first of the aforementioned articles was inspired by “The Wind in the Willows” written by that great sage of old: Kenneth Graeme. But then I can never get them down cos there so bloody complicated (and no-one reads what I write anyway).

But just to give a general flavour…. The shiur was about the decrees of the Moroccan rabbinate and the nature of the Moroccan Jewish community. It was one where the whole community was under the sway of Halakha. Yes individuals were non-observant and very few you would call ‘Orthodox’. Yet the communities were run according to the decrees of the Rabbinate and they lived a traditional Jewish life. There was no ‘reform’ Jews trying to give a different account of what Judaism essentially was or should be. However, neither was there a need for a self-conception of ‘Orthodoxy’ and there was no need to tailor Halakha (or strengthen it) to root out the community of true believers from those who have left the fold.

The Bet Dinim (courts of law) had far more authority over the Jewish community in Morocco (as opposed to these days where, as per the ‘funny’ quote above, you’ll only listen to a Bet Din if you ideologically agree with the people that make the decisions). However, the effect of this is that the rulings were more lenient. Why? Because you are not ruling over a sect, or a group of like minded people, or those who have exactly (or so poskim must think) exactly the same needs. No… Halakhic law is just that. Law. It has to take into account and run society with people in with different needs, different beliefs, different circumstances. Plus they could be lenient because they didn’t think the leniencies would be taken as a concession to other sects of Judaism. How often, these days, do we hear “Oh. Umm. It’s technically allowed but you still can’t do it. It may lend credence to feminism, to other denominations, to secular wisdom, to the gentile customs, etc; plus don’t complain stringency beautifies the mitzvah” Does it heck!

[To a certain extent, this kind of situation still exists even within Sephardi ‘Orthodox’ congregations in Europe. When my brother was in Aix-en-Provence he said that it would be unheard of to have synagogue that weren’t run by ‘traditional’ Rabbis, but they didn’t kick up a poop when women in the ladies gallery put on tallit and tefillin]

Yet when the Moroccans moved to Israel, their culture and their halakhic traditions and thousand year old customs were not respected. There was a general prejudice against sefardim: the secular believed they were ignorant, superstitious and backward looking and the Yeshiva world couldn’t comprehend that there may be some traditions that are not codified in the Shulchan Aruch. Rav Ovadiah Yosef, a major figure, brought back pride for Sephardim but at a cost. In order to win respect from the ‘Orthodox’ (the Chareidi Yeshivish world) he has attempted to standardise Sephardic practice according to the Sephardic opinions in the Shulchan Aruch (despite the fact that many of his rulings deviate from it!). He himself orchestrated attempts to wipe out the halakhic traditions of some Sephardim. For example, based on teshuvot of Rambam, Moroccan Jews do not repeat Mussaf Amidah (especially if there is talking in shul). Unacceptable. Why? Because the Shulchan Aruch defines ‘Orthodoxy’. Why? Because ‘Conservative’ Jews say that halakha changes, whilst that law code was appropriate for the time, it is now no longer. So, G-d forbid that anyone deviates an iota from it (despite the fact that they do) because it lends credence to Conservatives.

What was interesting was some of the halakhic rulings of Moroccan Jews that are very pertinent today. There is a lot of fuss about women prayer groups in our world! Yet they have rulings going back hundreds of yours saying they are fine and happened! [G-d forbid we do them unless we are going egalitarian or copying the gentiles]. There are instances of ‘mi shabeirachs’ about v’imateinu Rachel, leah, v’sarah. [G-d forbid we have prayers like that unless we are reform]. There are other that aren’t directly importable (because they were relevant to their community not ours] but are still interesting. For example, prohibitions on gentiles and wine did not apply. Based on a [previously censored] ruling of the Rema, it was argued that there absolutely nothing wrong with wine handle d by Muslims. In fact, to prohibit it would be to turn the holy into the profane as, G-d forbid we consider worshippers of G-d into worshippers of idols. Obviously, that was a completely Muslim and as such, monotheistic culture, it would be different where there are religions [including Christianity] that may {or may not} be considered avodah Zorah.

In fact, there were lots of interesting rulings and so much to say. Let’s make a date… we’ll talk some time.

Damn its 4 o’Clock

Philosophy and Judaism

As per the Chief Rabbi:

• Philosophy is about impersonal truth. Judaism is about personal truth.
• Philosophy is about detached observation. Judaism is about engaged participation.
• Philosophy is about a single ideal picture of the world. Judaism is about the irreducible multiplicity of perspectives.
• Philosophy searches for truths that are universal. Judaism articulates truths that are particular.
• Philosophy is about the discovery of harmony. Judaism is about cognitive dissonance.
• Philosophy is about the truths that we see. Judaism is about the truths that we hear.
• Philosophy is about truths thought. Judaism is about truths lived.
• Philosophy sees knowledge as cognition. Judaism sees knowledge as relationship.
• It follows that if philosophy is about the conquest of ignorance, Judaism is about the redemption of solitude.
  
  

The Laws of Xmas

1. PREPARING FOR XMAS


1. Preparations for Xmas must not begin1 before2 Thanksgiving.3 This applies to preparations which affect the holiday mood, 4 but not those which are done in private. 5

1 This contrasts sharply with Shabbos, for the mitzva of honoring Shabbos applies all week long. For example, if one finds a particularly good food during the week, one should save it for Shabbos even though it is now only Sunday and Shabbos is a week away. However, Xmas preparations may not begin too far in advance, in order to fulfill the dictum, "It's beginning to look a lot like Xmas."
2 This is because of the principle that two festive occasions should not be mixed into each other. Note the decree of the great R.H. Macy, who established that Santa Claus may not appear in the Thanksgiving Day parade until after all the other floats have passed.
3 There are some who begin preparing for Xmas as early as Halloween. This is wrong, and they will be called upon to account for their evil ways.
4 Such as setting up the Xmas tree (some say even buying one,) or playing holiday music on the Muzak.
5 Such as buying gifts or buying the Xmas dinner turkey. Cooking the turkey may not be done before Thanksgiving because it will appear to be a Thanksgiving turkey.


2. Some hold that the tree should be decorated immediately after Thanksgiving, 6 but others prefer to decorate it as close to Xmas as possible.7

6 For the mitzva of "adding to the yom tov" by beginning the Xmas season early.
7 As it is said, "Do not put off for tomorrow, that which can be put off for the day after tomorrow."


2. THE TREE


1. Any species of tree is kosher for use as a Xmas tree, provided that it has needles and not leaves. In our lands it is customary to use a fir tree.8 It should be reasonably fresh, but not too fresh, in accordance with the principle "A Xmas tree with no fallen needles is like a sukkah with no buzzing bees."

8 If the lady of the house already has a fur, then any evergreen may be used.


2. The tree should be chopped down specifically for use as a Xmas tree; if it had been cut for lumber it is invalid. If the tree was cut for general decorative purposes, but not specifically as a Xmas tree, some authorities allow it while others are strict. A stolen tree is not valid for the mitzvah.9 Fortunate is one who is able to chop his own tree himself.10

9 One who cuts his own tree must make sure that he has permission from the landowner to do so. Ideally, cut only from one's own backyard. A tree taken from a reshus harabim, such as the county park (which is actually a carmelis, not a reshus harabim,) is considered as stolen and invalid.
10 One who is unable to cut his own tree should make sure to purchase it from a reputable dealer, or one who is certified by a national kashrus organization.


3. During the shmitta year, a Jew may not cut the tree down, but it should be done by a gentile. However, since the tree is inedible, the problems of “kedushas shviis” which apply to the esrog do not apply to the Xmas tree.


4. The tree must be bright green. Bright red, or a mixture of green and red, is also acceptable for a Xmas tree,11 but brown is not. There may be one brown spot near the bottom of the tree,12 but in the top half of the tree, even one brown spot will invalidate the tree. A truly pious person will make sure to bring along a Xmas tree expert when he goes to look for his tree.13

11 Because such trees do not grow red naturally, many Sefaradim adorn the tree with red poinsettia flowers. Ashkenazim prefer poinsettas.
12 Or even two, provided they are on opposite sides so they cannot be both seen at the same time.
13 But it is more macho to pretend to be an expert and pick the tree out himself.


5. The required height of the tree is subject to many rules. An indoor tree must be tall enough so that it reaches within 3 handbreadths of the ceiling.14 An outdoor tree must be at least 20 cubits tall.

14 Where local fire codes prohibit the use of such large trees, a smaller tree - even a bonsai - may be used, provided it has toy people around it who will make it appear tall.


6. The law is "Etz ish u'beito" - "One tree for a man and his home". This teaches that individuals must have a Xmas tree at their home, and that the main function of the tree is for the benefit of the family, but public places are exempt. If one wishes to place his personal tree in a public location he may do so, but he will not have fulfilled his obligation unless it is truly seen by the public. In this case, "seen by the public" means that the tree is large enough that it is shown on the local TV news reports.15

15 This is the origin of the custom of the great tree in Rockefeller Center, where a shaliach from Lubavitch lights the tree just before su
nset on Erev Xmas, and is then returned to Crown Heights by an NYPD helicopter in time for the dinner meal.


7. In recent years, there has been a great controversy over the use of manufactured trees. In theory, some hold they are invalid,16 while other authorities hold they are valid.17 In practice, however, even the lenient opinions hold that artificial trees are too tacky, and thus violate the principle of "hadar". But if one has already met his obligation by displaying at least one kosher Xmas tree, he may have additional trees of any kind, natural or not.18

16 Based on the verse "Etz chayim hee" ("A tree is alive"), teaching that even if it looks like a tree, it still cannot be a tree unless it was alive at some point.
17 Based on the verse "Etz chayim hee" ("It is a tree of life"), teaching that some trees have life, and others do not necessarily have life.
18 Similarly, manufactured trees are acceptable in malls, offices, and other exempt public places.


8. Originally, the law was that the tree must be displayed so that it would be visible to passers-by outside the home. Over the centuries, as persecutions increased, the people inside the home became the main audience. Even so, it should be displayed in a prominent area of the house, to show respect for this mitzvah. When possible, it should preferably be by a window where it could be viewed from the street, to continue the original practice.


3. DECORATING THE TREE


1. As with all mitzvos, the tree should be tastefully19 decorated. Popcorn tastes excellent, and some string popcorn together (with needle and thread)20 to make long chains which are wrapped around the tree.

19 In order to keep children actively interested and participating in all the goings-on, "tasteful" is defined by the youngest person in the household. This generally results in displaying all sorts of holiday projects in school, no matter how tacky or amateurishly done, giving great prominence to "artwork" which is normally allowed nowhere but the refrigerator door.
20 To remind us of the verse, "We're all connected." (Nynex)


2. The main decoration for the tree is strings21 of colored22 lights. The circuitry of the lights is arranged with parallel23 wires, not in serial. A certified24 electrician should inspect each set of lights.

21 The numerical value of the word "orot" (lights) is 613, similar to the value of the word "tzitzit".
22 The lights may be of 5 colors (corresponding to the knots in each tzitzit) or of 8 colors (corresponding to the 8 strings in each tzitzit). Where these combinations are unavailable, all the lights must be white. (Some use all white lights, with each eighth light being blue.)
23 Just as the eight strings of the tzitzis are tied in two parallel groups of four strings to help keep them kosher in the event a string breaks, similarly, arranging the lights in parallel will keep the other lights lit even if one light goes out.
24 By mutual consent, certification of Xmas lights is handled not by the OU but by the UL.


3. Additional lights are set up around the outside of the home,25 each according to his own ability. The more lights and other decorations26 one sets up, the more praiseworthy he is.

25 The minimum which one should strive for is the outline of one window which faces the street, and this is sufficient for apartment dwellers.
26 Those who have a front yard or lawn put all sorts of decorations up, whether lit by lights or not. Some say that if a snowman was built before Xmas, and by New Year's it still has not melted, it is a sign of blessing for the home for the coming year.


4. The lights must stay lit27 until28 most people can be presumed to be in bed29 or asleep.

27 One may use a timer to turn the lights off each night automatically, but not on Shabbos. Because of the public nature of the lights, they must stay lit lest anyone think that they were turned off manually, which would be a violation of the holy Shabbos.
28 11:35 pm Eastern, 10:35 Central/Mountain time.
29 Watching Leno or Letterman.


5. Tree decorations are considered "muktza l'mitzvasa", "set aside for its mitzvah", and may not be used for any personal use until after Xmas is over.30 For example, edible decorations may not be eaten until after Xmas. Similarly, since they may not be used for personal use, any decorations which fall from the tree on Shabbos or on Yom Tov may not be replaced31 until after Shabbos or Yom Tov.

30 See Siman 9 below for opinons regarding when Xmas actually ends.
31 Or even handled.



6. If the lights were not32 put away after Xmas, then in the following year each33 bulb must be removed34 from the wiring and reattached.

32 But if they were put away properly, then the act of restringing them the following year suffices for the mitzva. It is only where they stayed up all year that the lights must be renewed by removing and reattaching them.
33 If is enough if this is done for the majority of bulbs.
34 The bulb does not need to be totally removed, but it is adequate if the bulb is so loose that the electricity will not flow to it to light it.


4. GIFTS

1. One is obligated to buy presents, regardless of his income level, for every person that he has ever spoken to in his entire life and their immediate family members. One may go into serious debt in order to carry out this mitzvah. Presents may be exchanged at any convenient time during December up until the 25th.

2. Regarding a child whose birthday occurs on or around Xmas, some say to give him a double portion of gifts,35 and others say to give him a single portion.36 Some resolve this by getting him a normal number of gifts, but they would be double in size or value.37

35 Which may cause others to feel cheated.
36 Which will surely cause him to feel cheated.
37 Another idea has been to celebrate "Xmas in August". See Rabbi Edward's opinion below, in section 9:2.


5. THE OFFICE PARTY

1. “When December arrives, office productivity decreases.”38 Beginning at 9:00 AM on the Monday prior to Xmas, all real office work stops.39 In order to maintain the illusion of doing real work, employees busy themselves with tasks such as the company newsletter, or planning the office “Holiday Party”.

38 As it is said, “It’s a slow time of year.”
39 When that Monday is Erev Xmas itself, this work stoppage is moved up to the preceding Monday.


2. It is a requirement that all companies conduct an annual “Holiday Party” each year. This had been called a “Xmas Party” until 1972, when the Supreme Court ruled it to be a discriminatory name. The term “Holiday Party” was enacted so that Native Americans, Asians, and Muslims40 will all feel equally un-American.

40 When Ramadan is not in December.



3. The “Holiday Party”, in order to be done properly, requires a great deal of ritual drinking and debauchery. "Ad'loyada" - One must drink and continue drinking up to41 the point he cannot tell the difference between his fat dumpy wife and his gorgeous 22 year-old blond secretary.42

41 In this case, "up to" means "ad v'lo ad b'clal" - "up to but NOT including" the point when he cannot tell the difference. Once one has reached this point he is excused from further drinking. See next note for more details.
42 The example above presumes that he is a male, and his secretary is a female. However, if his secretary is male, and he has reached the point where he cannot tell the difference between his fat dumpy wife and his handsome 22 year-old blond male secretary, then he is forbidden to drink any more alcohol until Purim.


4. All banks and offices must close at noon43 on the 24th of December so that everyone may be able to get home in time to take care of the last minute preparations.

43 Retail establishments remain open until 4 PM on Erev Xmas, and restaurants a bit later. There is a popular saying that "Denny’s never closes," leading many people to ask, "So why are there locks on the doors?" The answer is that until recently, Denny's restaurants had been non Xmas-observant, and in fact did not have locks on the doors. Locks were installed only a few years ago when Denny's became Xmas-observant and began closing for the holiday.


6. THE FESTIVE MEAL

1. In the evening, after three stars appear in the sky, the family gathers together for the Erev Xmas meal. There are various opinions as to what is to be eaten at this meal. Only fish is to be eaten at the Erev Xmas meal.44 In our lands, the custom is to eat 12 fishes45 at this meal corresponding to the 12 days of Xmas.

44 When Erev Xmas is on Friday, and the dinner coincides with the first Shabbos meal, only gefilte fish may be used.
45 Even on Shabbos, one can easily reach 12 different kinds of gefilte fish: How can we show that four different fishes can make twelve different dishes? Because we ate four different fishes in Egypt, (whitefish, pike, carp, and whitefish-pike,) but we are now able to buy them three different ways. We can buy them ready-to-eat in jars, frozen in loaves, or ground raw at the fish store. Now, it follows that if there were four different species made three different ways, then there are 12 different gefilte fishes. How can we show that each of the twelve fishes is actually eight dishes? Because they can be made with or without salt, with or without sugar, and with or without matzo meal, and there are eight combinations of those three options. Thus, if there are twelve fishes that can be prepared eight ways, then there are a total of 96 dishes! How can we show that each of the twelve fishes is actually sixteen dishes? Because each of the eight recipes can be made either cooked or baked. Thus, if there are twelve fishes that can be prepared sixteen ways, then there are a total of 192 dishes!


2. Once the meal is complete, the family gathers in the room with the tree where they sing zemiros and drink eggnog.46 At midnight the family heads to shul for tikkun chatzos. Some say that tikkun chatzos can be said as early as 8:00 pm,47 but it is good to be stringent on oneself.

46 Eggnog being a milchig drink, some hold that this is the real reason for eating fish instead of meat.
47 So that the children will be awake.


7. SANTA CLAUS

1. For many years, the existence of Santa Claus was a subject of intense dispute in the adult community. In 1897, a team of investigative reporters was commissioned by one Virginia O’Hanlon to resolve the question. Their findings concluded “Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.”48 This was reaffirmed several decades later in a court case brought in New York County Supreme Court.49

48 New York Sun, September 21, 1897. (not in December as one might think)
49 Testimony from the United States Post Office proved to be crucial in deciding this case, as documented in Miracle on 34th Street, 1947.


2. It is absolutely forbidden to light any kind of fire in the fireplace on this evening.50 Those who want to roast chestnuts on an open fire should use a barbecue.

50 DUH! (But see also below, note 39)


3. To demonstrate our faith51 in Santa, each year we leave him a plate of donuts or cookies on a table near the tree, with a glass of milk to drink. Soon after this practice began, children began to question why the milk was still on the table the following morning, so their parents adopted the custom of drinking the milk after the children went to bed. However, just three years ago,52 while delivering his gifts, Santa accidentally revealed to a young girl that he suffered from lactose intolerance, and that this is why the milk had been left undrunk all those years. The following year, she left him a glass of pareve soybean “milk”, and this practice has spread far and wide since then. (In communities which accept the use of government supervised milk in lieu of rabbinic cholov yisroel, Lactaid™ milk is used instead.)

51 "I believe with complete faith that he knows if you've been bad or good, so be good for goodness sake." Ani Maamin #11, daily siddur.
52 The Santa Clause, by Tim Allen, produced by Walter Disney, 1994. This film also showed Santa’s new fire-resistant suit which was developed just that year. Nevertheless, the principle is that a protective measure is not abandoned even if the reason no longer exists, and so the ban on lighting fireplace fires remains in full force.



8. OTHER CUSTOMS

1. One is to rise early on the morning of the 25th in order to open the presents. There is a ritual meal which must be completed before sunset.

2. Meat and wine must be served at this meal. Lots are drawn to choose a designated driver who may not have any wine.

3. The meat may only be roasted. One may not eat any boiled or broiled meat at this meal.


4. After the meal, many have the custom to retire to the family room to watch sports on T.V.


5. Kiddush is not recited on Xmas, but holly is required.



9. HAVDALA

1. There are many opinions regarding when the Xmas season is over.53 Some hold that Xmas is over when the last item in the After-Xmas Sale has been sold. Others are strict and hold that Xmas is over immediately at the conclusion of the football game. The last opinion is the main one.

53 Many are confused by the term "twelve days of Xmas", implying that the Xmas continues until and including January 5. Today, this view is accepted only by the Eastern Orthodox, who hold that December 26 through January 5 constitute Chol Hamoed Xmas. This view is opposed by both the Modern Orthodox and the Ultra Orthodox (and even the Non Orthodox) who hold that Xmas is only one day long, and any context which seems otherwise actually refers to the Xmas season.


2. Walled cites continue Xmas until the end of the winning team's ticker-tape parade. A recent authority, Rabbi Edward, celebrated Xmas in August. For this he became known as "Crazy Eddie".