Category: Q&A

Politics, a mosque on the Temple Mount, and a live rabbinic debate over whether the future Temple even needs them.

Q. Why doesn’t Israel sacrifice bulls, goats, lambs anymore like they did long ago?

Technically, the mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the location of the first and second Temples, is “in the way”, but obviously it’s more complicated than that. Big changes, as well as all national and universal mitzvot like building the Third Temple, must be done slowly and surely, and with the initiative and support of the nation of Israel, and if possible, all of mankind, “for My House will be a House of prayer for all the Nations” (Isaiah 56, 7). We’re undoubtedly not there yet. Additionally, Rav A. I. Kook, the first Chief Rabbi of Israel, deals extensively with the possibility that there may not be animal sacrifices in the future Temple, maybe just vegetarian ones (“m’nachot” from oil, wheat, wine, spices, etc., Kvatzim miKtav Yad Kodsho II, pp. 15-17). In addition, the fact that the G-d who runs history has apparently decided that the time isn’t right yet, because we can just imagine what kind of international crisis with the Muslims would be caused by rebuilding the Temple (this is also a halachic factor). On the other hand, we must do whatever can be done, even if it’s mostly theoretical at this stage, for example, studying the topic, preparing the necessary utensils and garments, and most importantly, educating towards a desire and strengthening the motivation to want to revive the sacrificial services, and all mitzvot which we aren’t presently observing.

A rabbinic, not Torah-level, prohibition — which leaves room for leniency when appearance is genuinely distressing.

Q. Tattoo of the eyebrows with vegetable dyes, fade after 2-3 years. Is this permissible?

Shalom Rav,

Rav Ovadia Yosef has a comprehensive response on the topic (Taharat HaBayit III, p. 34) where he allows temporary tattoos for reasons of embarrassment, for example, if a woman’s eyebrows aren’t so visible, or to cover a scar, etc. R. Neventzahl and R. Ezra Batzri allow it as well in such situations. The rationale is that a woman having a problematic facial appearance is a very sensitive issue and accordingly, also a legitimate halachic factor. This wouldn’t be enough to permit a Torah prohibition, but in certain cases, such as a temporary tattoo, which isn’t a Torah prohibition but rather a rabbinic one, those same rabbis who decreed, also have the authority to be lenient, as well, when there are extenuating circumstances. Obviously this general rule cannot be applied in all cases and by just anyone, but only where the halachic authorities allow it, like in the situation under discussion.

With Love of Israel, Rav Ari Shvat

‘Light unto the nations’ turns out to mean something closer to example than to outreach.

Q. Zechariah (8:23) says that Gentiles will cling to the hem of a Jew so they can learn about G-d. Is there a mitzvah to teach Torah to Gentiles? What does it mean to be a “light to the nations”?

There is clearly no mitzvah to teach Torah to gentiles. The concept of Jews being a “light to the nations” (Isaiah 42 and 49) is referring to what Israel should show the world through example and practice how to run a model country, modern culture, moral army and economy etc., in the most ethical, just and G-dly fashion possible, and not through lecturing or teaching Torah. In fact, modern educators feel that a living, appealing example influences much more than a dry, intellectual or even emotional sermon, especially if we are talking about the masses, who aren’t all intellectually bent. Similarly, the verse which you cited in Zecharia, says that the gentiles will cling to the Jew saying “We will go with you, for we heard that G-d is with you”. They will support and want to be associated with the moral G-dly people in the Holy Land out of idealistic identification and a true desire to be part of something great and historic, but it’s not referring to us teaching them Torah. Even the “Torah (which) will go forth from Zion” (Isaiah 2), isn’t referring to textual study, but to the ideals, as is explicit there: “the ways of G-d”.

A command 3,300 years old, a G-d who quietly let its target disappear, and what’s actually left to observe.

Q. If we are commanded by Hashem to kill Amalek, then how is that any different then the Arabs who claim that Allah told them to kill Jews?

True the concept of erasing Amalek, today, sounds cruel. On the other hand, the eternal Torah, had to be relevant not only today, but 3300 years ago, as well. To judge methods of national survival 3300 (!) years ago with a modern measuring-stick is anachronistic and simply irrelevant. The same loving G-d who commanded us the super-moral mitzvot, also commanded us peace-loving and “slave-mentality” Jews who just left Egypt, that sometimes we must “toughen up” to “fight fire with fire” in self-defense and retaliation, and is the same G-d who historically “lost” Amalek somewhere along the line, because He doesn’t want that “mitzvah” to be preoccupying modern man. He made sure that Amalek no longer exists, but the only thing that remains is the obligation, once a year, to remember that sometimes we “nice guys” who would do anything not to kill, have to artificially “get tough”, otherwise our anti-Semitic enemies will surely take advantage of us (it still took us thousands of missiles down south and the Nova massacre until we finally retaliated!). Self-defense, retaliation and deterring the enemies of peace is life-giving and moral, and the exact opposite (!) of Islamic terror which brags about how many innocent citizens they killed, and even names streets after those evil “heroes”.

A blanket policy against it, explained — and the kinds of cooperation that are contrarily welcome.

Q. Would not both Jew and Christian hearing what each other has to say, foster greater friendship? I realize that for most of history the majority of Christians haven’t thought this way, and so skepticism is understood and honored as justifiable, but today, many feel that you have something valuable to offer, and maybe to receive.

It’s great hearing an open-minded gentile who isn’t out to “missionize” or convert Jews. Unfortunately, as long as convincing Jews to convert is a common or even central goal to many Christian groups and clergy throughout history and to this very day (sometimes even veiling their real intentions), I imagine you can understand and respect our policy not to get into confusing differentiations or potentially “explosive” situations, preferring a blanket policy of not holding inter-faith dialogue regarding theology. We’re not out to convert or convince others, and we expect a similar, tolerant common courtesy. On the other hand, dialogue on political, community, humanitarian or international issues and events are fine, and cooperation of all mankind can help greatly. For example, if you can help us Jews deal with the immoral crackpot Moslem leaders in Iran who not only inconsiderately deny the Holocaust, but want to actually nuke us and kill another 6,000,000 Jews in modern Israel, it would be greatly appreciated, so we don’t have to do it ourselves and alone. This type of universal brotherhood is a lot more urgent!

Even Rav Soloveichik, no hardliner, drew this line — including at the cost of hearing the shofar.

Q. I thought that it is allowed to enter a Reform Temple as long as they are not doing a service there. On Sukkot, I went in with a lulav and etrog to be “mezakeh the rabbim” (benefit the masses)- and teach them about that mitzvah. Is this wrong?

Shalom,

Rav Y. D. Soloveichik was definitely considered one of the more liberal Torah giants in America of the last generation, yet even he prohibited entering a Reform Temple, even if it meant not hearing the shofar on Rosh HaShana (a Torah obligation!). The idea is that there can be no religious legitimization given to a movement which unfortunately doesn’t believe in the eternal Torah, and many of their “rabbis” don’t even believe in G-d. It must be clarified to all (including those that attend or potentially may do so) that even if they are Jewish, their practice is simply not Judaism. Although your intention was admirable, the halacha is that one shouldn’t perform a mitzvah through doing an aveira (wrongdoing), and almost always, the end doesn’t justify the means. There are plenty of other places (almost anywhere!) and ways to teach others about the beauty and depth of mitzvot. On the other hand, Rav Soloveichik did allow meeting together with reform leaders regarding community and national issues, and the obligation to love them, as all Jews, obviously applies.

With Love of Israel, Rav Ari Shvat

Why books like Maccabees were left out — and why some are still quietly cited anyway.

Q. What was the process of the canonization of the Tanakh and what is the status of the apocryphal books like the Book of the Maccabees and Ben Sira?

The books which you mentioned as well as others are often called “outside books” which were around during the second Temple period but purposely not included by the Anshei Knesset HaG’dola in the Tanach. Although we are taught not to invest too much time in reading them (see Tiferet Yisrael on Mishna Sanhedrin 10, note 8), some of them, like Ben Sira, are even quoted in the Talmud, while others are mentioned in the Ramban in his commentary on the Torah and elsewhere. The first book of Maccabees is cited by some modern day poskim, as well, although this is done very carefully because it is known that some outside influences entered these books over history. Fragments or copies of most of these books have been found in their original Hebrew versions, however, most of them were preserved better in their Greek and Latin translations and therefore may well have been subject to Christianization. These books are definitely not holy, but can sometimes serve as interesting outside sources to confirm certain historical facts or verify some ancient customs, but even this must clearly be done with supervision, and it’s not a blanket acceptance.

Not everything needs to be sold — a practical map of what to sell, set aside, or just leave alone.

Q. What chametz should or shouldn’t I sell for Pesach to a gentile?

It’s better that “absolute” chametz, where a fermenting grain has come in contact with water (for example whiskey, noodles, etc.) be destroyed and not sold to a non-Jew unless it involves considerable loss. This is evaluated subjectively, so a rabbi should be consulted, but the most common example for many people is an expensive bottle of whiskey, or a favorite imported cereal which is hard to replace, etc. On the other extreme, there is no need to sell food where there is clearly no chametz but just lacks Peach supervision, like rice, canned fruit, etc. These can be put aside in a place where nobody will accidentally eat them, and should be designated as such. The chametz which is usually sold consists of “uncertain” foods, where there may be chametz involved, so we sell them to a gentile, “just to be sure”. This may include chocolate spread, soup mixes etc., which list “stabilizers” or starch among the ingredients, for this can sometimes contain chametz. It’s best to detail in the sale where the chametz is kept, and a cell number where the seller can be reached, should the buyer wish to use his newly-acquired chametz during the holiday. Please note that Jews from abroad who are visiting Israel should sell their chametz in Israel, or in an early sale abroad, for Pesach begins earlier here, and ends later (if keeping 2 days).

Different rules for matza, the four cups, and whether you’ve already benched.

Q. What do I do if I forgot to lean while eating at the Pesach Seder?

If a man forgets to recline while eating at least one olives-worth of the matza of mitzvah than he must go back and eat again while reclining unless he is elderly or sick, and then can rely on the lenient opinion cited later. A healthy man who forgot to recline and already “benched” (birkat hamazon after meals), must eat again at least one olives-worth, and make a motzi, but not bless the bracha on “achilat matza”.

Regarding any of the four cups of wine, Sfaradim must go back and drink again that which lacked reclining, but the only one Ashkenazim must drink again is the second cup, and all agree that you need not make another bracha. Korech and afikoman need not be eaten again. The meal need not be eaten while reclining, but nevertheless, it’s worthy to do so. Being that some opine that women need not recline, and others add that today it isn’t considered a sign of freedom for anyone to recline when eating, if a woman forgets to recline, she need not repeat anything.

You can’t picture G-d — so picture the needs of Israel instead, as concretely as you can.

Q. What is one supposed to picture when praying since we may not picture Hashem and since He has no image?

Shalom. When davening, one should concentrate on and picture the needs of Israel, and think of, and even better, to word in any language you want, practical current examples. These could and should be either personal, or even better, national needs or reasons to thank and praise G-d, and to add to the appropriate blessing in the Shmoneh Esreh as you say them. For example: for the freedom of hostages or wounded, for peace in Israel, for the success of the Israeli government and economy, success in learning Torah and decision-making, health for a sick relative, etc. Thanking Him for the State and our relative security, for a good marriage or correct decision, our children, etc.

Even though obviously G-d knows how to run the world, we are supposed to ask Him and thank Him for those things which we think we should want, and what we think He’d like us to want. In addition to strengthening our closeness to G-d, it’s also good for us to make these thoughts as concrete as possible, by first putting them into words, and then, even better, trying to actualizing them as much as we can. Thus, together with G-d, we’ll make the world a better place!   With Love of Israel, Rav Ari Shvat