Volume 58 Number 88
Produced: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 03:54:26 EDT
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Holocaust
[Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz]
Hungarian
[Eitan Fiorino]
Psalm 27
[Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz]
Rashi's Daughters (was: WTGs?)
[Russell J Hendel]
Why did they stay?
[Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...>
Date: Thu, Aug 19,2010 at 07:01 PM
Subject: Holocaust
Jeanette Friedman <FriedmanJ@...> wrote (MJ 58#86):
> Hillel Markowitz wrote (MJ 58#83):
>
>> This reminds me of the story of Rav Yochanan Ben Zakkai and Vespasian.
>> The Gemara asks, why did he not ask for Yerushalayim. Also, when
>> Vespasian used the analogy of the snake wrapped around a wine cask,
>> Rav Yochanan ben Zakkai could not answer. The Gemara gives an answer
>> that could have saved Yerushalayim (or at least the Bais haMikdash)
>> and considers why he did not give that answer. One answer is that
>> Hashem had decreed the destruction and the Chachamim of that time had
>> become "mixed up" so that they could not save the people. In one
>> Tish'a B'Av drasha, this concept was applied to the Shoah. We cannot
>> know what was going on in the world that it "merited" such a
>> punishment as the second phase of the First World War (WW II was
>> actually a continuation of the war between Germany and the rest of the
>> world according to many), but once the destruction was decreed, it
>> affected even the righteous. Note that we call those Jews killed in
>> the war "kedoshim" [martyrs] no matter what their practice and
>> affiliation while they were alive.
>
>> The fact that we cannot understand this means that it was a chok
>> [decree] and happened. We cannot know what would have happened "if".
>> All we can do is expect to see the reason "after 120 years" or "when
>> Moshiach comes".
>
>
> I so much disagree with this, that anyone who has read my postings about
> the H. over the last 18 years on this list would understand. Hinting at,
> implying, inferring, suggesting, even a soupcon of such a hint that blaming
> the victims, saying this was in any way warranted, saying Hashem wanted it
> this way, absolutely blames the victims and exonerates the perpetrators. I
> do not know the pasuk in Hebrew, but it does say that Hashem helps those who
> help themselves and that you don't wait around for miracles.
The pasuk that you want is "ein somchim al haness" [do not expect or
rely on a miracle]. The Torah commands us to go to the doctor when we
are on the level of living in the "natural world". When a person
injures another it says "verapo yerapei" [and heal he shall heal]. The
double language emphasizes the imperative and also applies the command
to the rest of life.
My comment does not "exonerate" the perpetrators as we see from
Mitzrayim. Hashem brought the Bnai Yisrael down to Egypt and allowed
them to suffer the years of slavery. That is why we have the plagues
brought to force the emancipation of the Bnei Yisroel. A murder victim
is there because Hashem allowed him to encounter the murderer. It was
the murderer's free will that caused him to commit murder and the
punishment is deserved. We are required to attempt to stop the murder
if we see it happening because Hashem put us there to give us the
opportunity to do so. The question that is asked is why did Hashem
allow the gun to fire? Why did Hashem allow the victims of 9/11 to get
to work early when there were others who's bus was delayed by a flat
tire and were not in the building when the plane hit? Why were a
number of accountants at a convention in New Orleans instead of in
their offices in the World Trade Center on September 11? None of this
"exonerates" the perpetrators.
The point is that when we see people making wrong decisions we can
attempt to learn from them and be able to make the right decisions
ourselves. However, the question that had been brought up was how
could people like the rabbonim have been able to make such a wrong
decision in the first place. It is only in retrospect that we can
attempt to see what was going on and consider "what should have been
done". That is why I brought up the case of Rav Yochanan Ben Zakai.
How could he have made the mistakes that the gemora points out in that
incident?
> Would you say the genocide in Darfur was declared by Hashem or the
> Sudanese? Would you say that sentencing all gays in Uganda to death was
> Hashem's decision? How about the murder of that Indian tribe that lives on a
> Bauxite loaded mountain in India? Did Hashem decide they should be genocided?
> Or did the corporations that bought the mountain from the government? Did
> Hashem tell the Serbs to go after the secular and moderate Muslims in their
> midst? Or was it abunch of haters led by Milosevic? Did Hashem tell the Hutus
> to go after the Tutsis? Or was the government corrupt and needed them dead
> for political reasons?
The point is that people did do these horrible actions. They are
guilty, just as Mitzrayim was guilty and merited the plagues and they
too should be punished. However, the question would be how is Hashem
going to take the results of these crimes and cause the world to go in
the way that He wants it to. Also, the question would be why did
Hashem allow this to happen and not intervene to stop it. We have been
asking these questions since the time of Iyov (Job) and have asked
them about the all the events that we mourn on Tish'a B'Av. We also
need to determine how we can act now and in the future and what
lessons can we take away from this for ourselves.
> People did these things to people. Whether in the Roman Wars (and go read
> who really set fire to the Beis Hamikdash and why). Jews were fighting with
> Jews. And Jews don't always have the right answers, not even during the
> Holocaust. Were I to start listing who did what against their fellow Jews or
> did nothing during the H., all your hair would turn white -- from the
> Chassidishe Rebbes to Ben Gurion, from Abba Hillel Silver to Stephen Wise and
> Co. etc. etc. etc. The Jews in America and the Yishuv and Switzerland, for the
> most part (and I can name the exceptions, starting with the Sternbuchs and
> Wiessmandl) did nothing or thwarted efforts at rescue.
> So PLEASE don't' hand me this "we don't get it." We do get it. People
> committed evil acts and they should have been resisted. Until almost the end,
> such evil was NOT resisted, because it was not politically expedient for the
> leaders of the world to do something about it.
That is the point. What we "don't get" is how could so many people
have done nothing when it appeared that they were capable of
understanding what needed to be done. The point of the mashal
(parable) is that there are times in which the greatest seem to "lose
their way" and make the wrong decisions. Someone like Rav Yochanan Ben
Zakai should not have overlooked the simple answers that the gemora
could see. Then again, the gemora gives an alternate answer that
Vespasian would never have accepted the possible answers and what he
asked for was all he could get. In fact, one of the explanations is
that what he asked for actually led to the survival of the Jewish
people. In that case, the prevention of the destruction could have led
to even worse consequences down the line. Note that this is something
that we cannot know. All we can do is live in the world as it is now
and try to make things better.
> I strongly suggest that people read this in Haaretz:
> http://www.haaretz.com/magazine/friday-supplement/good-people-bad-jews-
> 1.307804
>
> People made choices. PEOPLE had to live or die by the choices they made.
> And people still make stupid decisions and act stupidly.
Yes, that is true. But sometimes it seems as though the choices that
they make are not consistent with the rest of their lives. Also, we
can never see what the final result is. For example, in another post I
brought up a possibility that had been mentioned at a history lecture.
If the Jews had made it out of Europe into Palestine during the
1920's, would Hitler have reprioritized his resources in such a way as
to be able to win in North Africa or delayed matters long enough so
that he would have gotten the Atomic Bomb. Imagine atom bomb tipped
V-2 rockets. None of those things happened. We cannot know what would
have been.
There is a quip that says "Why did Hashem create atheism?" The answer
given is so that when a poor person comes for help, we will not say
"God will help", but we will help the person ourselves. It is too late
to do anything about the kedoshim of the war. It is not too late to
act ourselves to help the world in which we live.
--
Sabba - ' " - Hillel
Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eitan Fiorino <afiorino@...>
Date: Thu, Aug 19,2010 at 06:09 PM
Subject: Hungarian
Mechy Frankel <michaeljfrankel@...> wrote in vol 58 #85:
> A little more complicated, especially for the generation (I'm
> guessing) you might be familiar with who would have lived in
> Romania. After WWI, Marmorish (and Transylvania) was
> transferred to Romania - actually the northern half of
> Marmorish was transferred to Czechoslovakia. At the beginning
> of WWII, both halves of Marmorish were transferred back to
> Hungary. After WWII, back to Romania - except, I think the
> northern part which went to either Russia or the Ukraine. My
> memory of some of these high frequency oscillations starts to
> go vague)
For those interested in the question of Hungarian Jews in Czechoslovakia between
the wars, there was an article in the AJS Review a few issues back - "'Abandon
Your Role as Exponents of the Magyars': Contested Jewish Loyalty in Interwar
(Czecho)Slovakia" by Rebekah Klein-Pejov. It is a fascinating analysis of the
interplay of language, religion, nationality, politics and Zionism in a
multi-faceted Jewish population that suddenly found itself in a situation in
which a strong commitment to a nascent country was demanded, with language a key
marker of that commitment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...>
Date: Thu, Aug 19,2010 at 06:09 PM
Subject: Psalm 27
Carl Singer <carl.singer@...> wrote (MJ 58#83):
> The ubiquitous Art Scroll siddur specifies that "from Rosh Chodesh Elul
> through Shemini Atzeres Psalm 27 .... is recited." (At the conclusion of
> Shacharis & Maariv.)
>
> The common Nusach haGrah siddur omit this.
>
> Any comments?
Does it say at all when to say it or does it assume that the person
davening would know when to say it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@...>
Date: Thu, Aug 19,2010 at 09:01 PM
Subject: Rashi's Daughters (was: WTGs?)
Some points on the above:
1) The first Women's Tefillah group happened in 2048 BC: Miriam who although she
didn't have Semichah was a full-fledged Prophetess this prayer group and also
used musical instruments to facilitate mood. See Ex.15-20:21.
2) Rivkah Slonim who **did** do research on Women's Tefillah groups told me that
in the middle ages there were "female cantors" who led the women in prayer in
the women's section (Which in big shules was too big to hear the male cantor
downstairs). How did it work? If the cantor was saying Ashray or Shma (Hebrew
prayers) the designated female cantor led the women in those prayers upstairs in
the women's section.
3) Despite the above "facts" we can also justify the above theoretically. Do you
think it is a modern yearning of women to pray? Women always wanted to pray and
communal institutions to reflect this always existed. I owe some postings about
"Minyan (quorom of 10) as a Rabbinic concept": As I previously said the
requirement of minyan was a rabbinic invention to warn men not to engage in
slander when they get together (I will fully defend this and answer some very
good objections next week). Women did not need the minyan to pray since they
aren't politically conservative and don't need reminders like men. Let us also
not forget that the Talmudic men learned the laws of prayer not from King David
but rather from Channah (Shmuel's mother) (1 Sam 1).
Bottom line: One thing that modern women movements did not contribute is women's
prayer groups. Prayer is a natural psychological urge that all women always
engaged in.
Russell Jay Hendel; http://www.Rashiyomi.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...>
Date: Thu, Aug 19,2010 at 06:09 PM
Subject: Why did they stay?
Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...> wrote (MJ 58#83)
Jeanette Friedman wrote (MJ 58#81) in reply to Daniel Cohen (MJ 58#80):
>
>> The ME didn't let his chassidim leave. I will find the email from his
>> chassid that says he said better to die than assimilate in the US or go to
>> the treyf medina.
>
> This reminds me of the story of Rav Yochanan Ben Zakkai and Vespasian.
> The Gemara asks, why did he not ask for Yerushalayim. Also, when
> Vespasian used the analogy of the snake wrapped around a wine cask,
> Rav Yochanan ben Zakkai could not answer. The Gemara gives an answer
> that could have saved Yerushalayim (or at least the Bais haMikdash)
> and considers why he did not give that answer. One answer is that
> Hashem had decreed the destruction and the Chachamim of that time had
> become "mixed up" so that they could not save the people. In one
> Tish'a B'Av drasha, this concept was applied to the Shoah. We cannot
> know what was going on in the world that it "merited" such a
> punishment as the second phase of the First World War (WW II was
> actually a continuation of the war between Germany and the rest of the
> world according to many), but once the destruction was decreed, it
> affected even the righteous. Note that we call those Jews killed in
> the war "kedoshim" [martyrs] no matter what their practice and
> affiliation while they were alive.
>
> The fact that we cannot understand this means that it was a chok
> [decree] and happened. We cannot know what would have happened "if".
> All we can do is expect to see the reason "after 120 years" or "when
> Moshiach comes".
>
Rabbi Dovid Katz of Baltimore brought up an interesting point
regarding the status of Palestine in the 1920's and 30's.
This is from memory so any errors are mine.
There was a time when the British government was philo-Semitic and
would have accepted many Jews in Palestine had they come. At that
point, the major dispute was between the "political" and "cultural"
Zionists. The "political" Zionist (as exemplified by Jabotinsky)
stated that as many Jews as possible should be sent to Palestine to
set up a full Yishuv. The arguments over the actual society to be
created could wait until there were enough Jews to make it an actual
country. The "cultural" Zionists (as exemplified by Weizman) believed
that the society and culture were more important and only those who
"belonged" should be allowed to go. The policy was to give each
political group the ability to send members according to their voting
bloc in the Zionist Congress. As a result, immigration actually went
down to some very discouraging numbers. I found the following file,
http://www.palestineremembered.com/images/A-Survey-of-Palestine/Volume-I/Page0185.jpg
which showed that the numbers were
1925 - 33,801
1926 - 13,081
1927 - 2, 713
1928 - 2,178
1929 - 5,249
1930 - 4,944
1931 - 4,075
1932 - 9,553
1933 - 30,327
The total immigration from 1920 through 1945 is shown as 367,845.
Rabbi Katz suggested that had the Jabotinsky wing won, they would have
aggressively settled Palestine and the Jewish population
could have numbered in the millions. This would have given the Jews a
large enough block to become an actual commonwealth member while it
was still possible and would have meant something. However, he also
pointed out that this could have led to Hitler sending Rommel massive
resources in order to defeat the British in North Africa and the
Middle East. This is only a possibility and we cannot know what would
have happened. We can speculate about everything, but we do not know
why matters turned out as they did.
In any case, the actions of the rabbis who discouraged emigration can
be seen as similar to the actions of those in the Second Temple Era
who insisted on revolting against the Roman Empire. There are those
who say that the Judean Revolts actually led to the eventual downfall
of the Roman Empire by forcing withdrawal of legions from the other
borders in order to put down the revolts.
Had the masses actually left Europe, perhaps something even worse
could have happened. Then again, perhaps not. Many authors have
written alternate histories, but we can only live in the world as it
is.
--
Sabba - ' " - Hillel
Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 58 Issue 88
