Primum Non Nocere

The Secret to Being a Good Date

2012-03-07T13:55:00.005-05:00

There are two approaches to being a good date. They are both equally valid, although I think that the ideal is an alternating combination of the two. What is inexcusable, and results in a terrible date, is choosing neither.

When on a date, you need to be either interesting or interested. If you're not the sort of person who has much going on in his or her life, then you need to practice the art of active listening. You need to pick up on all of the little details mentioned by your date and ask questions about them. When he says that he used to be an exotic game collector, you need to recognize that this statement begs the question of whether he means Scrabble and Boggle or Rhinoceros and Siberian Tigers. You need to demonstrate that you're interested in what they are saying in order to make them feel comfortable with continuing to talk and express themselves. Often, people are unaware of how they present themselves. Many don't realize that their typical facial expressions when listening convey utter boredom and lack of interest even if this may not be the case. Part of being interested is making sure that your date is aware of your interest.

Alternatively, you can take the approach of being interesting in which case you seize on every question directed at you as a means of launching a conversation. Don't answer questions monosyllabically. Rather, when asked how many siblings you have, discuss your relationships with them, their personalities, which one used to hide dead bugs in your shoes, and what you think about your family size. And of course, most importantly, flip the question back on the other person. There's no excuse for not knowing as much about the other person by the end of a date as they know about you.

Having been on far too many dates with young ladies who convey neither interest nor anything of interest has driven this point home to me. Be interesting, be interested, or be single.

The Term-Switch and the TDH Frequency

2011-12-08T19:26:00.000-05:00

Today, class, we're going to be exploring not one, but two, new, useful concepts that have arisen from the innermost workings of the PNN Laboratory: The Term-Switch and the TDH Frequency.

It is my hope that these discoveries will serve to clarify that most confusing of relationships, that between the shadchan and the victim...oops, I mean the individual to be redt.

The term-switch is fairly self-explanatory. Observe the following exchange:

"So...is she pretty?"

"Yes, she is VERY cute!"

Now, prior to reading this post, you might have thought to yourself, "Wow! Not only is she cute, she's 'VERY cute'! Score!" However, this shadchan was employing "The Term-Switch" perfectly. This is quite an advanced shadchan tactic, so don't feel bad if you missed it. You'll notice that instead of answering whether or not the girl is pretty, she has answered with a completely different phrase, "cute". It's irrelevant that she answered "yes" as she subsequently felt the need to modify this answer with an entirely different word. This is an excellent sign that the girl might not fit the standard description of "pretty". (It's a topic for another post, but cute is a tricky word in that it can describe both appearance and personality.)

Another example:

"So, is he in good shape?"

"Oh, yes, he's very tall."

That's right, you caught it, Term-Switch! He may be very tall, but it's a pretty good bet that he likes his donuts.

The second concept is a slightly more difficult one to explain in the written medium, but I'm going to give it a shot. It was discovered by my wonderful apartment-mate, Tall-Dark-and-Handsome (TDH) and is thus named the TDH Frequency.

You will notice, that a tremendous amount of information is conveyed by the way we say things, sometimes as much as is conveyed by the words we use. TDH pointed out that it was often possible to determine the honesty of a shadchan's comments by the frequency of her voice. At first I didn't quite believe him, but experience has proven it to be true.

When a shadchan is describing a pretty girl as pretty, the frequency of her voice lowers and she says the words more slowly. "She's very pretty" (Deep voice). However, when a shadchan is describing a less-pretty girl as pretty, she generally adopts a higher-pitched voice and speaks more quickly. "She's pretty." (High voice).

Try it yourself. Pretend that you're trying to set up someone with a friend of yours, and he asks you whether they're pretty. Now, answer that question out loud regarding Hillary Clinton and then Charlize Theron and hear the difference in your voice. Did you catch that?

Now that you know about the Term-Switch and the TDH Frequency, you are a more knowledgeable consumer/dater and will now have an improved relationship and more accurate communication with your local shadchan. Go forth and put your new awareness to work!

The Traditional Jewish Approach to Women

2011-11-18T06:04:00.000-05:00

It is sad that we have reached a point where this article needed to be written. The Taliban-like demonization of women in chareidi Judaism has trickled down to Modern Orthodoxy, and sadly I know of several young ladies who have left the derech ostensibly because of their unease with a "women's place" in Judaism. This is a brave call by the author, a Chareidi Rav, to return from this warped and perverted version of Judaism to the original Jewish approach to women.
-PNN

The Traditional Jewish Approach to Women
By HAIM AMSALEM
11/16/2011 21:35

There is absolutely no basis in Jewish law for the separation of men and women on buses or public streets.

An extremely distressing development has emerged in the State of Israel in recent years, and especially during the past few months. It is not simply distressing to me as a human being in general, but also, specifically, as a haredi rabbi who tries to observe halacha, traditional Jewish law, to the maximum.

Let me begin by making a clear and loud declaration for all to hear: There is absolutely no basis in Jewish law for the separation of men and women on buses or public streets.

Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, the greatest Orthodox halachic authority of the 20th century, made this very clear in his responsa, where he ruled that there was no problem with riding the New York subway, where men and women are often pressed together in very tight quarters. This applies all the more so when simply sitting in close proximity on a bus.

Aside from the fact that Jewish law certainly allows men and women to sit together on the bus or walk on the same side of the street, there is actually a specific halachic transgression that occurs when such extreme actions are taken.

The Torah clearly prohibits a person from embarrassing another, which is exactly what happens when men harass and intimidate women for sitting in the front of the bus on a “mehadrin” bus line. In certain circumstances, Jewish law actually allows one to transgress a prohibition if doing so will preserve and protect the dignity of a fellow human being.

Therefore, even according to the warped understanding that Jewish law does mandate the separation of men and women in these circumstances, there would certainly be no justification for demeaning a woman by forcing her to move to the back of the bus.

Granted, Jewish law does mandate the separation of men and women during prayer and specific other times, but nothing beyond that. The Torah opens society to women and cautions that it is the man’s responsibility not to “stray after your eyes.”

But this isn’t just about buses. This is about growing extremism in the haredi world, part of which includes the demonization of women.That is the reason in certain neighborhoods the Clalit healthcare fund has stopped giving children stickers with pictures of little girls on them, and the reason some haredi newspapers will not print pictures of women. Some go as far as doctoring photos in order to remove women in adherence of this policy.

IF WE don’t stop this trend to extremism as a political force right now, I fear to think where things will be in 15 years. Will “religious police” dictate where we can walk, what we can eat, and how everyone must dress? We must ensure that our country is really an “Am Shalem” – a “Complete Nation” – where every group and individual, including women, contribute to the greater whole.

So let us take a few moments to clarify what the classic Torah sources say about women in order to understand why I, a haredi rabbi, take a strong stance on this issue.

Right at the beginning of Creation, the Torah says God created one being in the following way: “Male and female He created them.”

If there was only one being, why does the Torah say “them” and describe it as both “male and female”?

The Talmud explains that God fashioned an original being which embodied both male and female characteristics and then separated that one being into two. Why? Why didn’t He make them into separate male and female beings from the start?

Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, one of the most prominent Orthodox rabbis of the 19th century, explained as follows: “So that what was previously one creature was not two, and thereby the complete equality of women forever attested [to].”

Complete equality! Not a secondary being who can be told to go to the back of the bus or who can be removed from all pictures. (It is not within the scope of this column to explain what traditional Judaism does see as differing primary roles for men and women, but Rabbi Hirsch calls this a “division of labor,” with neither primary role superior to the other.)

But our tradition goes even beyond demanding equality.The Talmud teaches that the Jews were redeemed from slavery in Egypt due to the merit of Jewish women, and that the women did not worship the golden calf or believe the negative report of the spies about Israel. Our salvation in the Hanukka and Purim stories came because our women rose to the occasion. According to our tradition, women have binah yeteira – an increased ability to understand and comprehend. That quality has saved the Jewish people throughout history.
Finally, in medieval times, when most men treated women as little more than property, Maimonides ruled that “a husband must honor his wife more than his own self.”

The time has come for the non-extremist community, which includes moderate haredim, to demand that the surge to the extreme cease immediately. There can be no more demanding that women move to the back of the bus, no more removing women from all publications, and no more demonization of the half of our nation responsible for our very survival.

It is time for us to place women back on their pedestal and recognize the equality which God intended at Creation thereby enabling and empowering women to flourish, shine and proudly contribute to the future of our state and nation

The author is a Knesset member, an ordained rabbi and chairman of the Am Shalem movement. www.amshalem.org.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=245842

The Beauty Exchange to Age Ratio (BEAR) Calculator

2011-11-16T16:56:00.007-05:00

Whether you believe it to be the cause of the "Shidduch Crisis" (cue dramatic music), a tragedy, or merely the way things are, the age gap between spouses is a matter of much discussion. It would appear, like it or not, that men like younger women. And, interestingly enough, but not surprisingly, women like older men. A professor at the University of Wales recently described a "consistent cross-cultural preference by women for at least same-age or significantly older men."

This leads to tremendous confusion on the part of shadchanim who don't understand why it is that guys will sometimes accept suggestions with girls who are older than their desired age range, and why sometimes they won't.

While interviewing hundreds (if not, tens or ones) of young, single men of marriageable age, I have identified the answer to this conundrum as being an interesting willingness on the part of men to exchange remaining child-bearing years in their spouse for greater attractiveness. After locking myself away in my laboratory for several nights, I have boiled it down to a simple mathematical relationship. I am now offering this, at no charge, for the use of shadchanim the world over in the hopes that it will help them to suggest more fitting shidduchim, and lead in turn to more successful shidduchim, more batei ne'eman bi'yisroel and eventually moshiach.

The Beauty Exchange to Age Ratio (BEAR)

(I have included the equation itself at the bottom of the page for the mathematically interested.)

Description	Data Entry
Ideal Age
Girl’s Age
Minimum Looks
Girl Must Be At Least a	Calculated

Notes: (1) If the number arrived at is over 10, it just ain't happening. (2) Shadchanim should be certain to use the DOG Score to arrive at accurate values for rating looks.

In simple English, the BEAR equation states that for every additional point of attraction above his baseline, a man is willing to date a girl 2 years older.

To quickly define the terms used:
Maximum Age: The maximum age a young man is willing to date.
Ideal Age: The ideal age that a young man wants in a prospective spouse.
Looks: On a scale of 1-10
Minimum Looks: The minimum look rating (on a scale of 1-10) that a man is willing to accept in a prospective spouse.

So, to give an example: Let's say Shloimy is ideally looking for a girl who is 22 years old, and he only dates girls whom he thinks are 6 and above on the looks scale. This means that he'll date a 22 year old who is a 6, but if a girl is suggested to him who is 25, she'll need to be a 7.5 in order to be of interest. He'll even date a girl who is 28, but she'll need to be ((28-22)/2 + 6=) a "9".

I think that if Shadchanim employ this incredibly simple mathematical relationship (iPhone app coming soon) before making suggestions, they'll save everyone a lot of wasted time. Now, when a shadchan wants to set a girl up with a guy, she just needs to quickly enter the desired age that the young man told her he was looking for, the girl's age, the minimum acceptable rating in terms of looks that the guy will go out with, and voila! she will quickly learn whether or not the girl she has in mind is a realistic suggestion according to the BEAR Equation.

MA=IA+2(L-ML)

Rearranged: ((MA-IA)/2)+ML=L

More Rav S.R. Hirsch

2011-11-15T17:23:00.001-05:00

This is a beautiful piece by Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch on Reform Judaism. Sadly, many of the points he makes are now true about certain segments of the modern-Orthodox Jewish world.

-PNN

"Religion allied to progress": [the leaders of Reform have] with undaunted courage embroidered [this slogan] in scintillating colours on to the banner of our present-day religious struggles, that the educated "progressive" sons and daughters of the new age might rally to this new flag of the prophet and advance with it unhindered. How leaderless was this new congregation of prophets before this new messenger with this new message of salvation appeared among them! Since the beginning of the century the ancient religion had been to them--ancient; it no longer fitted into the society of the sons and daughters of the new age with their frock coats and evening dresses. In club and fraternity, at the ball and supper party, at concerts and in salons--everywhere the old Judaism was in the way and seemed so completely out of place. And even in the counting-house and in the office, in the courtroom and at the easel, on board ship and in the train--throughout the stream-driven lightning activity of the new age the old Judaism acted as a brake on the hurrying march of progress. Above all it seemed to be the only obstacle in the race for emancipation. No wonder then that without hesitation they shook off the old obstructive religion and hurried into the arms of "progress." And in the political market-place where emancipation was to be purchased, the modern sons of Judah could be seen in every corner offering to exchange the old Judaism for something else, since in any case it had lost all its value for their own use. For many a decade modern Jewry thus soared aloft like dust on the wings of a butterfly and tasted freedom in the unwonted airy heights; and yet they felt a pain in their hearts where the absence of religion had left a void, and at the end they were ashamed while enjoying the brilliance of modern life to be walking the earth without religion; they felt restless and miserable.

But behold! The prophet of the new message came into their midst with the cry of "religion allied to progress"; he filled the blank, pacified their conscience and wiped out their shame. With this magic word he turned irreligion into Godliness, apostasy into priesthood, sin into merit, frivolity into virtue, weakness into strength, thoughtlessness into profundity. By this one magic phrase he distilled the ancient world-ranging spirit of the Torah into a single aromatic drop of perfume so fragrant that in the most elegant party dress they could carry it round with them in their waistcoat pockets without being ashamed. By means of it, he carved out of the ponderous old rock-hewn Tablets of the Law ornamental figures so tiny that people gladly found room for them on smart dressing tables, in drawing-rooms and ballrooms. By means of this one magic phrase he so skilfully loosened the rigid bonds of the old law with its 613 locks and chains that the Divine Word which until then had inflexibly prohibited many a desire and demanded many a sacrifice, henceforth became the heavenly manna which merely reflected everybody's own desires, echoed their own thoughts, sanctified their own aspirations and said to each one: "Be what you are, enjoy what you fancy, aspire to what you will, whatever you may be you are always religious, whatever you may do--all is religion; continue to progress, for the more you progress the further you move from the ancient way, and the more you cast off old Jewish customs the more religious and acceptable to God will you be....

All this would of itself worry us who are of different mind very little. We allow everyone his own peace and bliss and also his fame, if only he would be fair enough to leave us not indeed our "fame" (to which we lay no claim), nor indeed our "bliss" (which cannot be impaired by human opinion) --but at least our peace and quiet.

But the eulogist of "religion allied to progress" and its prophet has found it necessary to enhance the brightness of his cause by painting its opposite in the blackest colours. He therefore describes us, [we the so-called proponents of Orthodoxy] who do not believe in the mission of the new prophet, as the "black opponents of progress and civilization." . . .

May one of these "fools and obscurantists" be permitted in the face of such provocation, a few carefully considered and objective remarks, for the purpose of stating fully and placing in their true light the facts which certain people are so glad to call "religious confusions" (because they fear lest they might be cleared up) and so taking the first step towards resolving them? ... [First] a point of fact, it was not "Orthodox" Jews who introduced the word "orthodoxy" into Jewish discussion. It was the modern "progressive" Jews who first applied this name to "old," "backward" Jews as a derogatory term. This name was at first resented by "old" Jews. And rightly so. "Orthodox" Judaism does not know any varieties of Judaism. It conceives Judaism as one and indivisible. It does not know a Mosaic, prophetic and rabbinic Judaism, nor Orthodox and Liberal Judaism. It only knows Judaism and non-Judaism. It does not know Orthodox and Liberal Jews. It does indeed know conscientious and indifferent Jews, good Jews, bad Jews or baptized Jews; all, nevertheless, Jews with a mission which they cannot cast off. They are only distinguished accordingly as they fulfill or reject their mission....

Now what about the principle, the much-vaunted, world-redeeming principle of "religion allied to progress"? If it is to be a principle--something more than an empty phrase meant for show--it must have a definable content and we must be permitted to try to clarify it. In the expression "religion allied to progress," progress is evidently intended to qualify religion. Indeed, this is the very essence of the "idea," not religion by itself, but religion only to the extent and in so far as it can co-exist with progress, in so far as one does not have to sacrifice progress to religion. The claim of religion is therefore not absolute but is valid only by permission of "progress." What, then, is this higher authority to which religion is therefore not absolute but is valid only by permission of "progress"? What, then, is this higher authority to which religion has to appeal in order to gain admission? What is this "progress"? Evidently not progress in the sphere of religion, for then the expression would amount to "religion allied to itself" which is nonsense. It means, then, progress in every sphere other than religion. Speaking frankly, therefore, it means: religion as long as it does not hinder progress, religion as long as it is not onerous or inconvenient.

The subordination of religion to any other factor means the denial of religion: for if the Torah is to you the Law of God how dare you place another law above it and go along with God and His Law only as long as you thereby "progress" in other respects at the same time? You must admit it: it is only because "religion" does not mean to you the word of God, because in your heart you deny Divine Revelation, because you believe not in Revelation given to man but in Revelation from man, that you can give man the right to lay down conditions to religion.

"Religion allied to progress"--do you know, dear reader, what that means? Virtue allied to sensual enjoyment, rectitude allied to advancement, uprightness allied to success. It means a religion and a morality which can be preached also in the haunts of vice and iniquity. It means sacrificing religion and morality to every man's momentary whim. It allows every man to fix his own goal and progress in any direction he pleases and to accept from religion only that part which does not hinder his "progress" or even assist it. It is the cardinal sin which Moses of old described as "a casual walking with God." Civilization and culture--we all treasure those glorious and inalienable possessions of mankind. We all desire that the good and the true, all that is attainable by human thought and human will-power, should be the common heritage of all men. But to make religion--which is the mother and father of all civilization and culture--dependent upon the progress of this same civilization and culture would mean throwing it into the melting-pot of civilization; it would mean turning the root into the blossom; it would mean crowning the human edifice with that which should be its foundation and cornerstone.

Now what is it that we want? Are the only alternatives either to abandon religion or to renounce all progress with all the glorious and noble gifts which civilization and education offer mankind? Is the Jewish religion really of such a nature that its faithful adherents must be the enemies of civilization and progress?

We declare before heaven and earth that if our religion demanded that we should renounce what is called civilization and progress we would obey unquestioningly, because our religion is for us truly religion, the word of God before which every other consideration has to give way. We declare, equally, that we would prefer to be branded as fools and do without all the honour and glory that civilization and progress might confer on us rather than be guilty of the conceited mock-wisdom which the spokesman of a religion allied to progress here displays.

For behold whither a religion allied to progress leads! Behold how void it is of all piety and humanity and into what blunders the conceited, Torah-criticizing spirit leads. Here you have a protagonist of this religion of progress. See how he dances on the graves of your forefathers, how he drags out their corpses from their graves, laughs in their faces and exclaims to you: "Your fathers were crude and uncivilized; they deserved the contempt in which they were held. Follow me, so that you may become civilized and deserve respect!" Such is the craziness which grows on the tree of knowledge of this "religion allied to progress"!

If our choice were only between such craziness and simple ignorance, again we say we would remain ignorant all our life-long rather than be thus godlessly educated even for one moment.
There is, however, no such dilemma. Judaism never remained aloof from true civilization and progress; in almost every era its adherents were fully abreast of contemporary learning and very often excelled their contemporaries. If in recent centuries German Jews remained more or less aloof from European civilization the fault lay not in their religion but in the tyranny which confined them by force within the walls of their ghettoes and denied them intercourse with the outside world. And, thank goodness, even now our sons and daughters can compare favourably in cultural and moral worth with the children of those families who have forsaken the religion of their forefathers for the sake of imagined progress. They need not shun the light of publicity or the critical eye of their contemporaries. They have lost nothing in culture or refinement, even though they do not smoke their cigars on the Sabbath, even though they do not seek the pleasures of the table in foods forbidden by God, even though they do not desecrate the Sabbath for the sake of profit and enjoyment.

Indeed, we are short-sighted enough to believe that the Jew who remains steadfast amidst the scoffing and the enticements of the easy-going world around him, who remains strong enough to sacrifice to God's will profit, inclination and the respect and applause of his fellows, displays far greater moral strength and thus a higher degree of real culture than the frivolous "modern Jew" whose principles melt away before the first contemptuous glance or at the slightest prospect of profit, and who is unfaithful to the word of God and the teachings of his fathers in order to satisfy the whim of the moment.

Our aims also include the conscientious promotion of education and culture, and we have clearly expressed this in the motto of our Congregation: An excellent thing is the study of the Torah combined with the ways of the world [Yafeh talmud torah im derekh erez]--thereby building on the same foundations as those which were laid by our sages of old--[then] what is it that separates us from the adherents of "religion allied to progress"?

A mere trifle! They aim at religion allied to progress--and we have seen that this principle negates the truth of what they call religion--while we aim at progress allied to religion. To them, progress is the absolute and religion is governed by it; to us, religion is the absolute. For them, religion is valid only to the extent that it does not interfere with progress; for us, progress is valid only to the extent that it does not interfere with religion. That is all the difference. But this difference is abysmal.

Judaism as it has come down to us from our forefathers is for us the gift and the word of God, an untouchable sanctuary which must not be subjected to human judgment nor subordinated to human considerations. It is the ideal given by God to all the generations of the House of Jacob, never yet attained and to be striven for unto the distant future. It is the great edifice for which all Jews and Jewesses are born to live and die, at all times and in every situation. It is the great Divine revelation which should infuse all our sentiments, justify all our resolutions and give all our actions their strength and stability, foundation and direction. Comparisons are futile. Judaism is not a religion, the synagogue is not a church, and the rabbi is not a priest. Judaism is not a mere adjunct to life: it comprises all of life. To be a Jew is not a mere part, it is the sum total of our task in life. To be a Jew in the synagogue and the kitchen, in the field and the warehouse, in the office and the pulpit, as father and mother, as servant and master, as man and as citizen, with one's thoughts, in word and in deed, in enjoyment and privation, with the needle and the graving-tool, with the pen and the chisel--that is what it means to be a Jew. An entire life supported by the Divine Idea and lived and brought to fulfillment according to the Divine Will. It is foolish, therefore, to believe--or to pretend to believe--that it is the wording of a prayer, the notes of a synagogue tune, or the order of a special service, which form the abyss between us. It is not the so-called Divine Service which separates us. It is the theory--"the principle" as you call it--which throws Judaism into a corner for use only on Sabbaths and Festivals, and by removing from Jewish souls that have strayed from their Divine Destiny the consciousness of their guilt robs them also of their last hope of penitence.

The more, indeed, Judaism comprises the whole of man and extends its declared mission to the salvation of the whole of mankind, the less it is possible to confine its outlook to the four cubits of a synagogue and the four walls of a study. The more the Jew is a Jew, the more universalist will his views and aspirations be, the less aloof will he be from anything that is noble and good, true and upright, in art or science, in culture or education; the more joyfully will he applaud whenever he sees truth and justice and peace and the ennoblement of man prevail and become dominant in human society: the more joyfully will he seize every opportunity to give proof of his mission as a Jew, the task of his Judaism, on new and untrodden ground; the more joyfully will he devote himself to all true progress in civilization and culture--provided, that is, that he will not only not have to sacrifice his Judaism but will also be able to bring it to more perfect fulfillment. He will ever desire progress, but only in alliance with religion. He will not want to accomplish anything that he cannot accomplish as a Jew. Any step which takes him away from Judaism is not for him a step forward, is not progress. He exercises this self-control without a pang, for he does not wish to accomplish his own will on earth but labours in the service of God. He knows that wherever the Ark of his God does not march ahead of him he is not accompanied by the pillar of the fire of His light or the pillar of the cloud of His grace.
In truth, if only most Jews were truly Jews, most of the factors would disappear which to-day bar many an avenue of activity to them.

If only all Jews who travel or who are engaged in business observed their Jewish duties, the need would--as always--produce its own remedy. The Jew would everywhere find the food demanded by his religion; it would be but little sacrifice for him to refrain from business on the Sabbath; and even in the regulations laid down by state and public bodies enlightened governments would gladly pay respect to a display of conscientiousness which would in itself be a not inconsiderable contribution made by Jewish citizens to the society in which they live. It is only through unfaithfulness of the majority that the loyalty of the minority becomes a duty demanding so much sacrifice, though the crown which it wins is all the more glorious for the thorns which our brethren strew in our path.

Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch

2011-10-30T22:09:00.000-04:00

"It would be most perverse and criminal of us to seek to instill in our children a contempt, based on ignorance and untruth, for everything that is not specifically Jewish, for all other human arts and sciences, in the belief that by inculcating our children with such a negative attitude we could safeguard them from contacts with the scholarly and scientific endeavors of the rest of mankind…You will then see that your simple-minded calculations were just as criminal as they were perverse. Criminal, because they enlisted the help of untruth supposedly in order to protect the truth, and because you have thus departed from the path upon which your own Sages have preceded you and beckoned you to follow them. Perverse, because by so doing you have achieved precisely the opposite of what you wanted to accomplish…Your child will consequently begin to doubt all of Judaism which (so, at least, it must seem to him from your behavior) can exist only in the night and darkness of ignorance and which must close its eyes and the minds of its adherents to the light of all knowledge if it is not to perish." - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (Collected Writings 7: 415-6).

No Price is Too High? Don't Be An Idiot

2011-10-18T10:35:00.005-04:00

עָלַ֤ץ לִבִּי֙ בַּֽיהוָ֔ה רָ֥מָה קַרְנִ֖י בַּֽיהוָ֑ה רָ֤חַב פִּי֙ עַל־ אֹ֣ויְבַ֔י כִּ֥י שָׂמַ֖חְתִּי בִּישׁוּעָתֶֽךָ

This morning witnessed the return of a son of Israel, Gilad Schalit, after almost five and a half years of captivity. I do not want to discuss whether the exchange of one man for over one thousand terrorists with the blood of hundreds of Jews on their hands was a wise one. There will be a time for that, but today is not that day. Today is a day for Jews to unite and share in the joy of the Schalit family and of all of Klal Yisrael.

But, these events have brought to my attention a disturbing viewpoint that I believe needs addressing. Facebook is currently filled with statuses such as these:

No price is too high!

One Jew is worth any number of terrorists!

Some of you are disgusting! Stop focusing on the bad implications of the trade! Our brother is coming home!

I have no doubt that their motivations were entirely pure, but statements such as these capture a fundamental problem that lies at the root of many of the poor policies implemented in both Israel and the United States.

You may have heard a similar idea expressed with regards to another policy. For example, "Even if the number of deaths caused by drunk drivers decreases to one person per year, that would still be one person too many." Or, "Of course we should put nets up on the sides of the Golden Gate Bridge! If it stops just ONE person from committing suicide then it will have been worth it."

The flaw in these arguments is only looking at the benefits and disregarding, or worse not even considering, the costs. If one death from drunk driving were really one too many, then I have a very simple plan that could be implemented to guarantee an end to all motor vehicle related collisions: Ban motor vehicles. Or, if you'd rather, install speed governors on all motor vehicles in the United States limiting their speeds to 5mph. Think of the benefits! No deaths from motor vehicle collisions (the leading cause of death in the US for people 5-34)! Reduced carbon dioxide production! However, no one in their right mind would implement this, because...wait for it...THE COST IS TOO HIGH.

All suicides must be prevented? How much are you willing to contribute from your paycheck to erect nets at every elevated point in your city? $10? $100? $1,000? I'm not sure what the point is, but I guarantee you that at a certain point it is no longer worth the cost to you. Especially considering that the money could also be spent in another manner, perhaps a more effective one, to prevent suicides. Once again, THERE IS A COST.

When seat-belts and airbags were made standard equipment, required by federal law, in all cars in the United States, the motivations were pure. After all, who could possibly be against saving lives? But did anyone consider the corresponding price increase of those cars? Did anyone consider the newly arrived, poor immigrant who would be more than happy to drive a car without airbags that fits his budget? Or the tax increase needed to pay for the new airbag inspectors and the bureaucrats needed to implement the new policy? Honestly, I don't know. But the point is, that THERE IS A COST.

With regards to Gilad, once again, there is a point at which the price is too high. I do not know what that point is, perhaps this deal is beyond that point, perhaps it is not. For the purposes of this piece, it is irrelevant. However, every decision has a cost, and unless that cost is truly considered and weighed against the benefits, a wise decision cannot possibly be made.

Well-Meaning Folly

2011-10-12T12:18:00.002-04:00

While I, like every Jew across the world, rejoiced at the news that Gilad Shalit will finally (b'ezras Hashem) be returning home, my joy was slightly overshadowed by a fear that this decision was prompted more by emotion than by wisdom. A government does not have the luxury or the right to make decisions based on emotion. I sat down to write out my thoughts on why this was a dangerous decision that will without doubt end up costing many Jewish lives, but before I could do so I came across Rabbi Pruzansky's excellently written piece which summed it up better than I could have done so.

Wishing my readers and all of klal yisrael a Sukkos that truly lives up to being a "zman simchaseinu". -PNN

Well-Meaning Folly
Rabbi Steven Pruzansky

That the announcement of an impending deal to exchange the IDF soldier Gilad Shalit for more than 1000 hard-core Arab terrorists has unleashed raucous celebrations in the Arab territories and restrained relief in Israel demonstrates the winners and the losers in this awful ordeal. Israel – which once boasted that it never negotiates with terrorists, and mocked the Europeans for doing the same – now is the only country in the world that negotiates with terrorists, and does it quite poorly to boot.

Two questions that are not being asked are: first, how long will it be before another Israeli is taken captive by Hamas et al, in order to exchange for more prisoners ? My guess is months, although a few weeks is also a possibility. Second, how many Israelis will be killed in the future by this latest batch of freed terrorists ? The organization Victims of Arab Terror reports that approximately 200 Israelis have been murdered in the last 20 years by freed
terrorists. Based on past results, and logic, Israelis should start preparing
both fresh graves, and new organizations to memorialize those future victims.

Certainly, I have no complaints at all against the Shalit family, and they acted as any family would and should – prioritizing the life of their child, an individual, over the lives of the public and the community. If I were in their predicament, G-d forbid, I would be doing the same thing. But it is at that moment – when emotion and sympathy provoke the desire to free the innocent captive at all costs – when the cooler heads who govern the nation are supposed to have the national interest at heart and do what is in the interest of the nation, and not the individual. And I would be told that the consequences of this transaction – politically, emotionally and militarily – are just too grave. But the Prime Minister, who has a smooth tongue but often seems to function without a spine, caved. It is a populist act, until, of course, the real price is paid.

Politically, it is a victory for Arab terror and can only provoke more terror. The bar has been lowered still further for those who want to kill Jews. Jewish blood – past and future – has become cheaper, and future terrorists will be even more emboldened that they can murder Jews with impunity. Those who will pat themselves on the back that the trade demonstrates how Jews value life are, in fact, misguided and short-sighted; it is further proof of how the will of many Jews has been broken by terror and they can no longer even think beyond the present. (It is not speculation that freed terrorists will murder Jews; it has been proved 200 times already.) It is not even a small comfort to recognize that, indeed, the life of a Jew is more valuable than the life of an Arab; about 1000 times more valuable according to the prevailing market rate.

Emotionally, it must be devastating for the families victimized by the Arab terrorists who will now be eyewitnesses to those murderers returning to their homes amid heroes’ welcomes and parades, and watching them walk the streets and plot more mayhem against Jews. When will the butchers who carved up the Fogel family be released? Not now – maybe next time, or the time after that. After all, we can’t bring back the dead, so why punish the living hostage and his/her family.

Militarily, it is a security catastrophe as one thousand hard core terrorists re-enter Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Israel proper (for the Israeli Arabs who will be released) to sow the seeds of the next rebellion. (Remember, the first civil war in Israel – in 1987 – erupted a little more than one year after the infamous Jibril exchange released more than 1000 poisonous terrorists into the Israeli bloodstream. Reportedly, this latest group includes about 1/3 currently serving life sentences. And many of these terrorists were captured in undercover operations in which soldiers and security personnel risked their lives, and in some cases were killed. But why risk one’s life to capture a terrorist today who will be freed tomorrow ?

Prisoner exchanges outside the context of an end to hostilities undermine any deterrence that might have existed. Every future terrorist can go about his ghastly business expecting to be released at some point, and be feted and handsomely rewarded when he is released.

Imagine, for a moment, the parents of a sick child whose life could be saved for ten billion dollars of medical care. They demonstrate, rally, petition and pressure the government – and even call the government immoral for rejecting their entreaties. Instead, the “callous” government responds that all life is precious, but the government does not have ten billion dollars to spend on one child, sad to say, and that money can instead be used to spare the lives of thousands of other children. Rational, yes, but small comfort to the parents of that child. But governments – and hospitals – makes such triage decisions all the time.

One might well argue that the Shalit case is different – it is not an individual illness but a soldier sent to do his duty on behalf of the nation for whom the nation than always has an obligation to redeem at any cost. After all, Israel boasts of its mantra that it will never abandon soldiers on the battlefield. But that tripe is obviously untrue. At least three Israeli governments have negotiated with Syria over the disposition of the Golan without first demanding the release of (or information about) the three captives from the Sultan Yaakob battle in June 1982 – Yehuda Katz, Zachary Baumol and Zvi Feldman). And even more Israeli governments abandoned Jonathan Pollard on his battlefield, with Ehud Barak even preferring the pardoning by Bill Clinton of Marc Rich over the pardoning of Pollard. So the cliché is inspiring but ultimately meaningless. It is the type of contention that is made and appreciated but subjected to rational cost-benefit analysis before actual implementation. (Israel also vows never to leave a body in the field, but they would be fools to have half a platoon killed in order to retrieve a body.)

By way of contrast, there are currently American soldiers captive in Iraq and Afghanistan. The US is not exchanging Arab terrorists for those captives. Those who conclude that is evidence that the US does not value life should at least consider the alternative; perhaps that is proof sufficient that the US does value life, and perhaps even more than Israelis do. They value not only the life of their captive soldier, but more broadly the lives of the soldiers who captured those terrorists and the lives of the citizens that will be snuffed out by those released terrorists.

What does Jewish law say about such grisly ransoms? Unfortunately, we have too much experience in this field. The Talmud in Masechet Gittin (45a) states that we “do not ransom captives for more than their value…because of tikkun olam” (the betterment of society), and the Sages offered two reasons, both of which resonate now: either because it will impoverish the community (i.e., endanger their future well-being) or because it will just encourage more hostage-taking by the wicked. Both are true in this context, and Jews have traditionally heeded such guidance. The Torah values life, but life is not our highest value, and the life of an individual does not supersede the welfare of the community. If that were the case, one should never go into battle, in which individual lives will be sacrificed for the good of the community and nation.

Why now? Why wait five years when a similar deal could have been done – at lower cost – five years ago ? Chalk that up to another blundered negotiation by the Israelis, and a persistent inability on the part of much of the populace to recognize – and to retain the reality – that they are in a war that has no end in sight. Certainly, there are political benefits that will accrue to Hamas, which will emerge from this looking like a reasonable interlocutor with whom the world can – and should – do business. (After all, the Israelis shopped in their marketplace.) The real change seems to be a harshening of the conditions of imprisonment for those Arab terrorists now in Israeli prisons. Until this past summer, terrorists were entitled to family visits, cell phones, library and educational privileges, and probably Cable TV and spa treatments. PM Netanyahu ended that when he suddenly realized – just this past July – that Arab murderers were living well on the Israeli shekel and Gilad Shalit had not even been afforded a visit from the Red Cross. That country club lifestyle ended; perhaps that amped up the pressure on Hamas to deal. And deal they did, and they must be enjoying their triumph.

It is certainly possible that the deal will yet fall through. Hamas in the past has raised expectations and upped the ante by asking for more prisoners at crunch time. But it seems as if they have made a reasoned decision to quit while they are ahead.

The feeling here is joy commingled with sadness, sort of like the reaction of a family whose relative survives a terrorist attack that kills ten people. One grieves for the victims but is quietly happy that one’s relative survived.

It is a gruesome image we dare not forget in the weeks and months ahead.

Rabbi Steven Pruzansky is spiritual leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun of Teaneck, New Jersey, and the author most recently of "Judges for Our Time: Contemporary Lessons from the Book of Shoftim" (Gefen).

The Butch Factor

2011-10-10T17:27:00.000-04:00

As, promised, after addressing The Neb Factor in an earlier post, I have returned to the subject to explore the NF's counterpart, The Butch Factor. Once again, I'd just like to begin with the disclaimer that the terms are misleading and do not accurately describe the concepts that I am describing. I have inherited the terms from the creators of these concepts and am not at liberty to change them. Besides...I like the shock factor when I say that I'm looking for a girl with a little bit of butch.

The Butch Factor describes the level of masculine traits possessed by a girl. I'm not talking about facial hair (that's covered under The Sephardi Factor and a topic for a completely different post), nor am I talking about deep voices, large biceps, or a proclivity for chewing tobacco (Those will be covered under another post, "My Date from Hell".). I'm instead referring to other qualities, such as bravery in the face of bugs, audacity in the face of arachnids (sorry, I got caught up in the alliteration), enjoying watching/playing sports games, a penchance for action films, a distaste for flowers and romantic gestures, etc.

As with The Neb Factor, I think that guys generally want a girl with some Butch Factor, but not too much. Having said that, I'm sure that different guys seek varying degrees of Butch Factor in women. Some prefer women who are constantly cast in the role of "damsel in distress" giving them the opportunity to ride in to the rescue, others envision themselves being carried off into the sunset by a strong woman. Far be it from me to judge people so soon after Yom Kippur, but were it later in the year, I'd call the latter group effeminate pansies. But...to each their own. Personally, I'm seeking someone with a fairly low Butch Factor...let's call it 10%.


0% Butch Factor


80% Butch Factor (You were expecting a picture of Hillary, weren't you?)

One thing I have yet to determine is a correlation between The Neb Factor and The Butch Factor. Do guys with higher Neb Factors seek out women with higher Butch Factors? Or is it the opposite? Thoughts?

Emma Watson: Modest is Hottest

2011-10-05T22:22:00.000-04:00

According to Emma Watson, of Harry Potter fame:

"I find the whole concept of being ‘sexy’ embarrassing and confusing. If I do an interview with photographs, people desperately want to change me - dye my hair blonder, pluck my eyebrows, give me a fringe. Then there’s the choice of clothes. I know everyone wants a picture of me in a mini-skirt. But that’s not me. I feel uncomfortable. I’d never go out in a mini-skirt. It’s nothing to do with protecting the Hermione image. I wouldn’t do that. Personally, I don’t actually think it’s even that sexy. What’s sexy about saying, ‘I’m here with my boobs out and a short skirt, have a look at everything I’ve got?’ My idea of sexy is that less is more. The less you reveal the more people can wonder."

I'd have to say that I agree. There's obviously a middle ground...I am truly not a fan of pleated skirts and cardboard BY sweaters...but there is definitely something to be said for girls who know how to dress in an attractive, yet modest and classy fashion. Provocative dress certainly attracts a lot of male attention, but not necessarily quality male attention.

According to an interesting book on marriage based on over 3,000 interviews:

Most men decide within 10 minutes of meeting a woman if she’s appropriate for marriage, or just for a casual affair.
Over 80% of men said or bragged that their fiancée was the kind of woman they were proud to introduce to friends and family
Over 70% of men said that they knew that their future bride was a “nice girl” the minute they met

Only 7 out of 2,000 men interviewed said that their fiancée was dressed in a very sexy outfit when they met.

Even in the not Jewish community, men date the "attracting-type" but marry the "attractive-type".

Random Quote of the Day

2011-10-04T22:08:00.001-04:00

Life is like an airlock. Sometimes you need to close one door in order for another one to open.

Guest Post: Jewish Boys and Looks

2011-09-27T21:12:00.003-04:00

The following post was written by the incredible Yedid Nefesh. Her writing is nonpareil (that's right, I can throw French around just like she can), and quite different from my own style which is why we thought it might be fun to swap pulpits every now and then. I hope you enjoy, and if you do, go check out her blog, Lovesick Soul. My own title for this post, which YN vetoed (too bad, it's my blog), is "Jewish Boys Are Ugly and Smell Bad, but All Hope is Not Lost." Enjoy! -PNN

As an avid reader and friend of Primum Non Nocere, I've enjoyed reading his humorous and brilliant theories such as The Neb Factor, The Dog Score, It's Not Me, It's You and many more... Even more entertaining at times, are the comments by some upset, appreciative or totally clueless readers. Now granted, it is sometimes difficult to understand the exact intended meaning when you don't know where the person is coming from.

However, if there is one thing we do know thanks to PNN, it is that looks significantly matter to guys.

How about us, girls? How do we feel about the looks of our boys?

I'll be the first to step up and claim the title of "shallow" and say that looks do matter to girls as well. But before you jump in, I'd like to specify that by looks, I do not necessarily allude to the facial features or body type of a guy as much as to his presentation: put together, well dressed...

And then of course, personalities do influence the laws of attraction and in fact, in the long run, girls do tend to be attracted to inner qualities. Yet, too often, I tend to be attracted to the well-dressed guys, those you might refer to as "metro-sexual" (if not homosexual).

I am not sure if it is a direct result of our societies or particular to our communities, where style and fashion generally do not enter boy zone, but I think Jewish Boys can certainly benefit from some fashion improvements. Fashion being a "feminine" term, I might want to instead use the word "trend" ... But let’s leave semantics, and for the sake of not turning off the guys, let me just say that I am not talking about extreme or ridiculous fashion. Simply stylish, put-together guys wearing a Kippah, which would allow all of us females who like the world of Fashion and Design, to appreciate its works and creations in the opposite gender's clothes.

Technically, boys do not have as many restrictions when it comes to style as girls might have due to the laws of Tznius. Granted, extravagantly trend or loud colors might not qualify as the best Jewish identity outfits. Nonetheless, even within the realm of White Shirt/Black Pants, there is room for fashion. If I told you that in France, even the more Yeshivish Boys look fashionable in their pointy shoes, skinny ties and fitted pants, it wouldn't help for you would answer back something along the lines of the well-known stereotype about French man.

Well, it's a real shame a vast majority of boys don't and wouldn't use the help of fashion to create a better, more interesting and worldlier presentation of themselves. Because, guys, clothes can really make the man.

PNN might never let me be a guest author on his blog again but I’m glad I got to add my feminine touch to it. :)

The Neb Factor

2011-09-25T11:29:00.001-04:00

This past Shabbos afternoon I was introduced to a new term in the wonderful world of shidduch dating, "The Neb Factor". Personally, I think that it should be renamed "The Mush Factor", because of the negative connotations associated with "Nebs", but minhag avosainu b'yadenu, it's not my place to change.

A family I am very close with, who have a daughter who recently entered "the parsha", explained to me that girls are looking for a guy with a roughly 10% Neb Factor. Not too much higher and no lower. If I understood this correctly, the Neb Factor is, in a sense, how in touch the man is with his feminine side. He needs to have a high enough Neb Factor that he will be able to behave in a romantic fashion, like babies, and secretly, deep, deep down not mind watching The Notebook with his wife as much as he pretends to. But on the flip side, he has to have a small enough Neb Factor that he pretends not to enjoy The Notebook, and essentially still possesses his masculinity.

I found this quite interesting and spent the rest of Shabbos deciding how high the Neb Factor was for each guy that I met. They often didn't appreciate it when, after some deliberation, I loudly informed them of my conclusion, but I like to think that I have aided them in their quest for their zivug.

Clearly different girls have different scales for Neb Factor and are looking for different target amounts, but all in all it seemed like a fairly useful concept and yet one more way to categorize and pigeonhole human beings...which after all, is what shidduchim is all about.

The Squatter

2011-09-06T15:24:00.001-04:00

My roommates and I run a very hospitable apartment. Rarely does a week go by during which one of us doesn't host a guest. Often bochrim from the local yeshiva spend Shabbos with us in order to be closer to the Jewish community. One such individual arrived early last week. According to one of my roommates, henceforth to be referred to as The Nicest Guy in the World (NGW) which he truly is, the yeshiva dormitories were too loud for him to sleep well so he needed a place to crash while he found other living arrangements. We were under the impression that this would be a night or two, three at the most. It's now been a week. That's right, the Three Musketeers' apartment now has its very own squatter.

NGW, in whose room he is staying, is far too nice to ever say anything. In fact, he's far too nice to even notice the imposition. He laughingly told me about how when he crept into his own room late one night he was admonished by the squatter for causing the floor to vibrate excessively. Just so you know, NGW is a marathoner with a body fat content of about 4%. A cricket having a heart attack would vibrate the floor more than NGW would if he was Irish step dancing (which he has been known to do).

Our squatter is not an unpleasant fellow. And hosting him is not a terrific imposition. However, hosting implies a predetermined, usually short, stay, and in this case it would appear we have a tenant. A tenant who never takes out the garbage, replaces the paper towels, or pays any of the rent. My other roommate, Tall Dark & Handsome (TDH), and I have discussed the scenario and we both find it somewhat amusing and somewhat irritating. We're trying to decide whether to accept this as yissurim (Berachos 5a) and an opportunity to work on our hachnasat orchim, or whether to have a talk with the squatter.

What would you do?

That's What Shadchan Said #2

2011-09-05T19:08:00.001-04:00

Shadchan on phone with my roommate:

"If a girl can smile and has dark hair, I consider her beautiful."

This shadchan is clearly a perfect candidate for The DOG Score.

Earning & Learning: Lechatchilah or Bedieved?

2011-08-04T08:02:00.000-04:00

This a correspondence that I have been having over the past few days with one of my closest friends (whom we'll call Bruce) regarding the age old controversy over earning and learning. I'm not sure whether it's of public interest, but thought I would put it out there for those few who care to read it. (Avid PNN readers will notice material that has been posted in the past):

Bruce:
Modern orthodoxy is dead. You've gotta start identifying yourself as something else. Dont sell yourself short. Join the yeshivish crowd. Sure there are many rotten apples. And sure weve seen more than our share of self-righteous shallow hypocrites, but that doesn't mean you should have any hesitation in identifying yourself with your great uncle or the chofetz chaim. Just because youve seen guys preaching the yeshivish penguin lifestyle and then smoking drugs on shabbos a few years later doesnt mean you should let the sour taste of the yeshivish world linger in your mouth.

PNN:

You may be right that the closest group to my hashkafah nowadays is the yeshivishe velt, however my unwillingness to identify with the yeshivish crowd is not due to the presence of a few bad apples. Nor do I think that you would be correct in categorizing my great uncle or the chofetz chaim as yeshivish. I think that there is at the root of today’s yeshivish hashkafah a set of beliefs that are incompatible with Torah Judaism as I understand it. I feel the same way with regards to the current form of modern-Orthodoxy. At the end of the day, I may end up in a yeshivish community, and my kids may go to yeshivish schools, but I will do my very best to shield them and direct them away from those parts of the yeshivish hashkafah which I believe are lechatchilah wrong and harmful.

Bruce:
Ok, you piqued my interest. What are these incompatible beliefs that are lechatchilah wrong and harmful? I need to know, so I can shield my kids as well.

PS- the yeshivish learning curriculum is completely against Reb Nachman. He considers it a waste of time to spend so much time in Iyun when a person doesnt have a grasp in the generals of Torah. In short, breadth is depth. I can refer you to a book that I believe, if put into practice, would see a lot more yeshiva students remaining on the derech. It emphasizes the vast amount of Torah a person can obtain by quickly doing bekius. If you can do a very fast seder and finish shas every 3 years, you will certainly be a baki after going through it many times. The book is much more convincing. The modern yeshiva student learns so many rishonim and achronim, that by the time they leave the classroom, their head is spinning, and they are confused as to the halacha. This is not the right derech.

PNN:

You’re absolutely right, the ridiculous focus on pilpul and b’iyun learning before talmidim even have the most basic grasp of a bekius knowledge of Torah is asinine. I’d love to know more about the book to which you are referring. I also find it a terrible indictment on today’s learning style that people can learn gemara for years and years without (a) knowing basic halacha, (b) basic hashkafa, and (c) attaining a comprehensive understanding of the Torah framework.

I think that the basic problems with the yeshivish world are more varied than this alone though. There are many concerns which come to mind, but I think that I will begin by just dealing with one in this e-mail.

I think there is a very dangerous emasculation of males that is held up as a worthy goal. This is largely caused by the anti-work, anti-world hashkafah, which flies in the face of my understanding of the Torah.

As explained at length by Rav Hirsch among others, authentic Torah Judaism encourages active involvement in the world. Hebrew uses the same shoresh (root) for the word “holy” (kodesh) as it does for words referring to our relationship with women and wine (kedeishah/kiddushin and Kiddush). The message is that unlike Christians, we do not flee from physicality and involvement in all aspects of the world, rather we are mikadesh the world, elevating it. The holy man of Torah is one who relates to the whole world passionately in a holy way. Not one who does not relate to it the world all.

Compare the "Mainstream" vision of the yeshiva bochur with that of the Torah. Yakov is the Tora's yeshiva bochur-the ish tam yosheiv ohalim, sitting in the beis midrash, a masmid and a yarei shamayim. But look at Yakov's other abilities. He defeats his more worldly brother reclaiming the birthright that should have been his. Executes and enforces a brilliant and binding contract with wicked uncle Lavan and becomes wealthy. Wrestles with an angel (he must have worked out at a health club!) and negotiates a peace with Eisav. If there is one underlying theme of Yakov's life, it is the ability to handle any situation by challenging it on its own terms and subduing it until it conforms to a Torah blueprint. He meets Eisav on the level of politics, diplomacy and warfare. Lavan on the business level, the peasant shepherds with sheer physical strength and courage, Pharoah with dignity and wisdom. Each time he displays competence and produces a kiddush hashem. This is why he is the first to bear the name Yisrael. Because he could grapple with human situations and with Godly situations and emerge victorious. You will probably agree with me that the picture of the mainstream yeshiva bochur you envisaged at the beginning of this paragraph doesn't quite match up to Yakov.

We in the "frum" world take the general bumbling incompetence, the affectation of complete ignorance of the secular world as a mark of a Tzaddik. That's not a tzaddik--it's a "wimp"! Can you see many of our so called yeshivishe people walking into the Chicago Mercantile Exchange without making total fools of themselves. Yakov avinu could have, and he is the Torah's paradigm of the yeshiva bochur. Can you see a yeshiva guy take on a few New York street hoodlums? Yakov could. Could a rosh yeshiva emerge a millionaire from a transaction with a Wall Street tycoon? Yakov did. We have absorbed a non-Jewish image of a Tzaddik. We can no longer tell the difference between a tzaddik and a "wimp".

Bruce:

Here's a link to the book: The One Minute Masmid. It comes with a kuntrus from the Gedolim of last generation emphasizing the correct derech of learning. It seems strange how most of the gedolim say this, yet the yeshiva system is still the way it is. The guy who wrote it is a Gateshead Rabbi.

Theres a great passage in Yoma that I recently came across. 71a - bottom of the page. "To you, Men, do I call..." Rabbi Berechia says these are the Talmidei Chachamim who are like women, but have gevura like men. Rashi explains that they are like women in that they appear weak and wimpy. But they have inner strength like a lion. When I learned this gemara, I thought of you. You told me a long time ago that the big, tough, guys with tatoos never made it through special forces training. It was always the smaller guys with the inner strength. If you had known Yaakov when he was in his father's house, you wouldve felt the same way. Talmidei Chachamim are deceptive. They appear weak, but when put to the test and thrown out in the goyish world, they excel. You know the famous story about that guy who complained to Rav Yaakov Kaminetzky that his bochrim dont have a secular education and cannot make it in the "real" world. So he told the guy to pick anyone in the beis medrash. He picked the most wimpy looking "loser" and Rav Yaakov told him to go to college and get a job to make a kiddush hashem. He went and started a really famous financial group. That is the midda of a talmid chacham. Go look at the maharsha on brachos 54a. When the gemara says how tall and strong moshe was, it was referring to his strength Lefi Hasechel ( according to the intellect). Another interesting gemara you should look at is Yoma 72b. It begins with the premise that the aron kodesh refers to the talmid chacham. It then proceeds to learn out each pasuk describing the measurements of the aron, as referring to the midot of the talmid chacham. Its no wonder midah- size, is the same word as midah - virtue! The big and buff yaakov was big and buff because of his virtues, not because of sheer strength.

When Rabban Gamliel said that today we dont have to stand whenever we learn torah because we dont have the strength they used to have. What kind of strength was this? Clearly it must have had physical consequences. Was it the strength that allowed eliyahu to go 40 days without food? What about Yonah? These guys went without food and water for longer than we would say was impossible, but yet both ask God to take their soul rather than do something they held was ethically wrong. These men had such strength in torah and middos, that their human strength was way beyond physical capabilities. And we laugh when we say chazal claims moshe was ten amos tall. If their middos (virtues) were superhuman, their midos (size) didnt follow suite??

Obtaining kedusha is mainly done through asceticism. As in sanctify yourself with what is muttar for yourself. sanctity comes from separation. from breaking your physical pleasures/ boundaries. If you want superhuman strength you need to make yourself superhuman. When I asked rav cheshing how rebbe nachman achieved such maalot at the age of 12, he responded, "he broke his taava for eating at the age of 6!" The two are related. Kedusha is the lechatchila, and being involved in this world is a bedieved. Pirkei avos says this. and its codified in the shulchan aruch. Work as little as you can, and learn the rest of the day. the first rashi in Vayeshev alludes to this. Yaakov was tired of work, he wanted to finally return to the tent (lechatchila), but his fortune did not allow it, so yosef was taken.

PNN:

I’d like to think that we both know that this issue is not as simple as you would imply. It is dealing with a machlokes that is encapsulated in the disagreement between Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai on Berachos 35b. As you well know, that gemara ends by saying that many followed R’ Yishmael’s approach of Torah study and derech eretz and it worked for them, while many tried Rashbi’s approach and it did not work for them. The Gra says on this that it didn’t work for “many”, but there are certain unique individuals for whom this approach is right. Personally, I believe that the pendulum has swung far too much over to the side of learning without derech eretz and we are currently viewing the result…v’lo alsa biyadan. When Rav Yaakov Kaminetzky, whom you quoted, discussed this issue, he was always very careful to state that it was not a clear cut matter one way or the other. I think that you are mistaken in viewing it as such, and in so doing have demonstrated one of the traits of the yeshiva world that I view as a flaw. Rav Hirsch writes that there were twelve shevatim in order to demonstrate that there is no one correct mehalach in Judaism. You can observe halacha and be a wonderful Jew and still live a very different life from another Jew who is also living according to halacha.

This bizarre, quasi-dichotomy is also captured beautifully by the gemara in Kiddushin 82a, where R’ Meir says one must teach his son an occupation, and R’ Nehorai says he puts aside all of the occupations in the world and only teaches himself Torah. What makes this interesting is the gemara at the top of Eiruvin 13b where the gemara says that R’ Meir and R’ Nehorai are one and the same, “Shehu mayir einei chachamim b’halacha”.

There are plenty of sources espousing the value of work….not as a bedieved! Rashbatz (a physician) points out on the mishnah in pirkei avot of “ehav es hamelacha” that this obligation goes beyond the duty to support oneself; even if one has other income, he is obligated to work “not only for the earnings involved, but out of love for it.” And with regards to the positive effect that working has on one’s studies, this is clearly expressed by chazal who say, again in Pirkei avot, “yafeh talmud Torah im derech eretz…v’chol Torah she’ein imah melachah, sofah biteilah v’goreres avon.” You don’t even have to go past the peshat of the Torah to see the emphasis on work. Man is placed in gan Eden to work. Sheishes yamim ta’avod. Etc.

You must know that for every source that you have quoted ascribing asceticism as a Torah value, I can quote ones that say the opposite. Surely you know that it is not so clear cut!

A Nazir must bring a korban chata’as. According to R’ Elazar HaKapar (Nazir 19a) this is for denying himself permitted physical pleasures. Interestingly enough, this is the same R’ Elazar HaKapar who says in Pirkei Avos that Kina, Tayva, and Kavod remove one from the world. Nedarim 38a states that Hashem’s Shechina only rests on one who is wealthy and physically strong. Rambam codifies this l’halacha (Hilchos Yesodei ha'Torah 7:1). See the Ran on this…he disagrees with your assertion that this was metaphorical, and the gemara bears this out (see Kesef Mishnah and Shalmei Nedarim). See Tosfos at the top of Bava Kama 72a regarding how Rav Nachman says that he can’t clarify a Torah point until he’s eaten a nice slab of beef. And lastly, my favorite, the Yerushalmi (Kiddushin 4:12) that for every permitted thing in this world which we do not experience, we will be held accountable.

Rabbi Mordechai Gifter says that kedoshim tihiyu means that just as God is intimately involved in every aspect of the physical world - since only His will at every moment allows anything to exist – we also must have contact with the entire physical world. But our involvement has to be like God's: we must elevate and sanctify the physical.

You make many valid points in your e-mail. You are right that physical strength is not always manifested externally. My great uncle used to bend horseshoes as Purim shtick. But we very much disagree on whether the “talmidei chachamim” produced by yeshivos today are on the level of those produced in the past. Granted, some people who look scrawny may possess tremendous strength…but it would be a mistake to solely choose scrawny individuals for an Olympic weight-lifting team. Scrawniness is not an indicator of great strength. I find it hard to believe that you could randomly pull a bochur out of Lakewood nowadays who could thrive in the business world. Also, while granting your point about external appearances, don’t forget that Yosef, the only person the Torah deems worthy of the title of “HaTzadik”, is the personality whom girls used to climb walls in order to stare at.

All in all, I think that you are in danger of oversimplifying Judaism into a one-dimensional vision that does not encapsulate all of Torah, but only those parts of it that align with your desired worldview. And I truly say this out of nothing but friendship and respect. I hope that you realize that I would only speak so bluntly to someone whom I care so much about and whom I know only engages in machlokot l’shem shamayim.

Bruce:
I just saw an amazing Tosfos that directly answers our issue. Its in Taanit n11a D'H Amar. The gemara quotes Shmuel who says that anyone who accepts upon himself a personal fast day is called a sinner. THen he quotes the passuk that identifies a sinner to his soul. Then tosfos asks how thats possible if we know that when someone injures himself he is patur. Tosfos rules that yes, he is certainly a sinner, as we learn from the korban the nazir needs to bring. (thats what you said) The gemara finds a kal vchomer. Just as the nazir needs to atone for not drinking wine, how much more so does someone who refrains from other pleasures. (you said that too.) Yet, Tosfos makes a 180. He rules that nevertheless, the mitzvah that he receives significantly outweighs the minor aveira. (Of course, this raises the issue of mitzvah haba ba'aveira, and sur meira, then aseh tov) He then proves it through the Taanit chalom situation. Where a guy wants to anull a bad dream he had, so he fasts on Shabbos and then on Sunday to atone for that fast.

The gemara in brachos is explicit that although its a tough nut to crack, the lechatchila is according to Rebbe Shimon. The problem is, we cant pull it off, so we end up with the Bedieved. Thats the pshat. As proof that this is pshat, look in Taanit 7a. There are two psukim: "If youre thirsty, you are given water." And "All who are thirsty go drink water." The answer the gemara gives is that the tzaddik has his parnassah given to him, and the not-so-tzaddik has to work for it. In other words: being a tzaddik and not working is lechatchila.

The mishna in pirkei avos that requires melacha piggybacks the command given to adam. God tells the not-yet-physical adam that he put him in the garden to work and to guard it. The garden is Torah, as it represents the 53 parshiyos in the Torah (GaN = 53). I'm sorry, I don't remember where I saw that gemara, but its quoted all over chassidus. Adam was placed in the GaN leOvdah, uleShomrah. The gemara (you'll have to forgive me, I forgot. Its either in the end of Yoma, or the beginning of Taanit.) It says that someone who studies and doesnt have Yirei Shamayim is like someone who has a fence around his garden, but doesn't have a garden. In light of this gemara, you see that to work and guard the garden, cannot possibly mean to become a lawyer and spend 12 hours a day pleading for a rapists life. Rather it means to work on your yiras shamayim (Ovdah) and learn torah to guard it (Shomrah). If you do not think this is pshat, then explain what work and guarding means to a non-physical entity.

PNN:

I think you are missing the point by phrasing it in terms of l’chatchila and bedieved. This is a question that harkens back to the dispute between Yehuda and Yosef in Mitzrayim of whether to integrate in society or whether to stay in yeshivot in Goshen. I think the real answer is that we need both approaches integrated into one national identity.

Regarding the gemara dispute between Rebbe Yishmael and Rashbi, again I think you are missing the point. Once more, I reiterate that for every source you quote supporting your view, I can bring you one supporting the other view. The Gra explains that you need to be medayek on the lashon of the gemara. Many will never be able to pull off the approach of Rashbi, it is not intended for many. But there are a few unique individuals in each generation for whom it is meant. The vast majority of us, however, are meant lechatchila to engage in work and learning.

So, in closing, I believe that the Jewish world needs Lakewood, but it also needs YU. I think the quality and quantity of people in each institution are not ideal, but that’s a topic for another time.

Bruce: Ok, fair enough. I guess we'll find out when eliyahu comes....Teku.

The Lost Art of Letter Writing

2011-08-01T11:49:00.001-04:00

Whether caused by the introduction and rapid adoption of e-mail, the decline in quality of our education, or sheer impatience, the art of the handwritten (or even typed l'havdil) great letter has disappeared. One can purchase books of letters written by the greats where each word has clearly been carefully chosen, much like notes in a symphony which when read together form harmonious perfection. Some of us even have years of correspondence written between grandparents while one served overseas. What will our children have to read of ours? "lol, gr8, btw 2nites gonna b insane, ttyl"?

My mother always insisted that we write handwritten letters to her. When my parents had something to convey to us, we would receive a long, well-written and very well thought-out letter. To this day, I write handwritten thank you notes to my Shabbos hosts, and judging by the reaction that I most often receive, this is not common. When it comes to e-mail, I am as guilty as the next man. I am busy and rushed, and I often dash out a line or two without giving much thought. But I also recognize the value of a good letter, and there are certain people with whom I've shared correspondences for over a decade, and when I write them I often first peruse a classic letter from the past to put myself into the proper frame of mind.

With that as introduction, here is a condolence letter written by Benjamin Franklin to the young daughter of a friend who has lost a pet squirrel. Would that we all put as much thought and time into writing actual condolence notes as he evidently did when writing a condolence note to a little girl for a squirrel.

London, September 26, 1772.

DEAR Miss,

I LAMENT with you most sincerely the unfortunate end of poor MUNGO. Few squirrels were better accomplished; for he had had a good education, had travelled far, and seen much of the world. As he had the honour of being, for his virtues, your favourite, he should not go, like common skuggs, without an elegy or an epitaph. Let us give him one in the monumental style and measure, which, being neither prose nor verse, is perhaps the properest for grief; since to use common language would look as if we were not affected, and to make rhymes would seem trifling in sorrow.

EPITAPH.
Alas! poor MUNGO! Happy wert thou, hadst thou known
Thy own felicity. Remote from the fierce bald eagle,
Tyrant of thy native woods,
Thou hadst nought to fear from his piercing talons, Nor from the murdering gun Of the thoughtless sportsman.
Safe in thy wired castle,
GRIMALKIN never could annoy thee.
Daily wert thou fed with the choicest viands,
By the fair hand of an indulgent mistress ;
But, discontented,
Thou wouldst have more freedom.
Too soon, alas ! didst thou obtain it ;
And wandering, Thou art fallen by the fangs of wanton, cruel RANGER!
Learn hence,
Ye who blindly seek more liberty,
Whether subjects, sons, squirrels or daughters,
That apparent restraint may be real protection ;
Yielding peace and plenty
With security.

You see, my dear Miss, how much more decent and proper this broken style is, than if we were to say, by way of epitaph,

Here SKUGG Lies snug, As a bug In a rug.

and yet, perhaps, there are people in the world of so little feeling as to think that this would be a good-enough epitaph for poor Mungo.

If you wish it, I shall procure another to succeed him; but perhaps you will now choose some other amusement.

Remember me affectionately to all the good family, and believe me ever,

Your affectionate friend, B. FRANKLIN.

RSS #3: Boys Don't Make Passes at Girls Who Wear Glasses

2011-07-17T15:46:00.000-04:00

Revamp the Shidduch System #3

"Boys don't make passes at girls who wear glasses." I came across this saying in a book of quotes from a rather eccentric, but wonderful, Jew. And it got me to thinking. Personally, I'm not terrifically biased against girls with glasses, but everyone has their own unique distaste for some ridiculously minor detail that really shouldn't play any part in the search for a spouse. In today's day and age, when many of the shidduch suggestions young singles receive come from people who don't know them and/or don't know the person being suggested, it is far too easy to reject a resume due to these pet peeves. After all, for the most part the resumes seem interchangeable, and there is nothing prompting one to invest anything in this particular resume as opposed to the dozens of other suggestions received. I myself have done this countless times. However, when a shadchan takes the time to actually tell me about the person (I'd be curious to hear from my readers how often this occurs for them. In my case, I think it would be true for fewer than one quarter of the suggestions.), to tell me why she thinks it is a good idea, to tell me about unique character traits this person possesses (No..."cute, great middos, and a warm family" just doesn't cut it!), to in effect "sell" the suggestion to me, such trivial considerations as glasses don't play nearly as large a role. If there is one simple thing that shadchanim could do to improve their success rates, I think this is it. And it is true for those of us who as amateur shadchanim have attempted to set up friends in the past. It is not enough to make introductions, it is not enough to provide a cursory description. Be a salesman!

This article, which I recently came across, spells this out beautifully.

Taking Matchmaking to New Levels
by Rabbi David Lapin

Addressing the growing singles challenge requires more than setting up introductions. We need to present one person to another.

The Divine art of matchmaking requires more than introducing two people to each other. God did not merely introduce Adam and Eve -- it would have been hard for them not to meet under the circumstances, even without God playing the matchmaker! God presented Eve to Adam. The Midrash [1] tells how the Almighty adorned her like a bride with 24 different items of jewelry before allowing Adam to glimpse her. That's presentation.

Many people are doing a lot of introducing, but that is not enough to address the growing singles challenge. What we don't do enough of is presenting people to one another. There's a big difference between the two.

Let's look at why the need for presentation and how to do it.

Why the need for presentation?
Finding your soul mate involves a miracle. It is natural for people to exaggerate both their own virtues and the flaws of others. This tendency makes it nearly impossible for a person to find someone truly worthy of him or her! But miraculously, people fall in love and the tendency reverses: the individual, blinded to the flaws of their beloved, sees only their virtues. (Based on Tiferret Tzion, B.R. 68:4)

We can play a part in facilitating that miracle. We can help people not only to meet one another, but to also notice one another and become attracted to them. We can do this by presenting people to one another instead of merely introducing them.

What is presentation?
Presentation is the art of helping people to overlook flaws and discover glory. We know how important the art of presentation is when we want to create desire. Chefs go to mighty efforts to present otherwise unappetizing bits of animal or vegetable as culinary masterpieces. We present ourselves well when we want to make an impression, masking our defects and accentuating our strengths. Shopkeepers and marketers seduce consumers with enticing presentation.

In romantic, social or business matchmaking, the same applies. If we truly want to create a connection between two people we need to do more than introduce them; we need to present them in ways that make them desirable. In short, we need to market them. It is much easier and more tasteful for us to promote one another than it is to promote ourselves: "Let a stranger praise you rather than praise yourself with your own mouth" (Proverbs 27:2). It is a great kindness to present others in a way that positions them well and saves them from having to promote themselves -- an action that the Torah reluctantly allows when anonymity is the alternative (Nedarim 62a).

How to present
Here are a few simple guidelines.

Presentation never entails misrepresentation. Presentation means highlighting the positives that may normally take a new contact a long time to discover. It does not mean making up positives that are untrue, nor does it mean concealing the truth when a serious shidduch inquiry is made.
If necessary do some research. Get to know the person you are presenting. Question them to learn about the more subtle and unusual aspects of their life experience.
Think like a salesman: you get your "commission" for closing the sale, not for a mere introduction! If you apply your mind, in an instant you can develop a marketing strategy. Figure out how best to present the individual. Create the right conditions and timing.
Create the opportunity in conversation and interaction, to "showcase" the person at their best. Facilitate opportunities for the person to shine in their own rights.
Demonstrate palpable enthusiasm for the qualities of the person you are presenting. Avoid lack of authenticity and exaggeration, but do not shy away from superlative description where appropriate.

Let's go beyond introducing people to one another and present them to one another. Even if it does not result in marriage, you will have elevated a person's dignity instead of watching them lose it in the conventional dating scenes. Yes, it does take some thought and some effort. If it didn't, it wouldn't be the mitzvah it is.
[1] Bereishit Rabbah 18:1

What We Can Learn From Chazal About Dating

2011-07-12T03:06:00.000-04:00

I do not agree with every point that Rabbi Pruzansky makes, but am nonetheless impressed that he would write such an article and that the Jewish Press would publish it. There is a lot of validity to what he is saying.

What We Can Learn From Chazal About Dating

By: Rabbi Steven Pruzansky

Date: Thursday, July 07 2011

A recent piece posted on Matzav.com signed by "A Crying Bas Yisroel" chillingly lamented the plight of a young single woman, with fine personal qualities but without any family money or yichus, who sits forlornly waiting for her phone to ring with calls from shadchanim. Alas, the phone never rings, and for her, the shidduch system is an ongoing nightmare.

Not coincidentally, but perhaps surprising to some, almost all the weddings I attended this past month were those of couples who had "long-term" relationships. They either met in high school or when high school age, or in Israel or their early college years, and almost all of them met on their own. They did not use shadchanim, but met the old-fashioned way: in healthy social settings where young men and women mingle naturally, without the pressure of "potential spouse" hovering over every encounter. That is not the norm in Jewish life these days, but perhaps it should be.

That is not to say that the shidduch system is failed, or failing, or broken. Too many people work too hard on setting up unmarrieds that it would be incorrect and insulting to say that it is broken. So it is not broken - but perhaps it should be a b'diavad (post facto) and not a l'chatchila (ab initio) system.

L'chatchila, it would seem, Chazal emphasized that we should find our own mates.

The Gemara (Kiddushin 2b) cites the pasuk "When a man takes a woman [in marriage]" and explains "darko shel ish l'chazer al ha-isha," it is the way of men to pursue women [in marriage]. It is not the way of men, or shouldn't be, to enlist a band of agents, intermediaries, and attorneys to do the work for them. By infantilizing and emasculating our males, we have complicated a process that should be simpler and made a joyous time into one of relentless anguish and hardship for many women.

This is reminiscent of the life story of a pathetic man we recently encountered in the weekly Torah reading - Ohn ben Pelet. The Gemara (Sanhedrin 109b) states that "ishto hitzilato" - his wife saved him from the clutches of Korach. Ohn was an original co-conspirator who is not mentioned again after the first verse, because his wife explained to him the foolishness of his conduct (Ohn loses if Moshe wins and gains nothing if Korach prevails), prevented him from joining his fellow conspirators, and, as the Midrash adds, held onto his bed to prevent the ground from swallowing Ohn and then dragged him to Moshe to beg forgiveness. Ohn was a sad excuse of a man.

Mrs. Ohn, in effect, saved her husband not only from Korach but also from himself. The problem with Ohn is that he perceived himself as an object, and not a subject or an actor. Ohn wasn't a leader - he was a born follower, an object for others to use. He just allowed himself to be yanked along by anyone - for evil and for good. He was just part of the crowd, the personification of the personality of weakness, dependence and self-abnegation. He took no responsibility for his own destiny.

An object is a tool of others; a subject is the master of his destiny. In the realm of dating and marriage, we are breeding Ohns by the thousands by freeing men from their obligation to pursue their potential spouses, and thereby relegating women to the dependent role of passively waiting to be the chosen one. Why do we do that, and is there a better option?

Some will argue that the shidduch system spares our children the pain of rejection - but part of life, and a huge part of parenting, is preparing our children for a world in which they will experience rejection at some point. That is called maturity.

Others will argue, with greater cogency, that we prevent young men and women from sinning. Relationships that begin when couples are younger, or friendships that start outside the framework of parental supervision, can induce or lead to inappropriate behavior. That possibility is undoubtedly true, but can be rectified by applying a novel concept called "self-control," which in any event is the hallmark of the Torah Jew.

We do not tell people to avoid The Home Depot even if one wants to buy a hammer lest he shoplift some nails, nor do we admonish others not to shop in Pathmark because one might be led to sin by the aroma of non-kosher foods. Self-control and discipline are routine components of the life of a Jew. And, even granting that "there is no guardian for promiscuity," it should still be feasible for a young man to talk to or display his personal charms to a woman without assaulting her.

Sad to say, there is a promiscuity problem, even among some of our high school youth and certainly in college, that cannot be swept away. It can be resolved if parents take responsibility and sit down with their sons and teach them how to respect women - and sit down with their daughters and teach them how to respect themselves.

Something is not normal, and against human nature as Chazal perceived it, for men to be so diffident, so timid, so Ohn-like, and sit back comfortably relying on others to procure them dates. Young men who would not allow others to choose for them a lulav and etrog do not hesitate to delegate others to find them a spouse. This also unduly delays their fulfillment of the commandment of pru u'rvu (procreation). And something is not normal, and frankly, unfair, when young women have to sit by the phone for weeks and months waiting to be contacted by agents.

What is the solution, or the other option? For those people currently of age and in the system, or for communities that would accept only the shidduch system, there is no other solution but to redouble our efforts. They will reap the reward, and also, sadly, the misery of those who choose to be passive in life. Obviously, unmarried men and women should be seated together at weddings to facilitate more natural, pressure-free encounters; it is so obvious, it is surprising it is even debated.

But for younger people today - say, older teens - there has to be a better way. The paradigm of "don't smile/talk/socialize/date" until one is ready for marriage constricts the capacity of our young people to assume responsibility for their own lives. Many will disagree with me, even among my colleagues, but if we wish to minimize the heartbreak of so many of our young people, we must find healthy ways of encouraging interaction between teenagers - in shuls, in schools, in youth groups. We have to de-stigmatize self-help and personal initiative.

For example, at a shul Kiddush, it should not be construed as abnormal or off-putting if a young man approaches a young woman who has caught his eye, and asks her name, and "would you like a piece of kugel?"That should be normal; at one point, that was darko shel ish. Indeed, that should be even more normal among people of marriageable age, and would consign the shidduch system to its appropriate b'diavad status, for people who have not been able to meet on their own. Perhaps the young woman whose lament was featured above should take similar initiatives as well.

Dating at too young an age is certainly problematic, but teenagers who learn to socialize in groups demystify the opposite sex and learn appropriate boundaries, communication skills and modes of interaction. Such contact makes males more sensitive, and helps them learn at an early age that a young woman is not a shtender, in the Steipler's elegant phrase, or a vehicle for their own gratification, in the modern lexicon. It certainly helps prepare a couple for marriage if they know each other longer than three weeks or three months, and the recent spate of broken engagements and early divorces in the Jewish world would tend to confirm that. And conversely, the plethora of recent weddings of couples in our community who know each other for years would corroborate that as well.

I am mindful of the opinions of the gedolim who proscribe any male-female interaction before one is ready to marry, and those gedolim who permit such contact in controlled settings. As a community we have other options than the false choice of isolationism or promiscuity, and we need to strengthen our young men with the inner confidence to guide their own lives. There are too many people walking around with Y chromosomes who are not men. They have an Ohn-like existence, sitting back comfortably and letting others plot their destiny in life. They will never be masters, only objects who cannot lead or build or create. That does not bode well for Klal Yisrael.

May Hashem bless with success the work of all shadchanim.But we need to shift the culture away from the passive indifference of the well-connected to the active pursuit of spouses by all, and thereby mold more assertive men and more confident women. That is because more is expected of us - as a nation that is called by God for greatness, not mediocrity; to be active, not passive; to be followers of God and leaders of mankind.

Rabbi Steven Pruzansky is spiritual leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun of Teaneck, New Jersey, and the author most recently of "Judges for Our Time: Contemporary Lessons from the Book of Shoftim" (Gefen).

"It's Not Me, It's You"

2011-07-07T02:45:00.000-04:00

I recently wrote a letter to a close family friend who had been rejected after one date. We had often spoken of how the vast majority of people are quite ordinary, and being ordinary and average and a member of the majority have a far easier time finding a counterpart with whom to share their life. The term we coined to identify those of us who escaped the cookie cutter mold is "The .2%", reflecting an arbitrary Gaussian distribution I scribbled on a napkin one motzai Shabbat to illustrate my theory. I found the writing of this letter to be quite cathartic and thought that I would share it with those of my readers who share the trials and tribulations of being a member of the .2% on the off chance that it might speak to others as well.

Obviously I cannot tell you specifically why this young man didn’t see it going anywhere. Even were I to have ruach haKodesh, which is a distinct possibility, I would be unable to confirm this by using it so publicly and definitively. However, I can share two thoughts with you. First of all, on those rare occasions where a young lady doesn’t fall head over heels for my charms, wit, charisma and Aryan looks on a first date and makes the illogical decision to not see me again, I consider it a blessing in disguise. It is God’s way of sparing me from the time wasted dating a girl who is not for me. It is a clear closure and indication that this was not the right person, and spares me from having to spend several weeks debating whether this might be the one. Secondly, because we are members of that blessed 0.2%, we have the mixed blessing of being decidedly not right for many people. The vast majority of middlers (my new term for those poor, unfortunate souls who fall out in the middle of every scale of measurement, i.e. background, personality, dreams, goals, etc.) get a second date. This is because there is not much substance there, and thus they rarely are identified off the bat as “not what I’m looking for.” The exception is when we 0.2%-ers go out with a middler, in which case that pathetic quality of unexceptional mediocrity is precisely what we’re not looking for.

I will tell you that I have been here for over four weeks now, and I have not gone on a single date. I have met many girls, been suggested many more, and even been pursued by a handful, but I have yet to meet one whom I am interested in. Were a middler in my shoes, I have no doubt that he would have spent every evening on a date and would most likely have already found his wife. However, God did not place our lot amidst those of the middlers. It is a mixed blessing, but one which in the end I am sure we will both come to realize outweighs the negatives with the positives.

None of this will make being rejected entirely pleasant, one always wonders precisely what it was that the other did not see as compatible with their life dreams, but I hope that you’ll also come to realize that it is in no way a negative reflection on you, but in actuality a positive one. You’re an individual, you’re one of the 0.2%, and you are most definitely not compatible with everyone. Thank God for that.

Yours always in friendship,

PNN

How 'Ya Gonna Keep 'Em Down on the Farm (After They've Seen Jerusalem)

2011-07-06T05:51:00.000-04:00

In 1918, following the United States' entry into WWI, Joe Young and Sam M. Lewis penned an immensely popular song entitled "How 'Ya Gonna Keep 'Em Down on the Farm? (After They've Seen Paree)". The premise of the song was that it would be difficult for the doughboys to return to the family farm after having traveled half way around the world and seen Paris...this was prior to the Islamization of France, so presumably it was a more attractive destination...although, as far as I can tell, the French were still around.

I've just passed the half-way mark of my trip to Jerusalem, and I'm finding my thoughts drifting in the same direction. For the past four weeks, not a single day has gone by without my meeting a new, interesting and unique person; discovering a new shiur or appealing geographic location; or encountering some epiphany or new way of viewing the world. Jerusalem is an incredibly stimulating city. It is difficult to walk the streets without experiencing a new-found sense of vitality and excitement.

My current home in the United States, where I am in school, is decidedly less so. It is a smaller community without much turnover, or to adopt a computer term, a slow refresh rate. While in school there last year, it was easy to engross myself in my work and interests and bury the feeling of social stagnation, but I'm not sure how successfully I will be able to do so after having spent this magical summer in Jerusalem. Until I discover a solution, I will continue making the most of my time here and storing up a summerful of warm memories to carry me over until my next visit.

Modern-Orthodoxy at Home and Abroad

2011-06-27T07:35:00.000-04:00

This past Tuesday night I sat in on a chaburah of ten, twenty-four year old young men. They have been close friends since they were in kindergarten. They are now all grown, mostly married and with kids, and they meet weekly to learn hilchot Shabbat l’ma’aseh. It was an inspiring sight, and it left me with many realizations.

First of all, I realized that the diminutive geographic size of Israel tends to encourage long-lasting friendships. Friendships are able to continue and thrive with ease, as at worst friends live a few hours of driving away. The members of this chaburah are able to meet regularly, and of course never miss each other’s simachot. I found this to be very different from the States where I have close friends in L.A., friends in Seattle, friends in NY, and friends in FL. It is rare that a few of us get together, and even rarer for all of us to meet, especially now that there are wives and children involved.

Secondly, I noticed that all of the members of this chaburah seemed to have mastered the “modern-Orthodox” balancing act. All are professionals, all served in the military with distinction, and all are still kovea itim on a regular basis. This is something that I don’t see much in the States. There, the divide seems to be far more black and white. You have those people who are modern and those who are Orthodox. Those who claim modern-Orthodoxy are often fooling themselves and fall more clearly into one camp or the other. If they do somehow manage to pull it off, it frequently fails when they try to pass it on to their children. This article on modern-Orthodox teenagers who keep "Half-Shabbos", drove that point home for me.

My observations have led me to believe that the future of modern-Orthodoxy lies in Israel and that in the States we will continue to face a polarizing drift to either yeshivish or modern, much as the conservative community has been steadily losing members to either the reform community or the more observant community. Modern-Orthodoxy is a balancing act on a tightrope. In the States it would appear that we are also plagued with a bad case of vertigo, making it next to impossible. In Israel, it seems that they have a better sense of balance.

Beyonce on Shidduchim

2011-06-02T23:18:00.001-04:00

I had to post this. Good chodesh!

Heading to Israel

2011-05-16T16:48:00.000-04:00

Well, I am shortly leaving to Israel for the duration of the summer. While there, I will be splitting my time between learning, working in a medical research lab, and corrupting a newly born nephew whom I have yet to meet. I'm not yet sure whether I will be continuing to write while there, or not, but either way, I am looking forward to exploring what the dating scene is like and later sharing my findings with all of you.

Wishing you all a wonderful summer!

PNN

Double, Double, Triple Date

2011-05-13T15:14:00.008-04:00

First of all, I have to give credit to Big Gedalia Goomber and Uncle Moishe (and possibly also The Mitzvah Men...I've always been a little fuzzy on their precise role) for the title of this post.

Now on to business. It occurred to me that perhaps there is a more efficient means of carrying out the laborious chore of dating. As things currently stand, a date means a certain investment of time and money and emotional angst in exchange for getting to meet one potential spouse. Now...what would you say if I told you that I could double or even triple your return while also throwing in a handful of extra benefits!? And no, my last name is not Madoff.

So here it is, the brilliantly simple solution of the week to the shidduch crisis. Instead of going out with just one person, you pair up with another couple, or even two additional couples, and you double/triple date! You each invest the same amount of time and money that you would have spent on a single date, and in addition the date is far more enjoyable as group interactions are invariably less awkward and less taxing than one on one. (Also, have you ever tried to play two-person machanayim? It's a pretty quick game.) And, at the end of the day, you have a two or three times greater chance of meeting that special someone. Theoretically, assuming an individual can free up one evening a week for dating, and assuming that it takes three hundred dates to meet your beshert (seems like as good a number as any other), a triple dating bochur/meidel should meet his or her beshert roughly a full four years ahead of someone still stuck in the single-date model! What's more, he will have spent one-third of the money, will have spent one-third of the time (leaving time for other important pursuits such as improving his chess or Boggle game (which, by the way, happen to be very sexy skills in a woman) and working out so as to be ready to compete in the Finnish Wife-Carrying Championships following marriage) and will have enjoyed himself far more during the dating process.

Having solved that problem, I am now going to turn my attention to the next biggest crisis facing the Jewish world today...finally writing some half-decent lyrics for Uncle Moishe.

The 56 Funniest Analogies Written by High Schoolers

2011-05-05T05:32:00.005-04:00

This is slightly out of character for my blog, but I couldn't resist posting it. Apparently, these analogies are the winning entries for a 1999 Washington Post humor contest.

Her eyes were like two brown circles with big black dots in the center.
He was as tall as a 6′3″ tree.
Her face was a perfect oval, like a circle that had its two sides gently compressed by a Thigh Master.
From the attic came an unearthly howl. The whole scene had an eerie, surreal quality, like when you’re on vacation in another city and Jeopardy comes on at 7:00 p.m. instead of 7:30.
John and Mary had never met. They were like two hummingbirds who had also never met.
She had a deep, throaty, genuine laugh, like that sound a dog makes just before it throws up.
The ballerina rose gracefully en pointe and extended one slender leg behind her, like a dog at a fire hydrant.
He was as lame as a duck. Not the metaphorical lame duck, either, but a real duck that was actually lame. Maybe from stepping on a land mine or something.
Her vocabulary was as bad as, like, whatever.
She grew on him like she was a colony of E. coli and he was room-temperature Canadian beef.
The revelation that his marriage of 30 years had disintegrated because of his wife’s infidelity came as a rude shock, like a surcharge at a formerly surcharge-free ATM.
The lamp just sat there, like an inanimate object.
McBride fell 12 stories, hitting the pavement like a Hefty bag filled with vegetable soup.
His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free.
He spoke with the wisdom that can only come from experience, like a guy who went blind because he looked at asolar eclipse without one of those boxes with a pinhole in it and now goes around the country speaking at high schools about the dangers of looking at a solar eclipse without one of those boxes with a pinhole in it.
Long separated by cruel fate, the star-crossed lovers raced across the grassy field toward each other like two freight trains, one having left Cleveland at 6:36 p.m. traveling at 55 mph, the other from Topeka at 4:19 p.m. at a speed of 35 mph.
Shots rang out, as shots are wont to do.
The little boat gently drifted across the pond exactly the way a bowling ball wouldn’t.
Her hair glistened in the rain like a nose hair after a sneeze.
The hailstones leaped from the pavement, just like maggots when you fry them in hot grease.
They lived in a typical suburban neighborhood with picket fences that resembled Nancy Kerrigan’s teeth.
He fell for her like his heart was a mob informant and she was the East River.
Even in his last years, Grand pappy had a mind like a steel trap, only one that had been left out so long, it hadrusted shut.
He felt like he was being hunted down like a dog, in a place that hunts dogs, I suppose.
She was as easy as the TV Guide crossword.
She walked into my office like a centipede with 98 missing legs.
The plan was simple, like my brother-in-law Phil. But unlike Phil, this plan just might work.
The young fighter had a hungry look, the kind you get from not eating for a while.
“Oh, Jason, take me!” she panted, her breasts heaving like a college freshman on $1-a-beer night.
It hurt the way your tongue hurts after you accidentally staple it to the wall.
It was an American tradition, like fathers chasing kids around with power tools.
He was deeply in love. When she spoke, he thought he heard bells, as if she were a garbage truck backing up.
The politician was gone but unnoticed, like the period after the Dr. on a Dr Pepper can.
Her eyes were like limpid pools, only they had forgotten to put in any pH cleanser.
Her date was pleasant enough, but she knew that if her life was a movie this guy would be buried in the credits as something like “Second Tall Man.”
The thunder was ominous-sounding, much like the sound of a thin sheet of metal being shaken backstage during the storm scene in a play.
The red brick wall was the color of a brick-red Crayola crayon.
She caught your eye like one of those pointy hook latches that used to dangle from screen doors and would fly up whenever you banged the door open again.
Her pants fit her like a glove, well, maybe more like a mitten, actually.
Fishing is like waiting for something that does not happen very often.
They were as good friends as the people on “Friends.”
Oooo, he smells bad, she thought, as bad as Calvin Klein’s Obsession would smell if it were called Enema and was made from spoiled Spamburgers instead of natural floral fragrances.
The knife was as sharp as the tone used by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Tex.) in her first several points of parliamentary procedure made to Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.) in the House Judiciary Committee hearings on the impeachment of President William Jefferson Clinton.
He was as bald as one of the Three Stooges, either Curly or Larry, you know, the one who goes woo woo woo.
The sardines were packed as tight as the coach section of a 747.
Her eyes were shining like two marbles that someone dropped in mucus and then held up to catch the light.
The baseball player stepped out of the box and spit like a fountain statue of a Greek god that scratches itself a lot and spits brown, rusty tobacco water and refuses to sign autographs for all the little Greek kids unless they pay him lots of drachmas.
I felt a nameless dread. Well, there probably is a long German name for it, like Geschpooklichkeit or something, but I don’t speak German. Anyway, it’s a dread that nobody knows the name for, like those little square plastic gizmos that close your bread bags. I don’t know the name for those either.
She was as unhappy as when someone puts your cake out in the rain, and all the sweet green icing flows down and then you lose the recipe, and on top of that you can’t sing worth a damn.
Her artistic sense was exquisitely refined, like someone who can tell butter from I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter.
It came down the stairs looking very much like something no one had ever seen before.
Bob was as perplexed as a hacker who means to access T:flw.quid55328.com\aaakk/ch@ung but gets T:\flw.quidaaakk/ch@ung by mistake.
You know how in “Rocky” he prepares for the fight by punching sides of raw beef? Well, yesterday it was as cold as that meat locker he was in.
The dandelion swayed in the gentle breeze like an oscillating electric fan set on medium.
Her lips were red and full, like tubes of blood drawn by an inattentive phlebotomist.
The sunset displayed rich, spectacular hues like a .jpeg file at 10 percent cyan, 10 percent magenta, 60 percent yellow and 10 percent black.

Tolstoy on Shidduchim

2011-05-04T13:04:00.001-04:00

"The French fashion--of the parents arranging their children's future-was not accepted; it was condemned. The English fashion of the complete independence of girls was also not accepted, and not possible in Russian society. The Russian fashion of matchmaking by the officer of intermediate persons was for some reason considered disgraceful; it was ridiculed by everyone, and by the princess herself. But how girls were to be married, and how parents were to marry them, no one knew."

- Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina

I've often thought about what it is that defines classic literature. What separates Shakespeare, Dickens and Hardy from J.K. Rowling (Spare me the comments, Potter-fans.), Dan Brown and Clancy? I believe that it has to do with the ability of literature to transcend temporal limits. When reading a Tolstoy novel, for example, the modern day reader has little in common with the portrayed lifestyle of the Russian aristocracy. And yet, while our modes of conveyance may be different, horse versus car, and while our forms of government, languages, and social standing may vastly differ, at the end of the day, people don't change. When an author manages to accurately capture certain integral truths about human beings, in a way that readers can relate to, his characters achieve an immortality not limited by their era or surroundings. When you can identify with the characters and with their character traits, flaws and thought-processes, that is great literature.

I recently reread Tolstoy's masterpiece, Anna Karenina, and had many moments throughout the book where I felt that Tolstoy had perfectly summed up something that I have experienced. One of these instances was with regards to the quote at the top of this piece. I think that we, in the Jewish community, are in a similar situation.

Our educational systems have raised and educated a generation who shuns like the plague any social events that could lead to interaction with the opposite gender. This means that even shiurim for young adults tend to only attract the very brave and the very desperate. Mixed Shabbos tables are unacceptable, charity work is segregated with men working on one night and women on another, weddings have separate seating. We have trained our singles not to approach each other, not to express an interest in each other, and if they are approached to immediately end the interaction and label the approacher "not frum". Online dating seems to have something of a taboo associated with it, and while I don't have personal experience, although there are undoubtedly exceptions I have heard it tends to be a last refuge for people who are too old, from out of town, unattractive, or cover their Shabbos tables with plastic. In short, vast numbers of mainstream Orthodox Jewry do not use it. And finally, the shidduch system is failing and in the words of Tolstoy, "ridiculed by everyone...But how girls were to be married, and how parents were to marry them, no one knew." And at the end of the day, we wonder why we have a shidduch crisis?

That's What Shadchan Said #2

2011-04-22T00:46:00.004-04:00

I just received a resume containing an interesting item, and I'm curious whether anyone else has ever seen one with a line similar to this:

Age: 22 (Date of birth: March 13, 1986)

At first it seems redundant. After all, either the age or the birth date should suffice. But then the number cruncher lying dormant inside you (still quivering with PTSD from Multivariable Calculus back in college) starts thinking. What year is it now? What's 2011 minus 1986? A quarter of a century? That's 25, right?

Then the cynic inside of you starts wondering...has this resume really not been updated in three years? If that were the case, why would anyone in their right mind include both the age and the birth date? It's almost as though someone were attempting to fool the non-mathematically inclined. Was the birth date then included so as to provide a defense against any claims of inaccuracy or "mekach taus"?

The questions continue: Have I become so jaded as to start seeing dishonesty and chicanery everywhere in shidduchim? Have I become so naive as to believe that no one has bothered to update this resume in the past three years? Does this shadchan really think that I wouldn't consider a young lady because she's twenty-five? Or in actuality was she the one who put this line in the resume?

All in all, considering that yashrus, honesty and integrity are of such importance to me as qualities in a future spouse, do I really want anything to do with a girl who would be involved in something that at best reeks of equivocation?

Chag sameach

Criminal Justice? How About Law-Abiding Citizen Justice

2011-04-14T21:51:00.002-04:00

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion; what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms!"

-Thomas Jefferson

Late last night, while walking my sister to her home, I saw an African-American teenager crouched behind her car. The street happens to be an all Jewish dead end, and there was no legitimate reason for him to be there. As I approached to confront him, he took off down the street...with my sister's GPS from her glove box, as we later found out. Knowing he was up to no good, my instinct was to chase after him, but my older and wiser sister restrained me. She didn't hold me back out of fear of the young hoodlum, thank God I can take care of myself, rather she was afraid of the police. And rightly so.

Just a few months ago, down in the Jewish community of Baltimore, a similar event took place. An African-American was spotted skulking through the backyards of a Jewish street peering into windows and trying back doors. An observant neighbor called the local, Jewish neighborhood watch who quickly responded, found the suspect in question and approached him. Seeing them approach, he picked up a 2x4 wood stud lying on the ground with nails in it. This was a poor decision. The responding member of the neighborhood watch was a former member of the Israeli special forces counter-terrorism unit, Duvdevan, and swiftly disarmed and restrained the suspect until police, who were called at the same time as the neighborhood watch, arrived (considerably later). Police promptly arrested him...the neighborhood watch member that is, for aggravated assault and false imprisonment. He is currently awaiting his court date. He is soon to be married, had just started a business (his business license was revoked), and is now spending every spare dollar that he has on legal defense in order to avoid spending his shana rishona in jail.

Those who believe that they can rely on the police to protect them are living in a delusional utopia. Police response times in most major cities are too slow to do much other than take down a report or call the coroner upon arrival. In Warren v. District of Columbia (1981) and Bowers v. DeVito (1982) it was also made quite clear that the state doesn't recognize that you have any right to the protection of law enforcement. Yet, legal codes in most states with large religious Jewish populations prevent individuals from defending themselves, making it nearly impossible to acquire concealed carry permits for firearms, and illegal to own pepper spray, tactical batons, self-defense knives, etc. There are forty states in which it is realistically possible to acquire a concealed carry permit, none of which have significant Orthodox Jewish populations. Gun control is an issue that deserves its own post, suffice it to say that the definition of a criminal is someone who breaches the rules or laws of a governing society. All that gun control accomplishes is ensuring that law abiding victims will be unarmed.

As I sat down to write this piece, I first glanced at the news (Fox News), only to see a piece regarding police officer Aaron Hess who is facing a $120 million wrongful death lawsuit over his fatal shooting of college athlete "DJ" Henry. A New York Post article reporting the same story, conveniently left out the fact that "DJ" (whose civil rights were violated according to his parents) was shot after running down Officer Hess with a car. Officer Hess sustained serious knee injuries as a result of this collision.

It is a sad fact that nowadays in the United States, the criminal justice system is more concerned with the rights of criminals than with the rights of productive, law abiding members of society. I truly believe that this is a harbinger of far worse to come and the eventual destruction of this once great country. Revolution anyone?

That's What Shadchan Said

2011-04-13T15:17:00.002-04:00

It all started last week when I received a call from a very sweet, local shadchan. "Primum" she said, "have I got a girl for you! She has all of your three required B's." (Perhaps I'll explain those in a future post.) She continued, "Why don't you look into her and get back to me."

She proceeded to send me one of these standard, generic resumes. Baruch Hashem, the girl went to all of the right day-camps and an appropriate elementary school. Her brothers-in-law all seemed appropriately aged and to originate in nice cities. And I was pleased to see that her father was in klei kodesh. Unfortunately, as is typical, I knew nothing about the young lady in question.

Instead of calling the listed references, I decided to begin with a quick Facebook search to see whether we had any friends in common. (Yes, I have Facebook. Chatasi, Avisi, Pashati. Can we get back to the story now?) Interestingly enough, she had a Facebook profile. Based on the little that the shadchan had told me about her ("quite yeshivish"), that was surprising, although I'm hardly one to judge in that department. For the record, in other departments, I'm quite enthusiastic about judging. Anyway, as I said, I was mildly surprised by her having a Facebook profile. However, I was stunned by the fact that her Facebook picture was of her in a miniskirt.

My first thought was to be dan l'kaf zechus. Perhaps this was a different girl with the same incredibly unique name. Maybe the girl happens to have shockingly long ankles and the skirt was really below the knee. Determined to get to the bottom of this mystery, I glanced through our mutual friends, and seeing a friend, I sent him an e-mail questioning whether it was the same girl I was set up with and whether it was possible that we weren't on the same page religiously...oh, and by the way, would you say that her ankles are average length for her size?

I received a response that it was indeed the same girl, and that while she was quite nice and came from a frum family, she was emphatically no longer religious. In fact, her current boyfriend isn't Jewish.

Feeling that I had done my research, I e-mailed the shadchan to thank her for the suggestion and explained that I thought the young lady in question was perhaps not of an equivalent level of observance.

The response: "I think you're wrong. But, your call."

This leads me to the following possible conclusions:

1) This girl changed her level of religiosity significantly and incredibly recently.
2) This girl's parents sent the shadchan her resume and are clueless about their daughter's present situation.
3) Shadchanim set up girls that they know nothing about with guys that they know nothing about and don't bother doing the least bit of research.

I think that all of these possibilities are somewhat depressing, and am even more determined to no longer go out with anyone suggested by someone who doesn't know both me and the girl well. Also, from here on out, ankle length will be a mandatory question...right after what 3rd grade summer camp did she attend.

This could be a regular feature. I certainly have enough material for it. It seems like not a week goes by without another great shadchan story. And, if readers have any stories to share, please send them in.

A Letter from Rav Hutner

2011-04-05T20:14:00.001-04:00

We all have struggles, and we all have times during our lives when we feel like we are losing those struggles. I would like to share a beautiful letter from Rabbi Yitzchok Hutner, ztl, to a talmid who was very discouraged. The talmid was lamenting obstacles and slumps and wanted to give up. It also happens to be a fantastic piece with regards to the "Artscroll portrayal" of gedolim as angelic beings.

A failing many of us suffer is that when we focus on the ultimate level of the attainments of great people, we discuss how they are complete in this or that area while omitting mention of the inner struggles that had previously raged within them. A listener would get the impression that these individuals came out of the hand of their Creator in full-blown ideal form.

Everyone is awed at the purity of speech of the Chofetz Chaim, considering it a miraculous phenomenon. But who knows of the battles, struggles and obstacles, the slumps and regressions that the Chofetz Chaim encountered in his war with the yetzer hara? There are many such examples, to which a discerning individual such as yourself can certainly apply the rule.

The result of this failing is that when an ambitious young man of spirit and enthusiasm meets obstacles, falls and slumps, he imagines himself as unworthy of being "planted in the house of Hashem." According to this young man's fancy, flourishing in the house of Hashem means to repose with calm spirit on "lush meadows" beside "tranquil waters" [Tehillim 23] delighting in the yetzer hatov, in the manner of the righteous delighting in the reflection of the Shechinah, with crowns on their heads, gathered in Gan Eden. And at the same time, untroubled by the agitation of the yetzer hara, along the lines of the verse "Free among the dead" [Tehillim 88:6].

Know, however, my dear friend, that your soul is rooted not in the tranquility of the yetzer tov, but rather in the battle of the yetzer tov. And your precious, warm-hearted letter "testifies as one hundred witnesses" that you are a worthy warrior in the battalion of the yetzer tov. The English expression, "Lose a battle and win a war" applies. Certainly, you have stumbled and will stumble again (a self-fulfilling prophecy is not intended) and in many battles you will fall lame. I promise you, though, that after those losing campaigns you will emerge from the war with laurels of victory upon your head and with the fresh prey quivering between your teeth. Lose battles but win wars.

The wisest of all men has said, "A just man falls seven times and rises again" [Mishlei 24:16]. Fools believe the intent of this verse is to teach us something remarkable - the just man has fallen seven times and yet he rises. But the knowledgeable are aware that the essence of the tzaddik's rising again is by way of his seven falls. " 'And He saw all that He had made and behold, it was very good.' 'Good': that is the yetzer tov. 'Very good': that is the yetzer hara" [Bereishis Rabbah 91.

My cherished one, I clasp you to my heart, and whisper in your ear that had your letter reported on your mitzvos and good deeds, I would have said that I had received a good letter from you. As things stand, with your letter telling of slumps and falls and obstacles, I say that I have received a very good letter from you. Your spirit is storming as it aspires to greatness. I beg of you, do not portray for yourself great men as being as one with their yetzer tov. Picture rather their greatness in terms of an awesome war with every base and low inclination.

When you feel the turmoil of the yetzer hara within yourself, know that with that feeling you resemble great men far more than with the feeling of deep peace, which you desire. In those very areas where you feel yourself failing most frequently - particularly in those areas - do you have the greatest potential for serving as an instrument of distinction for the honor of Hashem.

Black Holes, Mirrors, and Prisms

2011-03-27T11:20:00.000-04:00

Yes, it's been a while since I last posted. I could explain why, where I've been, and what I've been doing, but I don't want to make my readers jealous of my adventures. Instead, I'd like to share a dating theory that I developed last week while trudging through the mud in a downpour with a fifty pound pack on my back and lightning crashing all around me at an undisclosed, remote location.

I realized that I could classify most of the girls that I have dated into three categories: Black Holes, Mirrors, and Prisms. Bear with me while I explain.

I (and I think all of my readers who have the good taste to follow my blog fall in the same category) tend to be a leader, an out of the box thinker with grandiose ideas and plans, and a go-getter. In metaphorical terms, think of me as a million-watt light bulb shooting out photons of energy, beams of light, illuminating the darkest recesses of, to quote Shakespeare, "a naughty world." (For those concerned readers: No, I don't have any low self esteem issues.)

The Black Hole date absorbs all of the energy and light that her date is giving off, and still remains a dark, black (meant metaphorically, but come to think of it she does usually wear all black) abyss. She doesn't have many interests and doesn't have the common decency to fake an interest in anything her date discusses. She causes the energy-giver in the relationship to become a mere shell of his former self, quashes his dreams, restricts his personality, and all in all is, at least in my mind, a thoroughly unpleasant date. Men who wish to marry their mother often are attracted to this type of person.

Then there's the Mirror. At first glance, the Mirror date seems altogether delightful and refreshing. You're dazzled by her charm, her wit, her conversational talent, and then...it hits you, she's merely agreeing with everything you're saying, appreciating your charm, laughing at your wit, and echoing your conversation. She's reflecting the energy that you're giving off, but not giving off any creative energy of her own. You're enjoying the date because you're essentially dating yourself...and let's face it, you're a ton of fun. For many overbearing, insecure people, this is an ideal type of spouse. As for me, I prefer a relationship where both spouses contribute, which brings us to the last type of girl, the elusive Prism.

The Prism is the date who absorbs your light and then refracts it into a multitude of colors that you never thought possible. She introduces her own unique spin to your ideas, she comes up with ideas of her own, she turns your world into a 1960s disco with colored lasers and rainbows bouncing across your field of vision (minus the atrocious fashion and bad hairdos). The Prism, however, is difficult to find. It would seem that our educational institutions have stopped producing them. Mirrors and Black Holes are just easier to mass produce.

Still searching for my Prism...

The DOG Score

2011-03-07T05:37:00.003-05:00

"You're not going to believe this!" My roommate yelled at me as I walked into my apartment. "Mrs. S. (a local shadchan) just suggested a girl to me who she described as 'Gorgeous! A perfect 10.' But guess what?! I know the girl, and kind and sweet as she is, she'd be hard pressed to pass 5 if her life depended on it and her best friend was a cosmetician."

Yes, it's another blog post about shallow, superficial characteristics such as looks. I have steeled myself for the venom and vitriol that is sure to greet me in the comments section after I post this and am going ahead with it anyway, because, (a) I think this post touches on a truth about shadchanim's descriptions that all individuals in the parshah have encountered, and (b) it is intended humorously, something I know that at least a few readers will (even with this disclaimer) fail to understand.

Granted, attractiveness is subjective, (and in my case, thank God for that) but like many things that are subjective there are still certain ranges that the majority of people would agree on. For example, grossly fat is a relative term. Compared to the fattest man in the world, Michael Moore is (I can't believe I'm honestly saying this) quite skinny...but most people will still wait for Fat Mike to get off a rickety suspension bridge before stepping onto it. (See pictures below to confirm the veracity of this statement for yourself.)

Fattest Man Alive Michael Moore

Rickety Bridge

Likewise, with looks. Some people may rate a particular person a 6, while other will rate him/her a 5 or a 7. But, it is very unlikely that anyone is going to rate Jessica Alba or Sean Connery a 3, just as it is very unlikely that anyone will rate Hillary Clinton above a 5. (Again, see picture below for confirmation.) Research studies have in fact shown that "when asked to judge the attractiveness of a set of faces, people give remarkably consistent ratings despite individual differences in tastes and preferences."


Hillary Clinton (To be fair, if I was married to Bill, I'd probably also look like this.)

Shadchanim, however, seem to stretch the truth a bit more than most people. And it is not just confined to attractiveness. I can't tell you how many times my sisters have complained of being set up with a "very tall guy" or a "six-footer" only to discover that according to this shadchan, Danny DeVito would be a six-footer. (You know the drill.)

Danny(right) and me.

Recently, I came across a blog hosted by the OKCupid dating site. On it they compile data from all of the site members and crunch the numbers to come up with some interesting results. The study that interested me most was regarding what characteristics people lie about most in their dating profile. For men, height was a big one. As you can see below, the height distribution on OKCupid is similar in appearance to the height distribution for men in general, with one crucial difference...it is shifted two inches higher. In other words, men, on average, add two inches to their height.

This got me thinking of what a distribution would look like if we were to take all of the ratings for attractiveness given by shidduchim and then compare these to the ratings given by the people actually going on the dates. To clarify, Shadchan A tells girl that boy is a 9. Girl goes out and determines that he is actually a 4.2, and that extra .2 is just because she liked his sweater vest. I decided to crunch some data and generate a graph, and here it is:

Disclaimer: This graph is not based on any scientific or experimental realities, which is not to say that it is anything short of highly accurate.

As you can see, the average shadchan rating is a stunning 3.5 points higher than the average date's rating. And what's more, the standard deviation is much smaller for the shadchan's rating, suggesting that almost all of a shadchan's ratings fall out in the 8-9 range. Now...I don't know about you, but in general, most of the people I've met in life don't fall in the 8-9 range. I wish they did. Heck, I wish I did. The date's rating has an average of 5, and a standard deviation of 1.5, which means that most of the ratings fall in the 3.5-6.5 range, which to me seems far more accurate.

The next question I asked myself was how I could use this data to help those of us who have to deal with these "somewhat-less-than-honest", or perhaps "chronic-beer-goggle-wearing", shadchanim. By the way, for those of us unfamiliar with the beer-goggle sensation, I'm told it works something like this:

And so...I came up with the DOG Correction Factor and the DOG Score. I'm pretty sure these will revamp shidduchim. No longer will we have to stick to the old rule of thumb, "Gorgeous is pretty and pretty is plain". Tthanks to math and science (and PNN) we now have the Derived Objective Gorgeousness (DOG) Score! (Sound of trumpets) It works with other characteristics as well, such as height, wealth, charm, outgoing nature...frankly, any and all of the attributes which are habitually stretched beyond reality, but for purposes of demonstration I will stick with looks.

It works something like this:

Shaindel comes home from a date. She had expected Prince Charming, but instead she got Shrek. Instead of her usual post-date, cathartic phone call to her best friend Freidel, she instead logs onto the DOG Database. She enters the name of the shadchan who arranged the date: Mrs. Beer-Goggles. She is then asked to rate how attractive her date sounded from the shadchan's description. "Hmm, she said he looked like something of a cross between Patrick Dempsey and Matthew McConaughey. That would be a solid 9.5." Then she enters her own rating of her date's appearance. "Well, I kind of have a thing for moles, but the hunchback wasn't cool. That's gonna be a 5." Over time, the DOG database starts to accumulate data suggesting that Mrs. Beer-Goggles tends to consistently overrate her clients by roughly 3-5 points. She is then assigned a DOG Correction Factor of -4.

Along comes Shlomo...Mrs. Beer-Goggles has a girl for him! On the phone she described this girl as a perfect angel. If Jessica Biel and Catherina Zeta Jones had a baby, it would look like her. Definitely a 9 (and she's only not saying 10 because of an ayin hara)! He's thrilled and immediately heads for the door to go buy a new suit for the date. Suddenly, he recalls that his chavrusa had mentioned the DOG Database. He whips out his iPhone (yes, we're going to have an app) and zips over to Mrs. Beer-Goggles' record...NOOO!! A DOG Correction Factor of -4, that makes his date a 5. He reflects on this newfound information. Truthfully, he knows he's in that range himself, and her personality and middos did sound like much of what he was looking for. (Luckily, when it comes to middos and personality, Mrs. Beer-Goggles only has a DOG Correction Factor of -1, hooray!) He decides to still go on the date. Since he wasn't expecting Jessica Biel, he's pleasantly surprised to discover that his date is actually a solid 6. He didn't buy a new suit, so he's not annoyed that he made such an investment for a 6. The conversation is stellar, the 7-Ups are bubbly, and they get engaged. Yet another shidduch thanks to the DOG Database!!

Stay tuned for our site launch and tell your friends!

Oh...and good chodesh! Have a wonderful Rosh Chodesh Adar.

First, Do Harm

2011-03-03T15:02:00.000-05:00

I rarely admit that I am wrong. Not on account of any reticence to admit wrongdoing on my part, but merely on account of a general lack of wrongdoing. However, I am taking this opportunity to be modeh al haemes. I made a mistake. When I created my blog title it was with the very best of intentions, but the title, "Primum Non Nocere" (First, do no harm), champions a stance that is contrary to that of Judaism. This Latin phrase, one of the principle precepts of medical ethics, the basis of the doctrine of Nonmaleficence, is utter and complete rubbish.

Koheles teaches us that "ayn tzadik ba'aretz asher oseh tov v'ein yechetah", there is no tzadik who does good and doesn't sin. Notice that it doesn't say there is no tzadik who doesn't sin. There are people who don't sin. But, these are individuals who also do no good. It is not difficult to do no harm. I have a surefire recipe for anyone to ensure that they never cause any harm. It involves moving into a cave in the deepest, darkest recesses of the most uninhabited region in the world and staying there until you perish.

But that's not what the Torah demands of us. We are tasked to interact with the world, to attempt to improve it, knowing full well that at times we will stumble. Making sure you never do anything wrong is a surefire recipe for never accomplishing anything good. We live in the olam d'sfeikah, the world of uncertainty, not everything is black and white and the only thing that is certain is that we will all make mistakes. Yet, our guiding principle should be to do good, while obviously still attempting to minimize the harm we cause.

There's a quote often attributed to Edmund Burke which sums up this thought, "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." So, having completed my mea culpa, please disregard the title of my blog and go forth and do harm.

Quotables

2011-02-21T12:33:00.000-05:00

"The sooner the Jews farm it all, the better; their colonies are bright spots in a desert."

T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia) while traveling through Palestine in 1909. Coming from such a strong enthusiast of the Arab cause this is quite a remarkable statement.

The Shepherd Conundrum

2011-02-16T21:24:00.001-05:00

T.E. Lawrence and Marcus Luttrell

Recently, while reading Michael Korda's spellbinding biography of T.E. Lawrence (a.k.a. Lawrence of Arabia), entitled Hero, I came across a fascinating episode. Taking place during WWI, Lawrence leads his band of Arab warriors on a secret march across a brutal stretch of desert to attack the Turkish stronghold of Aqaba, near Eilat. Lawrence goes to great lengths to conceal his whereabouts from the Turks, who have only defended Aqaba from a seaward attack, assuming it impossible for any military force to cross the desert guarding their backs. All is going well until Lawrence and his men stumble across a young cowherd. This posed a serious predicament. They couldn't turn him loose as he would alert the Turks to their presence, tying him up in the desert would be a certain death sentence, and it seemed unfair to Lawrence to kill him just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The solution that they finally arrived upon was to strip him of his clothes and cut him across the soles of his feet with a dagger, preventing him from walking. The cowherd would now have to crawl on hands and knees to get home, a trip that would take two days, enough time for Lawrence's men to be long gone by the time the alarm went up, and his wounds would eventually heal. It seems fairly clear though, that had Lawrence not arrived at this option, he would have sooner killed the cowherd than released him and compromised the lives of his men.

This story fascinated me because a similar incident occurred in Afghanistan in June, 2005. Marcus Luttrell and his three fellow Navy SEALs, comprising a four man special reconnaissance team, were tasked with capturing or killing a high ranking Taliban associated with Osama bin Laden. While crawling through steep, mountainous terrain, avoiding enemy forces in the area, the team stumbled upon three Afghan shepherds, including a boy. At this point the team conferred. They had no means of radioing for backup or for extraction. If they released the shepherds they knew with absolute certainty that the Taliban would be alerted to their presence and they would be hunted down by overwhelming enemy forces. If they killed the shepherds, they would survive but would be tried as war criminals. The team voted and by a majority of one vote they released the prisoners and started running. Marcus' book, Lone Survivor, details how they were subsequently hunted down by the Taliban, and though they put up a brave fight (earning a posthumous Medal of Honor and killing scores of Taliban) all but one of them were killed. A rescue chopper that attempted to come to their aid was also shot down, resulting in the deaths of all sixteen men on board.

Two similar situations, incredibly difficult ones, separated by 88 years and 2,000 miles, one ends happily (at least for the Allied Powers), the other ends tragically. Is this a case of inappropriate compassion, as chazal say "Kol hameracheim al achzorim, sofo sheyisachzeir al rachmonim”? Who do you think reacted correctly in this situation?

Reverse Age Gap

2011-02-15T22:45:00.000-05:00

In general, in the marriages that I know of, the husband is usually a few years older than the wife. Granted, we're all aware of exceptions to this rule, but by and large this seems to be the case. Reasons for this vary, but include the additional length of time it takes for guys to become financially stable and the additional amount of time it takes for guys to mature. Once these guys reach that point, usually age 23-26, they start looking at the 19-21 year olds. I have to admit that I find the typical (yes, there are occasional exceptions) 19 year old that I get set up with to be about as dull as dishwater. They have limited life experience, very few original thoughts, and an immaturity bordering on the puerile. It's something of a relief when I get set up with someone slightly older who is capable of carrying on a conversation. But then there are the occasional suggestions where the girl is a year or two older than me. I have to admit an instinctive discomfort at these suggestions, but recently I've been reconsidering this.

People I've spoken to seem to have fairly strong views on the subject, one way or the other. I'm curious what my readers think about it. Guys, would/do you date older? Girls, would/do you date younger? Why? Why not?

The 25 Most Eligible Modern Orthodox Bachelors of 2011

2011-02-15T16:50:00.000-05:00

It has been about a year since ShidduchDater graced us with one of his amusing posts, but he's back in fine form with this year's list of The 25 Most Eligible Modern Orthodox Bachelors. Ladies, go get 'em!

Well, it’s that time of year again! No, I’m not referring to the start of tax season or the opening days of the Yeshiva University seforim sale. Rather, it’s finally time for the release of the most anticipated list of the year: “The 25 Most Eligible Modern Orthodox Bachelors of 2011.” Since I didn’t have the time to release this list last year, I wanted to make sure I got the 2011 rankings out early for all those eagerly waiting meidluch who want to get this year’s shidduch dating season off to a running start. Since 2009, some top bachurim got married or have girlfriends, while others have slipped through the cracks and are still on the market. There are also some newcomers to this year’s list who have spent the past year and a half refining their middot and stepping up their game in order to earn a spot on this esteemed list.

Rather than describe what characteristics make up a quality bachur, as I did in my 2009 list, this year I will write a VERY brief description on how each bachur earned their way on to this list. In doing so I hope to give each meidel an idea of which bachur may be shayich for them. Let’s get started: Click here to read more.

City of the Strange or Ir Shel Chesed

2011-02-13T10:22:00.000-05:00

When I first moved to the East Coast, I tried to get a handle on the various East Coast Jewish communities. There seemed to be stereotypes for every community ranging from Five Towns (that one was a real eye-opener) to Miami, but one of the ones that seemed the most peculiar to me was the description of Baltimore. You see, according to common wisdom, Baltimore produces real weirdos. This one puzzled me because while I can understand certain lifestyles and hashkafos producing certain types of people, which explained many of the stereotypes of other Jewish communities, I couldn't understand how it is that a city of varying hashkafos and lifestyles could consistently produce peculiar individuals. After spending some time in Baltimore, I was even more curious, as I found it to be a warm, welcoming community displaying levels of achdus that I hadn't seen in any other East Coast community. And yet...we've all bumped into those "Baltimore-types."

Fancying myself an armchair sociologist I came up with various theories for what might lie at the root of this phenomenon. Perhaps they were trying to walk the fine line between being "out-of-towners" and being "in-towners" without placing their feet firmly in either camp, resulting in the worst of both worlds? Perhaps there was something in the water? This perplexing question continued to trouble me until a friend's sister suggested a possible solution that I thought put a truly wonderful light on the Strange Case of the Baltimore Strangeness.

As I had noticed, Baltimore is a truly warm and welcoming community. For a community of its size, it has an unparalleled number of chesed organizations, true ba'alei chesed, and shuls and Rabbis that work together to a point beyond that which I've ever seen in any other community. Baltimore is also home to several world-renowned hospitals. Her theory was that people with troubles in their lives, who some might refer to as nebachs, are attracted to the support network available in the Baltimore Jewish Community. People with social issues are still invited to Shabbos meals, people with financial issues (who might not wear the latest fashions) are assisted in a manner truly befitting the title Tzedakah, and people with medical issues are given places to stay and rides to their appointments. So yes...the consensus seems to be that Baltimore does have more than its fair share of unusual people, but frankly from now on I will say that l'shvach and not l'gnai.

A Truly Great President

2011-02-06T14:28:00.001-05:00

Today is Super Bowl Sunday, a tradition I've never really been able to get excited about. Whether this is because I was raised in a culture that prefers rugby, or because I was raised to prefer playing sports and having fun myself rather than watching others play sports and have fun is up for debate. But, today also happens to be the centennial of President Ronald Reagan's birth. And that happens to be something I can get excited about.

This was a man of character, courage, humor and common sense. A man who was directly responsible for the fall of the Soviet Union and for a period of tremendous economic vibrancy in the United States. He also has some of the best quotes of any recent president. Including his now famous quote, said during a sound-check prior to an NPR broadcast, "My fellow Americans, I am pleased to tell you I just signed legislation which outlaws Russia forever. The bombing begins in five minutes."

Recently, as covered in a Time magazine piece, Obama has started trying to model himself after Reagan. Granted, they are both excellent communicators and skilled orators, but if you know anything about Reagan, you'll be quite clear that Obama is no Reagan.

I have to close by recommending two biographies on RR, When Character Was King, by Peggy Noonan, and Dutch, by Edmund Morris, and by offering a toast (very appropriate for Adar and a "v'nahafochu" mentality) in honor of the greatest president of recent time, "Bottoms up!"

Thanks to The Professor for letting me know about this:

They Say That Breaking Up Is Hard To Do

2011-02-03T17:30:00.000-05:00

It's not just a great song by Neil Sedaka. Anyone who is "in the parsha" has experienced it. After the first date or two, it's pretty painless and easy. You call the shadchan and that's that. But after a certain point, as much as you try to avoid it, emotions get involved on one or both sides, and you have to have "the talk." Although it is ridiculous to think that we need to be a perfect match for everyone whom we date, nevertheless people tend to take it personally when you tell them that you don't see this leading to marriage. Then there are the questions of proper protocol:

"Tell her by phone. No girl wants to be stuck out with a guy when he breaks up with her, and then have an awkward ride home."

"Tell her in person! Behave like a mensch."

"Tell her that you need to have a serious talk beforehand so she can start preparing herself."

"Don't say anything out of the ordinary. No need for her to suffer and try to interpret your message the whole day."

Is there a right way to do this? A "least-painful" way? What's it like from the girl's perspective when she ends it? Do they agonize over the best way to break the news also? Do they worry about the guy crying?

I'm in need of information. Readers?

RSS #2 - Charity Ain't Just About Giving Back

2011-01-30T12:22:00.002-05:00

Okay, it should be. But there's an added benefit for people who partake in charitable efforts, one known by every member of your local Rotary club, your local hospital support group, or your local Habitat for Humanity chapter. And that benefit is...networking! People make fantastic business contacts that advance their careers immeasurably at these charities! One might ask, if that's the case, why not just attend a networking function solely dedicated to networking? Answer...because only the losers show up to these. The networking isn't the secret, underlying reason why successful businessmen join Rotary. They join to do charity. But then, when one member is looking for a Realtor, you can bet that he will think of that wonderful lady, Patricia, whom he sat with on the fund-raising committee. And guess what, he knows her REALLY well! From working together with this Realtor while both of them focused on something else, outside of themselves, namely charity, they were given the opportunity to observe and truly get to know each other. Actions speak louder than words, and working next to someone, especially on a charitable project, lets you get to know someone far better than if you met at a networking event and conversed for an hour. So of course it makes sense that the inevitable outcome of organizations such as Rotary is business connections.

Now let's talk shidduchim. This is a really straightforward analogy. The networking events that all the losers show up to are...drumroll please...networking events that all the losers show up to! You know what I mean, shabbatons, speed-dating, etc. And the charities are...well, charities, but as of now they're non-existent, at least in PNN's city. The local charities don't attract young singles from the community, and if they do, they go to almost desperate lengths to keep the genders separated.

So here is Revamp the Shidduch System #2: Local charities should establish a "Young Singles Committee" to oversee one area of charity operations. This should be staffed entirely by young singles, who should be ruthlessly recruited, and overseen by an advisory member. Give people a chance to get to know each other by working together in a kosher environment where chessed is the end goal. Can you think of a more marriage conducive environment? I can't. Let singles get to know each other without the awkwardness of being in a contrived networking situation, and stand a chance at attracting quality singles who wouldn't be caught dead speed-dating all those losers.

You Decide

2011-01-27T11:19:00.001-05:00

Vs.

Oh, so now Global Warming includes massive snowstorms and temperatures far below normal? How convenient. You'd think they'd have thought of that when they originally came up with the name. But okay, we'll call it Climate Change now. Perhaps it is also time for Obama to consider renaming it the Stagnation/Stimulus Plan. You know, just to play it safe in case the unemployment rate increases. Oh wait, it did? Must've missed it while I was outside shoveling snow.

Confidently Stupid

2011-01-27T08:13:00.000-05:00

"Researchers at the Brookings Institution, in one of their frequent studies of education policy, compared students’ assessments of their abilities in math with their scores on a standardized test. Nearly forty per cent of American eighth graders agreed “a lot” with the statement “I usually do well in mathematics,” even though only seven per cent of American students actually got enough correct answers on the test to qualify as advanced. Among Singaporean students, eighteen per cent said they usually did well in math; forty-four per cent qualified as advanced. As the Brookings researchers pointed out, even the least self-confident Singaporean students, on average, outscored the most self-confident Americans."

So, although American kids are on average, scholastically-speaking, pretty dumb (the ranking in other disciplines wasn't great either), they sure feel great about themselves!

Is there a difference between a healthy self-esteem and a damagingly false sense of self? How do you raise children with one and without the other?

Kosher Pick-Up Lines?

2011-01-25T06:13:00.009-05:00

Scenario: A gentleman at Starbucks/Barnes & Noble/etc. sees a religious girl who he finds very attractive. Based on her dress/demeanor there's a good chance that they're on the same page hashkafically.

Is there any acceptable way for him to approach her?

Should it be acceptable? Why or why not?

Girls, would you ever be open to being approached in this manner?

Guys, have you ever done so?

Granted, "picking up girls" is identified as a very secular activity, but are there any ways to make it kosher and acceptable? After two people meet and express interest in each other, it's not as though it is too late to introduce a shadchan for the dating process. What do you think?

Gotta Love the Irony

2011-01-24T15:29:00.001-05:00

Rush Limbaugh pointed out that this past week, President Obama, the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner, hosted a dinner for the president of China, Hu Jintao, who is holding the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner, Liu Xiaobo, in prison! 2002 Nobel Peace Prize winner, Jimmy Carter, also attended.

Boat Trip Memories

2011-01-22T18:50:00.000-05:00

Browsing my archives when I should have been studying for an exam I came across this old piece of writing and found it too nostalgic not to post.

Take a family of two males and seven females and confine them in a space sixty feet by eighteen feet for one month. It sounds like a recipe for disaster, or perhaps a bad reality show, but in actuality, it was the best time of my life.

It wasn’t until I was about ten that I realized that not every family moves onto a boat for the summer. Do you mean to say that everyone’s idea of fun isn’t sleeping on the floor outside the engine room? The engine room. Now, that brings back memories. Engine checks underway. The glorious smell of diesel fuel and oil mixing in the bilge. Ear protectors clamped tightly to my ears as I braced myself against the rocking and pitching of the boat. The seemingly endless searches for the oil dipsticks.

I think the best parts were the early morning departures. I would be awoken by the rumbling of the diesel and the clanking of the anchor chain being raised. The intertwining smells of coffee and freshly baked bread would drift down the companionway enticing me out of my bunk. The pilothouse windows would invariably be covered in dew, and a thin layer of mist would hover motionless above the calm surface of the water; a smooth glassy surface only punctuated by the sound of a splash and then ripples spreading out from a salmon’s graceful landing. I would join my father on deck, and by the time the sun had risen fully we’d already be slipping out of whatever stunning anchorage we had intruded on for the night.

In a galley the size of a large bathroom my mother turned out one hundred and eighty-nine gourmet meals per week. Often these would be eaten while hunching over the wheel on watch, or while racing down the catwalks preparing lines and fenders for docking. It was a constant struggle between paying the proper attention due a fantastic meal, and performing the necessary workload.

At night we would barbecue. I was usually out in the dinghy when I’d catch the first whiff of steak floating down the inlet. I always made incredible time getting back to the boat on those occasions. The shooting stars in the heavens would be only matched in their luminescence by the phosphorescence stirred up by the motion of the water. Surrounded by the anchor lights of countless other boats, as if encircled by a cloud of fireflies, we would lie back on cushions discussing subjects ranging from philosophy to the oil consumption of the starboard engine.

Occasionally we would end up coming into an anchorage at night. The pilothouse instruments would all be on night mode, emitting faint glows. The overhead light shone a blood red. We all converged on it, to the pilothouse, like moths to a candle. There we would peruse the charts bathed in the burgundy light, ensuring that we weren’t going to run aground. On occasion I would need to go out onto the bow with the night vision goggles. I recall the cold wind coming over the bow and the occasional showers of spray carried by it.

Arriving at towns accessed mainly by boat was always a thrill. The anchor would hardly touch bottom before the dinghies were launched and the race to the dock begun. We would quickly tie up and run through the streets of the four-block down-towns. At first we all resembled drunken sailors, but the sea legs disappeared quickly enough. I recall my younger sisters commanding inordinate amounts of respect in the local chandleries after informing the owners that they had “squeezed more salt water out of my socks than you’ve seen in a lifetime.”

With no cell phone reception we were forced to use our imaginations. You wouldn’t believe how fascinating jellyfish can be when they’re the only form of entertainment available. My mother taught us to recognize the constellations, and how to calculate the time by measuring the sun above the horizon with your fingers. Another time we turned off the electronic depth sounder, and took soundings with a lead and line like in the olden days. There were always chores to be done as well. These ranged from dishes and cooking to engine checks and manning the helm.

When we were younger my parents would hold treasure hunts. They would bury a canister of candies and coins on an uninhabited island, and then give us a list of clues. The ensuing rush to the island probably resembled rats abandoning a sinking ship.

Though we were all confined together there was definitely no room for sore feelings on a sixty foot boat. Many a hot temper was cooled by a unanimously agreed upon toss overboard. Many keelhaulings (where you pass a line underneath the boat, tie the offending individual to one end, and pull on the other) were threatened, but to our disappointment none were carried out.

I’m sure that to others the risks entailed in taking seven young children on a boat seem quite threatening. And sure, we all fell overboard at one point or another; some more dramatically than others. Fingers were crunched, nails torn off, and splinters abounded. But, we all survived, and we learned a tremendous amount about personal responsibility and watching out for your siblings. My parents’ attitude was that if we were careful no one would come to any harm; and if we weren’t, it served us right. To quote author Arthur Ransome, “Better drowned than duffers, if not duffers won’t drown.”

In today’s caution oriented culture, children are given no rope with which to hang themselves, but with no rope they never scale any mountains either. The ocean can be a harsh master, but lessons learned on it are never forgotten, and the attachment to it is never broken.

Mark Steyn on the Decline of England

2011-01-21T15:21:00.000-05:00

One of my favorite political authors, Mark Steyn, has written a piece on the decline of Britain and what it foreshadows for America. It's well worth reading. Here's an amusing, if somewhat off-color, excerpt:

Somewhere along the way a quintessentially British sense of self-deprecation curdled into a psychologically unhealthy self-loathing. A typical foot-of-the-page news item from The Daily Telegraph:

A leading college at Cambridge University has renamed its controversial colonial-themed Empire Ball after accusations that it was “distasteful.” The £136-a-head Emmanuel College ball was advertised as a celebration of “the Victorian commonwealth and all of its decadences.

Students were urged to “party like it’s 1899” and organisers promised a trip through the Indian Raj, Australia, the West Indies, and 19th century Hong Kong. But anti-fascist groups said the theme was “distasteful and insensitive” because of the British Empire’s historical association with slavery, repression and exploitation.

The Empire Ball Committee, led by presidents Richard Hilton and Jenny Unwin, has announced the word “empire” will be removed from all promotional material.

The way things are going in Britain, it would make more sense to remove the word “balls.”

General Lee on Shidduchim

2011-01-19T12:07:00.000-05:00

Today is the 204th birthday of General Robert E. Lee. There is much for which to admire General Lee. As an armchair military historian, I can appreciate the genius of a military strategist who was able to defeat a force more than twice his size at the battle of Chancellorsville. And as someone seeking a wife, I can admire his embodiment of a trait that I believe may very well be the most important quality to look for in a prospective spouse. This trait is integrity, the character strength to do what is right even at great personal cost. In the new "Me Generation" this is a quality that is sorely lacking. Personal comfort and fulfillment have become the be-all and end-all...a death sentence for marriage. At the end of the day, knowing what is right will only get you so far, actually doing it is what matters. It's very easy for people to say the right things in the comfort of a Starbucks or hotel lounge, but if you are wise, you will confirm that when push comes to shove these principles translate into action. Find someone capable of making the difficult but right decision, rather than the easy but wrong decision.

I think it better to do right, even if we suffer in so doing, than to incur the reproach of our consciences and posterity.
- Robert E. Lee

Taking Care of Business

2011-01-18T06:04:00.003-05:00

Disclaimer: There exist a majority of fine shadchanim who selflessly give of their time and go to the trouble of really getting to know each of the individuals that they set up. This piece is emphatically not addressed to these wonderful individuals!

There's another kind of shadchan for whom shadchanus is a business. This type generally uses the pants-and-skirt or shotgun approach. A common refrain that you'll hear from this class of shadchanim is, "It's just one date. What's the worst that can happen?" Either the people they set up have absolutely nothing going on in their lives and have nothing better to do, or the shadchanim realize that they have absolute control in the system as it is currently set up. I for one have many better things to do than go on a string of dates that anyone who knows me in the slightest could have predicted would go nowhere. That's why I rarely accept suggestions from anyone who doesn't know me personally. But, I am aware that for many people this system is their only option.

Because of the apparent desperation prevalent among singles, and the power that the shadchanim retain as the Doorkeepers Of Zivugim and Eternal Happiness, some of these shadchanim get away with setting up poorly matched date after poorly matched date. It's a numbers game to them, and eventually they'll no doubt stumble upon a match. The poor victims of this system, on the other hand, are wasting their time and money and are growing depressed and cynical. From a purely economical point of view, the shadchanim have no cost and only potential for profit by adopting this approach. That's why I think that if a shadchan openly charges shadchanus gelt (potential profit), a cost also needs to be introduced. It's time for shadchanim to put their money where their mouth is.

From here on out, if such a shadchan wishes to set me up, I will happily agree, as long as he or she covers the cost of the date and compensates me for the value of my time. If shadchanim wish to view this as a business, then I will do the same. There is no legitimate business that reaps reward without incurring a commensurate level of risk. As such, I will require an investment on their behalf to indicate confidence in their suggestion, and should they be successful they will have an excellent return on their investment in the form of shidduch gelt. To raise starting capital, shadchanim can form corporations, go public, and find investors. The good shadchanim will have great rates of return and will attract lots of investment, whereas the bad ones will be forced into bankruptcy. Capitalism 101 at work.

If shidduchim is going to be a business, then let's run it like a business. It's time to stop masquerading under the cover of chesed. It is time for us, the commodities, to recognize our worth and rise up and throw off the shackles of subservience to shadchanim.

Revamp the Shidduch System (RSS) #1 - Shabbos Table Shidduchim

2011-01-16T03:10:00.001-05:00

I've decided to introduce a new series to PNN entitled "Revamp the Shidduch System", or RSS. In these pieces, which I'll post every once in a while, I intend to make a suggestion for a change that you can implement in your home, in your community, to help address the shidduch crisis.

RSS #1
Couples: Invite single men and women, of appropriate marriageable age, to your Shabbos table together, and do everything in your power to convince others in your community to do the same.
Singles: Accept the invitations! The presence of singles of the opposite sex isn't a reason to decline a Shabbos invitation, it's a reason to enthusiastically accept and ask if you can bring a friend.

If I did not know this to be the case from significant firsthand experience, I would not believe that there are actually people who think that it is inappropriate to host single men and women together at a Shabbos table. Folks, this is sheer insanity. What better place could there be for our young men and women to meet each other? Being able to see how potential matches interact with other people in a low pressure, warm, kosher environment is something that most shidduch daters don't get to see until very late in the shidduch process. And honestly, which do you think more accurately enables you to (a) display your true personality, and (b) learn about another person, an awkward first date where neither of you are yourselves, or a Shabbos table filled with people to interact with and situations to react to? A Shabbos table with many young singles when run by a competent ba'al and ba'alas habayis is a comfortable and appropriate environment for you to meet several singles and determine whether there is any initial interest in each other. And worst case, if you're not interested in anyone, perhaps you know of a friend who might be. This is a win-win situation. Let's make it happen more often.

'Tis the Set of the Sails

2011-01-12T06:30:00.000-05:00

Jeu de Voiles (Set Sail)
by Max Laigneau

As I write, this painting hangs above my desk. The scene is that of an open ocean race and serves as a constant reminder to me of several valuable points. But more of that to come later.

I was fortunate enough to grow up in a sailing family. When someone would foolishly challenge my youngest sister's nautical prowess, she (at age 8) would proudly inform the doubter that she had "squeezed more salt water out of my socks than you've seen in a lifetime." As I grew older, I purchased my first sailboat and dreamed of being the youngest sailor to circumnavigate. More recently, as an instructor, I have been privileged to share my love of sailing with countless others.

There is something about the self-reliance of sailing that is both character building and addictive. It is the sailor, his skill and his ship, versus the vast ocean. Should something go wrong while sailing in the middle of the Pacific, you may as well be the last person on earth because it is unlikely anyone can come to your aid. The sea has always been a favored metaphor for something that can at one instant be serene and peaceful and at the next tumultuous and terrifying. Much like life.

There is an unspeakable sense of beauty to the magic of harnessing an often silent, invisible force. However, invisible though it may be, as any sailor knows, the direction and strength of the wind have a tremendous impact on your route...but not on your destination. A sailboat can never sail directly into the wind, rather it must tack back and forth across the wind, covering much seemingly unnecessary ground to reach its destination. Each tack involves arduously adjusting the sails and trim.

No doubt, an ignorant observer would assume the tacking skipper to be intoxicated, but in fact, a direct point of sail into the wind would result in loss of ground.

Tacking teaches us two powerful lessons without which it is impossible to be successful in life.

First of all, external circumstances such as the wind aren't what dictate your path in life. By definition, you have no control over them. The wind will blow when it wants, in whatever direction it wants, and at whatever strength it wants. All that is in your control is how you react to these external forces. When it gusts you may need to reef your sails (reduce their size), when it shifts you may need to let out or sheet in the sails or adjust your direction of travel, but the entire time you keep your eye on your intended destination and ensure that you harness the changing wind to get you there.

Secondly, you often need to aim in a different direction than you really want to travel. At this point in the year, New Year resolutions are all the rage. People delight in setting major, life-changing goals for themselves, and they last for all of about two weeks. The secret to success is to set small bite sized goals along the path to your ultimate goal. For example, instead of aiming to lose sixty pounds by next January, you might instead aim to walk for ten minutes a day for the next three weeks. "But that will never lead to me losing sixty pounds!", you might protest. However, it is a resolution that you stand a chance of keeping, and following that you can set a subsequent goal that will lead you even closer to your final destination. Tack your way upwind.

With that, I'll leave you with one of my favorite poems:

'Tis The Set Of The Sail

But to every mind there openeth,
A way, and way, and away,
A high soul climbs the highway,
And the low soul gropes the low,
And in between on the misty flats,
The rest drift to and fro.

But to every man there openeth,
A high way and a low,
And every mind decideth,
The way his soul shall go.

One ship sails East,
And another West,
By the self-same winds that blow,
'Tis the set of the sails
And not the gales,
That tells the way we go.

Like the winds of the sea
Are the waves of time,
As we journey along through life,
'Tis the set of the soul,
That determines the goal,
And not the calm or the strife.

Ella Wheeler Wilcox

Time Travel Thought Experiment

2011-01-09T10:27:00.000-05:00

It is easy and natural to think how wise and advanced we are compared to primitive nations, such as the Mayans in the early parts of the Common Era. Think of all of the scientific advances we have made, the concepts we now understand, the medical breakthroughs, the fantastic engineering feats that are now accepted as common. While reflecting on this the other day, it suddenly occurred to me that if I were to be transported back in time, with nothing but the knowledge contained in my mind, to the Mayan capital in the 3rd century AD, I would be completely worthless.

Sure, I know quantum mechanics, I know about dialysis, diesel engines, and Diderot, but I couldn't put any of it to practical use by myself in a primitive time.

Imagine that upon arriving in a large puff of smoke you are captured and taken before the ruler of the society. He thinks you're a spy from an enemy tribe and is about to put you to death. What could you do or say that would convince him that you're from the future? You're on the spot, try to convince him of your worth.

See if you can come up with any solution, I couldn't.

Why Am I Not Frum?

2011-01-06T07:00:00.002-05:00

I should probably begin by saying that if my mother were ever to see this title she would have a conniption. Come to think of it, she’d probably be mortified if she knew I had a blog. My friends and family as a whole would also probably be pretty shocked by this title. But, read on and draw your own conclusions.This is a post that I should have written a while ago, but one thing led to another and I ended up pushing it off until Am I A Frum Feminist (Check it out!) reminded me that I was advertising for all the world to see that I am Orthodox, rigidly halachic, and yet not frum, without any form of explanation. I owe the idea for the title to her latest post Why Am I Still Frum?, although, to be clear, we’re not disagreeing. So here is my explanation.

The first reason that I don’t identify myself as frum is a simple matter of definition. Orthodox has a fairly straight forward meaning. It is derived from the Greek word orthodoxos which means "having the right opinion" (from orthos ("right", "true") + doxa ("opinion"). According to this, I am not only Orthodox with regards to my Judaism, but Orthodox in all respects, including my views on true humility. However, regarding my Judaism, I think most would agree this refers to believing in Rambam’s Sheloshah-Asar Ikkarei Emunah (13 Principles of Faith). Rigidly halachic is also fairly easily understood. It means that I keep halachah to the best of my ability. And I don’t use that phrase in the sense that Karl Marx used it (“From each according to his ability”, which invariably leads to no one truly contributing according to his ability.), I honestly mean to the absolute best of my ability. Are there areas with which I struggle? Obviously…as there are for everyone, but when it comes down to it, I keep halachah.

To adopt a gemara phrase, tzrichah, it was necessary to write both “Orthodox” and “Halachic” as I know individuals, and I’m sure you do too, who are Orthodox but not currently halachic, and some who are halachic but not Orthodox. And those categories are deserving of a post themselves, but back to the gist of the matter.

The term “frum” is not so easily understood. Technically speaking, it derives from the German “fromm” meaning devout/pious. But, in common usage it seems to refer to a quality above and beyond that of Orthodoxy or halachic adherence. Having searched the shulchan aruch and the gemara, I feel fairly confident in saying that the term appears in neither, nor, to the best of my knowledge, is it defined in any work belonging to the Rishonim. What this means, is that it is a word lacking a clear definition that has become a tool used to slander people who are both Orthodox and halachic. Now, fine, upstanding Jews who are Orthodox and halachic can be pejoratively labeled as not frum because they do not subscribe to the latest meshugas, whether that be the Indian sheitel crisis or the New York drinking water scare. So, simply speaking, I refuse to identify myself by an indefinable term. From Migdal Bavel (The Tower of Babel) to George Orwell’s 1984, the power of words and common definitions has always stood at the root of a functional society, and to ignore breaches is both foolish and dangerous. John Milton predicted, "When language in common use in any country becomes irregular and depraved, it is followed by their ruin and degradation." The same holds true for a religion and society.

The second reason that I don’t identify myself as frum is that I believe that authentic Torah Judaism has been replaced by a vague and ephemeral fashion, namely frumkeit. I could write whole tomes on the subject of how frumkeit differs from authentic Torah Judaism, but this post is already reaching a dangerous length, so I will identify only one point of difference.

As explained at length by Rav Hirsch among others, authentic Torah Judaism encourages active involvement in the world. Hebrew uses the same shoresh (root) for the word “holy” (kodesh) as it does for words referring to our relationship with women and wine (kedeishah/kiddushin and Kiddush). The message is that unlike Christians, we do not flee from physicality and involvement in all aspects of the world, rather we are mikadesh the world, elevating it. The holy man of Torah is one who relates to the whole world passionately in a holy way. Not one who does not relate to it the world all.

Compare the "Mainstream" vision of the yeshiva bochur with that of the Torah. Yakov is the Tora's yeshiva bochur-the ish tam yosheiv ohalim, sitting in the beis midrash, a masmid and a yarei shamayim. But look at Yakov's other abilities. He defeats his more worldly brother reclaiming the birthright that should have been his. Executes and enforces a brilliant and binding contract with wicked uncle Lavan and becomes wealthy. Wrestles with an angel (he must have worked out at a health club!) and negotiates a peace with Eisav. If there is one underlying theme of Yakov's life, it is the ability to handle any situation by challenging it on its own terms and subduing it until it conforms to a Torah blueprint. He meets Eisav on the level of politics, diplomacy and warfare. Lavan on the business level, the peasant shepherds with sheer physical strength and courage, Pharoah with dignity and wisdom. Each time he displays competence and produces a kiddush hashem. This is why he is the first to bear the name Yisrael. Because he could grapple with human situations and with Godly situations and emerge victorious. You will probably agree with me that the picture of the mainstream yeshiva bochur you envisaged at the beginning of this paragraph doesn't quite match up to Yakov.

We in the "frum" world take the general bumbling incompetence, the affectation of complete ignorance of the secular world as a mark of a Tzaddik. That's not a tzaddik--it's a "wimp"! Can you see many of our so called yeshivishe people walking into the Chicago Mercantile Exchange without making total fools of themselves. Yakov avinu could have, and he is the Torah's paradigm of the yeshiva bochur. Can you see a yeshiva guy take on a few New York street hoodlums? Yakov could. Could a rosh yeshiva emerge a millionaire from a transaction with a Wall Street tycoon? Yakov did. We have absorbed a non-Jewish image of a Tzaddik. We can no longer tell the difference between a tzaddik and a "wimp".

To personalize this, I am kovea itim every day and daven with a minyan three times a day. To be honest, with the demands of medical school and running a small business this is not always easy. However, I will admit that several days a week I show up to minyan wearing jeans and riding a motorcycle. I'm an avid fan of country music and the opera, I do not wear a black hat, and I work out daily. In much of the frum world’s opinion, this is enough to classify me as frei (not frum). I hope you will agree with me that this is insanity. What relevance should my mode of conveyance, style of trousers, music choices, headgear, or physical fitness have on my status in the Jewish community? But this mindset is precisely what frumkeit and the usage of the poorly defined “frum” encourage and enable.

Rav Amital, of Gush, recounted that his grandmother would say that frum stood for fiel rishus uveinig mitzvos, full of evil and few mitzvos…I think this is a bit extreme, but really lament that it’s no longer good enough to just be a God-fearing, Orthodox Jew who is shomer torah u’mitzvos.

Move or Die - The Lesson of the Shark

2011-01-05T07:00:00.001-05:00

If you have not seen this video yet, it is worth watching. An aquarium in Seattle had a shark tank in which dead sharks kept turning up. Mystified, they placed videos in the tank, and this is what they discovered. A giant octopus turns out to be the culprit. You can watch as this octopus wraps the shark up in its tentacles. It's quite an amazing sight. But, the question remains, how does this kill the shark?

I haven't seen any site that specifically answers this question, but one possibility is asphyxiation. Most sharks are able to utilize a form of breathing known as Buccal Pumping. This involves using their buccal (cheek) muscles to pump water into their mouths and out their gills. It turns out, however, that there are several shark species that breathe by means of a process called Ram Ventilation. This means that in order to breathe, sharks need to swim forward, ramming water into their mouths and out their gills. Obligate Ram Ventilators are sharks which can only utilize Ram Ventilation and are incapable of Buccal Pumping. I have found different views on whether or not a Spiny Dogfish shark (the kind in the video) is an Obligate Ram Ventilator, but if it is, immobilization by the octopus would prevent it from swimming which in turn would asphyxiate it.

As mentioned in an earlier post, there is a gemara that states that without the Torah we would be able to learn certain character traits from the animals. Spiritual reality is reflected in physical reality. I think that the message of the sharks, or at least of obligate ram ventilators, is a very clear one: If you're not moving forward, you're not standing still, you're dying.

Most cases of non-clinical depression can be attributed to stagnation. The feeling of lack of accomplishment is a thoroughly depressing experience. If you've ever spent the entire day in front of the television you know what I'm talking about. We were placed in this world with tafkidim, and when we waste the precious time that we've been given, God has given us an inbuilt motivator, depression, telling us to get off the couch and get moving. If you ever feel depressed, the solution is simple, get up, get out, and accomplish. I guarantee you that you'll feel better. Embrace the message of the shark! ("Embrace the message of the obligate ram ventilators" didn't sound quite as snappy.)

Takanas Rabbeinu Gershom for Dating?

2011-01-03T10:44:00.000-05:00

There is a place, let's call it OZ (v'hamayvin yavin), where Jews of marriageable age seem to congregate. For those of us outside of OZ, the vast majority of our suggested shidduchim are inconveniently located in OZ. This means that when our busy schedules permit it, every few months, we must make that trip down the yellow brick road to see whether we can find a munchkin of our very own...okay, I may have carried this analogy farther than it should have gone.

By the time one of these trips rolls around, a few dozen shidduchim have been suggested, and four or five have emerged as the most promising. Given the time, I would love to meet many more of the young ladies suggested, but time waits for no man. The trip to OZ goes up on the calendar, school and work responsibilities generally permit a trip ranging in length from four to six days. And now arises the million dollar question. How many dates should I set up?

Let me preface this by saying that when I lived in OZ I was a firm believer in the "date one person at a time" school of thought. First of all, to do otherwise seemed horribly disrespectful and to be doing a great disservice to the young ladies who were graciously willing to go out with me. Secondly, I felt that I owed it to myself to be able to give my full concentration and attention to each young lady in order to enable me to clearly evaluate whether I saw a future with her. And then I left OZ...

Different shadchanim have given me different opinions. Some have expressed outrage that I would set up three first dates in a week, others (the majority) have actively encouraged me to do so. There doesn't seem to be much of a consensus in the world of shadchanim, and the same is true among the world of married friends and PNN sisters. Most agree that it is not ideal, but given the logistics it is a necessity.

But what started out of necessity led me to wonder why that need be so. To be perfectly open, and to answer the question that I've received many times, I do not think I would care if I knew that one of the girls I was going out with was also going out on multiple first dates. I think that by the third date, or so, exclusivity is implied and wise, but seeing as how in the world of shidduchim a first date is almost always the first time you meet the person, I don't see why such a meeting needs to be exclusive. The first date has been blown wildly out of proportion from what it really is. It is almost a pre-date, the date where you decide whether you actually want to go on a date with a person. In the secular world it would be the equivalent of bumping into someone at a conference or in the workplace and chatting for twenty minutes. Once you have some idea of the person's personality and looks, then you decide whether you in fact would like to get all dressed up and take them out for an expensive dinner.

With regards to shidduchim, I don't think that exclusivity, long dates, hurt feelings if it doesn't work out, or large outlays of cash should have anything to do with "first dates". If I were in charge (Progress report: Optimistic!), first dates would take place with each individual wearing their usual daily attire, over a mandatory cup of coffee (or other cheap beverage of choice), and for a maximum of an hour and a half. Neither side would have unrealistic expectations about determining whether this person will be their future spouse. Rather, they'd just enjoy having the opportunity to get to know a fellow human being created b'tzelem Elokim.

But, I'm getting off track and I've been wrong before, so I'm opening this up to you...do we need a takanas Rabbeinu Gershom for dating?

A Modern Rendition of The Little Red Hen

2010-12-30T07:00:00.001-05:00

The idea for this blog struck me last night, when I was reading the original story to my nephew. It occurred to me that such a book would never fly in mainstream circles nowadays, and I endeavored to write a more up to date version. I was somewhat disappointed to discover that it had already been done by an unknown author, and done quite well, but decided to share it with my readers anyway:

MODERN VERSION

Once upon a time, there was a little red hen who scratched about the barnyard until she uncovered some grains of wheat.

She called her neighbors and said, "If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?"

"Not I," said the cow.
"Not I," said the duck.
"Not I," said the pig.
"Not I," said the goose.

"Then I will," said the little red hen, and she did.

The wheat grew tall and ripened into golden grain. "Who will help me reap my wheat?" asked the little red hen.

"Not I," said the duck.
"Out of my classification," said the pig.
"I'd lose my seniority," said the cow.
"I'd lose my unemployment compensation," said the goose.

"Then I will," said the little red hen, and she did.

At last it came time to bake the bread. "Who will help me bake the bread?" asked the little red hen.

"That would be overtime for me," said the cow.
"I'd lose my welfare benefits," said the duck.
"I'm a public high school graduate and never learned how," said the pig.
"If I'm to be the only helper, that's discrimination," said the goose.

"Then I will," said the little red hen.

She baked five loaves and held them up for her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share.

But the little red hen said, "No, I can eat some and sell the rest."

"Excess profits!" cried the cow.
"Capitalist leech!" screamed the duck.
"I demand equal rights! Or, I'll Call The ACLU" yelled the goose.

"We'll sue", yelled the pig, "a biased judge without the proper constitutional oath will see it our way." And they painted "unfair" and "selfish" on their picket signs and marched round and round the little red hen shouting obscenities.

When the government agent came, he said to the little red hen, "You must not be greedy."

"But I earned the bread," said the little red hen.

"Exactly," said the agent. "That is the wonderful free enterprise system. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide their product with the idle."

And they lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, "I am grateful. I am grateful."

But her neighbors wondered why she never again baked any more bread.

CLASSIC VERSION

Once upon a time there was a little red hen who lived in a big farm-yard.
She had three fluffy yellow chicks.
One morning as they were busily scratching about the yard, looking for something to eat, the little red hen found a grain of wheat.

"Look!" she said.
"See what I have found. Who will help me to plant this grain of wheat?"

"Not I," said the duck. "I must go down to the pond for a swim."
"Not I," said the cat. "I have some visitors coming in a few minutes."

"Very well, I will then", said the little red hen, and she did.

After a while some weeds appeared among the stalks of wheat.
One day the little red hen asked:
"Who will help me to weed this wheat?"

"Not I," said the duck. "That sort of work doesn't agree with me."
"Not I", said the cat. "I would not be able to tell the weeds from the wheat".

"Very well, I will then", said the little red hen, and she did.

After a while the wheat began to ripen:
"What fine wheat we have," said the cat and the duck.
"Yes, indeed, it is time to reap the wheat," said the little red hen. "Who will help me to reap this wheat?"

"Not I", said the cat.
"Not I", said the duck.

"Very well, then I will", said the little red hen.

She cut the heads off the grain very carefully and put them in a bag.

Then she called to the cat and the duck and she asked, "Now, who will take this wheat to the mill to be ground into flour?"
"Not I", said the duck.
"Not I", said the cat.

"Very well, then", said the little red hen, "I will take it myself".

So the little red hen trudged off to the mill, and in a few hours she was back with a sack of fine flour.

"Now, who is going to make this flour into bread?" asked the little red hen.

"Not I", said the duck.
"Not I", said the cat.

"I will, then," said the little red hen, and she did.

Soon the loaf was ready for the oven.

"Now, who is going to bake this bread?" asked the little red hen.

"Not I", said the cat.
"Not I", said the duck.

"Very well, then", said the little red hen. "I will do it".

So the loaf of bread was baked and it was baked, and it was beautiful, golden and crusty. The little red hen put it on the kitchen table, and the cat and the duck came into the house and looked at it longingly.

"Well now, who is going to eat this loaf of bread?" asked the little red hen.

"I will", said the duck quickly.
"I will", said the cat stepping close.

"Oh, no, you won't", said the little red hen. "I am going to eat it myself".

Then she called her little chicks together, and they ate the whole loaf of bread. Not a crumb was left for the duck and the cat.

It's "You Should Go Mi'chayil L'Chayil", Not "Mi'Chayal L'Chayal"! Continued

2010-12-27T07:15:00.026-05:00

It's hard not to notice that women of all ages and nationalities seem drawn to the apparently irresistible allure of a man in uniform. Considering the ill-fitting form and the nauseating color of Tzahal uniforms, I don't think this is about the uniform itself, but rather about what it represents.

As I see it, the most frightening and risky thing about a romantic attachment is the fear of casting your lot in with an independent entity who, like you, has bechira chofshis and can make whatever decisions they fancy. It is difficult to escape that nagging doubt in the back of your mind that you may not fully know this person with whom you are aligning yourself, and that one day there may arise a situation that you haven't discussed at which point they will behave in a manner contrary to your desires. What's more, when they do so, what recourse do you have? You can attempt to convince them that your view is correct, but what happens when this fails? What can you appeal to if you each view a situation completely differently?

This is particularly so for a wife, who often gives up her career and financial independence, relying on her husband to support her and their family, and will even pick up and move halfway around the world to follow her new husband. It must be terrifying to be subject to the capricious whims of a man you barely know.

However, a woman who marries a man in uniform has a safety net that your average woman doesn't. She knows that her husband answers to a higher authority (with apologies to Hebrew National). In a disagreement, it doesn't end up being him versus her, she is able to turn to the higher authority that she knows he respects and has accepted, the military code of honor.

A uniform is an inescapable statement of values. On a certain level, a man in uniform is announcing to the world that he stands for honor, commitment, integrity, industriousness, courage, and reliability. He is bound by a code. Nine times out of ten I can predict the way that my friends in uniform will behave in a certain situation. And, if they don't live up to those ideals that their uniform represents, all it takes is a quiet reminder that they are failing to live up to the standards which they took upon themsevles when they donned the uniform for the first time.

Which brings us to the question of the avot and imahot. What was it about Yaakov that caused Rachel to return the love of, and be willing to marry, a complete stranger? Granted he rolled the stone off of the well, an impressive display of strength for an ish tam yoshev ohalim, but there must have been something more. Well...he does kiss her. A part no doubt skipped over in many schools. But, the interesting thing to note is that the word used for kiss "vayishak" is identical to the word used in the previous pasuk to describe Yaakov watering the flock of sheep, "vayashk". So the kiss, is actually a form of watering. And, ayn mayim elah Torah. Chazal teach us that what was actually happening during this "kiss" was Yaakov showing Rachel his uniform. He laid out for her the system by which he lived his life, the Torah. By the end of this conversation, she knew exactly how he would respond/behave in every important situation in his life. And, she knew that should he ever fall short, she could always rely on this external authority being the ultimate guide in their marriage.

Similarly with Rivkah and Yitzchak. What convinced this young girl to travel far from her family to marry a man she had never met? When Eliezer was giving Rivkah gifts, he gives her two gold bracelets weighing ten shekels. As if this isn't a blatant enough hint, Rashi jumps in to inform us that this symbolizes the two tablets with the aseres hadibros on them. Just as in the later case with Yaakov, this was Eliezer conveying to Rivkah what her future husband's worldview was. By the time he finished, Rivkah knew everything that she needed to know about Yitzchak.

I think that it is precisely this lack of an external authority, a situation championed by such reprobates as Rousseau, that has contributed to the poor state of marriage today. When each spouse believes that their happiness and fulfillment is the ultimate goal of marriage, and their whims and beliefs take precedence over any other, it is a recipe for disaster.

My berachah to each of my blog readers is that they should strive to find spouses who proudly wear and live up to the uniform of Torah.

Save the Pandas, Kill a Panda

2010-12-24T13:13:00.009-05:00

In the last decade of the 20^th century, Kenya’s elephant population fell from 100,000 to 26,000, mainly due to poachers eager to sell the elephant’s ivory tusks. Zimbabwe, on the other hand, saw its elephant population soar from 48,000 to 67,000 over the same period. What could possibly account for such a remarkable disparity? Well, it’s quite simple really. You see, in one of the countries, the sale of ivory was illegal during this period, while in the other it was legal. But you’d be quite wrong if you guessed that Kenya was the country in which ivory sales were legal.

I have very little positive to say about Mugabe, president of Zimbabwe, who I believe is a racist thug who is responsible for, in the words of The Economist, “the most dramatic peacetime collapse of any country since Weimar Germany", but this may be the one thing that the socialist murderer got right.

Zimbabwe introduced a program called the Communal Areas Management Program for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) which transferred ownership of the country’s elephants to twenty-four tribal villages on whose land the elephants roamed. According to Zimbabwe’s Department of Wildlife, following this action the elephant population grew by 5 percent a year, close to the 7 percent maximum reproduction rate for the species. Today, Zimbabwe faces the challenge of having too many elephants, 5,000 more than the country’s land can sustain.

What is behind the success of this program? Simple, capitalistic, economic self-interest. Prior to the program, the elephants were pests. At best the villagers turned a blind eye to poaching, at worst they actively participated. But, once they had a vested interest in the elephants, they started actively protecting the herds from poachers (many of whom were subsequently hired by the villagers to protect the elephants from other poachers), culling them to prevent starvation caused by overpopulation, and taking all means necessary to ensure that their investment continues to produce ivory and profits. Poaching dropped by over 90 percent.

A World-Wide Fund for Nature report estimates that CAMPFIRE has increased household income in rural Zimbabwe by 15 to 25 per cent. Wildlife conservation and husbanding is now the principal source of cash for rural communities such as Tsholotsho on the southern boundary of Hwange National Park. No indigenous species has become extinct in Zimbabwe: indeed, populations are stable or growing.

As a result of the CAMPFIRE initiative, Zimbabwean villagers have dug water-holes and arranged food deliveries for elephants in times of drought (a truly remarkable turn-around from the days when elephants were regarded as a dangerous nuisance). They have also reduced tree cutting and annual burning of grazing lands to assist in wildlife management; and instead of just shooting or trapping wild animals to protect themselves, they have erected solar-powered electric fences to protect agricultural land and villages. Locals are trained as game wardens, scouts and tourist guides and assist in local wildlife management.

Money from tourism and trophy hunting is used to pay compensation to local people whose livestock or crops are damaged by wildlife. Earnings are also directed towards building basic village infrastructure such as irrigation systems, mills, schools and hospitals. (http://www.adamsmith.org/80ideas/idea/77.htm)

It’s really quite simple economics, when people buy ivory products they confer a value on elephant herds which leads to an incentive for villagers to ensure the continued survival of elephants. In addition to the ivory sales, Zimbabwe also makes a tremendous amount of money selling permits to big game hunters who want to bag an elephant. If this concept is still difficult to grasp, imagine what effect the outlawing of meat consumption would have on the cow population in the United States. It would practically disappear overnight.

By way of contrast, Kenya outlawed the sale of ivory. When the ivory trade was banned, a massive black market was spawned driving up the price of ivory from $200/kg to as much as $2,000/kg. This, naturally, created a huge incentive for poachers. The government employed rangers, with no real incentive to protect the elephants, have proven no match for the poachers.

One of the great success stories of privatization in the United States, which deserves a blog piece of its own, is the turnaround of Bryant Park in NYC from a squalid, dangerous place in the early 1980s to the gorgeous park that it is today. Since 1996 it hasn’t accepted a single dollar of government money. The idea is simple, if everyone owns something, no one owns it. If you need more convincing, compare the state of public restrooms to those found in office buildings or malls.

In truth, the best thing that could happen to an endangered species is for private ownership to be legalized and some economic worth attributed to it. Perhaps it’s time to start spreading rumors of the rejuvenative effects of Panda sweat.

Emerald City Up In Arms

2010-12-21T22:29:00.003-05:00

Way up in the Pacific Northwest, in the most beautiful corner of the United States, members of the Seattle Jewish community are outraged over a new advertising campaign plastering the ad pictured above on the sides of city buses. The ad text reads "Israeli War Crimes. Your Tax Dollars At Work." and features a picture of young Palestinian children staring at what appears to be the rubble of a destroyed home. E-mail campaigns have been burning up the web, calling for Jews to write to King County politicians and protest the advertisements. The Anti-Defamation League quickly came out with a statement:

“We’re dismayed,” says Community Director Hilary Bernstein, who calls the bus-born advertisement grotesquely one-sided. “Citizens young and old will be seeing this sort of propaganda, this very one-sided distortion. It’s unfortunate.”

When I first became aware of the issue, I have to admit that my instinctive feeling was that, in this case, those who are calling for the cancellation of the campaign are well-intentioned but misguided. While I believe that the First Amendment has been stretched to extremes that the founding fathers never intended, I think that this is a legitimate case of members of an organization exercising their First Amendment right to free speech. In the immortal words of Evelyn Beatrice Hall (often incorrectly attributed to Voltaire, although she was summarizing his views), "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Those well-meaning e-mail campaigns should instead be directed towards raising money to run a series of ads countering these ads and the "one-sided distortion" that they represent. Welcome to the marketplace of ideas!

As I thought about the issue, however, I wondered what the response of the metro authority would be to an organization wanting to run a series of ads saying "Homosexuality is an abomination. Leviticus 18:22" or "Islam: Making Terrorists since 610AD." Would they still proudly defend the First Amendment, or would they deem these subjects to be too offensive? Once they claim the right to make that judgment of what is acceptable, then citizens can rightly ask to have a voice in that evaluation since the bus company is not private.

However, as I looked into the matter further, I found that King County has specific guidelines regarding what can or cannot be placed on the sides of its buses, specifically:

Pornography
Alcohol
Tobacco, and
As long as the images and material used don't interfere with public safety or insult specific groups to the point that a riot could be incited, vandalism could occur or public safety could be threatened.

Looking at the last point, I think that there is a clear distinction between the Israel ads which protest foreign aid to a country committing, what they claim to be, war crimes, and between the ads that I suggested, both of which could be construed to target a specific, domestic group leading to the incitement of a riot, etc.

And so, I've arrived back at my original viewpoint, leading me to once again share George Bernard Shaw's feelings that, "The longer I live the more I see that I am never wrong about anything, and that all the pains I have so humbly taken to verify my notions have only wasted my time." ;)

I would love to hear other people's opinions on the matter though, so please share.

Lunar Eclipse, American Jewish History, and Menasheh Ben Israel

2010-12-20T18:15:00.010-05:00

Tonight, those daring enough to stay up into the early morning will get to witness a total lunar eclipse. This particular one happens to coincide with the winter solstice, the longest day of the year. From here on out, days start getting longer once more and Shabbos starts getting later.

The last time winter solstice coincided with a total lunar eclipse was in the year 1638. This was the year that the Catholic Church in Recife, Brazil closed the two shuls in existence there. You may not be familiar with Recife, but the 23 Jews who arrived in New Amsterdam (NYC) in September 1654, becoming the first group of Jews to set foot on American soil, embarked from that very community. Recife, the first organized Jewish community in the western hemisphere, attracted such notable Jews as the brother-in-law of Menasheh ben Israel A”H, who himself seriously considered moving there.

Menasheh ben Israel, descendant of the Abarbanel and author of the classic Nishmat Chaim, was a fascinating character. A close friend of the Queen of Sweden, Hugo Grotius (Dutch statesmen and philosopher), and Rembrandt, his portrait, painted by the great Rembrandt, still hangs in the British Museum. His father, a Marrano Jew fleeing the Portuguese inquisition, escaped to Amsterdam, took the name Joseph ben Israel, and named his sons Ephraim and Menasheh, a fitting point considering that we just finished Vayechi. Menasheh ben Israel is also known for petitioning Oliver Cromwell to allow Jews to return to England. They had been expelled in the year 1290. Cromwell, influenced greatly by ben Israel who he admired and befriended, readmitted Jews in 1656.

A small scallop of darkness will begin to appear on the moon's left edge at 6:33 UT (on Dec. 21) corresponding to 1:33 a.m. EST or 10:33 p.m. PST (on Dec. 20).

The moon is expected to take 3 hours and 28 minutes to pass completely through the umbra.

The total phase of the eclipse will last 72 minutes beginning at 7:41 UT (on Dec. 21), corresponding to 2:41 a.m. EST or 11:41 p.m. PST (on Dec. 20).

At the moment of mid-totality (8:17 UT/3:17 a.m. EST/12:17 a.m. PST), the moon will stand directly overhead from a point in the North Pacific Ocean about 800 miles (1,300 km) west of La Paz, Mexico.

The moon will pass entirely out of the Earth's umbra at 10:01 UT/5:01 a.m. EST/2:01 a.m. PST and the last evidence of the penumbra should vanish about 15 or 20 minutes later.

Busy As A Beaver

2010-12-19T17:49:00.001-05:00

This is an excellent, short BBC clip on beavers: http://wimp.com/beaverlodge/

The gemara in Eruvin (100b) says that had the Torah not been given we would have learned modesty from cats, honesty from ants, monogamy from doves, etc. What do you think is the lesson we're supposed to take from the beaver? There are plenty of other animals who work as hard as the beaver, ants being one example that readily comes to mind. So, as cliche as "busy as a beaver" is, I'd have to reject that as the solution. But, beavers are the only animals that I can think of who build and extend their natural habitat, water. And, as chazal say in Bava Kama, ein mayim elah Torah....thoughts?

It's "You Should Go Mi'chayil L'Chayil", Not "Mi'Chayal L'Chayal"!

2010-12-14T22:18:00.002-05:00

Why is it that women seem drawn to a man in uniform? And how can you harness that very same force of attraction to prove as irresistible to women as Yaakov was to Rachel, and as Yitzchak was to Rifkah (yes, this Torah technique works even long-distance)? And ladies, what "uniform" should you really be looking for in a man?

Stay tuned!

I'm Looking For a Spouse, Not an Employee

2010-12-14T21:16:00.002-05:00

Resumes. I recently received one which did not inform me what the young lady in question is currently doing with her life, whether she's an introvert or an extrovert, whether she wants to work or stay at home, or whether aliyah is in her future...but, Baruch Hashem, I can inform you that she attended all of the right camps as a pre-adolescent, and her brother's mechutanim's cousin happens to be a dayan in Lakewood. Book the wedding hall!!

My frustrations at receiving these bland, uninformative, pathetic attempts to capture a person's essence in one page are insignificant compared to the tremendous degradation that these girls are undergoing. Forcing a bas melech to describe herself in a page is akin to insisting that someone describe a sunset in ten words or less. If done, it is a paltry substitute and a sorely lacking description of something which cannot be captured in words. Al achas kama v'kama for a person created b'tzelem Elokim.

Granted, many shadchanim whom I've spoken with say that they can't stand the resume system. But, as they tell me, what other options do we have? Seeing as how my mind is currently preoccupied with the Krebs Cycle and the first perek of Kiddushin, I'm unable to tackle this dilemma as of this moment. But, I have a great idea. Why don't we temporarily reassign the focus of the "Chumra of the Month Club"? If anyone can come up with a unique, brilliant solution to this deplorable situation, it is those geniuses who brought us such pearls as the Indian sheitel crisis, the ban on salmon, the ban on NYC drinking water, the electric shaver ban, and my personal favorite the demonization of denim. It is their capacity for re-examining things, which have stood unquestioned for generations, and plucking a problem from thin air, resting on a foundation of twisted logic and sold with a healthy helping of false-piety and fear which will solve the resume crisis! So scatter to your respective kiddush clubs and task these pretentious progressives with their new mission!

At the very least, don't you think it is time for young men and women to inform shadchanim that we're looking for spouses not employees?

The Shadchan's Dictionary

2010-12-14T20:51:00.002-05:00

I've compiled this dictionary as an aid to assist you in understanding your local shadchan. Please feel free to submit new definitions.

Active: Once ran or walked a tzedakah 3k. A 5k if preceded by "very".
Ba'alei Tzedakah: Generally applied to the family, wealthy. Warning: The greater "ba'alei tzedakah" the family are, the less likely it is that the match is suited for you and the more likely it is that the shadchan is engaging in shotgun shadchanus aimed at the shadchanus gelt.
Ben Torah: No criminal record.
Best Boy in Yeshiva: He attends, or once attended, a yeshiva; he's male.
Brilliant: Of average intelligence.
Bright: Capable of dressing themselves.
Easy To Talk To: Was unable to get a word in edgewise while on phone with shadchan.
Easygoing: Utter lack of personality and opinions.
Generous: See "Ba'alei Tzedakah" or "Active"
Good Looking: No glaringly obvious physical deformities (e.g. cleft palate, hunchback, cyclopia, etc.)
Gorgeous: 1) Shadchan is a relative, see "Good looking". 2) Legitimately pretty
Growth Oriented: Generally refers to waist size.
Heimish: If male, wears white socks with a suit. If female, wears white socks with heels.
Honest: Has absolutely no future as a shadchan.
Mature: Dealt with shadchan directly instead of through parents.
Modest: For good reason.
Outgoing: Has at least the one friend that was listed as a reference.
Popular: See "Outgoing"
Pretty: See "Good Looking"
Simchas Hachayim: Smiled at shadchan.
Thinker: See "Tzanuah"
Tzanuah: Having a conversation with them will be like pulling teeth.
Warm: 98.6° core temperature.
Warm family: See "warm"