Tishri 1971

0

"r-

i K

ii

THE

• • • • • • • • • ■ ■ • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • ■ • a a a a a a a t

a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • a • • • a a a a a a a a • • • a a a a a . • • • • • • a

• a • .

• a • •

► • a aa a a .aa a a a a a• • •a a a a a a a • • • • • • a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • • • • • • a a a a a a a a a a a a . a a a a i a a a .

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • > a a a . a a ^

• • • a a a a a a a a a . a a • • . . • • . . ! ! ! ! . •a •. a• • • • a a a a a a• • • • • • • a • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • ■ • • a a a a a a a a a aa aa aa aa a a a a a a a a a a a . a a a . a ■ • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • < • .

• aa ............................................................................ a aa a• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • •••a ■ • • • • • ■ • • • • • • • • * • • ................ ....

••••• • • • • • • • • a aa a a • • • • • a a a a • a • a • a a• aa a • a • a • a • a• a• a■ • • • • • • • • • •••••••••••••••••aaaaaaaa • • • • • • • • a a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ■ • • • • • a a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• a• • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •a • • • • • • • • a * . • • • • • • • • • • • • • a a a a a a• aa aa aa a a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • • a .

Hi:

• m a i l t !

• • • • • • • • a a a a a a a a a a . . . . . . • • • a a a a a a a a a • a a a a a a a a at a a a a a a a a • a a a a a a a a a • a a a a a a a a a • a a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • • • a • a a a a a a a a a

::::::::::

• • • •

• a a •

• a a •

• a a •

• a a •

• a a •

• a a •

• a a •

• a a •

a a a a

aa aa • ................

!:

................................

::

aa aa a a a a

( • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ■ • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • a •a •a • a• a• a• a• •a •a aa aa aa a a a ( . • • • • • • • • • > • • • • • 1• a a a a a a a • • • • • • • a • . a a . a l . a a • • • • • • • • • a • a a a a a a a a a » • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

:::

a a • aa a • • • • •• •• •• a• • • • a a • • • • • a • • • • • • a • • • • • • • a • a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a

a a a • • a

:::::::::::::::::

• • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • ■ ■ • • • • • • • • • • • a • .• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • a a a a a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ■ a • • • • • • • • • • • • a a a a a a a a •••••••••••••••••••••a

• • a • • a ■ • «

Vol. 9, Nos. 2-3

SEPTEMBER. 197!

• • • • • • a a • • • • • • • a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a

• •••a

::::: :::::

• • • • • • • • • • • a

a a

• • » • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • a aaaa a aa • • a • • • • • • • a

aaaa a a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • a a• • a •• • • • • • a . a aa a aa • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • a aa • • • aa • a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • a a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • a • i . a a a a l aaaaa aaaaa • • • • • • • a a a a a a a a a aa a aa a a • • a a a a a • • • • a aaa • • • • • • • a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • a

• • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a aa • • • • • • • • ■ • • • • • • a a a a a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • a •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • a . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a . • • • • • • • a a a a a . • • • • • • • • • • • a * • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a a a a a

• .

• • • • • • • • • • • • • ■ •

• • • • •

• • • a

• • • a

• • a • • a • • a a

• • • • • • • • • a ■ a a . • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • a • • • a a a a a

• • • • •

a a a a • ■ • • • • a a a aa a a • • • • • a a a a a a a a

::::::: • • • •

S ' U a a a a a a .

• a a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • a .

• ■ • • • • • • a • a a a a a a a a a . a a a a a . .

■ • • • • • • a . a a a a a a a • a •. • • • • • a • •a

• • • • • a • ■ • • • • • • • • • • • a • ■ • • • • • • • • • • • a• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a a a a aaa a a a a a • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • ■ • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • aaaa a

a a • • •

. , aa a a a a a a • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • a

• • • • • • a a • • • • • a • • • • • • a

^ a • • % • • • • • • • • • a , aa aa a a• • • • • • • • • • • a a a a a a .

......................................... ............... ............................

• • • • • • • • • • a a a a a a a a a a a a

a a a aa a a

• • • • • a ■ • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • a • • • • • • a a a a a a a a a • • • • • • • • • • • a a a a a a a a

aaa

■• • •

• a aa aa aa aa a• • a aa aa aa • • ■•

t aa a aa • • • a aaa • aa a a • a aa a • a aa a • a aa a • a • • a • a a a a • a aa a • a aa a a aa • • • • • a • •

a a • • • • • • • • • • • • • ■ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a a

• • • • • • • • • • a

• • • a • • • a • • • a • • • a • • • a • • • a • • • a • • • a • • • a • • • a a a a a

• • a • •

:

• • • •

• • • •

• • • •

• • • •

• •• • • • • • • • • a • • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • a a a a a a a a a a a a .aaa >•••

:::::::::

• • • a a a a a a a a a a a a

aa a aa a a • aa

:::::......

• • • a a a a a a a . • • • • • a . aa a a • • ■ • • • • • • a .

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a • • •

• • • a a • a a

a a a a a a a aaa • • • • a a• a a a a a• • a • • • • a • • a a a a aa a a

• • • a • • • •

• • • • • • a a a a a a a a a a

• • a • a • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a . a a a a a a .

• • ■ • • ■ • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • •

• a • • a •

a • a a

• • • • • • • • • • • a a • • • • • • • • • ■ • • a • • • •

TISHRI, 5732

//

. • a a • • •

• a a a a a aaaa a a aa • a a•• • • • • • • • • • • • • a • a a a a a a a a a a a a • • • • • a

::s

:::::::.......

• • • • • • • • • a a a a a

• a f a a a• • aa a aa a a a a a a a a a a • ■ • • • • • • a

Hi!::

12^p.

CONTENTS Editorial New Year Message Officiant and Congregant, by Rabbi Dr. Chaim J. Cooper Guilt or Glands, Which? by Rabbi M. Turetzky ...

Torah Life and Modern Thought — 8, by Rabbi Dr. J. E. Ehrentreu 10-18 Sepher “Esh Dath”, by Rabbi Moshe Cohen 19-21 Matan Torah and Yom Habikurim, by Rabbi Gershom Harapanas 21

Chassidism and the Land of Israel,

by Rabbi Dr H. Rabinowicz Name-Changing, by S.K. ..............

What you should know about Mikveh,

by Rabbi A. Greenberg ... ujgnn oitui; inn tint: /tt?np n:n Duma Book Review, by Dayan M. Fisher Reports *** ••• Obituaries Letter a

a

••

••

a

i Hi, AC IING RAV RASHI AND DAYANIM OF THE Bin of tfje jfeberation of ^pnagogucs; EXTEND THEIR BEST WISHES TO THE CHIEF RABBI, THE HAHAM, THE r a b b in a t e o f t h e u n i o n , t h e i r r e s p e c t iv e b a t e i d i n , THE BATEI DIN OF THE PROVINCES, AND TO ALL RABBANIM AND MINISTERS, THE PRESIDENT, HONORARY OFFICERS, MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE AND GENERAL COUNCIL AND ALL MEMBERS OF THE FEDERATION OF SYNAGOGUES WITH THEIR FAMILIES, TO MEDINAT YISRAEL AND KLAL YISROEL THROUGHOUT THE WORLD FOR A

n^ts? rffKtti -- - ’

W

di? ot cpti

ruts?

22-26 27-28 29 30-31 34 35-38 39- 40 40- 41

Page Two

SEPTEMBER 1971— TISHRI, 5732

11 n n ii

ROSH H ASH ANA 5732 Once again in the approaching Days of Awe — Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur — thousands and tens of thousands of Jews throughout the world will stream into their synagogues, “overflow services”, shtieblech and temples, pouring out their hearts in prayer to their Creator in all their varied and unique rites and styles of service. Our Machzor is full of splendid and wonderful prayers, prayers which touch every individual personally as well as the congre­ gations in general, prayers which beg for the material well-being of every individual and his family as well as the happiness and prosperity of Klal Yisrael and especially of the State of Israel.

The most beautiful, most important and most exalted prayer of all in the services for the Days of Awe and the one in which our feelings should be most profoundly engaged is “And so, O L-rd, give honour unto Thy people”. “Honour to Thy people” does not mean merely that the Jewish people should gain the regard and respect of the outside world, the non Jewish world — which is in and of itself of great importance. The phrase has a much greater significance and a more profound one. It means that we Jews must renew our consciousness of the great­ ness and richness of our great, profound and exten­ sive heritage of spiritual treasures, and understand how to value and prize this heritage. It seems to us that precisely now, in this day and age, when we have gained the merit of emerging from great darkness into great light, from being a persecuted and insulted people to creating a proud and revived State of Israel, it is noteworthy that many of us no longer feel the great pride that bygone generations of Jews felt, even when their backs were bowed by the oppression of their physical enemies and perse­ cutors.

Yes, we were once very proud Jews. When others wanted to bring us low, our pride, which was deeply rooted within us, drew its strength from our glorious and brilliant past and strengthened our consciousness of being the descendants of the Patriarchs, of the Kings, of the Prophets and of the High Priests, whose spiritual treasures benefited the entire world. But today, alas, it must be stated that a great part of our youth have very little knowledge of our glorious past. Many have burnt all their bridges with the past and try to fill the resulting vacuum created by severing themselves from the old Jewish way of life, by indulging instead in new forms of living which have nothing lewish about them and are also not decent, not ethical and not moral. But now, as we stand on the threshold of the New Year 5732, we should not regard ourselves as having done our duty merely by reciting the prayers asking for a return

of pnde in being a Jew; the principal task is to marshal the strength at the disposal of all our res­ pective Kehillot in order to channel it into an inten­ sive campaign in the field of education of the younger generation. This is the first priority, and we hope that this Rosh Hashana will turn out to be a splendid opportunity for us to gather our spiritual strength and energy and that our prayers will illumine and warm with their Divine rays of light all our activities and efforts in the coming year to reunite the People of the Book with its Book and glorious past once more.

CLAUSE 43 Yet another problem has recently been added to the difficult problems already confronting the AngloJewish community. Certain sections of the press have fallen upon it as on a great find, in order to stir up trouble. We are referring here to the pro­ posal to change Clause 43 of the Constitution of the Board of Deputies, which lays down that only the Chief Rabbi and the Haham should be the sole reli­ gious authorities of the Board. The proposal seeks to include in these religious authorities, the leaders of other Kehillot in the metropolis — in other words, that the Liberal and Reform groups should also be consulted in religious matters.

We wish at this point to ask a sincere, honest and straightforward question: On which religious ques­ tions do the above-mentioned Kehillot wish to be consulted? The movements they represent have torn out of the Torah such matters as kashrut, taharat hamishpacha, Shabbat and Yomtov, chalitza and gittin, the sanctity of the Cohanim and — most shocking and damaging of all — they have smirched the sanctity of Israel and continue to do so today bv bringing into our midst their so-called “proselytes”.

Taking all this into account, what have they pre­ served of Torat Moshe except the Mitzvah of “love thy neighbour as thyself”, which non-Jews also observe? They have changed our Torah beyond recognition, and we ask again: What are the religious questions on which they wish to be consulted and state their opinions?

For a non-Jew to become a Jew according to the Halacha is very difficult. On the other hand, for a Jew to cease being a Jew is impossible. The Torah was given to the Jews when they stood under Mount Sinai, which was suspended over them in the form of an arch and ringed them round on all sides, in order to teach us the basic principle of Judaism: that there is no escape from Jewishness. This means

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

THE LI GHT

that every person born of a Jewish mother carries the inescapable responsibility of observing the 613 Mitzvot, no matter to which Kehilla or trend he belongs. And the Board of Deputies, which has been in existence for more than 200 years to guard and defend the political interests of Anglo-Jewry, as well as the interests and honour of Klal Yisrael and the State of Israel, all Jews in Britain have the right and duty to participate in the activities of this body.

However, when it comes to the question of recognising a certain group of Jews who have inscribed on their banner: “We have no portion and no inheritance (Heaven forbid) in the Torah of Moses” as religious authorities, this is something which must not be permitted, because to do so would mean that we, the Orthodox Jews, would be giving them the stamp of approval and the hechsher they are seeking for their movement, the consequences of which would spell disaster for Anglo-Jewry.

The Federation of Synagogues, which is certainly an Orthodox Kehilla and is without a scintilla of doubt entitled to be consulted on religious questions, has shown that it is prepared to forgo its rights and

Page Three

ieave the matter as it has stood until now — in the hands of the Chief Rabbi and the Haham, for the sake of peace in the community. The Federation has the right to expect the same attitude from other Kehillot, in order to avoid breaking up so important an institution as the Board of Deputies, We hope and believe that those responsible for bringing the matter onto the agenda, as well as those who will have their last say on this burning and aggravated question will, during the awesome and holy days which lie ahead, keep in mind and ponder profoundly the great responsibility which lies upon them for the future of Anglo-Jewry.

We hope and pray that a hand which lays tefillin, whether it be the hand of an ordinary Jew or the hand of a great or lesser rabbi, will not in any circumstances be raised in support of these changes in the Constitution of the Board of Deputies in any shape or form of words which could be interpreted by the ordinary man in the street as meaning that so-called religious authorities can exist which do not in fact represent any religion and certainly not the Jewish religion.

MESSAGE FROM THE ACTING RAV RASHI AND ROSH BETH DIN OF THE FEDERATION OF SYNAGOGUES, DAYAN M. FISHER As we stand on the threshold of the New Year 5732, I welcome the opportunity extended to me by HAMAOR of offering a few observations on the moral crisis which now prevails.

One of the earliest catastrophes which virtually led to the annihilation of humanity recorded in our Torah — a narrative familiar to many — is the deluge during the time of Noach, The events which preceded the flood and which provoked the wrath of G-d are summed up in the following verse: “And G-d saw the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted their way upon earth (Gen. 6.12)”. This “cor­ ruption”, our sages tell us, was the gross immorality to which mankind had succumbed. History repeats itself! Society today is besieged and polluted through sordid and unbridled pursuits, a state of affairs which has infiltrated into certain sections of our community, particularly our youth, and the fabric and structure which in bygone days epitomised Klal Yisrael is thus being seriously challenged.

When we comprehend the moral depravity and decadence which permeates our society; when we con­ template the sordid literature which swamps our bookstalls; when we witness the indulgence in illicit plea­ sures and indecency to which we are constantly exposed through the medium of the press, T.V. and other mass media, dare we remain complacent and. stand idly by when in our own day a dark page of history is once again rearing its ugly head? Can we remain unmoved, cognisant of the havoc the present trend is caus­ ing, with its ultimate shattering devastation of every vestige of decencv and dignity which should adorn man created in the image of G-d?

The tempestuous waters of our permissive society which threaten to drown mankind will only be calmed if, with resolute determination, our community fights against the current through a rededication to the ideals propounded in our Holy Torah, thus elevating and restoring the dignity of mankind.

It is these thoughts which must dominate our minds when during the coming Yomim Noraim we implore our heavenly father — “Remember us unto Life” — a life of dignity and honour. If we as a proud people who were privileged to witness the Sinaitic Revelation will seek to spread its eternal message to a sorely distressed world, we will witness in our own day the prophetic ideal of becoming a “Light unto the Nations” ustkVi

u&y1? rn'iv nVixm di^ to all our members and

i

D” n nw nmm ^0

Page Four

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

OFFICIANT AND CONGREGANT

By RABBI DR. CHAIM J. COOPER There is but little P entateuchal au th o rity for the iden­ tification of the first of Tishri w ith the festival of the New Year. The Torah speaks of the “Seventh m onth, on the first day of the m onth” (Leviticus xxiii, 24) and in so far as the Torah specifies any beginning of the year, it actually designates the m onth of Nisan as “the first of the m onths of the y e a r” (Exodus xii, 2).

In reference to the creation of the world, Rabbi Joshua held th at the universe w as created in Nisan (Rosh Hashana 11a). Even in our exalted and sublim e New Year liturgy only slight m ention is m ade of the occasion as the New Year, the passage concerned com m encing w ith the w ords: “This is the day, the beginning of Thy w orks” (“zeh hayom tech ilat m a’asech a”). In our festival prayers the nature of the day is expressed by the phrase, “Yom H aZ ikaron” — the “Day of R em em brance” — which is a very oblique m anner of reference to the occasion as New Y ear’s Day. Biblically the day is denom inated “the Day of Sounding the S hofar”— “Yom T eruah” (N um bers xxix, 1) and “Rem em brance of the S hofar” — “Zichron T eru ah ” (Leviticus xxiii, 24). The Torah thus clearly considers the Shofar the distinctive feature of the Rosh H ashana ritual, and so it has indeed rem ained. The Shofar expresses the very essence of the festival. For while Rosh H ashana shares, in common w ith the other festivals in our calendar, the m any laws and observances concerning Yom-Tov, yet it is the Shofar which differentiates Rosh H ashana, and which im parts to it a unique and distinctive ch aracter of its own.

The trem ulous and quivering sounds which issue from the ram ’s horn form the central and pivotal point of our New Y ear devotions. H ow ever far the atten tio n of w or­ shippers m ay stray during the service, there is a hushed silence, a heightened degree of devotional fervour and an air of sacred expectancy which stirs our em otions when the Ba’al Tekiya raises the Shofar to his lips. And, w ith the first plaintive notes th a t fall upon our ears, we are subconsciously aw are th a t the M itzvah of the day, as intim ated by the P entateuchal description of Rosh H ashana, is being fulfilled by the officiant.

So, a t least, it would appear. In point of fact, the M itzvah is apparently not the sounding, but the hearing, of the S hofar’s blast. The benediction we recite is not “litk o a”, but “lishm oa”, “kol S hofar”. But the Torah m akes no m en­ tion of “hearing” ; the norm al com prehension of the Biblical tex t would be, “the day of sounding the ram ’s horn” which, a t its face value, appears to m ake the obligation the sounding, not the hearing.

The subject is a controversial issue am ong the au th o ri­ ties, striking as it does a t the very basis of the M itzvah.

Precisely w hat are we com m anded? W hen the Torah calls it “Yom T eru ah ” do the w ords impose the obligation of sounding or of hearing the sounds produced? Do the con­ gregation, by listening to the Ba’al Tekiya, thereby fulfil their duty by the operation of the principle of “shom ei’a k e ’oneh” — a principle im plying th a t one who m erely hearkens fulfils his d u ty as effectively as if he had responded, thus equating receptive or passive hearing w ith active or articu late participation?

In our present context this would m ean th a t while the Torah enjoins the duty of sounding the Shofar, yet one who hears the sounds produced is tan tam o u n t to one who

n

rnn

has actually perform ed the tekiot. A lternatively, is the hearing in and by itself the actual com m andm ent — th at is to say, th at the whole essence of the M itzvah consists in the hearing of the Shofar?

The question is a point a t issue am ong the Rishonim.

Thus, the Rambam rules th at “it is a positive Com m and­ m ent of the Torah to hear the sound of the Shofar on Rosh H ashana” (M ishneh Torah, H ilchot Shofar, i, 1) — a decision expressed even m ore pointedly in his responsa: “The C om m andm ent consists not in sounding but in hear­ ing the b la sts”. Thus he decides th a t one who hearkens to the S hofar’s sound has fulfilled his religious obligation even though he him self did not sound the Shofar. The converse, however, is not true. Thus, if one sounded it, but “closed his ears so thoroughly as to be incapable of hearing such a Ba’al Tekiya has not perform ed the M itzvah.

The concept of obligation in relation to the Shofar may in this direction be likened to th a t of the Succah. Sounding the Shofar m ay be com pared to the construction of the Succah, while hearkening to the sounds em itted by the Shofar, to the actual dwelling in the Succah. Dwelling would not be possible w ithout prior construction, and so indeed the “hearing” necessarily requires “sounding”. But ju st as the M itzvah consists in the dwelling, not in the act of construction, in accordance w ith the verse, “In booths shall ye dw ell seven days” (Leviticus xxiii, 42) — so it is the hearing, not the sounding, which constitutes the actual perform ance of the M itzvah of the Shofar. And, ju st as the benediction for the Succah is “leshev basuccah”,’ and not “livnot hasuccah”, so it is likew ise “lishm oa kol sh o far” and not “al tek iat shofar”.

But although this is the form ula of the benediction which is in universal use, yet its adoption w as by no m eans unanim ous. Thus, Rav Yehudai Gaon advocated the for­ m ula litkoa kol sh ofar”, while among later authorities Rabbenu Tam and the th irteen th -cen tu ry R. Moses of Coucy in his Sepher M itzvo t Gadol both give the form ula “al te k ia t sh o far”, the la tte r explicitly stating th at it is the sounding which constitutes the M itzvah.

O ur wording, which m akes the hearing the M itzvah lays itself open to the objection th a t if th at w ere indeed the case, w hy cannot the M itzvah be fulfilled by hearing the Shofar sounded by one who is not him self obligated thereto — such as, for example, one of unsound mind, or a m inor — or even one who has no intention of perform ing the M itzvah, but is m erely practising, or attem pting w hat­ ever sounds he m ay be able to produce (“m itassek ”)?

Because of the w eight of this objection, the Sha’agat Aryeh concedes th at the actual M itzvah is both — the sounding and the hearing. The form er discharges his obli­ gation by sounding, and the latte r on the principle of “shom ei’a k e ’oneh”. O ther authorities have replied to this difficulty by insisting th a t the essence of the M itzvah is hearing, but th a t the Torah insisted upon th at type of “hearing” which is m andatory, not of a sound produced by one legally inadm issible. C ertainly the concept of “kav an n ah ” is here operative — th at the b a’al tokeia m ust have the definite intention — the conscious desire — to exem pt his listeners (or to be “m o tsi”) from their obliga­ tion. Such deliberate intention or “kavannah” cannot be ascribed to one who has not the legal capacity, because of his ineligibility, to perform the M itzvah for himself.

The halachic principle of “shom ei’a k e ’oneh” is based upon a passage in Succah 38b, w herein Rava deduced a num ber of liturgical rulings from contem porary usages.

The last of these is the recital by the reader of “Baruch

u

THE

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

LI GHT

haba” (Psalm cxviii, 26), to which the congregation re­ sponded with the words, “b’shem HaShem” (ibid.). From this usage, says Rava, the principle of “shomei’a ke’oneh” can be inferred. The deduction here made is that the congregation do not repeat the actual words of the reader (“baruch haba”), yet they fulfil their obligation, the reason obviously being that merely to have listened is considered equivalent to having responded. Rashi ad loc. gives an example of this ruling in practice when one prays in syna­ gogue on his own account and the reader then recites Kaddish or the Kedushah. The worshipper concerned can­ not interrupt his devotions in order to make the necessary antiphonal responses (e.g., “y’hey sh’mey rabba mevorach”) but discharges his duty merely by ceasing to pray privately and hearing in silence the reader repeat those responses — that is, hearing them is equivalent to actually respond­ ing. In support of this ruling Rashi quotes the authority of the Halachot Gedolot of Rav Judai Gaon (the Halachot Gedolot is also ascribed to R. Simeon of Kayyara).

Proceeding along these lines, the Gemara then asks whe­ ther one who made no response at all, but merely heard the reader, had thereby carried out his devotional obliga­ tions. And R. Chiyya bar Abba replied, invoking the weighty testimony of scholars, scribes and leading expoun­ ders, that one who listened to the reader, though he failed to utter the statutory responses, has nevertheless per­ formed his duty (“shama v’lo anah yatza”)—again con­ firming the principle of “shomei’a ke’oneh”.

Further to substantiate this ruling the Gemara then pro­ ceeds to invoke Biblical citation. What Biblical sanction exists for this principle? R. Simeon b. Pazzi quotes R. Joshua b. Levi, who cites in the name of Bar Kappara the verse from II Kings xxii, 16 in reference to the book

Closed Shabbat

Page Five

discovered in the Temple by Hilkiah the High Priest. Huldah the prophetess in that verse speaks of “the book which the King of Judah (Josiah) had read”. But, the Gemara questions, we know from verse 10 of the same chapter that it was not Josiah, but Shaphan the scribe who read it, while King Josiah only listened to Shaphan’s reading. Yet Huldah speaks of King Josiah having read it. Hence the Gemara deduces, listening to reading is equivalent to read­ ing itself. Thereupon the Gemare questions further, but perhaps King Josiah did in fact read the book after Sha­ phan the scribe had done so? But that is rejected by R. Acha b. Jacob, who cites verse 19 of the same chapter, in which Huldah speaks of Josiah’s “hearing” of the book, not his “reading” of it.

The above-mentioned comment by Rashi is questioned

by Tosafot ad loc., s.v. “shama”. According to Rashi one may pursue one’s own private devotions in synagogue, and when the chazan recites those prayers which require re­ sponses by the congregation, remain silent, listen to the responses repeated by the chazan, and at the conclusion of the passage (whether it be Kaddish or Kedushah) re­ sume his personal prayer.

This, argues Tosafot, appears contrary to the ruling in Berachot 21b by R. Joshua ben Levi, which is as follows: If one should arrive at public worship and find the con­ gregation engaged in reciting the Amidah, then if he is able to commence the Amidah and finish it before the chazan reaches the Kedushah in his repetition, then he should recite the Amidah but if not, then he should not begin it. If, Tosafot argues, Rashi’s ruling were indeed correct, then there would surely be no need for the state­ ment by R. Joshua ben Levi. W hether the worshipper concerned could complete the Amidah before the chazan

Wishing all the Clergy, Hon. Officers, Members and Vx-w

raw nn’nm ravo One of the largest selections of .

\

DIAMONDS

V

Y

\

1

for investment.

1911-1971 Sixty years’ reputation of trust & confidence

BLACK LION YARD, LONDON, Tel: 01-2474196 01-4058671 01-4050734 Cables: Logrojewel, London.

V

Page Six

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

reached the Kedushah or not, he could com m ence it and then, according to Rashi, sim ply break off and rem ain silent during the Kedushah, resum ing his recital of the Amidah a t its conclusion. A pparently, T osafot argues, R. Joshua ben Levi would not approve of any such procedure, since he would evidently hold th at such breaking off in silence in order to listen to the read er’s responses would in fact co n stitu te an interruption of his recital of the Amidah (“h afsak at tefillato”).

Hence perhaps, T osafot concludes, while the principle of “shom ei’a k e ’oneh” is undoubtedly operative, yet the tw o things are not absolutely identical in value. To m ake the actual response is a m ore com plete and valid fulfil­ m ent of the M itzvah than m erely to listen to it being m ade by another. Listening is therefore, according to T osa­ fot, a form of su b stitu te for an articu late response, but it is not equivalent to it. T hat is why R. Joshua ben Levi m akes no m ention of R ashi’s procedure, but lays down the ruling which would enable the w orshipper to m ake the requisite response w hen and w here required.

We have, then, a tw ofold in terp retatio n of “shom ei’a k e’oneh” . Rashi takes the w ords in th eir literal sense— th at is, th a t listening is equivalent to responding, while Tosafot, on the other hand, would apparently consider listening only an im perfect su b stitu te to be resorted to w here actual response is not possible. This la tte r view is explicitly advocated by T osafot in Berachot 21b s.v. “a d ” where, in quoting the G em ara in Succot 38b, T osa­ fot adds the w o rd s : “One should not in the first instance do so (i.e., recite the Am idah privately and then rem ain silent while the chazan recites the K edushah, resum ing after he has finished), because response is the m ore w or­ thy fulfilment of the M itzvah (than m erely hearing the chazan repeat the responses— despite, th a t is to say, the principle of “shom ei’a k e ’oneh”). The use by T osafot of the term lechatchilah” in this connection clearly indicates th at listening as a su b stitu te for responding is operative only as a last resort.

The application of this principle appears in several di­ verse connections and contexts in our codes. Thus, the M echaber in the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim xxv, 10 ru les: “If in the course of donning tefillin one should hear the recital by the read er of Kaddish o r K edushah betw een binding the Tefillah shel yad and th a t of shel rosh then he should not u tte r the requisite responses for such u tte r­ ance would co n stitu te an interruption, but he should re ­ m ain silent and listen and concentrate on the w ords being recited ”. The M agen David ad loc., sub-section 8, com ­ m en ts: “He should m aintain silence and listen, for silence is equivalent to response in resp ect of the fulfilment of his obligation, and should not be regarded as any kind of interruption. Y et”, adds the M agen David, “if he did recite the response such as ‘y ’hey sh ’m ey rabba . . .’ he would not have been guilty of an interruption such as would have necessitated the repetition of the benediction over the tefillin, as would have been the cas had he interrupted by speaking of secular m a tte rs” . This la tte r qualification appears to be a form of com prom ise betw een the views of Rashi and Tosafot.

Sim ilarly the ruling is given in Orach Chaim civ, 7: “One m ay not in terru p t the recital of the Am idah either by responses to Kaddish or K edushah, but should rem ain silent and concentrate on the w ords of the reader, this being equivalent to actual responses” . To which the Magen A vraham com m ents, “And following such responses by the reader he should then resum e his own private devo­ tio n s” .

In the Orach Chaim cix, 3 it is laid down th at if one

n o n

w ere reciting the Amidah as an individual and he arrived a t the K edushah a t the very tim e w hen the congrega­ tion w ere reciting the “K edushah D esidra” (i.e. the verses “kadosh kadish kadosh . . .” in the prayer com m enc­ ing “uva letzion”) then he should not recite “kadosh . . w ith them , for the tw o prayers and settings are not iden­ tical. Likewise if the congregation w ere reciting “k eter . .” he should not say “kadosh . . .” w ith them , but should m aintain silence and co n cen trate his atten tio n on the w ords being recited by the congregation, for hearing is equivalent to responding.

Finally, in the Orach Chaim ccxiii, 2 the ruling is given: W ith reference to the recital of a benediction for food, one cannot discharge this obligation on behalf of others unless he has eaten and drunk w ith them , in which case they fulfil th eir duty by listening to his recital and by concentrating upon his words. And the Magen David ad loc. significantly ad d s: “It is accepted in m any places th at he who u tters the benediction m ust likew ise have the specific intention of discharging them as well as him self of th eir obligations” .

The concept of the Sheli’ach T sibbur’s legal capacity to fulfil the duty of prayer on behalf of other w orshippers is illustrated by an interesting passage in Rosh Hashana. The M ishnah in Rosh Hashana 33b rules th a t ju st as the reader is under the obligation of reciting the daily prayers, so is every individual under sim ilar obligation. But Rabban Gamaliel differs from the Tanna Kamma, saying th at the reader clears the whole congregation of their obligation.

The G em ara in 34b enlarges upon the differences betw een the tw o opinions.

Rabban Gamaliel w as rightly asked why, in his view, the congregation needed to pray for them selves. For if,’ as he holds, the Sheli’ach Tzibbur by his public ren d er­ ings th ereb y exem pts the congregation from their obliga­ tion, w hy then should the w orshippers be required to re­ cite individual prayers a t all? To which Rabban Gamaliel replied th a t the purpose of private prayer by the individ­ uals com prising the congregation w as to enable the p re­ centor to arrange his prayer “k ’dei lehasdir sheliach tsibbur tefillato ”)— th a t is to say, to allow the reader time and opportunity to prepare the w ording of the prayer in his mind, prayers in those days being recited from memory.

Rabban Gamaliel, in his turn, then asked his colleagues why, according to their ruling, it w as necessary for the reader to officiate a t all? For if, as the stam M ishnah holds, it is requisite th a t each individual w orshipper recite his own prayers, w here then is the need for the function of a public reader? In reply his colleagues explained th a t the purpose of the chazan was to exem pt from their obliga­ tion such of the congregation as w ere unacquainted with the prayers (“k ’dei lehotzi et sh e’eino baki”)— th a t is to say, the function of the reader w as in their view to act on behalf of those w orshippers who w ere unable to pray for them selves. To which Rabban Gamaliel reto rted th at ju st as the reader is invested w ith the pow er of exem pting those who are unfam iliar w ith the prayers (as his oppo­ nents had adm itted) so he has the capacity to act sim ilarly for those conversant w ith the texts, and so cover the possibility of any error in prayers by a m em ber of the congregation.

To this last rejoinder by Rabban Gamaliel the rabbis w ere apparently unable to reply. The strength of Rabban G am aliel’s standpoint rests on the concession granted by his colleagues th at the reader does have the pow er of exem pting others from th eir duty to pray. And so Rabban Gamaliel has them half-way, as it were, to full agreem ent w ith him. He clinches their concession by the argum ent

' i 0

r-

f

i

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

T H E I I GHT

that once von admit that the reader has the authority to act for some of the congregation (those who do not know the prayers), you then can no longer differentiate for whom and on whose behalf such power may be exercised. Having admitted that the reader may exempt some, the rabbis were obliged to agree that he may act for all, for there can be no warrant for distinguishing among worshippers, and of limiting the exercise of authority by the reader appointed by the congregation, to be effective only for certain members of the assembly, while being denied to others.

It would appear that the underlying difference between Rabban Gamaliel and the others consists in their diverse conceptions of congregational worship. Rabban Gamaliel thought of a congregation as a single unit, while his rabbi­ nical colleagues in the first instance regarded it as a group in which the individuals retained their separate identities as single worshippers. Rather like the question as to whether a collective noun governs a singular or plural verb, and somewhat resembling the dispute in Chullin on the question whether “behemah le’evarim omedet” or “lav le’evarim omedet”—whether the whole is indeed the sum of its constituent parts, as in the process of integration in the mathematical discipline of calculus. From the Gemara it is clear that Rabban Gamaliel’s colleagues eventually conceded the question.

As the result of Rabban Gamaliel’s cogent line of reason­ ing, the rabbis acknowledged the truth of Rabban Gama­ liel’s ruling and conceded the question in his favour. This is not wholly and entirely confirmed, for the Gemara goes on to distinguish between prayers on Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur on the one hand, and those recited during the rest of the year on the other, according to R. Meir, while

Page Seven

the Mesichta concludes with an important qualification in Rabban Gamaliel’s ruling, namely, that only worship­ pers in the fields were exempted by the reader because their work prevented their attendance; those in town were not so exempted.

I cannot resist the notion that the difference in ruling between Rabban Gamaliel and his colleagues has a basis in the divergent views concerning the origin of our prayers.

The well-known passage in Berachot 26b quotes a differ­ ence between R. Jose b. Chanina and R. Joshua b. Levi, the former holding that the three patriarchs instituted the three daily devotions, while according to R. Joshua b. Levi their origin was intended to correspond with the daily sacrifices.

While abundant Biblical texts are adduced in support of both views, the point at issue is not wholly and entirely academic. There is a practical aspect involved, since the sacrifices were unquestionably a congregational rite—that is, they were offered on behalf of the congregation as a whole. If we therefore derive the practice of public wor­ ship from the sacrificial cult, we should be justified in conforming with the view that the reader exempts the individual worshipper from the obligation of prayer—just as the “korban tamid” was offered on behalf of the whole congregation. But on the other view, that our tefillot were ordained by our patriarchs, there are no grounds for post­ ulating any such exemption, and the duty devolving upon the individual worshipper remains his personal obligation.

It therefore appears to me that the underlying difference in standpoint between Rabban Gamaliel and his colleagues is that the former held that our daily prayers were insti­ tuted to correspond with the daily sacrifices, while the latter, that they were originated by our Patriarchs.

The Members of THE PRESIDENT AND HONORARY OFFICERS

HAMAOR

OF THE FEDERATION OF SYNAGOGUES

PUBLISHING COMMITTEE

EXTEND BEST WISHES TO THE DAYANIM, MEMBERS,

wish to express their sincere thanks

FRIENDS AND THEIR FAMILIES AND TO

to contributors, advertisers and supporters,

KLAL YISROEL FOR

and wish them all and

nm u n z rn m n r n a

□,,n men nmo nzrnm mvia

(0

j

Page Eight

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

GUILT OR GLANDS, WHICH?

By RABBI M. TURETZKY Lord Devlin, in the course of a lecture some tim e ago, referred to the seem ingly paradoxical attitu d es tow ards guilt. He pointed out th at while some people experience pangs of guilt for little cause, others, including the m ost dangerous and hardened crim inals, feel none w hatsoever.

He w ent on to say, “If w ith the w ave of a psychoanalyti­ cal wand you could abolish the sense of guilt from the hum an mind it would cause an instant collapse of law and order.”

It requires but a nodding acquaintance w ith the history and developm ent of Judaism to appreciate th a t the dis­ tinctive characteristic of Judaism am ong w orld faiths is th at the idea and concept of Law (H alacha) co n stitu tes the very basis of its m oral fibre and existence. In the light of this knowledge, a recent definition of Judaism as “the religion which legislates” is both a tru e and apposite one.

Bearing this fact in mind, the profound observation noted

by Lord Devlin in respect of law and order in general, m ay well be adapted and applied w ith advantage to the Jew ish scene in particular. It could thus be adduced th at the sharp decline and defection w itnessed today in Je w ­ ish life both in religious practices and observances and in the stan d ard s of personal and social m orality, m ay well be related to a corresponding loss in the sense of guilt

i i Nnn

in the com m ission of such acts considered in Judaism to be co n trary to the will of G-d.

This relationship can be attested in m any areas of Jew ­ ish life, but perhaps none m ore p aten t and obvious than in the attitu d e adopted by the large m ajority of Jew s to ­ w ards the observance and understanding of the High F est­ ivals. On these solem n days of the Jew ish calendar the synagogues will be filled to capacity. In m any synagogues th ere will also be overflow services to accom m odate the throngs for whom no seats would otherw ise be available.

These Jew s of every shade and opinion, and of varying degrees of observance will be visiting the synagogue for an annual encounter with th eir M aker in the solemn attem pt to gain thereby a form of reconciliation w ith Him, and rediscover w ays and m eans w hereby this can best be effected.

It is precisely because of the m agnitude of this task th a t Judaism does not take its adherents unaw ares, but prepares and coaches them for the approach of these Holy Days. The Shofar is sounded throughout Ellul and Selichot are read on the days im m ediately before Rosh H ashana and Yom Kippur, all of which is to im press and to enable the Jew to approach these days w ith a renew ed intensity in order th a t he m ay retrace his steps in the attem p t to discover the royal road leading to G-d.

But w hat in fact obtains? The synagogues rarely have a uniform atten d an ce for their services. They fill in waves w ith a rhythm ic ebb and flow of w orshippers. The sprink­ ling of congregants who are the first to arrive a t the servi­ ces are by far and large the sam e few who rem ain in their seats to the end of the service. Again they are the same handful who participate fully throughout the service and

THE

LIGHT

Page Nine

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

speak only when absolutely necessary, and pray in a spirit of humility and spiritual intent, mindful of the solemnity of the occasion. A type of person who in our estimation needs least of all to be subject to pangs of guilt, in this case, largely generated by the devotions of the day.

Yet the largest majority of Jews for whom these solemn days could well be a golden opportunity to mend their ways, and to transform their egocentric lives activated by the caprice of the moment to a life inspired by the awareness of G-d, appear to be the least interested participants in the synagogue service. When they do arrive, it is usually close to the Musaph Service and they leave as a rule shortly after, and this usually only after having exchanged greetings and mutual topics of interest with like-thinking congregants; a visit to the synagogue both empty of any inner content or token of sincerity and certainly no evi­ dence that the guilty conscience has been aroused. This apparently paradoxical situation can only be explained in the manner suggested by Lord Devlin, albeit in a different context, namely the mental abolition of any sense of guilt in our relationship with G-d.

The experience and sensation of the guilt feeling as a consequence of a fully conscious moral experience which is carried out in violation of the letter and spirit of Jewish teaching is basic to Judaism. It is in this sprit that the prophet Jeremiah declared: “I was ashamed, yes even con­ founded, because I did bear the reproach of my youth” (Jer. 31, 9).

In rabbinic literature, the far-reaching value of this fun­ damental attitude is demonstrated in a remarkable talmudic passage. In the course of a discussion concerning the vari­ ous Jewish Kings who will not have a place in the world to come, Ahaz, one of the most irresolute and irresponsible of the Kings of Judah, who was responsible for the in­ troduction of foreign modes of worship in Jerusalem, is not included in this list. The reason advanced by the an­ cient sages for this glaring omission is that he displayed a sense of guilt and blameworthiness by hiding his face when confronted by the prophet Isaiah (B.T. Sanhed. 104a).

Guilt engendered in this manner in the human heart pre­ supposes power in the moral agent to have acted other than he did; the knowledge of this and its acceptance by the perpetrator of the wrongful act, is the absolute pre­ requisite of true repentance.

Formerly, the problems associated with guilt and con­ science loomed large not only in Jewish classical sources, but also in secular philosophy which also concerned itself objectively with the many problems associated with good and evil. Take for example the problem under surveillance; the question posed by philosophers w a s: W hat is it that imparts within man pangs of guilt ? To this question philosophers are unanim ous: it is the voice of conscience.

The question then arises, what is to be understood by conscience? To this question, the answers provided are as complex as they are diverse.

In ancient Greek philosophy Cicero refers to the con­ science as the inner voice which accuses and defends our conduct with respect to its ethical qualities, and it is de­ scribed by Chrysippus as the consciousness of harmony within oneself. In mediaeval scholastic philosophy con­ science is considered to be the law of reason (lex talonis), an inner awareness of moral principles. In the English school of philosophy, Shaftesbury assumed the existence of a “moral sense” in man, a sense of right and wrong, an emotional reaction based on the fact that man is essentially in harmony with the cosmic order. Butler suggests that moral principles are an intrinsic part of the constitution of benevolent and generous desires in man. According to Adam

Smith, our feelings for others and our reaction to their approval or disapproval are the core of conscience. In existentialist philosophy it is the capacity to be able to listen to ourselves.

Many of these theories are obviously unacceptable to the Jewish way of thinking. None the less, from these sporadic gleanings it is evident that the attem pt was made throughout history to grapple with issues of paramount importance, rooted- in the knowledge that the problems of good and evil were issues which needed to be faced.

Nowadays questions of this nature have been infiltrated by psychology which, popularly interpreted, is less con­ cerned with the concept of good and evil than with their total abolition. Thus the different manifestations of con­ science have largely been taken up in the field of psycho­ analytical research, particularly in the field of motivation.

The trend is to bring action into the closest possible re­ lationship with character. This tends to obscure the real avoidability of sin. It has thus been demonstrated that guilt feelings are the result of the child’s instinctual demands conflicting with his early environment or, conversely, the child who has had no prolonged attachm ent or anchorage in his early life may develop into a psychopathic person­ ality with little feeling for others. This is often the back­ ground of those who commit crimes without experiencing guilt.

Now medical research has been enlisted to bolster these specious theories, and glands or rather their malfunction have recently been blamed for the existence of the guilty conscience! If we add to these the findings of the modem behavourist school, in which man is considered to be no more than a bundle of reflexes, reacting to his environ­ ment, is it then to be wondered at that man in modern eyes is reduced to little more than an automaton. Under the aegis of such theories we no longer commit sins, but anti-social acts.

W ithout wishing to press the attack against such theo­ ries too deeply, we must insist there is nothing to shake the religious truth that as possessors of a soul we have a wider environment than that of family or group. Juda­ ism teaches that good and evil are real; there is a con­ stant struggle between them in our hearts. To suffer the pangs of guilt is the personal expression of blameworthi­ ness and accountability for an act of wrongdoing. To demand less is to depersonalise man; reduce the reality of sin and you deprive man of the act of self-judgement so essential to the moral progress of society.

Finally, we can do no better than to sum up with the words of our rabbis, who possessed a matchless flair and inimitable intuition to couch the most penetrating thoughts in the simplest terms. “It is,” they say, “the man who is humiliated by his sinful acts who is forgiven for all his sins” (B.T. Ber. 12b).

MR. AND MRS M LEDERMAN 11 MAYFIELD GARDENS, N.W.4

wish their children, grandchildren, mechutanim and relatives, members of the Beth Din, Honorary Officers and Council of the Federation of Synagogues, and K’lal Yisroel a—

mtu n»'nm hivid

Page T en

SEPTEMBER. 197)— TISHRI, 5732

TORAH LIFE AND MODERN THOUGHT — 8

By RABBI DR. J. E. EHRENTREU COGNITIVE LIFE General aspects The problem of Religion and Reason is as old as m an­ kind. The Tree of Knowledge — not the Tree of Life — was the first problem of Man. He w anted to eat its fruit; it was denied to him. N evertheless, he did eat it and lost Eden. Since then, the problem has not come to an end. The struggle for a solution goes on. And it seem s th at this struggle is a p art of religious life itself.

Throughout the ages, religious philosophers tried to solve the problem by adjusting the ten ets of religion to the ever-changing discoveries of science, or vice versa.

(Science is here used in the w idest sense of the word.)

And a group of Jew ish philosophers regard philosophical investigations and rational considerations in connection w ith religious and general life not only as a perm itted, useful religious occupation, but as a M itzvah, and even more, as the highest religious ai m: absolute happiness, sum m um bonum.

Surely, we can find a g reat num ber of u tteran ces in Tanach and in the Rabbinic T radition th a t encourage an intellectual approach tow ards the Torah. But, how this is m eant and how it is achieved — this is the decisive question.

W ith the first aw akening of the intellectual independ­ ence of man, rational conception en ters his religious life.

M any overcom e this quickly w ithout its coming to lasting inner discord and disturbance.

W ith many, however, this is the beginning of a struggle which lasts the g reater part of th eir life-time, if not longer; and they m ay consider happy the m an of “simple p iety ”, who know s nothing of such intellectual struggles.

The disparity in the n atu re of m an does not have as strong an effect on any sphere of religious life as on th at of the rational. It is not so much a m a tte r (and

THE ACTING RAV RASHI AND ROSH BETH DIN,

DAYAN

M.

NIT

FISHER

EXTEND

YEAR

GREETINGS

FISHER,

TO

RABBANIM,

MINISTERS,

PRESIDENT,

HONORARY

AND

RABBA-

WARMEST THE

NEW

DAYANIM,

CHAZANIM, OFFICERS,

THE

EXECU­

n i nn n

often not a t all) of m ental talen ts as of general inclination tow ards — we m ay even say, connection with — the Rational. W hat occupies the whole of one person’s life, is to an o th er a m atter of indifference. It m ay be said that, to a certain extent, the Rational, though innate in man, succum bs easily to an influence from outside. On the one hand, namely, it was rought in to some people from outside, and in other cases it was repelled, tem por­ arily or perm anently, by various outside circum stances.

But it cannot be doubted th a t w ith m any people, above all in certain periods of life and in special conditions, the Rational w orks — alm ost — by force of nature.

The im portance and significance of Cognition for the religious life lies in the deep m eaning which it has in general for the whole of m an. It tries to control him in every sphere; it subm its everything to its own judgem ent.

But this does not m ean th a t he alw ays behaves rationally on this account. On the contrary, it is a w eakness of m an th a t he often does not try or does not succeed in carrying out its “ b etter know ledge’’ against wilfulness, sensuality, sentim ents. And a second w eakness — which is especially om inous because of its lasting effect on the whole personality of m an — lies in the fact that, when, against sober consideration, he has done a w rong action, following one of his passions, he only adm its this in rare cases. He deceives him self by pretending to have acted in accordance w ith his intellectual conviction. This is w ishful thinking. Before, during, and afte r the action, alm ost autom atically and unconsciously, he seeks grounds which m ake this action appear to have been ju stly done and justified in his mind. The wish becomes the father to the thought; and this is how false views follow false actions, and these gradually gain a hold on him.

Only w ith people who have a specially strong sense of self-criticism , self-know ledge and severity against them ­ selves, does this danger not exist. Yet these people are rare. However, Torah-life intends to train us to be men of this kind. In the intensity of Torah-learning and of kevanah (devotion) in Tefillah, the aw areness of Teshuvah-sincerity should be aw akened in us day and night.

The gulf betw een “Be” and “O ught to Be” should become clear in our minds; no distortion of the real issues should be allowed. Man m ust see the ex ten t and the full nature of the disparity betw een w hat he is and w hat he should be. So long as this disparity is unclouded in his mind and heart, he can have the inner im pulse to fight against it; and though this m ay not alw ays succeed it can succeed if not today, then tom orrow . But if the differences and lim its betw een his life-duty and his life-conduct are once effaced, then it becomes increasingly difficult to turn back to duty. Then, in a favourable case a general religiosity m ay survive, perhaps even continue to live for longer; but tru e Torah-life is lost.

Let us investigate this vital problem of Jew ish thought on a lim ited scale — how it has entered Talmudic dis­ cussion — w ith the aim of assessing the nature and value of th a t approach to traditional thought and life, in accord­ ance w ith the m ost ancient sources.

TIVE, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, AND ALL MEMBERS OF THE FEDERATION

OF SYNA­

C hukkim and M ishpatim

GOGUES, AS WELL AS THEIR MANY FRIENDS

njnan nVixai oitoi D” n naira

dVd

•D-arp

We read in Yom a 67b the following Tannaitic s ta te ­ m ent taken from the S ifra: ‘ “My M ishpatim you should carry o u t’ (V ayikra 18:4). This refers to Com m andm ents which, if they w ere not w ritten, would have had to be

K

TH E L I G H T

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

written. (In other words, every decent human being would have demanded laws to that effect.) And what are these Commandments? Those which forbid idolatry, sexual immorality, bloodshed, robbery, and blasphemy. Further, we read: ‘And My Chukkoth you should keep’ (Vayikra 18:4). This refers to Commandments which are attacked

by Satan (the Yetzer Hara and the nations of the world; this is the version in the Sifra). And these a r e : the prohibition on eating pork, on wearing Shaatnes, the Mitzvoth of Chalitzath Yevamah, Taharath Metzorah, and Sair Hammishtaleach. But perhaps you will say, these are things of nonsense and nuisance (see Rashi’s explanation).

Therefore it is said: ‘I am Hashem, I have decreed them, and you have no permission to ponder upon them.’ ” This Rabbinic saying is the source of the well-known conception that the one group of Commandments — Chukkim — is beyond, and even against human under­ standing, whilst the other group — Mishpatim — is not only within the limits of human understanding, but selfevident.

In addition to the terms “Chukkim” and “Mishpatim”, the Torah uses other words for the Commandments: Eduth, Mitzvah, Torah, Mishmereth. But there can be no doubt that the Torah comprises in the dual term “Chuk­ kim and Mishpatim” all the Taryag Mitzvoth. Not only are these terms the most frequent ones, but they occur in the most remarkable passages of the Torah and the rest of Tanach; and it would be an utter impossibility to say that in such places only two groups of the Taryag Mitzvoth are meant. If only one of the 613 Command­ ments were excluded, the whole Passuk and the whole

passage would be unintelligible. Consider the following Pessukim from three books of Tanach (where Chukkim and Mishpatim are mentioned without any other deno­ tation) : Vayikra: 18:4, 18:5, 18:26, 19:37, 20:22, 25:18.

Devarim: 4:1, 4 :5 , 4 :8 , 4:14, 5:1, 11: 32, 12:1.

Yechezkiel: 5:6, 5:7, 11:20, 18:9, 18:17, 20:11, 20:13, 20:16, 20:19, 20:21, 20:24.

And of other books of Tanach, let us mention only Maleachi 3 :3 2 : “Remember the Law of Mosheh My Ser­ vant which I have commanded to him on Chorev for all Yisrael, the Chukkim and the Mishpatim.”

Surely, the question arises: If in this dual term all the Commandments are comprised, what is the meaning of the other terms we have mentioned, which are some­ times added to one, and even to both, of the terms “Chuk­ kim” and “Mishpatim”. The answer seems to be that in those passages a special sideline of meanings is in­ tended. For instance, when the son asks (in Devarim 6:20), “W hat are the Edoth, Chukkim and Mishpatim?. . .”, this is to be explained as follow s: The interest of the son is not primarily to know of the division of the Com­ mandments into groups. His first interest — and the father’s answer fits in very well—is to know of the “testi­ monies”, Edoth, which are the expressions of G-d’s dominion over the world, exhibited in Mitzrayim, and what was personally experienced by his father (see the Passuk Devarim 4 :4 5 : “These are the Edoth, and the Chukkim, and the Mishpatim . . . when they went out of Egypt”.).

And another example: When we read in Shemoth 24:12, ,(Vehatorah Vehamitzvah”, it is obvious that these terms

FOR KASHRUS AND QUALITY

FINEST VIENNAS

SALAMI

TINNED SOUPS, ETC.

MANUFACTURED BY

M. BLOOM (KOSHER) & SON LIMITED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE LONDON BETH DIN With best wishes to all readers of h a m a o r for a very Happy and Prosperous New Year

u:

■A

Page Eleven

iV

L

V 1 Zh> & a

r—

Page Twelve

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

have to be related to the ensuing w ords, “which I have w ritten to teach th em ”. (See the C om m entators.). For instance, one opinion is th at the dual expression refers to the W ritten and Oral Law. A nother view is th a t it refers to the two aspects of the M itz v o th : the intellectualspiritual and the practical-physical.

Let us consider now the Sifra, quoted in some detail.

M aharsha brings up a few significant points. A pparently, he w ants to explain the reason that the Sifra m entions the particular cases for Chukkim and M ishpatim respec­ tively. Are they random exam ples out of hundreds of others of the T aryag M itzvoth, or is there some special idea behind this choice? His answ er is th at in these cases each of the tw o groups has a special qualification. U n­ der the head of M ishpatim are m entioned those which are identical w ith the Seven C om m andm ents of the D escend­ an ts of Noach. The difficulty, how ever, is th a t only five (or even four, according to the likely version of Rambam) of the seven are m entioned. U nder the head of Chukkim , those cases are m entioned which are especially ridiculed by the antagonists of the Law, because th ey are cases which co n stitu te prohibition, while very sim ilar ones are perm itted. For instance, w hilst chazir m eat is forbidden, the shibbuta-fish is perm itted, w hose brain has the sam e taste as th at of chazir (Chulin 109a). ; In short, one could define the qualification and difference of Chukkim and M ishpatim as follow s: The M ishpatim are so self-evident and so m uch w ithin hum an u n d erstan d ­ ing, that reasoning about them is superfluous and th e re ­ fore pointless. And the Chukkim are so m uch beyond and against hum an understanding, th at reasoning about

11 r n n

them m ust be useless and therefore also ju st as pointless.

Through M aharsha’s explanation of the group of the Chukkim , he w ants also to explain why, firstly, Parah A dum ah — the m ost ch aracteristic Chok — is not m en­ tioned. (It is, how ever, m entioned in the version in the M idrash Rabba to C hukkath.) And, secondly, why the prohibition on pork is m entioned, while th at on other for­ bidden anim als is not.

A fter we have understood, according to M aharsha, the reason for the m entioning of the individual cases in the Sifra, the question arises, w hat is the position of all the o th er T aryag M itzvoth? Can we actually divide them into the tw o groups of Chukkim and M ishpatim ? It is not know n th a t this w as ever done or even attem pted. And, indeed, it seem s to be im possible. But an even more cardinal question is th is: The Sifra concludes v ’eyn lecha reshooth leharher bahem — “You have no right to ponder on th em .” W e know, how ever, th a t since ancient times, g reat Jew ish Teachers have pondered very intensively about the reasons of all M itzvoth, the Chukkim included.

These points, and others, lead us to give to the Sifra passage a special m eaning.

It seem s th a t the m ain idea behind the division is not th a t the individual C om m andm ents as such — each of them sep arately and totally — belongs to one or the other of the tw o groups, but th a t very m any of them contain Chok as well as M ishpat elem ents, to a lesser or g reater degree. T hat m eans, th a t one — surely a com prehensive one can include both types. And the ancient division of the 613 C om m andm ents prom pts us to see each M itzvah

With the compliments and best wishes of

GOLUB

CO. LTD

27 OSBORN STREET, E.l Phone: 01-247 7430 S to c k ists of JU D AICA and HEBRAICA for the hom e and synagogue

%

w

rHE

LIGHT

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

not so much as a complete entity in itself, in this matter, but as a combination of detailed prescriptions and items which are very often even counted as such among the Taryag Mitzvoth, e.g., as a lav and an asseh, or as more than one of them — some of them to be listed among the Chukkim and others among the Mishpatim.

A few details. Since even within one Mitzvah both Chok and Mishpat-elements are combined, it is under­ standable that the Sifra, as Maharsha asks, does not include groups under the Chukkim, because it wants to bring pure, full Chukkim. Many nations in recorded history had, and have, laws of the mentioned groups (prohibitions of certain food, and also of forbidden sexual unions), but the details of these laws are purely Jewish. And this surely refers to the Mishpatim as such. When we take each of them as an entity, we find that none of our Mish­ patim is identifical with the Mitzvoth Beney Noach. When, however, we make a distinction between the main idea and details, the m atter becomes clear. The Sifra thinks only of the main ideas of the Mitzvoth Beney Noach as being identical with the respective Mishpatim of Am Yisrael in their principal idea.

It is understandable that it is often doubtful whether a law or a part of a law is a Mishpat or a Chok. And, in addition to the few cases mentioned in the Sifra, there may also be other cases that are pure Mishpatim or pure Chukkim respectively. But the main principle is that Chukkim elements as well as Mishpatim elements are found in the same Mitzvah of the greater part of the Taryag Mitzvoth.

Limits in inquiries There are other cases where a limit is put to inquiry.

For instance, on the one hand, we are demanded to emulate the qualities of Hashem, and on the other hand, we are enjoined eyn leharher achar middothav shel hakadosh b.h. (a very similar expression to that at the end of the Sifra passage) — “do not ponder about the qualities of Hashem.”

The Gemara (in Pessachim 22b) says of a Teacher that he explained the word eth, the accusative sign, in all cases where it occurs ip the Torah, in such a manner, that something special, additional to the simple meaning, could have derived from the Passuk. After having done the greatest part of the work and after already coming to the Passuk (Devarim 10:20), eth Hashem Elokeichah teerah, he gave up his work (later R Akiva gave an explanation for this eth, too), because he could not find anything which could be “associated” with Hashem in such a manner. The obvious thought that the work he had put in on this subject m atter up to then had appar­ ently been in vain, he answ ered; “As I have received reward for (the attem pt of) my explanations, likewise I am receiving reward for now refraining (from further ex­ planations of this kind)”.

Freedom of religious inquiry and limitation of the same religious inquiry are not contrasts and are not mutually exclusive. A more extensive discussion of this topic follows in a later section.

“You have no right to ponder” The important concluding phrase in the Sifra passage is ve eyn lecha reshooth leharher bahem. Though there are slightly different versions in the various sources, they can be ignored, because they do not contribute to a clarification.

Page Thirteen

(First, the following tentative suggestion may be sub­ mitted for further consideration. The root of the word “reshooth” can also mean “obligation”, as in Chulin 54b: “The workmen are—in special circumstances— not obliged to stand up in the presence of Talmidey Chachamim”, and also in other places. And the respective meaning in our passage would b e : One could have thought—mistakenly— it a Mitzvah to ponder about the reason for the Chukkim, just because in this group of Mitzvoth the Yetzer Hara and other'hostile elements attack; against this view, the Tanna say£: This is no reason for special research, “you are not obliged . . .”.)

Applying the usual translation and explanation of this phrase, we have to ask ourselves: Do we find that this prescription is observed in Torah-study and research? And if not, why not? And the opposing question: How can one comply with it, how does it apply? For we do not know which of the Mitzvoth belong to the Chukkim (apart from the very few that are mentioned in the Sifra). There is no list—even a tentative one—out of the 613 Command­ ments concerning the Chukkim. And as there is no list existent there is equally no prohibition in practice.

If we, however, according to the suggestion made above, understand by Chukkim Chok-elements within the indivi­ dual Mitzvoth, the situation is different. We follow the natural human trend to think about any of the Mitzvoth, their ideas and their reasons; we come, then, to a stage and condition where we feel that “it now goes beyond our conception”, the situation is changed. Surely, it is difficult to see and to decide where the permission to ponder ends and the advice of discontinuance begins. The final decision depends on the individual; the main point is that he re­ cognises this possibility, and draws the correct conclusion.

W hat is decisive is not where the limit is, but that there is a limit at all. Religiously faithless people break off re­ search and proclaim in joyful triumph the conclusions of their disbelief—it is all “nonsense and nuisance” (Sifra).

Faithful people also break off their research, but they acknowledge and appreciate this in devotion, in emoonah shelemah in G-d’s wisdom and will. They stand in aweinspired admiration before the Chukkoth Shamayim Vaaretz.

This devotional state and status is not only of a passive character, but has a productive, active element. Rationalists consider Reason the sole source of knowledge. Torah-life, though attributing a proper position to intellectual human endowments, demands the putting of strict limitations and limits on Reason. The greatest shortcoming of Reason is that it is insufficient to recognise the boundaries set to it by nature.

Of vital importance and significance is that, in addition to Reason, there are other sources from which human inner life receives its impressions.

Our religious belief is that actions of the Chukkim— “without knowledge of their reasons”—have influence on our inward life if these actions are carried out with utter devotion to Hashem, whose Spirit is embedded in them.

The actions in outward life lead to reactions in inward life.

They cannot be easily observed in single, individual cases.

But our religious belief is that in shaping the fullness of the Jewish personality these influences of the Chukkim have their share—by pointing to a higher and deeper world than the Mishpatim (which by definition, point more to this world and this earth).

By devoted active performance of deeds with Chok ele­ ments, unconsciously to us, many impressions and exper­ iences enter our inner life and lie there as valuable ele­ ments for a higher life, if the hour calls for this.

Page Fourteen

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

n i Rn n

Both Chok and M ishpat w ithin the sam e M itzvah

earthly bonds, one finds union with the world of G-d__ m e ’eyn olam habba.

Let us consider some M itzvoth from this point of view, (a) The M itzvah Shabbath is m entioned a num ber of tim es in the Torah. And we derive from the various passages various aspects of this M itzvah. Thus, in Shem oth 23: 10-11, only the social aspect is m entioned.

Research into the “reaso n s” for the Jew ish Shabbath is very abundant, and the view m ay be prevalent th a t none of the Shabbath thoughts is beyond hum an understanding.

But is there a source th a t counts Shabbath under the Mishpatim ? There are various explanations of the dual term “Chok u-M ishpat” in Shem oth 16:25. And the Torah itself, in m entioning Shabbath in the second setting of the Ten Com m andm ents (Devarim 5 :1 2 ), refers to this very event in M arah. Is one justified in seeing in the Shabbath-M itzvah a Chok and a M ishpat?

b) And afte r the Shabbath day let us consider the Shab­ bath year. Shem ittah is first m entioned, together with Shabbath, in Shem oth 23: 10-11. And later, in V ayikra 2 u . 1-7, Shem ittah is again m entioned. Its social aspects are on a very high level and appeal w onderfully to our hum an h eart and mind. And a few Pessukim later we read (20-23) “And you will say : W hat shall we eat in the seventh year . . .? then I com m and my blessing upon you in the sixth year, and it shall bring forth fruit for three years . . .”

Surely, Shabbath is far beyond only the concept of a M ishpat (even if it is taken in the w idest and highest sense, nam ely regulating fully hum an relations, and general conduct in earthly m atters), w hen one considers the severe prohibition of w ork w ith all its details on Shabbath. Mitzvath Shabbath is an oth— the sign of the C ovenant of G-d with Y israel— a thought w hich far transcends the scope of the concept of a m ere M ishpat. Zachor vesham or— “Rem em ­ ber and k eep ”, w ere spoken in one w ord— “w hat the m outh cannot speak and w hat the ear cannot h ea r” (Shevuoth 20a).

And the concept of the nesham ah yetherah, the “A dditio­ nal Soul” leads, indeed, our Shabbath thoughts and our Shabbath observance into the sphere w here, beyond all

Should not we, according to hum an judgem ent, expect th a t the eighth and the ninth year would bring richer harvests because the soil was rested in the seventh year?

Is this not the “reasonable” resu lt of the Seventh Year?

Indeed, if this M itzvah w ere a law only to regulate hum an life and its w elfare and prosperity, the above ch aracterisa­ tion of the harvest problem would be correct. But this is not the case. The Chok elem ent is indivisibly associated w ith this M itzvah. And, indeed, ju st in the context of the Torah rem arks quoted, we read : “ . . . you shall do My C hukkim and keep My M ishpatim , and do them (V ayikra 25:21).

The M itz v a : “H onour your father and your m o th er” (Shem oth 20: 12) c) In the second setting of the Ten Com m andm ents (Devarim 5 :6 ), this is the second M itzvah w here the Torah

THE HONORARY OFFICERS & BOARD OF MANAGEMENT OF THE YESHURUN SYNAGOGUE EXTEND THEIR BEST WISHES FOR A HAPPY, PROSPEROUS AND PEACEFUL NEW YEAR TO THE MEMBERS OF THE BETH DIN, HONORARY OFFICERS, EXECUTIVE AND ALL MEMBERS OF THE FEDERATION OF SYNAGOGUES

TH E

LI GHT

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

refers to Marah, according to Tradition. Are we justified also to see in this Mitzvah a Chok and a Mishpat? And can we suggest some idea, why such a Mitzvah even has a Chok character? Human heart and mind would say.

If this Mitzvah collides with a “Mitzvah between G-d and man” the Mitzvah towards man should have preference, but the Torah says differently: “Every man should fear his mother and his father, but My Shabbath-days you must keep” (Vayikra 19:3). The Shabbath has preference over the honouring of parents (Yevamoth 5b).

Is it not strange that rewards are mentioned for the Mitzvah of “Honouring one’s Father and Mother one reward in the first setting of the Ten Commandments, and two rewards in the second—a Mitzvah of an action which flows by force of nature from any and every human heart that deserves this name. And here Divine rewards are so much stressed! One may even feel embarrassed, if one is told, or if one only thinks of the fact that one is rew ar­ ded for this action. Is not such an action even deprived of its dignity, integrity, and purity of purpose if one on y speaks or thinks of reward? It seem s: often we read in Torah Pessukim of actions of the heart, and they con­ clude with the phrase, “I am Hashem, (Your G-d) . Ac^ ording to Tradition, these words should tell us that Hashem is trustworthy of giving rewards; He knows what is m the heart of man and the like. But one may add that in this indication of the reward, this action should be lifted up from a purely human affair of helping people and the like, to a matter of human relation to Hashem, namely that in performance of the action we should be aware of perform­ ing a Mitzvah. And how is this exhibited and demonstrated.

Bv Riving preference to the Divine Law in cases when it is against parents’ demand and wish. This is the feature of a chok. d) Other Mitzvoth will be discussed later, such as the laws of the king’s wife, of the widow’s pledge, of the bird’s nest. e) Gezerath hakkathoov hee, this phrase in Talmudic discussion and research denotes what is called in this exposition a Chok-element with regard to Hashkafah dis­ cussion and research. Frequently, after a long discussion which brought up and brought out sound, logical, agreed argumentations, the researcher encountered a case that did not fit into the result of the exploration. In such cases, in certain circumstances, the rabbinically approved answer is gezerath hakkathoov hee, “it is a decree of the Passuk , meaning that it is beyond human reasoning.

The following is a random example: Disregarding deba­ ted and debatable details, the case could be presented in this short form—In Beitzah 12b, the Talmudic sugyah, “mittoch”, is referred to. It means, there are certain types of melachah (“labour”,) which are necessarily or generally used in preparing food or drink for forthcoming meals.

These labours are permitted on Yom-tov for these very purposes. The rule mittoch declares now: Because these types of labour are permitted for these very purposes, they are permitted to be done for no purpose, or nearly no purpose.

This generally difficult concept becomes more difficult by referring to a particular individual case.

The Gemara in Pessachim 46b say s: One who bakes on Yom-tov for the next day, which is a working-day, is guilty and should receive punishment. We see, then, that labour for the next day, though useful, must not be done, while labour for nothing, or nearly nothing, is permitted. This case is stated as being “a decree of the Passuk”. In par­

Page Fifteen

enthesis, one may suggest that there is a logical reason behind it. The honour and the distinction of Yom-tov—in comparison with the other days of the year—is impaired, if on this festive day labour is done for the next day, which is a working day. However, when one does labour on Yomtov for no purpose, or nearly no purpose, an under-estima­ tion of Yom-tov, with regard to, and in reference to, the working days, does not exist. One could judge the un­ necessary work as a kind of playing around in a Yom-tov leisurely mood. Under the rabbinical term mithassek, this kind of activity, even on a Shabbath, is, though forbidden, not so guilty as a deliberate action melecheth machsheveth (Shemoth 35:33). This detailed instance may serve to explain in general that the term “Chok-element” does not mean that “Chok” is to be regarded as being of an absolute character. It can happen that explanations come forward in the course of time. The basic characterisation of Chok is : There do exist law items beyond human understanding.

The concept of Chukkim in the mind of David It is in Psalm 119, where David reveals his attitude to us.

In Passuk 12, we read the shortened Berachah, “Baruch attah Hashem, lamdeinu chukkeicha”. Linguistically speak­ ing, this wording is difficult, as the imperative form, refer­ ring to the future, is not used in a Berachah. Therefore, according to Rashi and Redak, the meaning is: “I bless and thank You for Your having taught me Your Chukkoth; and I ask You to continue teaching me them.” In four other Pessukim we read the phrase, “Teach me Your Chukkim”, within the 176 Pessukim that overflow in phra­ ses about the greatness of the Torah. And the term Chuk-

I »'

t

Page Sixteen

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

kim ” as such occurs in this Psalm 22 tim es. We see and realise in these Pessukim the deep urge of David th a t the spirit ol the Chukkim m ay descend on him. It is his longing for G-d th at m ay be expressed in longing to obtain the spirit ot the Chukkim. It is the m ighty attem p t of a breakthrough from this world to the W orld of G-d. It is the closest approach to, aw areness of, and union w ith Hashem.

riA>s\

nsnn

Chukkim.

See also Pessukim like: “For all His M ishpatim were before me, and as to Chukkim, I did not depart from th em ” (Shem uel II, 22:23). Or— “For all His Mlshpatim were before me, and I did not put aw ay his C hukkim ”.

The concept o f M ishpat in the m ine of Yirm iyah

This “teaching and learning” of the Chukkim is not on an intellectual basis. It is th at rem arkable kind of receiv­ ing know ledge th at transcends earthly w ays and means, and requires the w ays and m eans of the Higher World.’ f o r this David asks in w ords of deep emotion.

To this there is to be added an im portant feature, which is revealed to us by Rambam in Hilchoth M e’eelah VIII, 8.

A pparently basing him self on a M idrash-source, Rambam quotes the two Pessukim 69 and 86 from Psalm 119, and it seem s enlightening for us to quote them in th eir w ider context, together w ith other Pessukim , namely, the refer­ ence to enemies.

(67) Before I was afflicted I w ent astray, but now I have kept Your word. (68) You are good and do good to teach me Your Chukkim . (69) The proud have forged a lie against me; I will keep Your precepts— Pikkudim (70).

I h e ir heart is as fat as grease. I delight in Your Law. And the other p assag e: (85) The proud have digged pits for me which are not afte r the Law. (86) All Your Com m andm ents are faithful; they persecute me w ro n g fu lly help You me. (87) They had alm ost consum ed me upon earth, but I did not forsake Your precepts— Pikkudim .

A very few Pessukim earlier (83), David sa y s: “I becam e like a bottle in the smoke, yet I do not forget Your

In Yirm iyah 9: 22-23 we read : “Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom , neither let the m ighty glory in his m ight, neither let the rich m an glory in his riches. But let the one, who glories himself, glory him self in this w ay: to u n d erstan d and to know Me, haskel veyodoa othee, because l am Hashem W ho exercises lovingkindness, judgem ent and righteousness on earth; for in these I delight, says H ashem .”

Y irm ayah here rebukes the people who pride them selves on qualities they think they possess, am ong them wisdom — based on their own intellect. To these people the pro­ phet says the w ords m entioned in the name of Hashem The g reat question arises h ere: Surely the qualities m en­ tioned are an outstanding and param ount part of the Torah but is it the whole Torah? W hy is the other p art of Torah legislation apparently ignored? And is not a passage like th at a w elcom e support for those who take pride in say­ ing: This is the Torah of so-called “Prophetic Judaism ” and I believe in this, and not in m ore Judaism ?

Our answ er is: This other p art of Torah legislation is m ainly covered by the Chok principle, and these M itzvoth being beyond hum an understanding, are also beyond the hum an possibility to detect in them item s of Divine guid­ ance of the world and of m an which could be em ulated r

/

I t u i l d e r s

237 Golders

&

C

o n t r a c t o r s

*een Roach N .W .ll

Telephones: 01-455 8466 01-458 1455 Tii m a n !11u ii ii i / i n i n m i 111 ju i ; i .m - 1 ,u u ii l i n u i ii i l i m i i i i m i i i j i j m i i i i j m f i j ' m n ^

—c — -

-

X

T

f

I

K

ll fr°mthere f atl®i Were

<inr

e

i/i Wlse man 0rv in his les- But let l l s to ?e- because ;en*nt and

1ttashem,” •hemselves m wisdom ? the prof Hashem. menthe Torah, : of Torah ssage like le in sayJudaism” slation is Mitzvoth, yond the ine guidemulated

m

THE LI GHT

Page Seventeen

SEPTEMBER. 1971— TISHRI, 5732

by man. All the more, the Mishpat elements could, and should be made a subject of study, to find in their rea­ sons and ideas an abundance of ethical, intellectual, social, emotional, etc. values for enrichment of the Mussar and Hashkafah world within ourselves—“in earthly m atters”.

The concept of Chukkim and Mishpatim in the mind of Yechezkiel Yechezkiel’s utterances are, so to speak, the earliest, most ancient commentary on the two Pessukim that occu­ pied our attention so intensively and extensively.

We find this in Chapter 20, which is indeed of remarkable significance. While, generally, the occasion and the date of the individual prophetic orations (and also of the Psalms, etc.) are mostly unknown and therefore they often defy a fully satisfactory explanation—with regard to this chap­ ter all these questions are answered. It contains what is, indeed, a iecture given to people who paid a visit to him.

Let us read the text itself: “And it came to pass, in the seventh year, in the fifth month, on the tenth day of the month, that certain of the Elders of Israel came lidrosh eth Hashem (to inquire of Hashem); and they sat before me.” The date was the tenth of Av 591 (or 590) b . c . e ., that means five (or four) years, to the day, before the destruc­ tion of Yerushalayim. It was the seventh year of the exile of King Yehoyachin (Yechoyah), the son of Yehoyakim, who died on the way to the exile in Bavel. The year was the seventh year of the rule of King Tzidkiyah, the uncle of Yehoyachin.

A significant part of the Jewish people was already in Bavel, among them Yechezkiel himself. On the date men­ tioned, some of the Elders of Yisrael came to him to inquire, as we would say, “about the Jewish position.” This occa­ sion is exploited by the Prophet to give a survey of Jewish history up to the very day when he spoke to his visitors.

And in his talk—within 14 Pessukim—not less than 8 times the very terms “Chukkim” and “Mishpatim” are mentioned.

This shows us what great significance he attributes to these phrases and these Pessukim.

He sees the strongest point of effective Mussar in Pes­ sukim like this (11): “I gave them My Chukkim, and My Mishpatim I made known to them—those which man does and lives in them (vechay bahem )” The latter words, taken directly from the Torah, require some explanation. Accord­ ing to Targum Onkelos, Rashi and others, they refer to life in the World to Come. But they must refer also to the life of this world, since an all-embracing Halachah of paramount importance (that refers to the physical life here on earth) is derived from these very words. According to Yoma 85b and Sanhedrin 74a, etc., nearly all laws may be and must be transgressed if and when, by means of this transgression—even only possibly—danger to life is pre­ vented. This is learnt from the Passuk, which includes the affairs of this world.

The Passuk, apparently, speaks also of life here on earth, stressing that even if the final life is in the World to Come, this does not mean that we have to negate this world and to cut out all its pleasures from our life.

On the contrary, in this very chapter (Passuk 15) the Prophet speaks of the land “flowing with milk and honey, a glory of all lands.” It is recognised, respected, perhaps even feared, due to their strength. “Surely this great na­ tion is a wise and understanding people. That a great nation this is, to whom G-d is so near . . . W hat a great nation this is, that has Chukkim and Mishpatim—righteous ones.

(Devarim 4: 7-8).

In his orations, Yechezkiel, living as he did in the Golah, often had the other nations in mind, even more than the other Prophets. First as those who unfortunately be­ come the models for Yisrael’s idolatries and immoralities, and then as those who do not escape Divine judgement.

He speaks of them in Passuk 26. And generally the whole Chapter has some special connection with the non-Jewish world’s life, because precisely the two Pessukim so thor­ oughly discussed here are actually mentioned in the Torah in the closest connection with this non-Jewish world.

The Pessukim (Vayikra 18: 4-5) are not isolated but (with­ out any sign of separation) follow the warning against the abominations of the “Chukkoth” of the people of Egypt and Kenaan and these two Pessukim are followed (again without any separation) by a long list of abominations of that kind. While these nations build up their whole life on the Chukkoth of their abominations, Yisrael is deman­ ded to build up its life on the Chukkim and Mishpatim of Hashem.

The Jew, in faithful performance of Chukkim and Mish­ patim, lives a good life here on earth as the preparation, as the prosdor (the entrance-hall) to the World to Come.

The concept of Chok in Iyov’s thought While David pours out his heart in an emotional manner and asks to be granted insight into the spirit and the work­ ing of the Chukkim; while the passage from Yirmiyah conveys to us the Divine ethical teaching which lies in the Mishpatim; while Yechezkiel enlarges on the concept of the Chukkim and Mishpatim as an always up-to-date, strong

J. DAVIES (SHIPPERS) LTD

wish

• .

/

Page Eighteen

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732 *ii

M ussar adm onition, Iyov provides us w ith the philosophical aspect of the Chok concept.

And w hat has Iyov to say about our subject-m atter ?

“Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? N ot o ne” (Iyov 14 4). W hatever the Peshat and Derash explanations of this Passuk m ay be (see Niddah 9a w ith Tossafoth, M idrash Rabba C hukkath, etc.), in the main thought of Iyov is inherent th at the iu m e ’ah and taharah Dinim are com ­ plex (which is predom inantly show n in the Chok elem ent of Parah Adumah). And Iyov brings this com plexity of G-d’s Law into context w ith the hard and harsh problem s of hum an life on earth, for instance of his own life and the sim ilar lives of so m any other people.

The M idrash Rabba, at the beginning of C hukkath, ex ­ plains: “W ho did so? W ho com m anded so? W ho decreed so? Not the Only One in the w orld?” The M idrash relates a num ber of cases in Jew ish history and Jew ish Law of the fact th at the Clean arose, and arises out of the Unclean.

This is indeed beyond and even against hum an understanding; G-d’s W isdom and Will is indeed im m easurably higher than all th at the hum an mind can grasp. And this is the sublime M ussar teaching of Iyov in the days of his suprem e distress. Believe in G-d’s Guidance! There is the Chok principle in hum an destiny, too. Much is beyond hum an understanding. ‘‘But shall not the Judge of all the world do rig h t?” (B ereshith 18:25).

Let us retu rn now to the Sifra passage itself for final basic exposition.

The term s “sham ar” and “asah The term s Chukkim and M ishpatim are frequently asso ­ ciated with the verbs shamar, “k eep ” and asah, “do”. And

n

n n

there are repeated Rabbinic sayings th a t each of both verbs is used in reference to each of both nouns.

W hat is the m eaning of sham ar? It is often rtfeant to refer to lev, the “h e a rt”, e.g. “and his fath er kept the m at­ ter [in his h e a rt]” (B ereshith 37:11). But m ore significant I? the Slfra 2 6 :3 w here it is said : W hen the Torah says “Rem em ber (zachor) the Shabbath-day to sanctify it” one could have perhaps assum ed th a t this m eans “in your h e a rt” . W hen, how ever, it is also said : “Keep (sham ar) the Shabbath-day to sanctify it”, this la tte r w ord sham ar m ust refer to lev the “h e a rt”, e.g. “and his fath er kept the matth at zachar refers to an utterance w ith the m outh. We derive from this T annaic source th a t sham ar refers to an inner action, nam ely to th at of the mind, and zachar refers to an outw ard action, th a t of the m outh (and other physical deeds).

Of the Pessukim which bring the verbs sham ar and asah in reference to both Chukkim and M ishpatim , one is Vayikra 18. 4-5 (actually tw o Pessukim ) and one is Vayikra 19:37. And betw een these Pessukim , there are m entioned a g reat num ber of detailed Dinim; some of them are of m ore C hok-character— K edushah and T aharah— some are of m ore M ishpat-character— Justice and Love. These great principles, in a variety of Dinim covering the so-called small and the g reat things in life, convey to us, tim e and again, in study and in practice, how even the sm allest things m ust not be ignored and neglected lest the whole body of Torah-law should be endangered. If the sm allest part of the hum an body does not work, the whole life can be endangered. If in the g reatest and m ost com plicated m a­ chine the sm allest p art is m issing or fails to function, it can im pair the functioning of all the other innum erable parts. It is up to us to lift even the little things in life up to the higher regions, by including them into Torah-life, at the proper tim e and the proper place. This is achieved by the physical m eans of asiyah and by the spiritual means of shemirah.

Epilogue

EMET V ’SHALOM SYNAGOGUE The President, Hon. Officers and Board of Management extend sincere greetings to all their members

W hen, a t the end of a m onth and a t the end of a year — in a mood of Teshuvah concerning the past, and in a mood of hope concerning the future— we contem plate about our life and encounter thoughts about its problem s, ob­ scurities, and m ysteries— we should be clearly aw are th at they are the Chok-elem ents in our world of relative values, which in G-d’s W orld are form ed to absolute values, to M ishpat: T ruth— Justice. Thus we read in Tehillim 81 : 4-5, w ords th at are recited on the festive days m entioned: “Blow the horn on the New Moon, a t the beginning of the m onth for our Day of Festival. It is a Chok for Yisrael, and a M ishpat to the G-d of Y aakov”.

(To be continued)

and K'lal Yisroel for

The next issue of n a n n n ^ s m m V i d ’ y i d jw

HAMAOR

will appear for CHANUCAH

THE

LIGHT

Page Nineteen

SEPTEMBER, 1971 — TISHRI, 5732

SEPHER “ESH DATH”

By RABBI MOSHE COHEN There recently passed away in Tel Aviv the renowned Talmid Chacham, Rabbi M. Ch. Epstein *?"XT, author of eleven volumes entitled Esh Dath (“A Fiery Law”). These comprise several thousand discourses and essays dealing with fundamental thoughts and ideas, with a universal approach to Jewish thought and teaching. Some of these ideas are presented in the course of this article.

In Chapter 14, volume 7, the subject dealt with is “The People of Israel and the Land of Israel”. The author writes: “Just as Israel, the People, are termed t ’rumah, a holy offering, as they are described by Jeremiah (ii, 3)— ‘Israel is the L-d’s hallowed portion His first fruits of the increase. All that consume him shall be held guilty’— so the Land of Israel is a physical or territorial holy portion of the L-d. And how do we know that the L-d took only Israel as his portion from among the peoples of the world?

For it is said (Deut. 32, 9): ‘For the portion of the L-d is His people Jacob the lot of his inheritance.’ ” From the above it will be noted that there is a bond between the People and the Land of Israel, both being t’rumah, a holy offering or dedication to the Creator.

In Bereshith Rabbah, we are taught that Eretz Israel is superior to other lands, for the Torah learned there is superior. And there is no wisdom equal to the wisdom of Eretz Israel. The Sanhedrin, the Supreme Court of Justice, may sit only there and the laws relating to the adjustment of the calendar are administered only by this Court.

The Mechilta (The Midrash Halacha on Sh’moth) com­ ments on the verse in the Shira, the Song of Moses: “Till Thy people pass over, O L-d, till the people pass over that Thou hast acquired”. (Kanita—lit. “thou has purchased”).

Thus, although the whole world is Thine, only Israel really belongs to You. As Isaiah says, (Chapter 43): “This people that I have formed for Myself.”

The Talmud (Pesachim 87) enumerates four Kinyanim (acquisitions) including Israel and the Land. Also in the Shira there is the verse, “Thou wilt bring him (Israel) and plant him in the mountain of Thine inheritance” (Nachalah).

So, too, are the same four termed Nachalah, the Beth Hamikdash, the Torah, the Land of Israel and the People of Israel. Hence “Israel, who are called Nachalah, will come to the Land of Israel . . . and build the Beth Hamikdash .. . by virtue of the Torah.”

The Talmud, (Kethubot 110) declares that at all times it is better to dwell in Eretz Israel (even in a place where the majority are Gentile) rather than in the Diaspora, even where the majority are Jews; for in Eretz Israel, one is nearest to G-d. The Maharal of Prague sta te s: “Eretz Yisrael is the Holy Land and is distinguished from all other lands, in that the very air instils wisdom in its inhabit­ ants, and only there was the spirit of prophecy to be found.”

The Talmud (Gittin) recounts examples of the wisdom even of the children of the Holy Land.

The Mechilta states further: “Know that the Divine Presence — Shechina — is not to be found outside Eretz Yisrael, for it is said: ‘Jonah arose to flee from the Divine Presence !’ Is it then possible to escape anywhere from the Shechina? Is it not said (Psalm 139), ‘Where from Thy presence can I flee?’ But Jonah thought to escape to the Diaspora, outside Eretz Yisrael, where the Shechina is not revealed.”

The Maharal declares that there is a complete identifi­ cation between the People and the Land, for the Land of Israel is the natural habitation of the People. Just as every land represents the natural instincts of its people, so the Holiness of the Land of Israel is matched to the holiness of the People of Israel.

Ii is well-known that the Passover Festival is a “root” principle in the Torah and in Jewish living. Many com­ mandments were given to us as a result of the Exodus from Egypt, and many commandments are fulfilled in remembrance of the Exodus. The Exodus, however, was not merely a physical phenomenon, but more especially a release from the spiritual and mental slavery that our ancestors suffered.

There can be no deeper or more soul-searing suffering than to be bound in service to the degradation of the lowest form of idol worship. It is necessary only to be reminded of the types of gods worshipped by the Egypt­ ians to understand and to feel the abhorrence of our ancestors towards their daily tasks. It is because of this that we say in the Hagadah: “We thank Thee for our release and for the redemption of our souls” (“P’duth Nefshenu”). It was this harrowing experience of our ances­ tors that inculcated within ourselves the hatred of slavery and the unconquerable desire to be free men and women throughout the generations.

Apart from idol worship of the Egyptians, their most evil trait of character was their gross pride, demonstrated

by Pharaoh in his question: “Who is G-d that I should listen to him?” for Pharaoh deemed himself a god.

In prophetic writings, Egypt has been designated by the name Rahav, which means “utmost arrogance and pride” .

Our sages teach us that Chametz—leaven—is the result of allowing flour and w ater to remain unattended after mixing for more than a short time (eighteen minutes), when fermentation sets in. It is as a result, then, of some outside agent that permeates the mixture. On the other hand, if this mixture is continually activated and rolled flat, the result is Matzah. The activity prevents the dough from rising. The chemical agent which causes the fermen­ tation has been equated by the sages with the greatest sin of all, pride and gross arrogance. The ethical lesson, then, to be learnt is to develop humility to the utmost.

It is this trait for which Moshe Rabbenu was lauded :

DAYAN

AND

RABBANIT

BRACEINER

FAMILY EXTEND SINCERE GOOD WISHES TO THE DAYANIM, RABBANIM AND MINISTERS, THE CHAZAN, PRESIDENT, HON. OFFICERS, BOARD OF MANAGEMENT, SECRETARY AND ALL MEMBERS OF THE FINCHLEY CENTRAL SYNAGOGUE AND THEIR FAMILIES FOR A nn ^x iE n m i o ruc>

f *'

. 1\

t

Page Twenty

SEPTEMBER. 1971 — TISHRI, 5732

"And the man Moses w as humble m ore than all men on the face of the ea rth .”

In the Zohar, the C ham etz represents the “erev ra v ” the mixed m ultitude th a t joined the Children of Israel in the Exodus.

They w ere a m otley and assorted com pany of slaves who w ere happy to leave the hard labour to which they had been condemned, even if they could see no im m ediate destination. Moshe Rabbenu allow ed this crow d to join the Israelites w ithout previously asking Divine perm ission.

It was this “mixed g ro u p ” th at set up the Golden Calf, and w ere the cause of the m any com plaints and provoca­ tions th at occurred during Israel’s journey to the Homeland.

In an o th er section of the Zohar, it is stated th at this mixed group included m any descendants of Esau and Ishmael. These descendants of Esau, w ere know n as “Edom ”, the Red, because Esau had asked Jacob to let him eat of this “red p o ttag e” .

It is a curious but historical coincidence th at in our time, Com m unist Russia, which has adopted the red-col­ oured flag as its symbol, has taken on the m antle of Esau — Edom, and joined w ith Ishm ael— the A rab nation— for the purpose of destroying Israel. This rem inds us of the replies of descendants of both Esau and Ishm ael, who re ­ fused to accept the Torah because of th eir inherent ch arac­ teristics and natural instincts.

Esau-Edom-Amalek. They all have identical c h a ra c te r­ istics and have played the sam e role throughout Israel’s chequered history. Their descendants in our generation have in p art fulfilled the desire of their ancestors. The gene of Esau-Am alek w as Sinat Chinam, causeless hatred, and this also expressed th eir inner hatred of the Divine C reator. These distinctive features contain the pow er of

11 h n n

changeability and, cham eleon-like, can take on different colours, so as to be alm ost totally unrecognisable.

The nations who in th eir tu rn w ished the destruction of Israel, did so only because they would not accept the au th o rity of the “King of the U niverse”. As the Psalm ist states (Psalm 69): “Because for Thy sake I have borne reproach, I am become a stran g er unto my brethren. Be­ cause zeal for Thy house hath eaten me up and the re­ proach of them th at reproach Thee are fallen upon m e.”

And in Psalm 83: O G-d, keep not Thou silence, for behold Thine enem ies are in an uproar. They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation, th at the nam e of Israel m ay be no m ore in rem em berance’. For they have consulted together with one consent, against Thee do they m ake a covenant. The ten ts of Edom and the Ishm aelites; Moab, and the H agrites; Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; Philistia w ith the inhabitants of Tyre; A ssyria also is joined w ith them; they have been an arm to the children of Lot.” This hatred, handed down to the present generation, has been only too well dem onstrated by the action of both the R ussian and G erm an peoples. The inherent barbarism of G erm any has been highlighted by the following ex tract from the w ritings of H einrich Heine. Although himself having broken all contacts w ith his people, he saw through the civilised facade of his hom eland, and his prophetic spirit endeavoured to w arn the world one hundred years in advance, of w hat would result when the tw o-thousandyear-old barbarism threw off its m ask and reverted to its tru e natural self— the n ature of the Sons of Amalek.

“The dom inant religion has occasionally calmed the brutal G erm an lust for battle, but it cannot destroy th at savage joy. And when once th at restraining talism an, the sym bol of th at religion, is broken, then the old com batants

King David Suite FOR BANQUETING AT ITS BEST • MARBLE ARCH W.l.

SCHAVERIEN (Caterers) LTD.

Under the Beth Din and Kashrus Commission

01-723 7933

a : y\

TH E

L IG HT

SEPTEMBER, 1971 — TISHRJ, 5732

will rage with all the fury celebrated by their ancient poets.

The wooden talisman is fast decaying and the day will soon come when it will break pathetically to pieces. Then, the old stone gods will rise from unremembered ruins, and rub the dust of a thousand years from their eyes and Thor, their strongest idol, will leap to life at last and bring down his gigantic hammer on their cathedrals . . . German thunder is truly German . . . it takes its time, but it will come, and when it crashes, it will crash as nothing in history crashed before. A drama will be performed which will make the French Revolution look like a pretty idyll.

Never doubt, the hour will come.”

These words were written a hundred years before the Holocaust that destroyed six million of our people and prepared the way for the spiritual destruction of a further three million by Soviet Russia.

The Russian Government learnt from Germany’s mis­ take, and indulges in a more refined method of persecu­ tion. It attempts to destroy Israel not by direct murder, but by a form of asphyxiation, that is, depriving the Jew of his Torah, which is his “life and length of days.” This method is in line with Pharaoh’s, but as his plot did not succeed in the past, so will his method not succeed now.

In the words of the Prophet M icah: “As in the days of thy coming out of the Land of Egypt — Will I show unto him marvellous things”.

MATAN TORAH AND YOM HABIKURIM

By RABBI GERSHOM HARAPANAS The divine revelation at Matan Torah on Har Sinai was the overpowering splendour of the stream of goodness from the Creator to His creatures. This appearance was unique; only once in history did a nation hear “the voice of G-d speaking from the midst of the fire’”. This was the exceptional merit of Am Yisrael, the offspring of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaacov, to stand at that position, for whose sake G-d created heaven and earth.

This greatness, to be sanctified to become a nation of prophets and a kingdom of priests, comes to us through the merit of our holy forefathers, who were many times tested for their enduring faith in the Al-ty, and they stood staunch through them all. Yet the children of Israel them­ selves, despite their low Madrega in Egypt, were also worthy to receive the grace of G-d more than all the other nations. Although they were deeply sunk in the impurities °f Egypt, the children of Israel did not inter-marry, they did not become assimilated to the Goyim, and they kept their identity with clear recognisable signs. Therefore they were worthy to be redeemed, and to rise within 50 days to such a level that they were fit to hear the Ten Com­ mandments from G-d Himself.

The Torah was given almost immediately after the departure from Egypt and before entry to the Holy Land.

This is to teach us that the essence of the departure from Egypt was only for Matan Torah, since learning Torah and keeping the Mitzvot is the sole aim of Geulah, and entering Eretz Yisrael was only for forming the conditions for a

Page Twenty-one

full Torah-life, because there is no place in the world where it is possible to keep all the “Taryag” Mitzvot, apart from Eretz Yisrael. The law of Israel encompasses one’s whole life. The learning of it is our delight; our life’s content is the fulfilment of its Mitzvot, and the handing of it to our future generations must be our deter­ mination.

The stories of the Torah give pleasure to man and prepare him for noble moral conduct which is identical with the will of the Creator. The depth of the words of the Chachamim of the Talmud and other Gedolei Yisrael points out to us the Jewish way of thinking and educates us to Yirat Shamayim.

“Kol Reishit Le’hashem”, is based on the idea that all goodness comes to man from G-d. We express our thanks for all this goodness through keeping the Mitzvot con­ nected with the first fruits of our work, e.g. Bechor, Omer, Shetei Halechem, Truma, Bikurim, etc.

Some kinds of “Matanot Kehuna” were given to the Cohanim wherever they happened to be, e.g. Truma, Challa, but there were other types which were brought to the Beit Hamikdash. These were the Omer, the two loaves of bread, and the first fruits of the trees.

Bringing the Bikurim to the Beit Hamikdash was done with great ceremony and an intense feeling of Kedusha.

This brough the ordinary farmer who tilled the land to the high Madrega of a servant of G-d.

The Omer and two loaves of bread were offered from the two most important kinds of grain of Eretz Yisrael, which are the first mentioned of the “Seven Species”, the crops with which Eretz Yisrael is blessed, i.e., wheat and barley. The barley ripens in Nisan and the wheat' in Sivan.

The first fruits of the barley were brought to the Beit Hamikdash on the second day of Pesach, in the form of “Omer Hatnufah”. It consisted of barley flour of the new produce. When the wheat became ripe 50 days later on Shavuot, they brough the two loaves of bread from the new wheat harvest.

With the waving of the two loaves in the Beit Hamik­ dash, special offerings were brought, apart from the Mussaph offering for Shavuot.

Shavuot is not called Yom Habikurim because they brought the first fruit of the trees, for in fact these Bikurim were brought after Shavuot until Succot. It is called Yom Habikurim because of the two loaves which were offered on that day. ® This article was held over from the last issue through pres­ sure on space.

The President and Honorary Officers of the

SHA’ARE SHOMAYIM SYNAGOGUE 47 LEA BRIDGE ROAD, E.5

extend New Year greetings to the Rabbi, Chazan, Officials and members of the Synagogue and their families, and to the President and Hon. Officers of the Federation of Synagogues, and all their members and families.

Page Twenty-two

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

CHASSIDISM AND THE LAND OF ISRAEL

By RABBI DR. H. RABINOWICZ “If I forget thee, O Jerusalem , let my right hand forget her cunning,” the Jew s had w ept by the alien w aters of Babylon; “Let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth, if I rem em ber thee n o t.” (Ps. cxxxvii, 5-6). And th ro u g h ­ out their long and b itte r exile, they kept alive the m em ory of their ancient hom eland. For the C abbalists it w as fraught w ith m ystical significance and the Zohar expresses p as­ sionate love for the Holy Land. “H appy is he w hose lot it is during his lifetim e to abide in the Holy Land. For such a one draw s down the dew from heaven above upon the e a rth ” .

Three tim es the Besht set out for the Holy Land, on one occasion travelling as far as Istanbul, b u t each tim e “Heaven held him back,” for it w as know n th a t the fusion of the Holy Man and the Holy Land would hasten the coming of the M essiah. In vain the Besht yearned to fulfil the M itzvah of living in the land of Israel and of planting the seeds of Chassidism in the hallow ed soil. A lthough the m aster was not destined to accom plish this task himself, his aims w ere achieved through his pupils and associates.

In 1746 Rabbi A braham G ershon K utow er, the brotherin-law of the Besht, a learned T alm udist and Cabbalist, em igrated to Israel. Rabbi Jo n ath an E ybeschutz spoke of Rabbi G ershon w ith the utm ost reverence. At first, Rabbi G ershon had not recognised the hidden g reatn ess of his siste r’s husband, but later he becam e a m ost devoted fol­ low er of the Besht. Rabbi G ershon arrived in Jerusalem

U N T] fl

on the eve of New Y ear and w as w arm ly welcomed by both the Sephardim and the A shkenazim , who offered him a rabbinical post. He settled, however, in Hebron and later in Jerusalem . The Besht often w rote to him and occasion­ ally sen t money.

I one lette r the Besht co u n selled : “Let the w ords of M ussar (ethics), in which I have instructed you always be in your m ind.” For the Besht, distance was no ob­ stacle. “One Friday night, during the service,” said the Besht, “I searched for Rabbi G ershon throughout Palestine and could not find him anyw here. But the next m orning I found him .” Rabbi G ershon explained th a t he had spent th a t p articu lar Sabbath at Acre, praying on Friday night in a synagogue which w as technicaly outside the boundary of Israel. “P ray for m e,” the Besht w rote to his brotherin-law, “pray th a t I m ay be w orthy to join the inheritance of the L-rd, for the Al-ty know s th a t I have not given up hope of going to the Land of Israel.”

Like Nahum of Gimzo, the second-century Tanna, Rabbi N ahm an of H orodenka’s com m ent on every m isfortune w as “gam zu letovah” (“This, too, is for the b est”), for his faith w as as “strong as a pillar of iron.” He was a faithful com panion to the Besht, accom panying the m aster on m any travels. “I have afflicted my soul and I have im m ersed m yself in ritual baths, but I could not rid m yself of alien thoughts until I becam e attached to the B esht” .

T ogether w ith Rabbi M enahem Mendel of Przem yslany (d. 1772), N ahm an decided to settle in the Holy Land.

The journey w as difficult and dangerous. W ith the ship tossing on the storm y seas, Rabbi N ahm an exclaim ed: “L-rd of the universe, if it has been decreed by Thy heavenly court th at we should perish, this holy congre­ gation, jointly w ith the Shekhinah, declares th at we de-

SUPERB BANQUETING AT THE

Sam uel C a te re rs UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE BETH DIN AND KASHRUS BOARD OF THE FEDERATION OF SYNAGOGUES CATERING AT ANY HALL OF YOUR CHOICE Apply 808 0221 or 800 0364

Lr\

THE

J

><

•-Li

LIGHT

Page Twenty-three

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI. 5732

dine to accept the decree. We demand its prompt annul­ ment!” The passengers landed safely on Tishri 12, 1764.

Rabbi Nahman and Rabbi Menahem Mendel lived in Tiberias and Safed.

“Eretz Yisrael is an exalted land,” wrote Rabbi Jacob Joseph of Polnoy, “and the Holy One, blessed be He, hath given it to Israel as a perpetual gift. It is reserved ex­ clusively and completely for them.” Rabbi Jacob Joseph made careful preparations for his pilgrimage to the Holy Land for which he yearned. It is known that the Besht even gave him a letter to deliver personally to Rabbi Gershon. However, for reasons unknown to us the journey was never made and the letter was never delivered. Later, Rabbi Jacob Joseph published it in his book Porat Yosef under the heading: “This is the epistle which the Besht hath given me to hand to Rabbi Gershon’.’

According to Rabbi Phinehas of Korzec, it was a symp­ tom of melancholy for a man to evince no interest in visiting the Holy Land. Commenting on Moses’s prayer: “Let me go over, I pray Thee, and see the good Land” (Deut. iii, 25), Rabbi Phineas commented: “Moses said to G-d, ‘I do not wish to be as the ten spies who brought back an unfavourable and gloomy report. I wish to see only the ‘good of Eretz Yisrael.’ ” In 1790, Rabbi Phinehas left Ostrog for Israel, but he d'd not reach his destination He died in mid-journey at Shepetovka in 1790 or 1791.

In 1777, three hundred Chassidim left Galati, Rumania, under the leadership of Rabbi Menahem Mendel of Vitebsk (1730-1788), Rabbi Abraham Ha-Kohen of Kalisk and Rabbi Israel of Pultusk. After a great deal of hardship they reached the Holy Land five months later. “At last the day has come for which we have waited with such impatience,” wrote one of the leaders. “How happy we are in the Holy Land, the delight of our hearts, the joy of our thoughts is the land which is sanctified by different types of sanctity.”

Although the Chasidim were received with great friend­ liness by the Jewish communities, the arrival of so large a group of newcomers created economic problems. Their funds soon petered out and they naturally had no means of earning a living for their families.

“Even a man with the heart of a lion melts when he beholds infants begging for bread.” So Rabbi Menahem Mendel enlisted the support of his followers in Russia.

He sent Rabbi Israel of Pultusk to raise funds for the Halukah (literally “Division”), as the collections made abroad for the support of the Yishuv (“Settlem ent”) in the Holy Land came to be called. Rabbi Israel was the forerunner of many “Meshulahim” or “Shadarim” (“emissaries”) who paid periodic visits to Chassidic centres in Eastern Europe for this purpose.

“It is your responsibility,” wrote Rabbi Israel to the heads of the Jewish community in Russia, “to build up the house of our G-d and it is incumbent UDon Jewry to support the settlement in the Holy Land . . . Hasten to perform this great Mitzvah and to sustain the children of the House of Israel, feeding the hungry and clothing the naked, in order that they, who live on the holy soil, may pray for the scattered community of Israel in exile.” His appeal was not unheeded. With the help of Rabbi Shneur Zalman, “Maamadot” (a fund) was set up and consider­ able sums were collected. Rabbi Israel, however, did not return to Israel. As he was passing Pastov, the burial place ot Rabbi Abraham “the Angel”, he seemed to hear a summons. “Abraham is calling me,” he said. “He wants me to be buried by his side.” Abraham’s request was granted.

The adoption by the Chassidim of the Nusah Ari (“the Lurian Liturgy”) forged another link with the Holy Land.

But many Chassidim yearned for a more personal attach­ ment and sought to settle there themselves. It was a journey fraught with hazard. When Rabbi Hayyim of Krasny (d. 1793), the son-in-law of Rabbi Zeev Wolf of Zhitomir, was shipwrecked en route, he regarded the in­ cident as a mark of Divine displeasure and forbade the inscription of titles on his tombstone, because he had not been thought “worthy of visiting Eretz Yisrael.”

Although Rabbi Shneur Zalman, the founder of Habad, could not abandon his followers, he actively helped to support the Yishuv. He arranged for systematic collections and reguarly dispatched funds. Similarly, Rabbi Israel of Kozienice actively encouraged fund-raising for this pious endeavour.

Not since Judah Ha-Levi (c. 1075-1141), that “fiery pillar of sweet song”, to whom Jerusalem was the “city of the world”, had Zion had as lyrical a lover as the poet of Chassidism, Rabbi Nahman of Bratslaw. The sentiments that Judah Ha-Levi expressed in his Songs of Zion, Rabbi Nahman voiced in the pithy aphorisms for which he was renowned. Like Yehudah Ha-Levi, he travelled widely through the Holy Land but, unlike the poet, he did not visit Jerusalem. Minutely, he described his journeys and his visits to Elijah’s Cave on Mount Carmel, to the tomb of Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai at Meron and to the grave of his grandfather, Rabbi Nahman of Horodenka. Return­ ing home, he composed many prayers.

“O L-rd G-d, Who is merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abundant in truth and mercy,” he prayed, “in Thy great mercy make me and the Children of Israel worthy that our hearts may yearn for the Land of Israel, the main foundation of our holy faith, the land which'

J. SAMUEL & SON JA M E S SA M U E L 1797 - 1866

MEMORIALS & RENOVATIONS

Al! work under the personal supervision of Mr. Louis M. Samuel, a direct descendant of Haham Moses Cohen D'Azevedo

SIDNEY STREET, LONDON, E.l 2EH Telephone : 01 - 247 5181 4256

Page Twenty-four

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

the L-rd has chosen tor His people . . . G rant me the stren g th and resolution th at I should realise this craving of my heart ^ . . Thou alone know est how g reat is my need ot the land because of the distraction, confusion and im perfection which beset my life and remove me far from th ee.”

Although relatively few of the great Chassidic m asters w ere able to m ake the physical journey to the Holy Land, m ost of them m ade the journey in spirit, for again and again they stressed the m ystic significance of Zion. Rabbi Levi Isaac of Berdichev loved the Land of Israel as dearly as he loved the People of Israel. ‘‘W hen the Jew s dwell securely in the Land of Israel,” he declared, “then this country is inhabited. But when the Israelites are in exile, then the country is regarded as a w ilderness even though it m ay be inhabited by o th er nations. For the Land of Israel belongs to the People of Israel. And only they can inhabit it.”

Prophetically, Rabbi Solomon of Lutsk, disciple of the Maggid of M ezhirichi, saw the fu tu re of the land of Israel inextricably linked w ith the revival of H ebrew as a living language. In his work D ivrat Shlom o (printed in 1859) he w ro te: “It is essential th a t the people living there should use the holy tongue, the language in which the universe was created. If they do not speak the holy tongue, then the land does not really belong to them and they can be easily banished.”

Throughout the nineteenth century, the links betw een Chassidism and E retz Yisrael w ere m aintained. And a steady stream of pious pioneers exchanged com fortable homes for the rigours of a S partan existence. W hen Jacob Samson, the Rabbi of Shepetovka, visited his friend Ben­ jam in Wolf Zbarzh (d. 1822) in Tiberias, he saw the rabbi’s wife labouring over the w ash-tub. “Rabbi, this linen is not m in e !” she exclaim ed. “ I am w ashing it for others and I am not being paid for the task. But I feel no regrets.

No sacrifice is too g reat for the privilege of living in Eretz Y israel.”

The Seer of Lublin urged Jew s to refuse to accept the prevailing conditions. Only then would there be hope th at Israel would be redeem ed. Rabb' Sim ha Bunam com pared the love of Israel tor the Land of Israel w ith the love of a bride for her bridegroom . The “m arriage” will be con­ sum m ated when the M essiah comes.

The report of the first visit to the Holy Land of Sir Moses M ontefiore fired the im agination of the Chassidim .

Rabbi Sim ha Bunam is reputed to have asked w hy M onte­ fiore was not endeavouring to purchase the Holy Land from the Turks for a Jew ish settlem ent. W hen he was ask ed : “To w hat avail is the purchase of the country prior to the advent of the M essiah?” he replied: “W hen the land passes out of the hands of the A rabs and into

MR. & MRS. E. CHANAN 4. Shlomo Hamelech St., Netanya, Israel wish their relatives and friends a happy and prosperous New Year.

mio navim nave nyiuvn □,”n man

n nn n

Jew ish hands, then the M essiah will come im m ediately.”

Since Rabbi David of Lelov, disciple of the Yehudi, could not journey to the Holy Land himself, he urged his son Moses (b. 1777) to do so. “Go to the Holy Land and hasten the redem ption.” M oses’s father-in-law , the Yehudi, encouraged the young man to undertake the journey. His father bequeathed his property to his sons Avigdor and Nehem iah, but not to his oldest son Moses. “A house is ready for you,” he told Moses, “ in the Land of Israel in Jerusalem , the Holy C ity.” In 1843, Moses sought to fulfil his fa th e r’s wish. “W hen w ith the help of the Al-ty, I will arrive safely in the Holy Land, I will go to Jerusalem to the W estern Wall. There will I lift up my voice like a tru m p et and I will bring the M essiah.”

Personal and pecuniary problem s, however, stood in his way. His wife, Rebekah Rachel, opposed the journey and the persuasions of her husband’s rabbinical colleagues could not alter her attitu d e. W hen they sum m oned her to a special gathering to discuss the m atter, she stood in the doorw ay and cried o u t: “Have respect for the daughter of the Holy Jew .” U ltim ately she did not accom ­ pany her husband. Rabbi Moses was travelling throughout Poland w ith his disciple, and Rabbi Solomon of Radomsko had raised enough m oney to finance the trip. He left Rum ania in 1850 w ith his children, ten disciples and two atten d an ts. He celebrated the High Holy-Days on the high seas and a succah w as erected on the ship.

A fter a tw o-m onth journey, he landed in Acre. A fter a brief stay in Safed, he finally arrived in Jerusalem . Now exhausted and in rapidly failing health, he no longer had the stren g th to w alk to the W estern W all. He instructed his sons to carry him there. “I m ust be at the W estern Wall this very day,” he told them . On the way, however, several A rabs gathered round and attacked the little group, which hastily sought refuge, and Rabbi Moses did not reach the hallowed site. He died 74 days afte r arriving in the Holy Land. Yet his last wish was fulfilled and he was buried near the grave of the prophet Zechariah in Jerusalem .

Through the strenuous endeavours of Rabbi Isaac Meir of Ger, 40,000 roubles w ere raised for the Yishuv betw een 1838 and 1840. In 1863, during the Polish Rebellion, Isaac Meir com m ented: “We see how the Poles are sacrificing them selves to liberate their country from the hands of the foreigners and we, w hat are we doing to regain our land?” He felt grave forebodings about the future of the Jew s in Europe.

The publication, in 1862, of Derishat Zion (“Q uest of Zion”) by Rabbi Zevi Hirsch K alischer (1795-1874) gave im petus to the Hibat Zion (“Lovers of Zion”) m ovem ent.

Under the leadership of Leon Pinsker (1831-1891), Moses Leib Lilienblum (1843-1910) and Judah Leo Levanda, Hibat Zion societies w ere form ed in Russia, in A ustria and in Germ any. W ith the helo of Baron de Rothschild (1854-1934) of Paris, several settlem ents w ere established in the Holy Land.

As a rule, Chassidim did not join the Hibat Zion m ove­ m ent, but there w ere such notable exceptions as Elijah G utm aher (1796-1875) of G raetz. Rabbi Hayyim of Pilev (1870-1906), a grandson of Rabbi Mendel of Kotzk, even form ed his own m ovem ent. His society, the Agudat Ha-Elef (“The Thousand G roup”), aimed a t settling a thousand Chassidim in the Holy Land. Rabbi Hayyim collaborated w ith Rabbi Isaac Jacob Reines (1839-1915) and Rabbi Samuel M ohilever (1824-1898) and w rote a booklet Shalom Yerushalayim (“Peace of Jerusalem ”), which dem on­

' i 0

rv

f 'i

THE LIGHT

SEPTEMBER. 1971— TISHRI. 5732

strated that it is incumbent on every Jew to participate in the rebuilding of the Holy Land.

In a letter to Rabbi Hayyim, Rabbi Yehudah Leib of Ger w rote: “Certainly he upon whom the fear of heaven rests, who takes it upon himself to fulfil the commandments of Tithes and Maaser and knows that members of his family will not object to them, need not be afraid and it will be reckoned as a Mitzvah. Although Aliyah is not considered for its own sake, nevertheless we can say that eventually it will turn out to be for its own sake.” Like Rabbi Hayyim Eliezer Wacks of Kalisz, Rabbi Yehudah Leib urged that Chassidim should import Palestinian etrogim.

While the Jewish world at large was growing increas­ ingly enthusiastic over the possibility of the Jewish home­ land being restored through political means, the Chassidim for the most part did not share this enthusiasm. For the battle still raged between Chassidism and Haskalah. The Chassidim associated Haskalah with assimilation and even apostasy. And many of the Maskilim carried the flag of Zionism. Moreover, this solution was regarded as tanta­ mount to interference with the divine order of things.

Conscious of the power of the Chassidim, Dr. Theodor Herzl (1860-1904) was anxious to enlist their support.

In his diary he recorded, on May 8, 1896, “The Chassid Aaron Marcus (1843-1916) of Podgorze (Galicia) again writes me a very fine letter in which he holds out the possibility that the three million Chassidim of Poland will join my movement. I am answering him that the partici­ pation of the Orthodox will be welcome, but no theocracy will be created.”

Three years later, Herzl pleaded passionately for the co-operation of Rabbi Yehudah Leib of Ger. “In the name of thousands of Jews whose position, under the hatred of

Page Twenty-five

their neighbours, grows daily more difficult,” wrote Herzl to the Rabbi of Ger, “in the name of the hungry multitudes who engage in all kinds of occupation in order to still their hunger; in the name of the thousands of refugees who flee from Russia, Rumania, Galicia to America, Africa and Australia, where the danger of assimilation awaits them, and finally in the name of G-d and the Torah, we urge the honourable rabbi to tell us openly the sins that we have sinned by espousing Zionism.

The Zionist leader kept in touch with Rabbi Yehudah Menahem Halevi of Przemysl (1862-1920), Rabbi of Botosain, Rumania, “who offered to negotiate with the wonderrabbi, Moses Friedmann of Czortkov. I got a letter in which I invited Friedmann to send me his son.” Herzl met the rabbi’s son and Aaron Marcus even tried to persuade the Rebbe to call a conference of rabbis to promote the aims of Zionism.

In Herzl’s entry for November 10, 1897 he w rites: “A man from Jerusalem named Back came to see me. He is travelling round Europe in order to found an agrarian bank for Palestine — a vest-pocket Jewish company, evidently his vest pocket. He claims to be under the patronage of the Galician wonder-rabbi, Friedmann.”

Herzl also met another Chassidic rabbi. “One of the most curious figures I have just encountered,” wrote Herzl, “is the Rvmanover Rebbe Horowitz, son-in-law of the wonderrabbi there. He came to see me, accompanied by his secretary.

Rabbi Abraham of Sochaczew urged the Jews to settle in the Holy Land providing that they had the means to support themselves there and that they settled among upright Israelites. “This is the fulfilment of a Mitvah which is equal to the sum of all the Mitzvot. Moreover, there is ' > y

I •• *•

yy

|( O .V \V SHACK) l ic e n s e d h i - f e d e r a t i o n r e t h d in

Fish and Dairy Finals our speciality MID-WEEK AND SUNDAYS ANY HALL

Beehive Lane, Redbridge T elephone: 0 1 -5 5 4 7 5 7 5

OI-2 I7 0155

T O K .w .

J

< NVR • •••*

Page Twenty-six

SEPTEMBER. 1971— TISHKI. 5732

no limit to the rew ard of those who participate in the purchase of land for this purpose.” To Rabbi Israel of Pilev he w ro te: ‘‘I have exam ined the contents of your little book and I have derived much pleasure from it, for it rouses the heart to a love of the Holy Land in sw eet and pleasant phrases . . . It is a proper thing to purchase an estate in E retz Yisrael . . . I, too, w ant to do so.” In 1898, he sent his son and his son-in-law to purchase land from the Turkish overlords, but the tran sactio n was not com pleted.

Fund-raising alone did not satisfy the rabbis of the dynasty of W arka (founded by Rabbi Isaac W arka).

Rabbi Simha Bunam Kalish, son of Rabbi Isaac, set out w ith his wife and five children for the Holy Land in the w inter of 1887. Like all R ussian tourists, he bore only a thirty-day perm it which soon expired. In Tiberias he was arrested and im prisoned for five days until the Jew s m anaged to secure his release. He received perm ission to stay for three m onths and then had to retu rn home.

Tw enty years later, in 1906, he w ent back to Jerusalem and there he rem ained. He died in 1907 and w as buried in Tiberias next to M enahem Mendel of V itebsk.

Diligently, the ascetic Rabbi M eir Yehiel of O strow iec collected m onies for the support of the poor of the Holy Land, who took precedence in his view over the poor in his own home tow n. He used to say : “I am from the Land of Israel but because of our sins we w ere exiled from there and I live in O strow iec. Sim ilarly, w henever a Jew is ask ed : ‘W here do you come from ?’ he should reply ‘I come from the Holy Land but now I live tem ­ porarily in exile.’ ” W ithout exception, C hassidic rabbis agreed th a t it was a sacred and im portant task to support the poor of the

11 Hn n

Holy Land. Rabbi Israel of Rizhyn becam e a Turkish citizen and on his passport w ere the w ords ‘‘a native of Jerusalem .” In 1843, Nissan Back of Jerusalem told him th a t the Czar of Russia w as contem plating the purchase of a site near the W estern W all for the purpose of erect­ ing a m onastery. To circum vent the plan, the Rabbi sup­ plied the m oney th a t enabled Back to acquire that strateg ic piece of land. According to legend, when the Czar heard th a t he had been outbid by the Rizhyner, he ex claim ed : “Every tim e th a t Jew stands in my w ay.”

A beautiful synagogue, know n as “T iferet Y israel” or “Bet H aknesset of N issan Back” was erected and opened in 1873 and served as a rallying centre for the Chassidim of Rizhyn.

Rabbi Israel was not im pressed with the events of the “annus m irabilis”, 1848. “There will come a tim e,” he om in­ ously predicted, “when the nations will drive us out of their lands. It will indeed be disgraceful th at after the ordeal of such an exile the Redem ption should be under such circum stances.” The Rabbi of Rizhyn stressed th at the Redem ption would take place in a natural way. A cen tu ry before the Balfour D eclaration, he said : “As in the tim e of Ezra, a G overnm ent will again arise th a t will give the Jew s perm ission to return to the land of their fath ers.” He was w orldly enough to realise th a t a country cannot be built up by the settlem ent of a few celebrities.

“If I go to Israel,” he said, “they will ask me w hy did you not come w ith your Jew s? W hat answ er can I give th em ?”

Rabbi Israel’s son, A braham Jacob Friedm ann of Sadgora w rote to Sir Moses M ontefiore asking him to persuade the Czar to allow collections for the Holy Land “w ithout fear or dread.”

HARRIS MR. H. BOND, PRESIDENT OF THE CROYDON

AND SON

& DISTRICT SYNAGOGUE, AND MRS. BOND

M EM O RIALS

WISH THE MEMBERS OF THE BETH DIN, PRESIDENT, HON. OFFICERS AND EXECUTIVE OF

RESTORATIONS

AND ADDITIONAL INSCRIPTIONS

THE

FEDERATION

OF

SYNAGOGUES,

HON.

OFFICERS, EXECUTIVE AND MEMBERS OF THE 216/218 MI LE END ROAD, LONDON. E.l 4LW Telephone: 01-790 2326

CROYDON AND DISTRICT SYNAGOGUE AND ^ 3

A HAPPY, HEALTHY AND

24-HOUR ANSAFONE SERVICE

PROSPEROUS NEW YEAR AND SHOWROOMS

WELL OVER THE FAST.

OPEN

WEEKDAYS 9 . 3 0 A . M . - 5 . 3 0 S U N D A Y S 10 a . m . - 2

p .m

.

p .m

.

H

K

I

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

THE LI GHT

NAME - CHANGING

By S. K. Parent: I should like my son to be taught his Barmitzvah at this cheder.

Headmaster: Very well, but how old is your son?

Parent: He has just turned eleven.

Headmaster: And where has he been attending cheder till now?

Parent: Well, I didn’t think it necessary for him to bother his head at all with this sort of thing until it was really needed. I’m sure he can manage to learn what he has to say in shool in two years, and, if the worst comes to the worst, I can always have his portion tape-recorded so that he can learn it that way.

Headmaster: I’m afraid you’re labouring under a mis­ apprehension. I’m not the first Headmaster to point out that these classes are not intended to be simply a Barmitzvah factory. We are primarily religion classes and our aim is to produce a generation of observant Jews.

The teaching of Barmitzvah portions is only incidental to our work here.

Parent: Well, we ourselves are not religious at all, but I wouldn’t like him to feel he’s different from the other boys who do get Barmitzvah’d.

Headmaster: Look, I don’t intend to argue the matter with you, but you must understand that we shall do our best to teach him as much as we can of the rudiments of religion as our main task. I hope you’ll appreciate the wrong you are doing to your son in denying him the opportunity of seeing the other side as well. As it is, you’re giving him only a one-sided education. Anyway, what’s his first name?

Parent: Ashley.

Headmaster: I meant his Hebrew name.

Parent: I can’t tell you that, but w hat’s wrong with Ashley?

Headmaster: Well, first of all, he can’t be called up in shool as Ashley.

Parent: l can’t see why not. W hat’s in a name? A rose by any other name smells just as sweet, as Shakespeare puts it. But, in any case, why can’t you be a bit more modern and keep up with the times?

Headmaster: One doesn’t apply that approach to religion.

In fact, with us it’s the other way round. We rather adapt our way of life to the requirements of religion, which are immutable.

Parent: What has a boy’s name to do with religion?

Headmaster: It’s a question of identification. By giving him a Hebrew name, you ensure that he is identified with the Jewish people with all the responsibilities that mem­ bership involves. It’s also a question of self-respect if you want him to have any pride at all in being Jewish.

We’ve been taught, in fact, that one of the four merit­ orious acts for which our ancestors deserved to be re­ deemed from slavery in Egypt was their clinging to their Hebrew names, most of which have some sacred signific­ ance.

Parent: You mean a name like Moses?

Headmaster: Well, not exactly. Moses is a Grecianised form of Moshe and you won’t hear anybody in shool being called up by the name Moses. Not that we haven’t made exceptions in our history for our choice of nomenclature —names like Alexander, Antigonus and Abbaye—but there have always been special circumstances to account for their inclusion. It would have been unthinkable in former times for a parent to substitute Montgomery for Moshe ^

THE DIRECTORS

GERRY’S SNACK BAR Licensed by the Beth Din and Kashrus Board of the Federation of Synagogues

Lanson House, Whitchurch Lane, Edgware W ish th eir F am ilies, C ustom ers and Friends lit)

Page Twenty-seven

crn rnw

Page Twenty-eight

SEPTEMBER, 1971

or Archibald for Avraham , while a name like Paul, re­ calling the person responsible for the spread of C hristian­ ity throughout Europe and a stream of invective against the Jew s, would have been taboo even for a Jew who had little self-respect.

P a ren t: You’re not seriously suggesting th at my son should walk about w ith a name like A vraham ? He atten d s a non-Jew ish school and it could affect his whole career both in school and later on in life.

H eadm aster: W hy do you say that? Think of such personalities in the life of this country as Lord Cohen of Birkenhead, who is P resident of the G eneral Medical Council, Sir Solly Zuckerm an, who was Chief Scientific A dviser to the G overnm ent in the W ilson A dm inistration, and Sir Isaac W olfson, the business m agnate. They have all reached em inence w ithout finding their Jew ish names any hindrance in their progress. Incidentally, I don’t see Indians changing their nam es when settling in this country.

They have too much self-respect.

Parent: Y ou’ve been speaking m ainly about first names, but w hat about surnam es?

H eadm aster: Our surnam es are to a large ex ten t d e­ rived from those our ancestors w ere com pelled in 1789 to adapt by a decree of the A ustrian Em peror, but you may have heard th at m any Jew ish im m igrants to Israel have H ebraised these nam es. In any case, though, w e’ve digressed from my original question about your so n ’s Heb­ rew name. Look, he m ust have been given a Hebrew name at the tim e of his circum cision. Don’t you rem em ber it?

Parent: No. I didn’t tak e much notice at the tim e, and, in fact, I’m not even sure of my own H ebrew name.

H eadm aster: It’s a pity you haven’t the custom th at some religious Jew s have of reciting before the end of the Amidah a verse from the Hebrew Bible, the first and

TISHKI, 5732

11 HT3 n

last letters of which coincide with the first and last let­ ters respectively of their own Hebrew name. In th a t way, you could never have forgotten your own Hebrew name.

As for your son’s name, I’d like you to m ake enquiries.

It’s not only for his B arm itzvah th at he’ll need it or for other occasions when he m ay be called up for the Reading of the Torah. It is necessary to use the Hebrew name also in Kiddushin and G ittin, th at is, m arriages and divorces.

I should m ention, incidentally, th at the g reatest danger to our people a t the m om ent lies in the inroads made by assim ilation and, if we are to com bat this th reat to our identity, we m ust use every possible means. To revert to calling our children by their H ebrew nam es would be a distinct contribution to the erection of a bulw ark against fu rth er encroachm ents.

Parent: Well, I’ll adm it you’ve given me food for thought.

MR DAVID DRIVER wishes all his Family and Friends A Happy New Year

MR. AND MRS. ALAN MILLET, PAUL AND SARA 1 CHESTNUT AVENUE, CANONS DRIVE, EDGWARE

Bert Barnett Under supervision of ihe Beth Din and Kashrus Commission of the

wish their parents, relatives and friends a happy and prosperous New Year — a

nmu nrrnm ruro

TAVISTOCK BANQUETING ROOMS Dales available ai Ihe Tavistock ibis year

and at the luxurious

lannni laron mi to rutr1?

PLANTATION SUITE PLANTATION HOUSE, MINCING LANE, E.C.3

REV. IVI. J MORGENSTEIN

Air-conditioned. Central heated.

Accommodation for 200/400 guests SOLE CATERERS FOR SUNDAY FUNCTIONS PLEASE ’PHONE 01-554 6126 01-554 0809

wishes ihe President, Honorary Officers and Beth Din a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year

THE LIGHT

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT MIKVEH

By RABBI A. GREENBERG An authoritative work, Daughters of Israel, has recently been written on the subject of Mikveh. I should like to glean a few paragraphs from its introduction which will shed some light on this much misunderstood subject, and I shall merely add my comments here and there.

“Earthly life is a phenomenon locked in unfathomable mystery. For thousands of years the human intellect has pursued this mystery—to comprehend the cosmos and all that fills it; to delve into the essence of life and death, being and transition; to know the source of existence.

And yet, despite the supreme efforts of the most accom­ plished minds, human wisdom has not succeeded in solv­ ing the mystery of existence and the secret of life—or in discovering the process by which they come about, and where man does not discover its objective he therefore finds neither purpose nor method in his life” (Daughters of Israel).

How truly these words illustrate the sorry state of today’s world, a world devoid of any sense of purpose or method. When we see the aimless ramblings of the younger generation, we cannot but feel pity and shame.

Pity for the lost souls, and shame that we have failed miserably as parents and teachers. But, in our despair, there is still a glimmer of hope. The mystery of life’s purpose, man’s destiny and responsibilities was unravelled at Sinai. To fulfil of our holy Torah—this is our objective and the Torah our guide in life.

Among the precepts of our Torah there is a sacred and wonderful Mitzvah which is the basis and foundation of the Jewish home, and that is the Mitzvah. of Mikveh.

“Man is privileged to join his Creator in the bestowal of earthly life”. “Three participate in man, the Holy One, blessed be He, his father, and his mother” (Kiddushin 30b).

He is privileged to share in the creation of a life, the fashioning of a human being, a living soul. He participates in the formation of a sensitive intelligence capable of thought, of choosing good and detesting evil. Just as a man’s departure from the temporal world is veiled in mystery—no one knows the secret of death—so, too, is his entry into life shrouded in secrecy. The creation of man is totally concealed.

The Al-ty who grants the gift of life, has established for us immutable rules of conduct governing this partner­ ship in the creation of life.

And thou shalt not approach a woman in her separa­ tion period” (Lev. 18-19). Man cannot understand the reasons for these restrictions, just as he cannot fathom completely the reason for any of the divine command­ ments. Indeed, the motivation for the observance of Mitzvot is never the knowledge of their meaning, even if this were attainable. The basis for Mitzvot is rather the real­ isation that they are the manifest will of the Creator.

Man’s only goal on earth is to fulfil, for as long as he breathes, the will of the Creator of the entire universe.

The laws of separation and immersion in the Mikveh are of such vital importance that the Torah prescribes the severe punishment of Karet, extirpation, for any violaHon of them. Our Rabbis go further and state that children resulting from such a union are branded as “Bnei Hannidah (Children of the Niddah), a term implying that such offspring are the result of a forbidden union.

Having presented these fundamental concepts, we may attempt to understand, albeit fractionally—other facets of

Page Twenty-nine

these statutes regulating marital relationship and wedded life.

We shall now dwell upon the abundant physiological benefits, derived incidentally, by men and women who live according to these laws. It has already been proved and much has been written in medical literature that absten­ tion from marital relations during the menstrual period, as presented by the Torah, has prevented, or severely restricted, the occurrence of numerous diseases among the Jewish people.

The Rabbis taught further, that abstention from rela­ tions during menstruation serves the most valuable pur­ pose of renewing man’s affection for his spouse. “So that she may be as precious to her husband on the day of her purification, as on her wedding day” (Niddah 31b).

By rejuvenating the love covenant, the life shared by marriage partners is not transformed by familiarity into a relationship devoid of fresh affection. In our day we have been particularly conditioned to understand in the broadest sense how vital is this freshness and rejuvena­ tion for the creation of the harmony and tranquillity of the wholesome marriage.

“Total lack of restraint brutalises married life. The proper conjugal relationship, one not based merely on animal lust, can be established only through the restric­ tions decreed by the Torah” (Daughters of Israel).

In conclusion, I should like to make readers aware of the beautiful Mikveh we now have at Ilford. The Federa­ tion of Synagogues has spent something like £20,000 on its construction and decoration. It is classed as one of the most beautiful Mikvaot in the country.

I shall also be pleased to send to anyone who is interes­ ted a booklet which deals with the laws of Mikveh in much more detail than has been possible in this short article.

THE PRESIDENT AND HONORARY OFFICERS OF THE

GREENFORD SYNAGOGUE WISH THEIR MEMBERS AND FAMILIES AND K'LAL YISROEL A HAPPY NEW YEAR

nmto ruw?

mnnm ■nran

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

Page Thirty

x1? i3*?o dmxm *?y m m 1? 121^x 1 x1? .dim iy unx3 x*?07 nr ji^osi jiVon 731733 mt .nr pnxfc ^ n i 1? m ^yM D’yx&xi i x ^ ix . n n i p s i m o n n n 1? i d w i moyMn 071202 poo xW 2*>mt3 m o m rm n M 3i p ,t o „ ^ r n i y n i 3 nr m 1? T72i XX721? io d x d m h 1XM731? T i n hixo*1? ^ n m 1?! . " i n i dim i ^X 3 ^ ^ y .□ m i *?y i n n i d ^ o i 1? m o m □r» ^33 i"0"03i otho xm m m o *?y xoip u^x y in i s m m nx nyi*? 1111^22 ya»n^ ir*?y n i m x y3Do1? w o i 3 i m i .1V0 a M ^ x m d m m s i i m x mt — m m p a i m o m d m t m in m ^y niTO D ^im a n n i *?o o m n x 1? n n o n 3 im t n o n p i laxixa i"M y3 opo*? im t D^&oan i m p i x1? .31x 3721 yas □ m w im x*?o iim o n i 1111 *13173 m ,rpm onn» n m y n s n .n o r n i m u x ix n i 1? Mp m x s m i 1??!*1? l i m n m o m i n n i nx w bib u n w 3"mt2 ^ n m nMnn 02 ^33 717201 n o n p i p nx m ^ o 1? .h i m ibn b v m i 1113 rm n io x ,i t x ?21 i 1?™ ox 1 3 1?1 ? m o in " ^ i 1? ira y o m a w n imx m m x3 m y im 013x "33 *?d *?y ‘n i a i m ix p a n 13 0 m nx n m n ,a y i *?x m i> op n v n p a 110102 x*?x , x i r o i •’3113 x1? .i m ^ x i *?dit3 la^n ‘ly . i n n iam b nmx ,11111 i n 1? im ^ y i1?! 717211 bx .iiM 3i n x y 13 173*073,1 nx Vm i i 1? u n i inx; *id *?y .moTDi m n 1? i*?i3 ayn ixfryn1? n y i n n 1? in x *?d *?y 7731 in x n n^ix .^xio** n n n Vo m aion n m o a — o n p mi. 0 113 m b n n ix x d

THE FINEST BANQUETING SUITE IN NORTH LONDON Now Newly Decorated

ABRAHAM LEIFER HALL 47 Lea Bridge Road, E.5 (adjoining Clapton Synagogue) A FEW SUNDAYS STILL AVAILABLE

For Bookings apply to the Secretary Telephone : 01-806 4369

❖

ninm

m id i

naio 130 V

MR. & MRS. S. SYNETT AND FAMILY Wish the Dayanim, President, Honorary Officers and Executive of the Federation, the Minister, Hon. Officers, Executive and members of the Ilford Federation Synagogue and K’lal Yisroel a Happy, Healthy and Prosperous New Year ❖

iintid

nv»w&& m ao Vy ynxnV n s n i3*>Vyio m npan o o a 713 n T*i3 o*» "xino* n m n n n o .i.Vy»V i i s t i o niMo im x1? ixa y u v ix » 3itrn txt ay i t d^ x ,m im m x i 1:3 n i y 1? MD3 t o in x mpnnn v/y p i ^3 ,n^x: n r u o 1? i» ia v n i^ y n in n» dm m s ,Di3 .3^72,1 ]ipn^ ]ii33 mapoa^ y»mb *?3ia n n io i y in 13X72 1313 uyapw nvb'bw myMp im x ^3 niiTa.^ m ,n n b m .min3i27 yimn xin px ,nr 1113 ayn bw noiTr-’jm iii mz/n ix n nx ay p n ib ia?*?y it n n p i3 nmsa Distr1? ^133 nnn^ Miy-a 13113 iyia»n .m m m xm ni3iy .ya.t272,n bw wrvnb n ir^ y n nmirnn m m T r a a n nvnV nxr ^33 ,131 ,n”T p n .niaxn r ix n bxrvtr* manai ,n^D^D3 n ta te ,13 n ^ n b ,nM ionn» y ixn nx 1133*? ,i3T ,it i n buib r x .xm xii2iT xn^72 ix1? .niMy*? ^ixi1?! 1211123 *?y iipiy1? i v ^nun n*?xn m^iiM. *?3 m ^^i3nn» 11331 m i *??xn i n i 1? ^ y i x i h i m ayn b v i m p ^ .□biyn ni72ix im n y ^ m nD*?m» ni72 n72X3 1277:myn1? la^ y ,nr m 1? p ix bv> m » y yi3p*? n33 ^ysi MT27 in x 111 nmy*? 12m -jnyn1? i72i*?3 / mt nz2Tyl? ,it „ *?i27 1?x t 2T3 m nM ii3xn nx m m b ,1022 axi271113 ,crx3n anixa iiy 3 112*’33 ^12772.*? "1M01H ,1P1X3,/ M 1MT27 1M M ^3,1 Dy ,bbD 1113 I lM M 11172,1 **3 X3pD72 *?*?3^ y*’23 *»Xll-3 TX M /D^^Mn MM 2X12 □X D^IX .13*?H7 *?X!-T2T3 1127X72 mp72 111? "W lb 1T2 111X3 ,1X3 11T27X11 IM I MM 11111,1 3.11 ]’’3s? 13111 ]M 1X11727,1,1 IX lliy3 M 1M1 13n3pD72t27 *’X ll‘? 311p TX M ,*?XTZr> ^1X3 ’21271 1M1 IX ,D’pnx3 3i27n,nJ? n'b'O' nuni 172,1 ^xn.izr» n3M72 *?t27 11^12773721 *>tz7xi .iiV*?n dm ^ i ]M7213,2 pbvib 1M T ? 1T127 772*?T 172 13M721 X?I272^ 1111271^ 11272X l^X □Ml?7272 1723 12112 ay CTXM31 *?X27 D iTH Siyi IX IXipi 1*211 120 IX X3 u p .□173 n x *?3 M21? DiT>PW2 1011 b b ll DM1 DMD1272 11373M72 11X1071 I lly 1? 1127p D372X □^3X721 1111273 1172 IX 111721? ^OM*? „T1 7’3y72 .11111,12011 lliliy i .^ 1 S M3B723 1*?3ip72! 1110731? im O M 1?! D ll DMM *?XH21 11X3X3 07^311*? IMX !M Xb ]112 173^127 311 qi^XI M T 03 I2y723 ’3X 11723 l?//1X3 3X72,1 772 71X1 y207 M3*’X127 111721? ,1X10711 11XX113 .IT DUIO X11127 □im 3112 n o M m iiiii 3 x 721 m 1721*? 7m *’ x1? n y i 13 nx □372X M T311*? 1T27p,T27l ^ 17213 XT2 1T’X72 D13 .^XIO*? 13M723 i n n 111073 h i m a m iM 7M 2110’’ it 12111 b v m i h m mx » 1321X07 17213 *?*?3 IT 7'X 130711 7107X1,1 1M1 MM 1X1X3 l?X107*’ H IM 133X7207 772T3 13 ,11111307 □,5?p‘?ip7211i □*’1112,1 *?y □"3723 xxi72 m p 3 1113 xm i3io;n nio7XiV 3X72i ly n * ’ Di3 ,y n n nbo " m i *?372 130713// 1**12X72X11,1 XTSOM! D"3y .112^07 ^>07 7H03 bib 111,!1? 071 ,3X721 ppnb 1 lliy72 13*’X 1T1E1721 IM Xyi IXP*?!!

111X1X72 11X3 DM311 1*»*»X1 11172 1310713 ,107y3,/ 7M o p ^ o n p i *?07 130732 111X3 „107y72l? ,7113 IT 11,1 "XXI *?07 1113 1723 077272 /M72MX72 131011 O’Xl 131"3,/ 7Ml? "y720731 □,T’ir»iD3binn3 1 0 1 duo i i 3 i y □m m o i 107 *?07 it it o d .dmxa ,107Dx .i3M" iy i m i 7172 i s ip ! 72 is 5?no7 i n n nm x *?o ‘io* .IV’XXMXll 111131 n'lX .□■’i n n □"130M1 □M3i?3 7M3lb ,731723 *?07 1721X"y3 13X □*’3113 DM31 *?0* D110M D^IX .11111 l l^ y .13 13P07 M*? 7-3172 172iyi *?t2M 7*>ny "30* 7MX31 113 10*X ,p3X72 13T"0* 111 ,11111 "72"0*2721 M "XI" *?0* D^O* 111 l"72yi 13P07 "721? .ii" T i n n x 7,xo* ,Tl?y3 m m s n^y*? u n i iiy" "3 731" x1?! ,i"iiM3 ay i h i l m X3 TMpn 7"x ,11111 ID 1?0*1 p3X7307 X in y i .1^311 YP l1? 7"X:07 D"1X2 P3X72 xm X1? "3 1^07X1 IX 123 iyD2 ,130* "D^X 1071^07 IT 10723 13"M *?y *?*?33 130*723 172n*?721 .X"1 X1?! ,1111 ^0* 11721i?72l? X^X 131X12

THE LIGHT

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TiSHRI, 5732

nr "mas mK// d^tx .Dirjnt manayn x i r o 71a ny’pm mas nx lima "n’pa mx* dim1? nsn mpmi any1? pi nmnn nD^tyn1? paxamy nai1? mysx ’V^a 7Dixa .by bK 7,ma3aa oyn .ma^ma nynan Kbb ayaa aim iyi* iaai mya ma pyaa ia”n *?y . . nbxa anna in o’anyxin ammy ,nm na iaxn bx„ Kb a^iya m "in bin WOTa n man1? a’^’ai Wa nma xnmy iaa mioia-mann nanaa nanan ^siy1? *?xiot ay nn aaax ’a ,ixa naiayn xiaiy1? mnam nnon Kb laaaaxi1? .dim .nr u in xm aim in naw nonsn ,rm m ,na&\n nmaty mnna ami ma nxm xx inn Tna /iai iai Waa ny’iysn ’iaa maiysnn nnswan ”n *?^aa 7’x maaiaai. □•’tman amnna nTma nm nn na”pw pi dk id1? n .nxman n m dk main1? maa na1? ppm1? ttis nuy mmy ami rmyb b"ir\ amnna dt*d D”pn axan nx nwa nnxaa .mm o’x^s .in maxrr ’as£ D’ainn anixa mmmn niana ,sysD /Dvs^ra □’’Dir .nanb dik 7’aty nnxaaa □ipa1? dik paw ,<Tnn^^ nmnn mnsnm m*?xmy’n mann bv mama aipa m’ma pn. ’baa D’3Xia am, mannn anmiaa 7’mbnb lbtnynn nbian manxa D”nyaty xm xma nr snii asai .nmnn mnan Dvpn Dxy nx po»n ama nm nn nnrn TyiaiyD tod dw Dipa .naixn ni3b mami on*’ nx ,’mmn nbx na”nm hnaiy nynpa n px abix ,xmaiT 710a nr ba 7iaaaaa mibn nvniy bw mnaxn jmywD mammy baa mai'ay .niyipa )n ana D’xanai. in1? naman mmaon amy a”a’tap”aioi □ili ,Dp,,aiN d^ iu isoa mm5? ot 7x01 bxiOT ny bv noia-’anmn nayaa nnnnmy ’b’btyn axab nao .uinn nvm nx ayiryr ,maiyn it inVDai ,a*?iyn nnn^D (x •nnn nasa irnna ^ xdd to nr yiry-r .Waa mann bw ididh yiDn nnn ‘ran nnnnDm main mxsDnni. nv^nn (a 'Q^nn nan by iWn mmn inysirm ,pinxn m a n^^iiaam mmx mm o^aipa nawna nSi nyiy ,m^aipai maaoia npy .□ip ’3a m*?^D D’n na^adxr nym ow rt nina mmn nnnon nysin nmxi (3 •’irnin nniann ,’^atan ruaan nx non ny mno "nxnrn,, dm ny TOiy i i ,t tmr imx biy nmaaon naiyan bz nxi naiam .7XTO ay bw mam a*?n mmrn may nnx in 'isb nona nn^xian nmaymi *?xinr» nana napn bw xVsm dm (n ix nnmi xiry x^ir iarn ia nmn^ nnaan iaxya *?y ^xitt’’ mx □” ip’yn D’yaipn omun — iDnt? x^x ,mrxia nnaiy omaaiy ,mn nyi ,mm ^d1? nn^nna nmnan nnnn i^nn ‘pan □^ya iyaa: Kb "t\"in i^’sn n^n x1?^,, n^xa xpn in l^nna ympn men nna "’t osiyi ma„ ^ ]r>yin nx trrann^a

nr maa maon msixa ]yaa nmra mran mny bw nmxnsn fnTpy (n ^ &nna in^nim ^nann nnn nna a na^p nnn pa ,mran nnann nmnn ^ya ^amxjn,, nnnx aipa n^x mny *>3a lyair ix nxn ibbmr naa nmaa inn nain n^ma nnmsan □"pny am y (! maxii 03) v naa pna nr ms’a .^xyav’ nm^a

.d w n^x iiyaa nsm rmaiy mynn □^■’ya n’xaxyn ^xnxii n:naa omnnn D’nn (t npn maa 713a /□‘,,,a’,Dp'’mx ana .D’3W D*»n 'anna msia 3 on’mny ’miui' nxnei mny ,m naa maTya) ’a’3S inuan (xax) □^x D,,a,Dpi,aio anaii (idt idt nntypn ^avn /D’a npsox 713a *?iy pie’on 7dtx .nn’a 713a ,oyn 71an ^Ty r a n nanaa D”3nn nmpan ^xnm mi oy nmnoa mai D’ays naiy n^x d’Dix .naixn *?xy’Viaon nmx Tyiatya^ ia n:aoi

Page Thirty-one

urn p •>m n ^ n iD n d ^ ^ ojgnn oiun;i inn mn rxa ^xny’ ay *?xy a” nn do xn ’i’oa tj1? nan’iiy n nnn m3 my nna xbB3n naanp mo naa. na ,nrn mn nyi ’13*? mm .□,,axr D’yaiy 7’a inxa maiyan mainn ^a bw nota mo’ mn*? nasn it nnn nmyia n^iya on nx D^o’xmi mixn bw D” D’oan manpymy n^a _mya nnn1? nxiynm nann 7xaa .*?xmy’ nnna na333^, .nnn rnnyy .it dix na nn’^a *?xy mai mxa nmaona nnysnn nysm xn nnn1? ^xny’ ay *?xy iom D” Kna3 nnryi*? ny mioanna t1? nain 7*’xi ,iwi3x. na ^ naiya nvpb na*?ma nyarai am nnnn1? nnsp m’x D’a’nan .D’asiyai D’pn mixa *?iy nam 7"xiy na’aa nnna rri’Tn xn Vxny’a nnnn ma’1?1? mioannn ’ai V’Tya-my annm ^yixyn ^ a .7nxy*?ii naix mtya xa3m nx 11? ^a ion xn ^xnr* ay bw vna nnnn mpsn mynan1? xa’py 7mm 72 xann m *?xy nnsnyiy iaa ,a^iyn maix nneoa n*?apn .na^a bww* rnn^n1? nn” sxn nysm xn lay nnn isdi □tya ^xityn did ^a bw vmb na1?^ nai3iis n^x-a nnnn n^naia mam1? nnnn oyn ma’Sna nmynn nx naisa xmy mmiann n^a^an jonmysm ^a ^y D” nn nx ns’pa xn .nmaxyx mia xn nbmxa “?an by .n3’a njs mx w b /-aii iai m’jnan .nnana' nnamn D3i ,nasy- nnna tymsa nnna Tiaan nann an .na mxnna nn:7T by xa1? nnyran 7sma ^an rnmniy amy 7an m x .7an ’^aix1? n:n^ nnnn 1?H3n non nxi o^iyn xna ^ty nnnsn nnawnn nx im’a n*man' □’ 031 nnnn ’*?apa i n 1? nona1? vn maa ’aay nay ^xid^ oy .dv *?aa D'lyya in n^by ion rn^nn bw im n D^ian xnm nx nna nnn 7na nysm r^x laia D’pi^x b\p ynw nbw ny nyxa m aix ^y o’pi^xn naT nyxa ,D’x?a3n oy m^ynnn x?iy 03 nn m .tyxn j*na ,"ym j} myy3i„ mx ns may1?

711X na nnnn nx ma1?1? ‘?xny’ oy naT msmi q ' 2 v D’yaix Dmanai nano -|ina mpnn nT ma’1? naan mya — nnnn ^a m’aa nn 7nmiy D’ptVx nanp nmim naniyn nxnyn1? an1? nan 7’xiy mya ^ty n n nn^y naxn xaiyi .D” amn D’lmna Vio’aa myiya1? nn ,nnn 7nai onya nxm’ m bv 1a1?! ima1? nnnn nx innn1? na^a n’pbn x^x nnn Kb mn^n ’a nmyai naxy nnnn nxa matysa mya naix /'nbbpm naian p’as1? nna mam. D” nn„ nnan nyxa nniT nsipn nmx ^ty navoa naoan nyiya myaaiya maiy myaix Din ay nmyia 7xx *?ya nsn1? laiy 7axan nynm .np1? nstan nnn iy&b 1 a” na ninai,, itysa1? anx laya y-’3saa typaa xinii *lim Woa w> ynai ? D” na nsn iam ’a nnxa1? /pyin nnx nsniy D*?7y oy ^y ,b m nax ^y ynrn1? naa D’aiinm yiaaiya ? nvnb □Dianna inx nniy xn xrraiy nn .nanya n x ia la im y ^aa /»nTa ’3x id rnyrn n a i .i^yn Kb nx D’aiannn — m nnn’ .n^x — i^ ’y v Kb ii’^nm an xiiy1? vaiann ’a y i ’ ia x y iaan mya nx .im a aii’a mya m m m — q m ’myn nnTO ’a m a nnx nym mya cna1?^ nnn 7a noii inmyn naax on . . . 7iaa y i ’ xni. by a in a a ,iyaiy mb mnx m aty D’a a n 1?! D’X’aa1? nai / n nay .111 m a ^xny’i nmn’ ’a’ nam nmnan nso bv nD*?ymi ^sixn mya mxn *?ty» pia plan dot ns aaax

Page Thirty-two

♦ ♦ ♦

SEPTEMBER. 1971— TISHRI, 5732

MR. & MRS. D. ZYSMAN and SON, 63 Philpot Street, E.l wish their family & K'lal Yisroel mio n»’nm navra

MR. MARK KASLER

wishes his family and K'lal Yisroel

nmtD n&vmi navia

MR. & MRS. S. KLOT, 19 Stamford Hill Mansions, Stamford Hill, N.16. with their family and K’lal Yisrael nmo nzrnm nnvia

11 r n n

CONGRATULATIONS The Editorial Board of hamaor extend congratulations to : Rabbi & Mrs. Y. Freundlich on the birth of a son.

Mr. & Mrs. J. Jung on the birth of a grandson.

Mr. & Mrs. S. Rurka on the birth of a grandson and a grand-daughter.

Rabbi & Mrs. L. Spector on the birth of a grandson.

Rabbi & Mrs. B. Lapian on the birth of a grand-daughter.

Dr. & Mrs. C. M. Faith on the birth of a grand-daughter.

Mr. L. Elgrod on the birth of a g reat grand-daughter.

Mr. David Elgrod on the birth of a grand-daughter.

Mr. and Mrs. M. Scherer on the birth of a grandson.

Mr. & Mrs. R. Stern on th eir son’s Barm itzvah.

Mr. & Mrs. Stiftel-Lipman on th eir grandson’s Barm itzvan.

Mr. & Mrs. E. Angel on th eir son’s engagem ent.

Mr. & Mrs. H. Bond on th eir son’s engagem ent.

Mr. & Mrs. L. Gayer on th eir d au g h ter’s engagem ent.

Mr. & Mrs. H. L. Corb on th eir d au g h ter’s m arriage.

Rev. & Mrs. J. Kacenelenbogen on th eir d a u g h te rs m arriage.

Mr. & Mrs. S. I. Lipman on th eir son’s m arriage.

Mr. & Mrs. J. Litman on their son’s m arriage.

Rev. & Mrs. I. Nodel on their younger d au g h ter’s m arriage.

Mr. & Mrs. B. Rader on their d au g h ter’s m arriage.

Mr. & Mrs. A. J. Stoller on their grandson’s m arriage.

Mr. & Mrs. D. Goodman on th eir Silver W edding anniver­ sary.

Mr. & Mrs. S. Pizer on their Silver W edding anniversary.

Mr. & Mrs. M. Smulovitch on th eir Silver W edding anniversary.

Mr. & Mrs. D. Goodman on their Pearl W edding anniver­ sary.

Mr. & Mrs. P. Weiser on their R uby W edding anniversary.

Mr. S. Kalms on his seventieth birthday.

Mr. S. Bergbaum on his eightieth birthday.

CONDOLENCES

LOUGHTON, CHIGWELL & DISTRICT SYNAGOGUE The President, Hon. Officers, and Board of Management extend sincere greetings to all their members and their families for

nniiD nrrnni

The Editorial Board of hamaor extend sincere con­ dolences to : Rev. and Mrs. L. Hardman on the death of their daughter.

Mr. S. Angel on the death of his sister.

The fam ily of the late Mr. M. Borsook.

Cllr. A. D. Bermel on the death of his wife.

Mr. 1. Bloom on the death of his sister.

Mr. M. Caplin on the death of his brother.

Mr. M. Grad on the death of his m other.

The fam ily of the late Jacob Fine.

Mr. J. Levane on the death of his m other.

The family of the late Mr. B. B. Lichtenstein.

Mr. S. D. M azure on the death of his wife.

The fam ily of the late Mr. M. Mildiner.

Mrs. Rabson on the death of her brother.

Mr. and Mrs. J. Shafran on the death of their son.

Mr. S. Symons on the death of his sister.

Mrs. J. Singer on the death of her father.

Mr. J. Weitz on the death of his m other.

The fam ily of the late P. Zelansky.

Mrs. Hannah Weingarten on the death of her m other.

fiu t d

MR. & MRS. B. STONE & FAMILY, 25 Arthur Deakin House, Woodseer Street, E.l wish their -family & K'lal Yisroel m*i£> n»’nm nn’ro

THE

LIGHT

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

EAST LONDON CENTRAL SYNAGOGUE The Honorary Officers and Board o f M anagem ent wish their Rabbi, Chazan, M em bers, President and Hon. O fficers o f the Federation of Synagogues and all their m em bers and their families, and Klal Yisroel a very happy and prosperous N ew Year

Mitt n»*nm

m >m

MRS. JANE CAPLIN AND FAMILY SEND GREETINGS AND BEST WISHES TO b’inW’ bbs FOR A HAPPY AND PROSPEROUS NEW YEAR AND WELL OVER THE FAST

19 HOOP LANE, GOLDERS GREEN, N.W.n

Page Thirty-three

Page Thirty-four

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

BOOK REVIEW

of G-d’s Torah. “The early Rabbis ploughed, sowed, h a r­ vested, threshed . . sifted, kneaded and baked . . . but we have not the teeth to e a t”, states the Talm ud (Jerus.

Shekalim V, 1).

The Sages m ade it their task to process the w ords of the Torah so th at they can be readily absorbed. U nfor­ tunately, even so we have g reat difficulty in assim ilating so m uch learning. However, w ithout this Rabbinic pro­ cessing — as it w ere — grinding the W ritten Law into fine flour the Torah would be a closed book for us.

“If th ere is no flour th ere is no T orah” (Abot III 17) Both the W ritten Law and the Oral Law are therefore essentially the m essage of G-d. W e have to strive to understand the one w ith the help of the other. Even so we have to realise th a t the com plete understanding of Torah will rem ain beyond us.

This m ay well be the m essage of Aboth II, 1. “Con­ sider three things and thou w ilt not fall into the hands of tra n sg re ssio n . know w hat is above thee, a seeing eye and a hearing e a r” Know th a t the ultim ate tru th of the Torah is “above th e e ”, above your understanding. Yet attem p t to find it in “a seeing eye” the W ritten Law and “a hearing e a r” the Oral Law. This m essage of the unity of the two Toroth is well brought out by Mr. H arry Schimmel in his definitive study of the Oral Law. The book com prises a system atic analysis cf the Sources of the Oral Law and of the con­ tribution of the Sages to it. The C hapter on Legal Fic­ tions will be read w ith g reat interest. However, the sec­ tion dealing w ith the Origin of the M ishnah is p articu ­ larly well researched and should not be missed. I w hole­ heartedly recom m end this book.

Dayan M. Fisher

NOT TO BE MISSED T he O ral L a w , by H arry C. Schimmel. 175 pp Feldheim

Publishers,

Jeru salem /N ew

York. £1.75

Among the terrible visitations which th reaten our people for th eir m isdoings is the follow ing: “And every sickness and every plague, which is not w ritten in the hook of this Torah, then will the Eternal bring upon th e e ”. (Deut. XXVIII, 61).

For their sins, our people have in fact constantly been plagued by the cry “this is not w ritten in the book of the Torah”. T hroughout the ages th ere have been K araites — under w hatever name they m ay go — who have been fighting against the very best and very essence of the Jew ish heritage w ith this cry. They p ro test th a t there is no foundation in Torah for some of our m ost sacred traditions. T hat these are no m ore than Rabbinic innova­ tions and inventions. Yet just as the body needs a neshamah to live — so the W ritten Law was created w ith its tw in — the Oral Law — as a perm anent com panion.

It is certainly the task of a lifetim e spent in study to appreciate fully the unity of the tw o Toroth. Yet this simple principle m ust be realised by all who seek to understand traditional Judaism . N am ely th a t Torah Shebe-al-Peh is no m ore than the au th en tic com m entary on Torah She-be-ktav. It is intended to clarify the latter and to m ake it m ore easily understood.

Alas, even w ith the help of the Oral Law we still have g reat difficulty in understanding the full m eaning

BETHNAL GREEN GREAT SYNAGOGUE

THE PRESIDENT, HON. OFFICERS AND BOARD OF MANAGEMENT THEIR AND TO KLAL YISROEL FOR

*731

11 Nn n

D” n r u t?

the;

lig h t

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

REPORTS

GENERAL COUNCIL MEETING At a meeting of the General Council of the Federation of Synagogues, on July 28, the President, Mr. M. Lederman, reported on the present position with regard to the Federation’s building development programme. He stated that work on the reconstruction and extension of the Yes.hurun Synagogue in Edgware would commence in the very near future; the new building would include a Synagogue and gallery, a fully equipped communal hall and classrooms for the Talmud Torah. He also referred to plans for the future of the Shomrei Hadath Synagogue in Hampstead; part of the site was to be sold to deve­ lopers, and a new, more modern Synagogue and communal hall built for the congregation on the remainder of the site.

The General Council approved a proposal to sell the Federation’s office premises in Leman Street and to move Head Office departments to a new building to be erected on a vacant site adjoining the Great Garden Street Syna­ gogue.

Plans were also announced for the extension of the Emet V’Shalom Synagogue in Maida Vale. The President announced plans for the purchase of a property in Natanya for the Federation’s Israel Project, which was intended tc provide accommodation for retired members of the community and also temporary residence for pros­ pective olim. The Cannon Street Road Synagogue, which was shortly to merge with the East London Central Synagogue, had agreed to allocate £6,000 from the pro­ ceeds of the sale of the Synagogue, towards the Israel Project.

The General Council approved the annual accounts, which were presented by che Joint Treasurer, Mr. S. Rurka, and he appealed to Synagogues to make a greater effort to repay advances owing to the Federation.

There was some discussion regarding the need to attract younger members of the community to the Synagogue, and several delegates urged the Honorary Officers to appoint young Rabbamm, specialists in the field of youth work. The- President reminded the Council that only recently the Federation had appointed a young Rav with special interest in youth and education activities in the East End, and stated that the Federation’s Rabbinate in­ cluded young Rabbis and Ministers in North, East and South London.

A report on the London Talmud Torah Council was given by Mr M. Caplin, the Chairman. Rabbi M. Frydman, Chairman of the respective Committees, reported on the work of the Beth Din and the Kashrus Board.

FIRST NATIONAL CONFERENCE

Page Thirty-five

throughout the Jewish world as Shlichei Tzibbur, have always played an exceedingly important role in the life of our Batei Mikdash Me’at — our sanctuaries in mini­ ature, throughout the ages. In mediaeval times, Chazanim were counted among some of the greatest and most famous Talmudic scholars, and many of our popular Piyyutim, Selichot and other tefillot were composed by them.

You have every cause, therefore, to be proud of your vocation and I am sure your conference will help to strengthen still further the spirit you have inherited.”

Mr. Goldman wrote: “While the social and financial status of Chazanim has much improved in recent years, the title of your Association implies some ambiguity in your communal role, and you may possibly find your­ selves deliberating on the many problems involved in your pastoral function.

“W hether the Chazan is primarily the ‘Minister’ or the ‘Reader’ will depend in each case upon the man himself and the requirements of his Kehilla. For myself, the Chazan’s prime responsibilty has always been that of the Sheliach Tzibbur, the ambassador, as it were, of the Jewish people before the Divine Throne. And to this end, he needs to achieve mastery in prayer, to become the true Ba’al Tefillah, to subordinate the musical art to the mood of prayer, and thus to inspire also his fellow congregants to prayer and Teshuvah.

“Those of us whose task is the administration of the community are frustrated by widespread apathy and in­ difference. The Rabbanim, whose supreme task is to teach, complain that none come to learn. Perhaps it will be the privilege of the Chazanim to strike a dormant chord, to arouse a sleeping community, so that all of us, oskim b’tzorchei tzibbur, will see in the results of our own efforts our own rew ard”.

THE MINISTER, PRESIDENT AND HONORARY OFFICERS OF

SINAI SYNAGOGUE GOLDERS GREEN, N.W.ll wish all their members and their families, the

OF THE ASSOCIATION OF

President and Hon. Officers of the Federation

MINISTERS / CHAZANIM

of Synagogues, their members and

The first full-day national conference of the Association of Ministers/Chazanim of Great Britain was held last May and was attended by Chazanim from all over the country.

The conference concluded with a choral service at the Finchley Synagogue. Messages to the conference were sent by the Acting Rav Rashi and the Secretary of the Federation of Synagogues.

The Acting Rav Rashi w rote: “The Chazanim, known

their families, and

,?N"1(1F

mm nrrnm rurm

a

Page Thirty-six

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

11 N n n

YOM HA’ATZMAUT SERVICE A central Service of Rem em brance and Rejoicing was held in celebration of Israel’s Independence Day a t the S ha’are Shomayim Synagogue, on W ednesday, April 28.

The officiants w ere Dayan P. Braceiner, Rev. I. M. Braier and Rev. S. Milch, and the choir was conducted by Mr. A. A. Bramson.

Dayan M. Fisher, acting Rav Rashi, addressed the con­ gregation and took as his tex t the following quotation from the Talm ud (Sanhedrin 2 0 b ): “Rabbi Jose says, T h re e com m andm ents w ere given to Israel w hen they entered the lan d : to appoint a King, to cut off the des­ cendants of Amalek and to build for them selves the Bet H am ikdash’.” Recalling th a t the joy of celebrating the re-establishm ent of the S tate of Israel w as m ingled w ith the sadness of rem em brance of the suffering involved in acquiring the newly-won independence and freedom, as well as the m em ory of the third of the nation sacri­ ficed during the Nazi H olocaust, Dayan Fisher declared th at this “im poverished and orphaned g en eratio n ” w as never­ theless the m ost fortunate generation of all those co u n t­ less generations who rose a t m idnight to lam ent the Churban Bet H am ikdash to whom no expulsion, no exile, no tem porary dom ination of the land by foreign powers, neither declarations, nor Royal Com m issions, nor orders in Council, nor w hite or black papers, served even for one m om ent to deflect them in the slightest from their undying hope and passionate convictions, th a t sooner or later, G-d’s prom ise to his people woul be fulfilled. Our Dor w as to be the one privileged to see the N issim and w ondrous deeds of G-d, th a t out of the sm ouldering ashes of A uschw itz and Dachau, th at out of the valley of death and tears, th at out of the fiery furnaces, the Techiyat H am etim of our People cam e about, and a new generation w as born, w ith a new spirit and w ith an iron resolve th at never again should such a calam ity and catastro p h e befall our people.

The first task of the infant S tate w as “leh a’amid lachem M elech”, to mould out of alm ost nothing the com plicated m achinery of governm ent and at the sam e tim e, “lehacharis z a r’o shel A m alek”, to destroy the surrounding enem y bent on the annihilation of Israel. And having success­ fully rem oved this im m ediate danger, this sm all warw earv people prepared to receive into their tiny land a flood of Jew ish im m igration. New cities, villages, ham ­ lets and kibbutzim w ere built, industries of all kinds established, the Jew ish genius dorm ant for so long came into full play and in a short tim e accom plished w onders, in fulfilment of Isaiah ’s prophecy, “And they shall build the old w astes, they shall raise up the form er desolations, and they shall repair the w aste cities, the desolations of m any generations.”

The achievem ents and accom plishm ents of the S tate of Israel in its short span of 23 years, had not only raised the spirit and m orale of every Jew in the Gola, it had not only straig h ten ed m any a bent Jew ish back, but had also straig h ten ed m any an evil and bent mind am ong the “Umot H a’olam ”, who had come to realise the enorm ­ ous hidden potential pow ers of the Jew ish genius. The m any problem s of Israel external and internal, had yet to be solved, and the peace we seek so w holeheartedly is still far off. The internal battle, for the character and image of the S tate, is alas, grow ing in intensity and becom ing m ore bitter, and the last and final com m and­ m ent, “Livnot lachem Bet H abchira”, of leading our people

back to the w ell-proven and w ell-trodden road is yet to be achieved. But the battle for the soul of our people, for its purity, san ctity and divinity, will be won by tolerance, patience, understanding, and above all by the influx through Aliya of increasing num bers of T orah-true Jew s. And thus we shall live to see the prophecy of Ezekiel come true, ‘And I will put My spirit w ithin you and cause you to w alk in My statu te s and you shall dwell in the Land th at I gave to your fathers and you shall be My people and I will be your G-d.”

LONDON TALMUD TORAH COUNCIL The annual prize distribution of the London Talmud Torah Council was held on Sunday, May 2, 1971 a t the A braham Leifer Hall, 47, Lea Bridge Road, E.5. Mr. M. Caplin, C hairm an of the Council, w arm ly welcomed a large gathering of pupils, parents, and friends. He con­ g ratu lated the prize-w inners and he was pleased to report th at there had been a steady im provem ent in the standard of education at all C entres. The exam ination results showed th at the prize-w inners had attained a very high percentage of m arks, and he felt th at this w as due in no small m easure to the untiring efforts of Rabbi L. Spector, Education Officer of the London Talm ud Torah Council and to the dedication of the Council’s teaching staff.

Mr. Caplin proceeded to welcome Dayan M. Fisher, acting Rav Rashi, the guests of honour, Mr. and Mrs. Leon G erstler, and also Mr. and Mrs. H. Gaventa.

Mr. G erstler, in his address to the children, congratula­ ted them on their achievem ents and urged them to con­ tinue to advance th eir Jew ish religious know ledge by diligence and regular attendance a t classes.

Dayan Fisher appealed to the children to strive for g reater know ledge of their Jew ish religious heritage and to grasp every opportunity for higher studies. He was pleased to note th a t M ishna and G em ara w ere being tau g h t in several centres and was m ost gratified to hear th at a num ber of pupils from our Talm ud Torah classes had graduated to the Yeshiva a t G ateshead.

Rabbi Spector presented his report on the w ork of the Council. He took special pride in the G em ara class held at the Stam ford Hill Talm ud Torah under the wise and able guidance of Rabbi Schecter. Eight boys betw een the ages of 14 and 17 w ere attending this class and some 25 Dapim of G em ara had already been taught.

Rabbi Spector com m ented on this fine achievem ent and expressed the hope th at pupils from other centres would join the class. He thanked Mr. M. Lederm an, President of the Federation of Synagogues, and the H onorary Offi­ cers of the London Talm ud Torah Council for their sup­ port and encouragem ent in the form ation of the Gemara class which had proved to be so very successful. Mr. Lederm an m ade an appeal to parents to take a greater in terest in the Jew ish religious education of their children and stressed the im portance of regular attendance at classes.

Mrs. Leon G erstler presented the prizes.

A vote of thanks to the guests of honour, Mr. and Mrs. Leon G erstler; the Chairm an, Mr. M. Caplin; Dayan M. Fisher; Mr. M. Lederm an and Rabbi L. Spector was given

by Mr. S. Synett, Vice-Chairm an of the Council.

THE

LIGHT

SEPTEMBER, 1971â&#x20AC;&#x201D; TISHRI, 5732

Page Thirty-seven

FIELDGATE STREET GREAT SYNAGOGUE The Honorary O fficers and Board of M anagem ent exten d N ew Year G reetings

to

the Chazan,

the

Sham m as,

and

M em bers

of

the

Synagogue and their fam ilies, as well as to the B eth Din, Honorary O fficers, m em bers o f the E xecu tive and S ta ff of the Federation o f Synagogues.

u srm rn l a m r i m i o m w '?

CROYDON & DISTRICT SYNAGOGUE THE PRESIDENT. HON. OFFICERS AND BOARD OF MANAGEMENT WISH THE MEMBERS OF THE BETH DIN, AND MEMBERS OF THE CONGREGATION A HAPPY AND PROSPEROUS NEW YEAR

lannrn -aron mu: mu?1?

Page Thirty-eight

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRJ, 5732

iiNnn The leading prize-w inners w ere as follow s: Senior E xa m in a tio n : Rebecca Vernick, M artin Bandel and S tu art H arris.

Junior Grade B E xa m in a tio n : Vivian Vernick, H ow ard Cohen and Naomi A rkus.

Junior Grade A Exam ination : B arbara Morris, Michael K aufm an and Kuna Sassoon.

1971 EXAMINATION RESULTS Junior Grade B. Howard Cohen (4); Alan K urt (5); M ichael K aufm an (4) ; Ellis Ezekiel (5); Eric K urt (5); Sarah Isaacs (9); A nton Stein (4); Richard Sm erin (4); M ealanie Cygelm an (1); S tu art Saffer (4); H arry Phillips (5); Paul S heeter (1); S tu art G ayer (8); A. G oldberg (9); A braham Ezekiel (5); Alan Sum m ers (2).

Junior Grade A. A rthur W eller (1); M. H. M orris (6); C herry G othelf (6); M artin Linder (7); Simon Law rence (3); Jeffrey Cohen (4); Neil S avitt (6); H arvey Track (4); David G reen (1); Mi­ chelle Taylor (1); G aynor Bandel (1); E sther Cohen (5); Simon A rkus (1); M artin G oldstein (6); David Freedm an (3); Naomi A bram s (3).

K ey to Centres (1) Yeshurun; (2) D alston; (3) Neasden; (4) Clapton; (5) Stam ford Hill; (6) W oolwich; (7) E ast London; (8) South Hackney; (9) Finchley C entral.

ILFORD FEDERATION SYNAGOGUE On Shabbat P arsh at Emor, the service w as conducted by m em bers of the Synagogue’s Youth Congregation.

The service was tuneful and interesting and well up to the standard of previous years. It w as delightful to see so m any young people in the congregation, particularly the Scouts, the Guides and Cubs who attended the service in uniform for the first tim e. All m itzvot and aliyot w ere distributed to the youth.

C ongratulations are due to all c o n c e rn e d : to our “tem ­ porary M inisters”, Steven Allen and M artin M organ, who davened Shachrit; to H arold Schragger, who conducted En Kamocha; to Steven Allen, H arold R ader and M yer W ertheim er, who read the Torah; to Jonathan Schrier, who recited the prayers for the Queen and the S tate of Israel; and to Alex S tuart, who conducted M usaf and w hose nusach w as adm ired by all.

Four Scout Cubs w ere given the final Pesichah. By the pride on their faces, one would hope th a t they th ere and then resolved to come to shool every Shabbat!

MR. JOEL GLAZER On Sunday, June 27 a Sefer Torah w as presented by the Federation of Synagogues to the Branksom e Dene Con­ valescent Home in honour of Mr. Joel Glazer, Elder of the Federation and a Life W arden of the Croydon & Dis­ trict Synagogue, who is now a resident a t the Home. At the sam e tim e, a m antle for the Sefer Torah w as p resen ­ ted by Mr. G lazer’s children in m em ory of his wife, the late Mrs. E. Glazer.

The cerem ony w as atten d ed by the President, H onor­ ary Officers and S ecretary of th e F ederation of Synagogues, the P resident and H onorary Officers of the Croydon Syna­ gogue, the G rand M aster, G eneral S ecretary and other rep resen tativ es of the G rand O rder of Israel Friendly So­

ciety (proprietors of the Home) as well as m em bers and friends of the G lazer family.

The service in the synagogue at the Home was con­ ducted by Rev. A. Rosin, M inister of the Croydon Syna­ gogue, and the gathering w as addressed by Rev. Rosin, and by Mr. M. Lederm an, P resident of the Federation of Synagogues, who paid trib u te to Mr. Glazer, who had devoted so m uch of his tim e and efforts to the Croydon and the Addiscom be C ongregations for very m any years indeed. He also recalled the late Mrs. Glazer, who had been a tru e Jew ish m other and raised her family in the best trad itio n s of Jew ish life and charity.

At a tea arranged by Mr. J. Brand, m anager of the Home the speakers included Rabbi M. Frydm an, a V ice-Presi­ dent of the Federation and Mr. H. Bond, President of the Croydon Synagogue, who both referred to Mr. G lazer’s services to the Synagogue and the Federation; Mr. J. Gold G rand M aster of the G rand O rder of Israel; and Mr. Brand! who expressed th eir appreciation of the presentations. Mr! J. G lazer responded on behalf of his family.

An announcem ent by Mr. Lederm an th at the F edera­ tion of Synagogues w as engaged in establishing a sim ilar home in Israel w as w arm ly welcomed.

MR. SAMUEL BERGBAUM W e are happy to record the eightieth birthday celebra­ tion of Mr. Samuel Bergbaum, who has been Senior W ar­ den of the Em et V’Shalom Beth H am edrash in Maida Vale for over tw enty-five years and is generally very active in the affairs of the congregation. He has been instrum ental in helping to a ttra c t new m em bers and has alw ays under­ taken the m anifold duties involved in his office with cour­ tesy and tact. W e hope th at he and Mrs. Bergbaum will enjoy m any m ore years together in health and co n ten t­ m ent, so th a t he m ay be able to continue his valued service to the com m unity.

SCHOLARLY ACHIEVEMENT C ongratulations to nine-year-old M aster Benjamin D or­ man, son of the S ecretary of the Croydon and D istrict Synagogue, who gained the Sir Robert W aley Cohen Prize in the recent junior exam ination of the London Board. This success was particularly notew orthy, since Benjamin was the youngest entrant.

ON ALIYA Mr. M. Sinclair, form erly Secretary of the Stam ford Hill Beth H am edrash and an active congregant, has left w ith Mrs. Sinclair and their family to settle in Israel.

W e wish them every happiness and success.

SUMMER SCHOLARSHIPS Through the good offices of Mr. Mark Harm er, two m em bers of the Clapton Youth Synagogue, M orris Moscovitch and Jeffrey Cooper, w ere enabled to attend the special intensive sum m er course in Jew ish studies held a t the Jerusalem Academy, whose principal is Rabbi B. Horovitz, M.A., form erly of M anchester. The scholarships w ere partly subsidised by grants from B’nai B’rith, the Federation of Synagogues and other sources.

THE

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

LIGHT

Page Thirty-nine

to traditional Yiddishkeit in every sense of the word, his life and his home represented the best in the culture, refined warmth and generosity of Jewish tradition. His loss will be felt by a wide circle of friends who held him in high regard. Hespedim at his funeral were delivered

by Dayan L. Grossnass, Dayan A. Rapoport and Rabbi E. Salasnik.

Rabbi Salasnik w rites: Reb Boruch Ber Lichtenstein was a man of stature among ba’ale batim and notable among talmidei chachamim. This rather rare combination made him beloved and respected by all. He was born in Lodz 79 years ago, into a well-known and distinguished family. His father, Reb Ya’akov, was a staunch and devout Alexander Chassid, whose fine teachings and pious example he made the goal of his life. He bore the name of his maternal grandfather, Rabbi Baruch Dov Weinberg, a renowned Dayan in Lodz who was also a close associate of the Chiddushei HaRim. It was in that inspiring environment that he absorbed his Jewishness, and it was in that atmosphere that his charac­ ter was moulded. When the First World War broke out, he found himself, by an act of Providence, on the shores of this country.

In those turbulent and trying days he had to struggle for his livelihood. Guided by the maxim “work honours its m aster”, any occupation which would enable him to earn his livelihood was respectable. Some years later he married the daughter of the late Mr. J. B. Rosenstein, a man known for his temimut and piety and still remem­ bered with affection. Mr. Lichtenstein was successful in business, which he conducted with integrity and under­ standing, but at no time did he consider success in material

OBITUARIES

MR. BORUCH BER LICHTENSTEIN yr Mr. B. B. Lichtenstein, who passed away on Shabbat Nachamu, was a much loved and widely-known figure in the London Jewish community. A leading member and some-time Chairman of the Springfield Synagogue, as well as a respected member of the General Council of the Federation of Synagogues for many years, Mr. Lichten­ stein was recognised as a distinguished scholar and an honoured ba’al habayit whose counsel was often sought both in communal and private affairs. Staunchly loyal

OHEL SHEM SYNAGOGUE THE HON. OFFICERS AND BOARD OF MANAGEMENT EXTEND GREETINGS TO THEIR MEMBERS AND THEIR FAMILIES FOR

nan nnVxmm^n D”nnw

iV

&

k

L .

L—

Page Forty

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

things as the ultim ate aim in life. At all tim es he would practise the dictum of Rabbi M eir (Pirke A v o t iv, 12): “Lessen your toil for w orldly goods, and occupy yourself w ith T orah” .

The following is a (tran slated ) quotation from the fore­ word of his Sefer, Y a lku t Baruch D ov: “And I have done my best to follow in the footsteps of my forbears . . . and although I have not learned Torah as much as I would have wished because of preoccupation w ith business, nevertheless not a single day has passed w ithout study, in accordance w ith the rule of ‘fixing tim e for T orah’ Some fifteen years ago he retired from business a lto ­ g eth er and settled down to learn Shass. His studies w ere fruitful because they w ere co n stan t and because of his profound thinking and keen observation. The Sefer which he published m any years ago and which bears his name, was w ritten, he said, in his own m em ory, for he had no children. (This Sefer is obtainable free of charge.) There can be no b etter sum m ary of Mr. L ichtenstein’s philosophy than the sim ply-w orded lette r he asked to be distributed among the m em bers of his fam ily: I appeal m ost earnestly to those m em bers of my family who are not religious to m ed itate on th eir a tti­ tude tow ards religion and perhaps they will yet realise th a t living a m aterial life w ithout Judaism is a very em pty existence, for even Professor E instein adm itted during the last years of his life th at “Science w ithout religion is blind”. To me Judaism w as the vital force of my life and I am sure th a t m y fam ily will find happiness and contentm ent by com bining religion w ith th eir mode of life.

mu awn ■wan mva tojn n-nm 'H '3 'X '2 'T)

■>&nrcx

n

rnn

RABBI YITZCHOK MEIR LEWIN W orld Jew ry m ourns the passing of Rabbi Y. M. Lewin, who died recently in Jerusalem . A son-in-law of the form er G erer Rebbe, Rabbi Lewin was one of the founders of the A gudas Israel O rganisation established by C entral and East European religious leaders to counter secularism in Jew ish life.

The organisation opposed political Zionism, but Rabbi Lewin, in an act of statesm anship, joined w ith Zionist leaders in signing the D eclaration of Independence of the S tate of Israel in 1948. He served as M inister for Social W elfare in the first Israeli Cabinet, but later resigned from the G overnm ent over m atters of religious principle.

'H '2 'X '1 'D

LETTER

DAYAN DR. M. KRAUSZ F rom : Sir Karl C. Cohen, C.B.E., LL.B. 22 Gledhow Park Avenue, Leeds.

M arch 23, 1971

D ear Mr. President, I shall not be able to be present a t the M emorial Service in your synagogue to the late Dayan Dr. M. Krausz.

I was pleased to be able to be num bered am ong his friends while he w as in Leeds and I believe th at the m utual

*

to

r--

f l

N>

TH E L I G H T

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

respect we had for each other continued also when he took up his appointment in London.

For me it was a privilege to have worked with him during his stay in Leeds and I learned to appreciate his wide learning, his patience, tolerance and true Jewish attitude to all social problems — an attitude of demanding justice instead of charity and of being sincerely concer­

Page F orty-on e

ned with the well-being of all members of the community.

The many who knew him can justifiably say: “Here is a life well spent”.

Please convey my sincere respects and condolences to the members of his family.

Sincerely, Karl Cohen

THE FEDERATION OF SYNAGOGUES .

Derashot in Halachah and Aggadah will be delivered on Shabbat Shuva,September 25, as follows Dayan M. Fisher YAVNEH SYNAGOGUE, Ainsworth Road, E.9.

After Mincha

Rabbi Y. Freundlich EAST LONDON CENTRAL SYNAGOGUE, Nelson Street, E.l.

After Mincha

Dayan S. Gukovitzki SPRINGFIELD SYNAGOGUE, Upper Clapton Road, E.5.

Before Musaf

Rev. L. Shaposnick GREAT GARDEN STREET SYNAGOGUE, Greatorex Street, E.l.

After Mincha

Dayan P. Braceiner FINCHLEY CENTRAL Redboume Avenue, N.3.

After Mincha Rabbi D. Berkovits SHOMREI HADATH SYNAGOGUE, 527a Finchley Road, N.W.3.

After Mincha Rabbi M. Smith SHA’ARE SHOMAYIM SYNAGOGUE, Lea Bridge Road, E.5.

After Mincha Rabbi I. Waserman STAMFORD HILL BETH HAMEDRASH Lampard Grove, N.16.

Before Mincha

Rev. I. Nodel ILFORD FEDERATION SYNAGOGUE, Coventry Road, Ilford.

After Mincha Rev. L. Gayer FIELDGATE STREET GREAT SYNA< Fieldgate Street, E.l.

After Mincha 1st Day Rosh Hashana, before Tekiot Rabbi M. Aaronberg SHEPHERD’S BUSH, FULHAM & DISTRICT SYNAGOGUE, Poplar Grove, W.6.

After Mincha

Rabbi B. Lapian YESHURUN SYNAGOGUE, Fernhurst Gardens, Edgware.

After Mincha

Rev. B. Koschland, B.A. OHEL SHEM SYNAGOGUE, Chamberlayne Road, N.W.10 After Mincha

Rabbi J. Rosenfeld SINAI SYNAGOGUE, Woodstock Avenue, N.W.ll.

After Mincha

Rev. A. Rosin CROYDON & DISTRICT S^ 30 Elmwood Road, Croydon.

Before Musaf

Rabbi I. L. Abrams AHAVATH SHALOM SYNAGOGUE, Clifford Way, N.W.10.

After Mincha

BETHNAL GREEN GREAT SYNAGOGUE, Bethnal Green Road, E.2.

Kol Nidrei

.

i !'

k

r-

Page Forty-two

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TiSHKl, b732

n

SHOMREI HADATH SYNAGOGUE

AHAVATH SHALOM SYNAGOGUE

The President, Hon. Officers and

The Rabbi, President, Hon. Officers

Board of Management

and Board of Management

wish their Rav, Secretary, and all their members

extend sincere greetings to their

A Happy New Year and well over the Fast

members and K’lal Yisroel for a Happy and Peaceful New Year

lannni lanan naiu nw1?

innnni nmn nmu njuj’?

The Honorary Officers and Committee of the

NEW ROAD SYNAGOGUE

YAVNEH SYNAGOGUE The President, Hon. Officers and Board of Management wish their Rav and all their Members

wish all their members a year of good health and prosperity a Happy and Healthy New Year

lannni mnan naio nwb lannm innan naio

/

nn

n

*

f H E TI GHT

SEPTEMBER, 1971— TISHRI, 5732

Page Forty-three

Vintr ’» man

THE MINISTER.

FEDERATION OF SYNAGOGUES

HONORARY OFFICERS AND

FINCHLEY CENTRAL SYNAGOGUE

BOARD OF MANAGEMENT OF THE

ILFORD FEDERATION Redbourne Avenue, Finchley, N.3

SYNAGOGUE The

P resid en t,

H onorary

O ffice rs

and

Board

of

M anage­

wish the members of the Beth Din, President and m en t.

Hon. Officers of the Federation of Synagogues, all their members and their families, and '7N1(IT *?*?D

on

b e h a lf

B ra cein er,

of

R av;

N e e d le m a n ,

the

R ev.

Synagogue, H.

S ecreta ry :

R ich , a ll

fa m ilie s fo r

nmiD nrrnm

w ish

Chazan ;

m em bers

and

Dayan M r.

P.

H.

th eir

5732

hutd

at d byi hd-d i

n^n r w

LEYTONSTONE & WANSTEAD SYNAGOGUE

WOOLWICH & DISTRICT

The President, Hon. Officers,

SYNAGOGUE

and Board of Management %

extend sincere good wishes to all their members

The President, Hon. Officers and Board of Management wish all members and their families

for

mu *731 DiVun □’’n nur

and Klal Yisroel

mu *731 rrn nnVxn mbn □’’n ruw

SEPTEMBER. 1971 — TTSHRI. 0732

Page Forty-four

*n r n n

iannm inron nmu nw1?

BRI T I S H (LONDON) LIMITED

ALL BANKING BUSINESS TRANSACTED HELPFUL

FACILITIES COMPANIES

NORMAL

WELCOMED

—

—

Published by HAMAOR Publications Committee, 64 Leman Street, London, B .l, and printed by Narod Press Ltd.. 129-131 Cave 11 Street. London, E .l.

*