Sefardi's lament K4P lists

Arlene J. Mathes-Scharf 's Kashrut.com ended up in my email inbox the other day.

Ms. Mathes-Scharf is a Food Scientist - Kosher Food Specialist working out of Sharon, MA (she has by sympathies for the winter weather). She is my "go-to" person not only for kashrut alerts but also alerts from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). She watches all the lists and boils the important items down to a paragraph or two, and cites her sources. I heartily recommend that everyone sign up for her free e-newsletter at http://www.kashrut.com.

ANYWAY, she has posted links to a number of Kosher for Passover (K4P) lists at http://www.kashrut.com/Passover/. Among the lists are the "usual suspects" and a number of others. All told, she has links to the following certifying agencies:

Australia Kashrut Authority Passover Guide
Beth Din of Paris
Congregation K'Hal Adath Jeshurun
COR Passover Page
Council Of Orthodox Rabbis Of Greater Detroit
cRc 2013 Passover Information
Jersey Shore Orthodox Rabbinate *
Kashrut Maguen David (Mexico)
Kosher Australia
London Beit Din Passover Page
MK Passover Guide
OK
OU Passover Information
Passover 2012 Magazine by Rabbi Eidlitz
Rabbinical Council of New England
Star-K
Vaad Hakashrus of Denver Pesach (March 2012) Newsletter
Va'ad HaRabanim of Greater Seattle

Israel Rabbinate Medicine List
Kehilas Yaakov Medicine List

Since we follow Sefardi (Moroccan) customs in our house, in the past I have relied primarily on two lists: Jersey Shore Orthodox Rabbinate and Va'ad HaRabanim of Greater Seattle.

This year, the Jersey Shore list includes a line on its first page that reads:

"There will not be a Passover List for Sephardim"

All questions are to be directed to a Rabbi Zvi Holland at Star K. Is there a difference between what the Star-K lists as K4P and what R. Holland will tell what could be thousands of callers? Equally important, what are R. Holland's Sefardi/Mizrachi credentials; he studied at, according to one of his two LinkedIn profiles, the Mir Yeshiva.

The Va'ad HaRabanim of Greater Seattle may be no better. A quick check of its Web site provides last year's (2012) document but, unlike previous years, it fails to list specific products; lots of good generic information, but from a "go to market" perspective, nothing worthwhile.

The cRc list at http://www.crcweb.org/passover2013.php doesn't really list Sefardi/Mizrachi items, but it does note that when cRc declares something not K4P, it notes why. See http://www.crcweb.org/Passover/Shopping%20Guide%202013-KM%20(Jan%202013).pdf and the following illustration.

Since the Ashkenazim avoid kitniyot during Pesach, and since the cRc is mostly by/of/for Ashkenazim, all products containing kitniyot are labeled NOT K4P - but with the explanation "kitniyot."

For all that, none of the lists are "final authorities" unless the rabbi you follow happens to be the organization's final authority.

As many Sefardi and Mizrachi families as we have in the U.S., it is more than sad that, it seems, everyone - including Sefardim and Mizrachim - has caved to the Ashkenazi customs.

There is nothing wrong with Ashkenazi customs; they simply are neither Sefardi nor Mizrachi customs.

Interestingly, in Israel, due to "mixed marriages,*" many rabbis are allowing customs to merge for שלום בית, peace in the home. But then, it seems Israelis - save for the extremists - are willing to welcome others' customs, e.g., rice on Pesach in Moroccan homes (brought to us by a Syrian in-law), and memunah, once shunned and now a national holiday. (Our guests for muflata include Iraqis, Yemenites, and others who "just happen" to drop by, and of course the Moroccan contingent.)

* Mixed marriages: Sefardim with Ashkenazim; what did you think?

"Arafat" beards

What is it with today's "bearded" Jews?

Most look like they are copying Yasser Arafat's stubble.

 

A Jew who wears a beard should wear a BEARD.

Stubble doesn't count.

Whose wife would let her husband wear stubble.

It irritates like sandpaper.

In the heat it itches - more than a "real" beard. (Trust me on this.)

No one is saying a beard needs to be down to the wearer's ankles and look like an untrimmed bush. That's for rabbis of "observant" shules who still believe a beard makes the man. (I've seen some Big Name rabbis who don't wear beards; maybe they can't grow a beard, or maybe their wives put their foot down - שלום בית trumps many beards. )

I see any unbearded Jewish men and many with real beards - Hakham Shalom Sharabi ע''הas an example.

But the "Arafat" beard ?

The Arafat beard is stubble; a beard that is trimmed using a beard trimmer set at the lowest number, at the closest setting that still leaves something that can be considered, if not a beard, then simply "not shaving."

For the record, my wife never has seen me sans facial hair. I came close one time when I failed to notice the shield (that protects my face with direct contact with the clippers) was missing. My daughter was delighted at my mishap, but her joy was short-lived, and I am not much more careful.

I suppose that if it is "the thought that count," than stubble is "thoughtful." But to call it a "beard" - especially a "Jewish" beard, seems - well, unorthodox.

Worm in the "Big Apple"

 
There's an article on ynet's Jewish World headed NY: Stores sued over modesty signs http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4347157,00.html).

Basically, a group of storeowners in Brooklyn's Williamsburg section are accused by the New York City Commission on Human Rights of discrimination after posting signs on windows advising customers not to enter wearing shorts, sleeveless tops and low cut necklines.

In beach communities, it is common to see signs on business stating either "Shirt and shoes required" or "No service without shirt and shoes."

In both cases, the shops in Williamsburg and in the beach communities, there are other businesses offering the same or similar services sans the dress code.

I live in, and occasionally vacation in other, beach communities, and I never have heard of anyone objecting to the proprietors' dress codes.; certainly no one ever filing suit against a dress code.

Some of the classier beaneries in the area demand that gentlemen wear a coat and tie - yes, even in Florida. Ladies likewise are expected to dress appropriately. No one is challenging the restaurant proprietor's dress code. The Federal government insists that the restaurants serve everyone regardless of any physical or mental attributes, but it does not insist that dress codes be abandoned.

If I don't like the dress code at La Haute Cuisine (strictly Bet Yosef, of course) I can get a bite at Etzel Yakov's, kosher if not Bet Yosef. Yakov, the owner, doesn’t dress in a tux to welcome diners and "Israeli casual" is welcome.

If I want to buy a suit and I wander into a GQ advertiser's shoppe I expect to dress accordingly. Likewise, if I want a tuxedo from Tux R Us, then I might wander into the store in shirt, shorts, and sandals.

If for some reason I am invited to visit a courtroom - hopefully only as a juror - I know that a t-shirt, cutoffs, and sandals are going to get me bounced from the venue. (I might be bounced to a jail cell for contempt of court.) I won't hear anyone complain or tell the judge "You can't do that; it violates my civil rights."

There are reasons why anti-discrimination laws are on the books, but having and enforcing a dress code should NOT be one of the reasons.

I think the "bottom line" in Williamsburg is that a liberal's "right" to dress in a manner that offends others in the "others" establishments trumps the rights of the proprietors AND the businesses other, often regular, customers to expect a modicum of modesty on the part of other patrons - or just liberals looking for a fight.

The shops in question are neither restaurants nor lodgings and certainly not on any interstate commerce route. The shops in question more than likely carry merchandise that can be purchased elsewhere, and probably at a better price … AND without the liberal customers being in contact with the extremists who expect modesty in their shoppes.

I suggest that Bloomberg's City of New York has hit a new high in lows.

I've had the misfortune to visit New York and even Brooklyn. Given my druthers, I'd druther not visit New York again; passing through one of its airports is more than enough for me. This silliness on the part of the New York City Commission on Human Rights is just one more case of power going to someone's otherwise empty head.

Maybe the New York City Commission on Human Rights should investigate itself.

עד לא יודע - The Rest of the Story

 

Every Jewish boy knows that the Talmud (Megillah 7b) quotes the opinion of Rava that a person must become drunk on Purim so as not to be able to tell the difference between “cursed be Haman” and “blessed be Mordecai.”

But most of us didn't bother to learn, as the late Paul Harvey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Harvey) would intone, "the rest of the story."

The rest of the story in the Talmud is that Rabba and Rav Zeira became drunk on Purim, so much so that Rabba murdered Rav Zeira with a knife. Rav Zeira was revived through a miracle. When Rabba invited Rav Zeira to a Purim celebration the next year, Rav Zeira declined.

According to an Angel for Shabat article by R. Marc Angel (http://www.jewishideas.org/angel-shabbat/sobering-thoughts-purim-and-every-day) Maimonides (Hilkhot De’ot 5:3) states: “One who becomes intoxicated is a sinner and is despicable, and loses his wisdom. If he [a wise person] becomes drunk in the presence of common folk, he has thereby desecrated the Name.” In his section on the Laws of Holiday Rest (6:20), Maimonides rules: “When one eats, drinks and celebrates on a festival, he should not allow himself to become overly drawn to drinking wine, amusement and silliness…for drunkenness and excessive amusement and silliness are not rejoicing; they are frivolity and foolishness.”

From Sobering Thoughts by Rabbi Eli Zoldan (http://www.priority-1.org/html/email/Sobering_Thoughts.pdf) we learn that according to some authorities, Rema was saying to drink until the stage right before intoxication. The Yad Ephraim further comments that beyond that point would be against the will of the hakhamim , because the purpose of drinking is to open our hearts to praise HaShem out of joy, but when our clarity of mind is gone, we can no longer recognize the great miracle to praise HaShem.

The Aruk haShulhan proposes the same idea, but then goes on to say that this is what a sage means when he says to drink a little more that the regular amount. He also proposes this as a possible explanation of Yosef Caro's Shulhan Aruk , which means that the Yad Ephraim and Aruk haShulhan explain the Yosef Caro's Shulhan Aruk to be saying that one should only drink a little more than his regular amount, and not to drink until the point of intoxication. This would mean that the opinion quoted by the Rema and the Shulhan Aruk are in agreement as to how much one should drink.

While we always answer to "a higher authority," we also are obliged to answer to a "lower" authority - the government's authority.

That means, among other things, that if we are inebriated in public we can be thrown in jail; if we are drunk behind the wheel, we should be thrown in jail (G-d forbid we should injure anyone), and if we give intoxicants to minors we can find ourselves facing jail time.

It's one thing to take a drink to celebrate the holiday of Purim, but let us not - like Rabba - kill anyone, either with a weapon or even with words. Miracles are not common in our time, and we cannot depend on one to restore someone we have injured.

Even if we were to follow Rava's admonition to imbibe until we don't know the difference between "curse Haman" and "bless Mordecai" the preservation of life takes precedence over everything, even Shabat.

Endangering a life - either with a weapon such as a vehicle or a weapon such as a knife or gun, or with words that shame or disgrace a person - because we became intoxicated is forbidden. Period. End of story.

Hacham Ovadia Yosef rules that if a person becomes intoxicated on Purim, and as a result he acts in a reckless manner, causing damage to other people – such as if spills food on people’s clothes, or gets into some kind of accident in which people are hurt or property is damaged – he is liable to pay compensation. The Purim festivities are not an excuse for reckless behavior, and one is fully responsible for his actions on Purim just as he is at any other point throughout the year.

According to R. Eli J Mansour, "the Misva of drinking on Purim is fulfilled by drinking more than one is accustomed to so that he grows tired and falls asleep. This way, one reaches the point described by the Gemara as “where one cannot distinguish between ‘Cursed is Haman’ and ‘Blessed is Mordechai.’” Moreover, if there is even the slightest concern that drinking wine will lead one to dangerous or inappropriate behavior, it is Halachically preferable for him not to drink on Purim. This concern is, without question, a valid basis for an exemption from this requirement. Especially in today’s day and age, when addictions and alcohol abuse are, tragically, so rampant, even in our community, it is preferable to forego on drinking altogether on Purim if there is even a small risk of irresponsible drinking. Many people mistakenly consider drinking on Purim the primary Misva of the holiday. This is absolutely incorrect. It is just one of numerous Misvot, such as Mishlo’ah Manot, charity to the poor, reading and studying the Megila, and so on, and if one wants to be stringent about the laws of Purim, he should be stringent in these areas, not about drinking. And, as mentioned, if there is any risk of drinking leading to dangerous or improper behavior, one is entirely exempt from the obligation to drink. To the contrary, it would be a Misva not to drink, in order to avoid danger and impropriety."

I might have a - as in "one" - shot of maheyah at the synagogue and a second at home before I head for the bed and the oblivion of sleep where I surely won't know the difference between "curse Haman" and "bless Mordecai."

Besides, we need a clear, sober head for morning prayers.

Hag Purim samach חג פורים שמח.

Salute the rank, not the man

 
The person in question may be detested, a scoundrel, and beneath contempt.

But the person's RANK, the person's POSITION, demands respect.

Therefore, the incumbent at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, District of Columbia, while deserving of Israelis' distrust and disgust, still deserves the Israelis' - and Americans' - respect as president of the United States. For Israel, the US remains Israel's biggest financial backer.

When I was in the Flyin' Corps, back when Hector was a pup and the Brothers Wright first became airborne, I learned, along with other basic trainees, that we were NOT saluting some jerk 2nd lieutenant (ensign to sailors or O1 to all branches), we were saluting the bars on the jerk's shoulders; we were saluting the RANK, not the PERSON.

I personally have no respect the man in the White House. As far as I'm concerned, the government house has lacked a respectable resident for many years - dating back well before the current occupant took up residency. The same holds true for the temporary resident at One Observatory Circle, also in Washington D.C.

I am a Beginite - I have no use for Ben Gurion and his apprentice Rabin; I cannot forgive them for the Altalena (see note at bottom). Peres is, to my mind, a disgrace as president of Israel. My respect for Netanyahu is zero; I consider him "du panim" and as firm in his expressed convictions as a sheaf of wheat in a 60 mph wind gust.

BUT, despite my hearty dislike of the aforementioned politicians, I MUST, however reluctantly, show respect due the position.

While some American Jews are encouraging Israeli Jews to disrespect the American president, I have to suggest otherwise. That does not mean to refrain from expressing displeasure over some of the president's obviously misguided policies, but it does mean to express the displeasure in "acceptable" means. I detested Rabin; the only thing for which I considered him useful was as a sleeping aid. Despite my feelings toward the man, I never would have considered assassination nor do I condone it now. He was, at the time, Israel's prime minister.

The same. holds true for the so-called chief rabbis. The POSITION deserves respect, even if the person filling the position does not.

It is one thing for cartoonists and comedians to poke fun at the "high and mighty" as individuals - I'm thinking in particular of David Levy at the aquarium - but the OFFICE is a different matter.

I might have, as an airman, saluted the president and shown proper respect for the office, but my opinion of the person holding that office may be far less than flattering.

Salute the rank, not the person.

URLs concerning the Altalena:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Altalena.html

http://www.etzel.org.il/english/ac20.htm

Rav Ovadia, בחייך!

 

Rabbi Ovadia Yosef was a גדול בדור - a great man of his generation.

Even if you disagree with him, it has to be admitted that he has been for many years a leader to many Mizrachi Jews.

Not so much for Sefardi/North African Jews; indeed, there is a book דברי שלום ואמת that basically starts off every topic with "Rav Ovadia says … and our tradition is …" and then sites the reason for the North African tradition.

But, the former Hakham Bakshe or Chief Sefardi Rabbi of Israel, now is proving that it's time to retire, a role the State's president also ought to consider for the same reason.

Both Ovadia and Peres are making statements that do not become a person for their (former) stature.

Ovadia's political slander borders on the obscene and certainly is not acceptable - calling fellow Jews "goyim" in the modern sense and now calling another a "scoundrel."

In the run-up to the elections in Israel, Ovadia called members of the Jewish Home (בית יהודי) party "goyim" and now, post-election, he is referring to the There Is A Future (יש עתיד) party leader Yair Lapid an "evil man" if an article in The Jewish Press (http://tinyurl.com/aq8kw29) can be believed.

Ovadia is to be commended for pushing for Sefardi/Mizrachi yeshivot in Israel; until the first of these yeshivot were established, all rabbinical want-to-be's had to go to Ashkenazi yeshivot. As most Jews now understand, there ARE different approaches to halacha. the most blatantly obvious appear at Pesach when some eat legumes (kitniyot) and others avoid them. (Less obvious, but of concern for the Sefardi diner is the Ashkenazi acceptance that as long as a Jew lights the fire, the rest of the meal can be prepared by a non-Jew whereas Sephardi Jews require a Jew to be involved in the food's actual preparation.)

The fact that Ovadia's followers now dress and act like Litvaks in their fedoras and black suits is minimally irksome. Don't misunderstand; that's fine for Likvaks, but not for Sefardim or even Mizrachim.

Ovadia does, on occasion, offer a decision that makes since in light of our times. But his political comments and decisions are, at least in my opinion, detracting from what once was greatness.

He and Peres need to retire to their rocking chairs and tell stories to their grandchildren. Failing that, the rabbi's reputation is in increasing jeopardy.

Another perspective

 

There is a great deal of debate - some hot - in Israel with spill over to the diaspora.

The subject: Inducting yeshiva "boys" into the military or national service.

The yeshivot contend that only (study of) Torah protects Israel and that anyone who goes to a yeshiva must be exempt from any interference by the state (i.e., free of military and national service).

On the other side of the debate are those who resent the yeshiva boys failing to, as the side perceives it, "do their duty to the state."

Adding insult to injury, the yeshivot get money from the state and the yeshiva boys are exempt from certain taxes other Israelis are obliged to pay.

When the state was re-constituted in 1948, Ben Gurion - the man who brought us the Altalena "affair" with his man Rabin in charge - made a deal with the haredim to that the state would support yeshiva boys while they studied. At the time they numbered about 5,000. Ben Gurion sold the exemptions to pay for haredim political support.

Today there are many, many more yeshiva boys, all on the dole from the state.

Since most debaters see things as "black" or "white" - my side is right, yours is wrong - there's very little talk of possible accommodations.

But accommodations have been made.

Tzhal - the IDF - kitchens are kosher.

Religious solders - and there are many and they populate all branches of the IDF - get time to wrap tefillin; girl soldiers wear skirts so they don't seem to be wearing men's apparel.

ON THE OTHER HAND, the observant soldier - and here I am not referring to the "ultra" religious haredim, but to the plain soldier who is shomer mitzvoth - do ask for some "special treatment." They apparently were promised special treatment by the IDF (read "government") and, equally apparently, the agreement has been abrogated by Tzhal (the government).

These old-country observant (vs. "modern orthodox") object to serving with soldiers of the opposite sex. The men object to being forced to listen to a woman sing (never mind that we listed to Miriam and other women who sang praises of HaShem after we safely crossed Yam Suf

(שמות ט''ו)

כ וַתִּקַּח מִרְיָם הַנְּבִיאָה אֲחוֹת אַהֲרֹן, אֶת-הַתֹּף--בְּיָדָהּ; וַתֵּצֶאןָ כָל-הַנָּשִׁים אַחֲרֶיהָ, בְּתֻפִּים וּבִמְחֹלֹת.

כא וַתַּעַן לָהֶם, מִרְיָם: שִׁירוּ לַיהוָה כִּי-גָאֹה גָּאָה, סוּס וְרֹכְבוֹ רָמָה בַיָּם.

(Exodus, 15)

20 And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances

21 And Miriam sang unto them*: Sing ye to the LORD, for He is highly exalted: the horse and his rider hath He thrown into the sea.

In Hebrew, "la'hem" - the all-inclusive "them" - includes everyone, male and female alike. My point: All Israel heard Miriam's voice and watched her and "all the women" dance.

IN ANY EVENT the rabbis, in their wisdom, prohibit males from listening to females sing.

The haredi soldiers also object to visiting non-Jewish (perhaps "non-Orthodox" as well) places of worship, even for the purposes to learning about the people the soldiers are obliged to protect. The fear, I suspect, is that they might be coerced into a religious service in a place with idols.

It seems to me that Tzhal/the government could accommodate the "religious" soldiers; do they really need to go to a concert where women are singing? Why can't the people they are to understand and protect come out from their places of worship and show some respect the Jewish sensibilities?

By the same token, why must Tzhal follow "glat" rather than the stricter "halak," a/k/a Bet Yosef? (Rhetorical question; I know the answer.)

I have a friend who is a rabbi. He is of a mind that true Torah scholars should be exempt for military or other national service. The number of such scholars, he opines, is minimal.

If Torah indeed protects Israel, maybe Israel can put yeshivot on wheels (mobile homes or caravans) so the few true scholars can, as Moses and the ancient cohenim did, be with the soldiers at the front - at least when fighting is going on.

Mark the trailers with a Torah on the roof; much as a Red Crescent or Red Cross (we can't have a Red Mogen David; that offends the International red Cross) so that the enemy will know not to target a vehicle filled with non-combatants. Embed the Torah scholars into combat units, much as "journalists" are embedded - I would heartily encourage embedding pro-enemy/anti-Israel news crews with IDF units; maybe they could report the truth for a change.

The bottom line is that both the haredim and the helonim (non-observant) need to move toward the center to find accommodation for the other. There IS neutral ground that, while it may not satisfy those committed to extremism, may help heal the rift between the two sides.

If we don't succeed here, Israel will be, once more, an exercise in self-destruction.

Donating ill-fitting apparel For people "in transition"

 

I'm doing some pre-Purim Pesach prep - cleaning rooms in which hametz never enters. The rooms where hametz enters will be thoroughly cleaned (de-hametzed) just before the grand-daughter and her parents arrive from Israel.

And now I'll once again have a young person to help me search for hametz - yea!!

Anyway, I found a suit that was too big and a couple of jackets that are "a little" tight.

I heard there are programs that accept donations of "gently used" professional clothing for use by people "transitioning" from unemployable to employable status and have a need business apparel.

I know if I gave the clothing a Goodwill, Salvation Army, or similar organization, the apparel would be sold and the money, I'm sure, put to good use, but the people who need, but cannot afford, the apparel are out of luck. That is not what I want for my "no longer my size" clothing.

Naturally I went on line to find someone or some organization that could use the wrong-size clothing.

I found a number of places to donate WOMEN's apparel by doing a Dogpile search. (Dogpile is a search engine, similar to Google, but a favorite of librarians.)

Finding someone to accept MEN's apparel was a different story.

According to About.com - and I had to go to two "About" sites to get the information - there are two - 2 - organizations that accept men's clothing:

* Career Gear http://www.careergear.org/

* Men's Warehouse http://www.menswearhouse.com/shop/Home_12751_12001_-1_N_

Career Gear makes it plain that donated clothing will, if suitable, be given to a person otherwise unable to afford interview clothing. It accepts clothing for men and for women. Career Gear has locations in Baltimore, MD 21217, Houston, TX 77036, Jersey City, NJ, Miami, FL 33136, New Haven, CT 06510, New York, NY 10271 (National HQ), San Antonio, Texas 78209, and Washington, DC 20002. Contact information for each location is on the Career Gear Web site (ibid.)

No location convenient? Career Gear allows donors to mail clothing to the New York office.

Men's Warehouse also accepts "gently used" clothing, but apparently only during select times of the year. Men's Warehouse accepts clothing for men and, despite its name, for women, too. (See http://www.menswearhouse.com/shop/ContentAttachmentView_-1_12751_12001____MWAboutNSDhome.html for donation information.)

From Men's Warehouse:
"Men's Warehouse does accept any gently used business apparel during our National Suit Drive Event. We do not accept any donations unless this event is taking place, but we will be more than happy to provide you with information about some of the non-profit organizations that we provide our donations to. If you would like this information, please contact your local Men's Warehouse store.

"This year, we will be holding our Suit Drive during the month of July. For more information about this special event, please click on the link below:"

http://bit.ly/KFqQ5w

Spirituality and Reality

 

By Rabbi Marc D. Angel
Used with permission

In last week’s Parasha, Yitro, we read the magnificent description of the Revelation of God at Mount Sinai. This was the loftiest moment in the history of the people of Israel—and in the history of humanity as a whole—when God directly conveyed the “Ten Commandments” as the foundation of religious and ethical life.

This week we read Mishpatim, which seems so mundane by contrast with Yitro. Mishpatim focuses on property rights, issues in business law, damages and restitution. These practical laws are interspersed with verses instructing us to be concerned for the welfare of the poor, widow and orphan; to be compassionate, since we ourselves were slaves in Egypt and should have learned from that experience to be sympathetic to those who suffer.

The Torah juxtaposes the lofty spiritual experience of Revelation with the practical concerns of daily life. It connects grand religious insights with laws governing everyday business life. The lesson: life as a whole is to be imbued with spirituality. Interpersonal relationships are significant aspects of a spiritual worldview and way of life.

These essential lessons were central to the teachings of one of the great rabbinic figures of American Jewry during the latter nineteenth and early twentieth centuries: Dr. Henry Pereira Mendes. Dr. Mendes, who served Congregation Shearith Israel in New York from 1877-1937, was a dynamic communal leader, teacher, and author. He was founder and first president of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America. He was among the founders of various institutions including the New York Board of Jewish Ministers (now known as New York Board of Rabbis), the Jewish Theological Seminary (originally an Orthodox institution), Lexington School for the Deaf, and Montefiore Hospital.

Dr. Mendes emphasized the need for religion to be a steady and constant force in one’s life. True religion is expressed not merely in ceremonials, but in our conduct in all aspects of our daily lives. In his book, “Jewish Daily Life Ethically Presented,” (published in 1917), Dr. Mendes wrote that “our religion requires threefold work from us: we must work for our own happiness, we must work for the happiness of the world we live in, and we must work for the glory of God” (p. 57). He continued: “Our daily work, no matter how important or menial, if we perform it conscientiously, becomes equivalent to an act of worship. It therefore means setting God before us as the One we desire to please by the faithful discharge of our daily duties. This kind of recognition of good faith, honesty and honor means religion. Conscientiousness is religion. We must therefore do our work conscientiously. We should derive spiritual happiness out of labor by recognizing that God consecrates labor” (p. 59).

In his interpretations of the Ten Commandments (in his book
“The Jewish Religion Ethically Presented” published originally in 1895, and in a revised edition in 1912), Dr. Mendes elaborated on the biblical text, offering moral lessons by which to govern one’s life. For example, in commenting on the commandment not to take God’s name in vain, he remarks: “We take His name in vain, or to no purpose, if we speak of God being good, just, merciful etc., without trying ourselves to be good, just, merciful, etc….We take or assume His name in vain when we call ourselves by His name and say we are His children or His people, while for our convenience or ease we neglect religious duties which He has commanded us” (1912 edition, pp. 59-60).

In discussing the commandment forbidding murder, Dr. Mendes noted that “we may not kill a man’s good name or reputation, nor attack his honor….We may not kill a man’s business….Respect for human life carries with it respect for anyone’s livelihood. We may not make it hard for others to live by reason of our own greed” (pp. 65-66).

Dr. Mendes often expressed his philosophy in short sentences and epigrams. A number of these were collected by Rabbi Dr. David de Sola Pool in his short biography of Dr. Mendes. The following are a few examples of Dr. Mendes’ wit and wisdom.

In too many homes, religion is a farce not a force.

The three greatest R’s: Reverence, Righteousness and
Responsibility.

Democracy is the ideal form of government, but it needs ideal citizens.

Let us have less fault-finding and more fault-mending.

Speak to the young: but first to the old.

Peace for the world at last; and the realization of reverence for God by all men. These are the essentials for human happiness. Zionism stands for them.

In 1911, Dr. Mendes had suffered a very serious illness. Upon
his recovery, he delivered a moving sermon in which he called on himself and his congregation to strive more mightily to serve God with righteousness. He concluded the sermon with words of thoughtfulness and profound inspiration: “Let us all try to prove our gratitude to God by doing His will. Then, come sorrow, come trial, come defeat, come death itself, the God who alone knows the human heart, who alone can read the inmost soul, shall judge whether you and I have labored in vain, whether you and I have spent our strength for naught, and in vain,--for surely our judgment shall be with the Lord and our work shall be before our God.”

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The Angel for Shabbat column is presented as a service of the Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals. Please visit our website jewishideas.org for a wide array of articles of special interest to those who wish to foster an intellectually vibrant, compassionate and inclusive Orthodox Judaism.

The Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals
8 West 70th Street
New York, NY 10023