Last week we began to describe a pagan practice called “divination” which Maimonides in Hilkhot ‘aboda zara 11:4 includes within the prohibition of idolatry. We explained that divination means “reading in nature or in trivial events messages from the gods” (see this).

In that same Halakha Maimonides refers to another type of divination. This time is not about a person reading the will of the gods in events that occurred to him or around him, but in signals that he sets for himself.   Maimonides says: “if a person sets omens for himself, e.g., if this and this happens I will do this… all is forbidden“.  For example. If a person has to make a personal decision (a business deal, a shiddukh, a medical procedure, etc.) and he says to himself: “Since I don’t know if God wants me to do this or not, I will flip a coin. If a get ‘tails’ it means that God wants me to do it, ‘heads’, God does not want me to do it.” This reasoning is apparently irreproachable. After all God definitely controls the outcome of the flipping coin.   For Maimonides, however, a person who acts upon this type of divination is transgressing a Biblical prohibition. Why? Because the person who flips the coin assumes that God is ‘coerced’ to reveal His will by making the coin land on “heads” or “tails”. And this is definitely a pagan reasoning. The quintessence of ‘aboda zara consisted of the idea that humans can force the gods to grant them information about the future, by setting imaginary preconceived omens. The ultimate goal of pagans was not to serve God (as it our goal as Jews) but to coerce the gods to serve them.  Such an attempt to manipulate God, Has veShalom, is an idolatrous and forbidden practice.    

NOTE: Flipping or tossing a coin to resolve a dispute, when both parties a priori agree to accept the results of the outcome–like what is done in a football game to decide which team will use the ball first–is an acceptable practice.  This type of method (in Hebrew goral) used for conflict resolution is mentioned in the shulhan ‘arukh, hoshen mishpat, 173:2, 174: 4,5 as a valid way by which heirs or partners would resolve their differences in dividing a piece of land, etc. 

QUESTION FROM A READER: Since we came to America, we celebrate Thanksgiving, is it OK for my family and I to celebrate Halloween? 

There are significant differences between Thanksgiving and Halloween. Thanksgiving is a civil holiday which has its roots in historical events, and has no traces of any practices related to idolatry. Most rabbis I know would not be opposed to celebrating Thanksgiving in America.  

Halloween, on the contrary,  has unmistakable pagan origins, deeply rooted in ancient idol worshipping practices. And although in our days its celebration might not be oriented toward idol worshiping, Halloween still possesses many elements related to idolatry. As we all know, idolatry or ‘aboda zara is the most serious offense in Judaism. Idolatry consists of numberless rituals, superstitions, magic and mythical beliefs. One particular subject that might be considered the most prominent motif of pagan culture is “death”. The aftermath was a scary mystery, which triggered extreme anxiety and agitation. Dead people, their spirits, were often an object of fear and cult. Halloween is no exception. “All-hallow-even” celebrates the “day of all (dead) saints”. The Celts, that is as far as Halloween goes, celebrated Halloween at the end of the summer, a time when they believed the evil spirits and souls of the dead visited the world of the living. The idol worshippers considered the dead as Hollywood today considers the “zombies”: bad and dangerous. The dead came back angry, for revenge, or to recruit newcomers. Pumpkins, which resembled the unpleasant faces of the dead, were carved to welcome them. And large fires would be lit to assist the dead finding their way into the world of the living.  Food, particularly sweets, would be left outside the doors to feed the ghosts (those who assisted the dead would be left in peace by them…). Cats were specially important in Halloween because cats, they believed,  could smell the presence of the invisible spirits. A black cat, however, was avoided (or killed) because witches or evil spirits reincarnated into black cats. The devil himself will come that night from inferno. The Druids, the Celtic priests–who would wear customs to make the dead think they were one of them–would knock randomly on the doors to request sacrifices for the devil or the revengeful ghosts (preferable a young son or a virgin daughter).   

As you can see from this brief description, Halloween might look fun or even innocent but it is deeply rooted in idolatry and cult to death. In one way or another, most (or all) elements that were part of the old-pagan-Halloween are still present today.   Therefore, we should avoid participating in any way, active or passive, in Halloween.  

As a side note, I personally think Halloween provides a great educational opportunity. How so? Heavy idolatry was the norm in ancient days. We Jews fought against it since the day Abraham broke his father’s idols. But many times I find it very difficult to describe to my children or my students the environment of idol worshipping. And when you realize the real dimension of ‘aboda zara, the human sacrifices, the religious promiscuity and the numberless of superstitions and delusions, you really appreciate our aversion for ‘aboda zara, etc. Halloween is an opportunity to help our children identify and stay away from ‘aboda zara, felling proud and privileged of being the children of Abraham Abinu.  

Candle lighting in NYC:       5.33 pm

Shabbat ends in NYC:           6:32 pm

Rabbi Isaac ben Abraham Abohab was a Talmudic scholar from Spain. We do not know the exact dates of his birth or death, or where exactly did he live. There were at least another two Rabbis with a similar name: Rabbi Isaac Abohab, the Gaon of castilla (b. in Spain, 1433-1493), and Rabbi Isaac Abohab de Fonseca (b. in Portugal, 1605-1693).

Our rabbi Isaac Abohab is known for his pen name, Menorat haMaor,  his most celebrated book. Rabbi Abohab was a very learned man in Talmud, all aspects of rabbinical Judaism  and also in classic philosophy.   He was a businessman, not a community Rabbi. Toward the end of his life he dedicated almost exclusively to write Menorat haMaor. In his introduction, and out of a deep sense of humility, he assures his readers that he composed his book chiefly for his own use as a public speaker.

Menorat haMaor, “A shining menora”  is a book that contains the ethical and spiritual teachings of the Rabbis of the Talmud, some times with the commentaries of Geonim and other rabbinical authorities. It is considered a classic and it serves as a virtual encyclopedia of Jewish values. It touches upon subjects dealing with human nature and human psychology.

It is divided into seven nerot, candles or branches, like the Biblical Menora. Each branch represents one principle of Jewish ethics.

The 1st branch, for example, deals with identifying and avoiding excessive behaviors. It follows the Rabbis’ statement that there are three “pitfalls”, that if not avoided, might cause our own destruction. Envy (excessive competition, destructive jealousy), lust (obsession for food, sex or money) and kabod (obsession with self glory, recognition, image).  In this chapter the author describes in detail each of these categories, the outcome of following these paths and the ways to stay away from them.

Menorat haMaor became one of the most important books in Sephardic communities and beyond. It is a book that could be read and reread to find inspiration and guidance for virtually all areas related to our daily life. Menorat haMaor is not a short book and it was studied in Talmud Tora by young children and also by adults, every Shabbat before Minha. This custom persists even today in several Sephardic communities.  Yemenite communities have an enormous esteem for Menorat haMaor and in some Yemenite congregations, to this day, it is the subject of their daily Tora studying

Last time (see here) we explained that the Hebrew word “Halaq” (Halak) means “smooth”, and Halaq meat refers to red meat coming from an animal whose lungs are completely healthy and without any sirkhot (fibers, filaments). The presence of these filaments render that meat forbidden, according to the Sephardic tradition.  The Ashkenazi custom, however, is more lenient in this case, and it authorizes non Halaq meat when some removable sirkhot were found in the animal lungs (Ashkenazi Jews who adopt a stricter opinion consume Glatt meat).  This debate is already found in the Shulhan ‘arukh. Rabbi Yosef Caro, the author of the Bet Yosef/Shulhan ‘arukh, adopted the stricter view. That is the reason Halaq meat is known and marketed today as “Halak Bet Yosef”.    

  

Rabbi Obadia Yosef z”l emphasized very much that Sephardic Jews should continue the tradition of their ancestors and consume exclusively Halaq meat.  When Rabbi Yosef began this clarification campaign, in the early 80’s, he found a big opposition, not just from an Halakhic standpoint but mainly because the Israeli food market had already adopted the more flexible Kashrut standard. This new requirement was going to affect not just the butchers but also restaurants, hotels, caterers, etc. What is more, even the average Sephardic Jew was not very enthusiastic about Halaq meat because it was very difficult to find.  I remember in 1982, when I was a rabbinical student, there was just one butcher in Yerushalayim, Mahane Yehuda, that sold Halaq meat. And the price was almost double the price of the standard Kosher meat. 

Winning this battle took Rabbi Yosef many years of struggle, but today we can see the fruits of his persistence. In Israel, in NY and in many other cities in the world, the standard meat for Sephardic Jews is Halaq Bet Yosef. 

2:6 “It is forbidden to walk in an upright posture, and a man should not walk with his head uncovered for four cubits (6 feet).” 

The textual source of these two Halakhot is the same: TB, Qiddushin 31a. The trained student, however, will notice a difference in the way these two rules are presented.  While walking in an upright position is classified as “forbidden”, walking with the head uncovered is not.

Why?

All Rabbinical laws have their origin in the Talmud, and the later Rabbis paid close attention to the way the laws were formulated.  In the case of walking upright the Talmud quotes rabbi Yehoshua ben Levy who said: “It is forbidden to walk erected”.  Rashi explains that in light of God’s Omnipresence walking in an upright position is considered a sign of arrogance. We should walk with humbleness.

On the other hand, when talking about covering one’s head the Talmud does not bring a general rule, but the case of Rab Huna. “Rab Huna never walked [even] four cubits without covering his head. Rab Huna said: God’s Presence is above me”. In another text Rab Huna emphasized the exceptional nature of his behavior: “I should be rewarded for never have walked four cubits with my head uncovered”.

All rabbis agreed that as opposed to “walking upright”, “walking with the head uncovered” is not a universal prohibition but Middat Hasidut: a personal stringency.   Maimonides classified this kind of personal regulations, brought very often in the Talmud, as mandatory for Tora Scholars. Maimonides dedicated one whole Chapter, Hilkhot De’ot Chapter 5, to the standards of behavior of Talmide Hakhamim (Tora Scholars) which are obviously, way above the normal standards.  In Halakha 6 he mentions that a Tora Scholar should not uncover his head.

On the other hand, and formulated as “one should not”,  the Shulhan ‘arukh, following the Tur, did no limit this indication to Talmide Hakhamim but to everyone else, as a permanent reminder of God’s presence.

The above mentioned discussion refers to “walking” with the head uncovered (at the workplace, in the street, etc.) . However, in the Synagogue, when praying or when studying Tora, the head must be covered.

A woman who is about to give birth (contractions or breaking water) is considered as a case of a hole sheyesh bo sakana, a patient in a serious condition. It is permitted, therefore, to help her, assist her and do whatever is necessary for her to arrive to the Hospital. Still, the Rabbis indicated that since as opposed for example to a patient having a heart attack, the mother-to-be is not in a life threatening situation, the actions forbidden in Shabbat (=melakhot) should be performed in an irregular way (‘al yede shinuy) or by the help of a non-Jew. Thus, rendering those melkahot to the category of Rabbinical as opposed to Biblical transgressions.      

Likewise, if one has to choose between taking his own car or a taxi, it is better to take a taxi, even if one has to phone-call the taxi, because parking the car (turning off engine, lights, etc) might be an issue with one’s own car (yalqut yosef Shabbat D, 297).  An ambulance is also a better choice than your own car.

All these indications–doing things in a irregular way or calling a taxi instead of taking your own car, etc.– are suspended if one knows or suspects that by doing them the mother or the baby might be in danger.  In case of a life threatening situation Shabbat is cancelled (hutra), which means that it has to be considered as if it was a weekday.

It is also permitted to travel with the mother, even when an ambulance is driving her and, technically, there is no practical need for someone else.  We learn this Halakha from an explicit Mishna that authorizes to do a forbidden activity on Shabbat (=lehadliq ner) just to calm down the mother at such a sensitive time (liyasheb et da’atah shel hayoledet).

Once one knows that his wife might be giving birth in Shabbat, a handbag with all the paperwork needed for the Hospital and all the basic things needed for Shabbat ( like food, a siddur, etc.) should be prepared before Shabbat. It is also recommended  to  contact a taxi company or a driver and pay him for his service before Shabbat.