I'm very happy to plug Rabbi Johnathan Mishkin's new site www.TanakhProfiles.org. One of the most talented and intelligent Jewish educators anywhere, R. Mishkin compiled a comprehensive database of every person mentioned in Tanakh, which now online is thoroughly hyperlinked. Not only is it useful for cross referencing biblical characters, but future parents can start bringing back forgotten names like Tzoveiva and Ya'a'zanya.
Once again, www.TanakhProfiles.org
I've recently been discussing with SIW the new state policies regulating metzita b'feh for circumcisions. I'm reading this new policy as a pragmatic compromise between the State and the religious institution.
There is obviously a segment of the Jewish population who have been neglecting basic health requirements1 and to protect the general welfare of it's population, the State understandably wants to take action. One option would be to make the practice of metzitza illegal, but this would be wholly counter-productive. Outlawing metzitza would alienate and antagonize the people whose behavior the State is trying to change. Not only would it be political suicide for whomever would suggest it, but there would likely be a knee-jerk backlash against the state trying to regulate religious practice. In fact I would guess that such an action would lead to more people ignoring the health laws simply out of spite, thus increasing the risk of infections while decreasing the likelihood that such infections would be reported.
On the other hand, the compromise defines mutually acceptable objective standards for metzitza, and in doing so outlines the expectations from both sides. The Rabbis get assurance and security from knowing what the State expects of them (and having input in such definitions), and knowing that given these rules metzitza may continue without futher interference from the government. In return for granting such autonomy, the State can not only expect the Rabbis to follow the mutually approved health code but also to actively assist in enforcing the standards.
From Section III of the Circumcision Protocol:
A. If an infant becomes infected with HSV on or after April 28, 2006 within a compatible incubation period following metzizah b'peh, the NYSDOH will conduct an investigation without prejudging the cause. Such an investigation would include but not be limited to interviewing, reviewing medical records of, and testing the mohel in question and all pertinent caregivers. The mohel in question must stop metzizah b'peh (up to 45 days) until the NYSDOH investigation is completed. B. So long as each local health department in whose jurisdiction such public health investigation is proceeding agrees to be bound by, without addition to or modification of, any and all provisions of this Circumcision Protocol, community Rabbis are expected to lend their support and cooperation in the event of any such public health investigation.
Quick recap: the Rabbis maintain autonomy and can expect the security to continue the practice and the State now has a legal and social mechanism for pursuing violations.
I'd say everyone wins.
1. And by logical extension the halakhot of pikuach nefesh, but that's another matter.
SIW links to a post and comment at Hirhurim on R. Herschel Schachter's take on Talmud criticism.
Since my M.A. is in Talmud from Revel and I studied mehqar under the tutelage of Dr. Yaakov Elman, you could imagine where I stand on the issue.1 But when I was in Gruss, I had the opportunity at one of the open "press conferences" to ask R. Aharon Lichtenstein what he felt about academic Talmud study. I expected R. Aharon to have an interesting take considering that one of his sons is heavily involved in mehqar and that academic Talmud is directly at odds with the brisker derech2
Now the thing about these press conferences is that people tend to ask horrible questions. Either they're intentionally vague or they're trying to bait R. Aharon into saying something which agrees with them. For example, a common question is "what does the Rosh Yeshiva think about X." Since R. Aharon answers the question precisely as asked, he will tend to expound philosophically, wax poetic, and generally lose his audience by going well over their heads.
So instead of asking the open ended "what do you think about Talmud criticism?" I asked "What do you like/approve or dislike/disapprove about academic Talmud?" Unfortunately I no longer have the transcript of his response. However I can report that in a nutshell he approved of the methodology i.e. the use of manuscripts and stylistic analysis of the Talmudic texts, but disapproved of the attitude of treating the Talmud as an "academic" subject. Meaning, the tools employed are fine, but Talmud study is not the same and should not be treated like English literature.
In terms of the practical consequences of academic Talmud, I remember him citing Whitehead in distinguishing between "Facts" and "Truth." I did not have the opportunity to follow up with a discussion as to what that meant, but I don't think I would have agreed with the answer.
1. An irrelevant but cute line by R. Dov Linzer on Talmud criticism: "What are they going to do, tell me it had multiple authors?"
2. Or as one professor explained, "Brisk works if you accept its premises and ignore all contradictory data."
I had a conversation over Shavuot with someone who works nearby my office in midtown and we were discussing some of local eateries in the area. When I brought up Kosher Delight he mentioned that a coworker of his showed him a health code document citing the restaurant for numerous violations.
Lo and behold, he was right.
According to the NYC's Department of Health's website, KD's recent inspection on 05/05/2006 turned up a whopping 33 violations1 including the disturbing indictments of "Facility not vermin proof. Harborage or conditions conducive to vermin exist" and "Evidence of mice or live mice present in facility's food and/or non-food areas."
This will come as no surprise to some people - Shosh once found teeth marks on a packet of BBQ sauce - but I can't help but feel more than a little unnerved. This is hardly the first time a Kosher restaurant has been cited for such violations, and others have been forced to close altogether. Aside from the potential hillul hashem involved, such violations make people question the point of keeping kosher especially in understanding why it is more important for food to be separated from utensils than it is to be kept away from rodents.
Although it will never happen, I think it would be nice to have the Kashrut agencies keep up with the Health Code and to have their hashgachot dependant on compliance. Not only would this force restaraunts to follow dina d'malchuta and clean up their establishments, but it would also avoid creating the perception that the NYC Health Code is somehow a "higher standard" of food preperation.
In the meantime, I'll be bagging lunch for a while...
1. Note that this is only for the KD in midown. The one on 13th Ave in Brooklyn had 6 currently unspecified violations from their November inspection and all were addressed. The one on Ave J had two violations in December which were addressed.
