Delta and the Saudis

 

The "SkyTeam Alliance" of which Delta and 13 other airlines are members (see http://www.skyteam.com/en/About-Us/Our-Members/) recently accepted Saudia Arabian Airlines as a member.

El Al, by comparison, has (or had) code share agreements with 7 other airlines, including American, although the American Airlines WWW site states, in bold letters:

Due to a regulatory change by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, American Airlines has suspended its code share on flights operated by El Al until further notice. See http://tinyurl.com/6dtb7vx for an explanation that may, or may not, satisfy.

IN ANY EVENT, Delta, which also flies to Lod (TLV) claims it has no control over who chooses to fly in its planes other than to check that the prospective passenger has a valid passport and, if necessary, a visa to the destination country.

Saudia requires a visa.

From my personal perspective, I would be hard pressed to find a reason to travel to Saudia. Jordan, OK. The "old" Egypt, maybe. Morocco, in a heartbeat. But Saudia ?

Saudia's embassy Web site provides a PDF version of its visa application.

That's innocent enough.

But, like most countries, when applying for a visa the potential traveler also must provide his or her passport.

If the passport shows a stop in Israel, the visa may be denied. (I think Israel passport control still offers the option of a paper entry/visa that leaves no marks on the passport.)

It's unfortunate that while the embassy Web site states that visitors to Saudia must abide by the kingdom's laws (standard wording for any country), it doesn't state that certain laws unknown in most free countries are applicable in Saudia, e.g., bringing in anything other than an approved Islamic religious text, nor does it state that women traveling alone must be met at the entry point by a male chaperone. (Imagine a female CEO of a major company who wants to do business in Saudia being told she can't leave the airport without a chaperone and she certainly cannot rent and drive a car in the kingdom. What would Fiona say to that?)

My take is that I have flown a lot of miles with Delta.

I've flown with El Al, KLM, Northwest/United - Air France, and once with a UK-based airline I hope never to see again; my wife frequently flies Iberia (El Al code share); my daughter and grand-daughter are coming over via Iberia, although she likes BA (despite its incompetency in dealing with threatened work (in)actions). My sister-in-law and family (6 in all) are traveling via American (an El Al code share until the US FAA cancelled that arrangement, ibid.).

If I can get a non-stop flight from Hartfield to Lod and back the same path, I'll probably book on Delta. I won't be risking a ride on a Saudi plane.

Given that some of the code shares align with other counties with "restricted" rights, e.g., China, I have no problem with Delta being a code share with Saudia Arabian Airlines; I wish it was not, but for now it's a done deal.

As long as Delta is ready when I am (and the price is right). . .

Rabbi trumps the Torah ?

 

Sh'alah

If there is no mikveh available, may a woman immerse in a pool?

Chacham Ovadia Yosef rules that a rabbi may not allow people to commit a rabbinic prohibition even in such a case, where they will otherwise violate a Torah prohibition. Halacha does not become more flexible in response to the "intimidation" of those who are prepared to transgress Torah law if a rabbinic provision is not suspended. This principle is explicitly mentioned as well by R. Moshe Feinstein (Russia-New York, 1895-1986), in his work Iggerot Moshe (Yoreh Dei'a section, 52), where he writes that a rabbi may not allow a violation of halacha of any kind due to the threats of sinners that they will otherwise commit more grievous transgressions.

Chacham Ovadia added that issuing a ruling permitting the use of pools as a mikveh eliminates any incentive on the part of the community to construct a proper mikveh. For this reason, too, a rabbi must not issue such a ruling, and should rather insist that the community take it upon itself to construct a valid mikveh.

From the Daily Halacha by R. Eli J. Mansour

 

Caught between hammer and anvil

G-d's very first commandment to us is to "be fruitful and multiply." (בראשית א כ"ז). This even before He told us not to eat of the "tree of knowledge."

The absolute first commandment to ben adam - humankind.

We also are told that a woman who is "nidda" cannot be with her husband until she immerses herself in a "fountain or cistern" (Soncinco translation of Leviticus 11, V36.)

According to R. Mansour, "a mikveh must be constructed in such a way that rainwater falls directly into the mikveh. If the water is brought to the mikveh from somewhere else, either through human involvement or a piping system, it is invalid."

I have never seen a mikveh open to the heavens (except for a lake or ocean).

I HAVE seen a great many swimming pools open to the heavens.

But back to the original problem.

If a woman must visit a mikveh before she can visit her husband, she could never become pregnant, thereby cancelling out HaShem's first commandment to us, to "be fruitful and multiply."

I concur with Ovadia that allowing women to immerse in their own chlorinated pools probably would discourage them from pressing for a local mikveh.

But rather than a rabbi - or even many rabbis - having the chutzpah to cancel HaShem's first commandment to humankind, it seems to be a better approach would be to make a mikveh desirable - and affordable - place for a woman to visit.

There are, I'm told, some classy mikvot where the visitors are treated royally. There are, admittedly, many that are dark and encourage a quick in-and-out. And, more and more, there are some "in between" mikvot - clean with a courteous attendant who, when necessary, provides information in a tactful way to newcomers and to those long-away from the mitzvah.

At the same time, rabbis - and knowledgeable rabbis' wives - need to educate the ladies that the mikveh is not for "cleanliness," although it has that benefit.

Telling a "modern" woman that she must travel perhaps a very long distance to a dirty mikveh possibly in a "not nice" section of town won't convince many women to make the effort.

Telling them they cannot use their pool - do they immerse completely unclothed as required? - without offering something more attractive is a waste of rabbinical time for most women, at least in the U.S.

Telling them they cannot approach their husband until they visit the mikveh likewise will result in most women ignoring the rabbi.

Some time ago I learned that a rabbinical fiat that the people ignore is no longer law.

I know the rabbis disagree with that, even though it came from one of their own. One told me "we took the law" which, by extension, he meant, "and you - simple Jew - will do as we say." The absolute arrogance of the man.

R. Ovadia has a large following, as does R. Monsour, and R. Feinstein's reputation is acknowledged worldwide.

But this time . . .

The Iraqi may be right that a woman should prefer the mikveh to a backyard pool, but I think his approach is wrong and the rabbinical gall to overrule a Torah law must have HaShem shaking his head in bewilderment - "Why are they doing this to me after I told them not to go to the left or to the right?"

I have to wonder

 

The incumbent at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue encourages Libyan and Yemeni leaders to step down; their countries are in turmoil. Tribes are revolting, encouraged, one suspects, by radical Islamists. (A few decades ago it would have been "encouraged by the Communist red menace.") I wonder what Our Fearless Leader would say if Americans were storming the White House. Would HE offer to resign?

Would he pack his bags and look for someone - Hamas, maybe - to take him in?

Or would he, as Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi, Bashar al-Assad, and Ali Abdullah Saleh call out the troops to shoot down the protestors?

Would the troops do it?

We went through something similar back in 1861 and again in Philadelphia's 1910 Motormen's' strike. And in my lifetime, there is Kent State and the integrationists.

But times have changed, and after My Lai the Army "got a conscience."

Perhaps America's fighting men and women would be reluctant to follow the Commander-in-Chief's orders to protect his posterior.

What if, say France or a Saudi price or the wise men at 760 United Nations Plaza, New York, NY 10017, told the incumbent to flee the country - they would welcome him and his family within their borders.

Would the president follow his advice to other megalomaniacs and vacate?

I really doubt it.

Power is compelling; once you have it, you don't want to let go.

His advice to al-Gaddafi, al-Assad, Saleh, et al is "do as I say, not as I do."

Seems to me even - even - Sarah Palin had more international experience when running with John McCain than the incumbent has now as evidenced by his continuing diplomatic gaffes; at least Sarah could see the former Soviet Union from an Alaskan island.

By the way, does anyone find it amusing that Our Fearless Leader fails to ask Iran's Supreme Leader, North Korea's Kim Jong-il, or China's General Secretary Hu Jintao - all accused of human rights abuses and strangling democracy-as-we-know-it - to resign?

A New Revelation?-- Thoughts for Shavuoth

 

By Rabbi Marc D. Angel

On Shavuoth, we commemorate the awesome Revelation at Mount Sinai, when the Almighty presented the Ten Commandments to the people of Israel. All of the Israelite men, women and children experienced that solemn moment, marking an everlasting covenant between God and the Israelite nation.

Let us imagine that God would invite us to a second Revelation at Sinai, asking all the Jews of the world to attend.

The Hareidim would say: we cannot be in the same domain as the non-religious or less religious Jews. We are pure, we will not have contact with those of lesser purity.

The Secularists would say: we cannot attend because we do not want to be bound by any commandments. We are citizens of the world and don’t want the particular responsibilities of being Jewish.

The non-Orthodox would say: we can’t attend unless the event is egalitarian; and unless there is no expectation that we accept any commandments. We are open to suggestions, but not to commandments.

The modern Orthodox would insist that the Revelation also include Divine words relating to science, philosophy and the modern world.

Hassidim would demand that they be placed near their own Rebbes, and not anywhere else.

Each Sephardic and Ashkenazic ethnic group would insist on having its own hazan, its own minhag, its own pronunciation of Hebrew.

Unaffiliated Jews would turn up out of curiosity; the Kabbalah Center would set up booths on the outskirts selling books and red strings.

Alienated and ignorant Jews would complain: this event is boring, we need a rock band or other entertainment to make it attractive.

The hypothetical second Revelation might not be such a happy and congenial event, after all. And yet, it should be a tremendous unifying experience for the Jewish people.

The Talmud (Eruvin 21b) teaches that King Solomon instituted two practices, and a heavenly voice approved of both. One practice is the washing of hands before meals; the other is the setting up of eruvin (boundary enclosures). Washing hands relates to personal purification. After we wash, we remain silent until reciting the blessing over bread. During that period of time, we are in a uniquely private domain, involving only us and the Almighty. Interpersonal relationships are excluded. The eruv, though, provides a method of including others in our domain. It is a symbolic way of turning a public area into a private area by considering all of us as one extended family and community.

For us to be a whole, united Jewish people, we need to draw on both of these wise practices established by King Solomon. We need to concentrate on personal purity, on fostering a direct and powerful relationship with God. We need the humility to accept God’s commandments, and to delight in them. At the same time, we need the “eruv” philosophy that attempts to include as many as possible within our domain. It is a philosophy of inclusion, not exclusion; it is a way of extending boundaries and demonstrating concern for our neighbors—even those with whom we may disagree.

Shavuoth is the festival on which we recall the Revelation at Mt. Sinai. It is also a good time to plan for a hypothetical second gathering of Israelites at Sinai—and to think carefully how we can envision such an event as an opportunity to bring all of us together.

For the Jewish people to find its spiritual balance, we will need to work on personal spiritual development and purity; and also on strategies that are grand enough to allow all of us to stand together in the presence of God.Moadim leSimha.

The Angel for Shabbat column is presented as a service of the Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals. Please visit thewebsite, http://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