YUTOPIA

Just some random postings today as I continue “enjoying” spring break:

• I added some Carlebach songs to the Chord Directory, so you might want to get the latest zip, or just download Simcha Le’artzecha and Asher Boro.
• The comments have been working well for the chords. I’ve been responding to most people via e-mail. I’d love to add more songs, so suggestions are appreciated (but actual chords would be most helpful).
• I’m in the process of tweaking the color scheme a bit. I’ve noticed that it looks much better on my laptop than it does on other monitors. As always, I’m open to all suggestions (especially if you’re Ephraim Shapiro).
• For all those who kept saying, “oh but Chicago is so cold!” I’d like to point out that yesterday was a beautiful 65. And yes, I did manage to spend some time outside and enjoy a lesuirley walk to the Point.
• Thursday, I’m going to see Guys and Dolls. It’s a professional troupe, but the theater is located on campus. Tickets are regularly $35 but $8 for UC students – not a bad deal.

That’s all for now. Evil Paper coming soon….

Huge thanks to Jacob Sasson for sending me the link to SoftMaza.com. Strange as it might seem, the Sepharadic matzot are not the wholesome crispy goodness most of us are accustomed to. Instead, their matzot might resemble pizza dough’s malleability.¹

Why the difference?

Jewish law defines two types of blessings for grain products: “Hamotzi” for actual bread and “Mezonot” for everything else. Berachot 41b-42a identifies a type of bread called “pat habah b’kisnin” and classifies this as mezonot, not hamotzi – unless one is kove’a seudah establishes a meal, in which case it would be hamotzi as well.

What is this “pat habah b’kisnin“? As always, it depends on whom you ask. Shulhan Aruch 168:7 provides two main definitions. One possibility is that this bread was made with additional flavorings or sweeteners such as honey, sugar, nuts, or fruit juices.² Then there is the opinion of R. Hai Gaon that kisnin refers to bread that is dry and presumably hard.³ Shulhan Aruch rules that the definition follows both opinions.⁴
Following this ruling, the typical “matzah” we all know and love should really be mezonot since it’s dry and hard. R. Ovadia Yosef addresses this issue directly in Yehave Da’at 3:12 and as always, quotes just about every relevant source. He concludes that Sepharadim would tread matzah as mezonot during the year, Ashkenazim would say hamotzi, and both have sources on whom to rely.

At any rate, it does seem odd that the same food would have different classifications at different times of the year. Either matzah should be hamotzi or it should be mezonot! The solution of course, would be to have matzah which is in fact soft, and thus wouldn’t come under the category of pat habah b’kisnin.

Another support for the soft matzah is in the haggadah itself. At the Seder we remember Hillel’s korech sandwich; he would eat the korban pesach (passover sacrifice), the marror (bitter herb) together with the matzah. As my father points out each year at the Seder, the word “Korech” means to “fold.” In order for Hillel to have been able to fold his matzah, it couldn’t have been the hard wafers we see today, but most probably was the soft matzah of the Sepharadim.

I have no idea how the soft matzah gets made, but they do have pictures of the baking process. You can also conveniently order your soft matzot and even get pre-checked rice!

1. No, pizza dough is NOT matzah. Calm down – it’s only an analogy.
2. Though not mentioned by the Shulhan Aruch here, eggs would also be included in this category. This is why many Jews are strict on having “water hallah” for Shabbat as opposed to the more common hallot which are made with eggs.
3. Note that the Star-K follows a stricter interpretation of this criteria, stating that the hardness must be “predicated on the intention of the producer when the product is baked or manufactured.”
4. Rambam (Hilkhot Berakhot 3:9) additionally requires that have the appearance or shape of bread.

I’m surprised this one wasn’t caught by The Juggle Zone. TES, purveyor of fine Jewish software, is running a sale on the popular Bar Ilan CD-ROM. Why is this blogworthy, you may ask? The sale creates an unusal pricing plan:

• Cost to purchase new: $529.00
• Cost to upgrade from v. 5: $599.00

So if you own Bar Ilan Version 5 and you want to upgrade, don’t tell them about it. It’ll cost you $70.

Apologies to the Loyal Readers for the lack of Purim shticks this year. I have too much real work to do at the end of the quarter, so it’s just not gonna happen.¹ But I do feel the need to write about another dangerous practice of Purim: The Shticks. Each year, some people overdo it and wind up sick, hospitalized, or worse. The problems are exacerbated by a society which forces people to be clever – whether or not they actually have a sense of humor.
If you’re going to do some Purim shticks, don’t go in without preparation. I’ve been involved in more shticks than I care to admit, and I’ve found that “being funny” is easier said than done. Some people simply aren’t funny, and others might be funny but have no idea how to make a good shtick or just try too hard. So allow me help with some rules to make this Purim safe, enjoyable, and hopefully lynching free.

Rule 1: Know The Types of Humor

Humor is an art. It’s more than just throwing out one-liners or insults. I recommend reading A Netizen’s Guide to Humor for some general pointers. Intelligent satire is better than the one-liner insult. Insulting one-liners aren’t funny unless you’re a professional like Triumph the Insult Comic Dog. You’re not. Use some creativity.
Satire is generally the best way to go for Purim shticks. Here are a few suggestions:
Parodies
If you’re too lazy to come up with something from scratch, just take something popular and redo it. Songs, gemaras, ads, articles, or whatever. What you do will normally depend on your forum. Some shticks need to be performed, others are better in print. If you’re doing a magazine, be sure to mix up the styles.
The original piece should be serious, thus increasing the comedic impact. If you try to modify a comedy piece, you run the risk of extreme lameness. The only way you could pull it off, is if your version is better than the original. Try to pick something that would be familiar to your audience. The Hamevaser song, although funny, was lost on most people. In YU people either read Hamevaser, or they heard Dennis Leary. Few people knew both.
Images
Any idiot can fool around with Photoshop, but few posess the twisted talent of Ephraim Shapiro.² If you don’t have the ability of Shapiro, use minimal image editing, and put more effort into the caption. Take this for example. Initially, they just imposed “YU Registrar’s Office” on the guy’s butt. I’m sure you will agree, the end result was much funnier.
Puns
Reuven summed up the problem with puns nicely: the better the pun, the worse it is. They can be useful for a change of style to to give the joke another level of humor. Just remember to use them sparingly. And never make a shtick completely out of puns. You will get beat up.
Trust me.
Remember that details are important. A poor choice of words can turn a funny shtick into a tasteless one. A good idea with poor execution just isn’t funny. Even worse, you’ve wasted a good idea. Finally, don’t make a joke if it’s too obvious. If there is a joke that just has to be made, find a clever way of doing so.

Rule 2: Know Your Audience

You have to know your crowd. What will they think is funny, what jokes won’t they get, and what will they think is offensive? Since you never know who is going to come across your shtick, try keep it tame or nuanced. Remember that “funny” can be measured quantitatively by how many people think it’s funny, and qualitatively by how funny it is. Ideally, you’d like to maximize both, but realistically this is just about impossible. If you can, layer the shtick with multiple meanings so it will work on a peshat and derash level.
If you’re writing a journal of some sort, remember that you don’t have to have each article be funny to everyone. Actually, it would probably be better to direct some shticks to certain types of people, provided the range of your readership is covered.

Rule 3: Avoid Redundancies

If it’s been done before, don’t do it again. Fortunately Hamevaser hasn’t had a Purim issue in years because they had this problem. Essentially, most of the issue was written by one person. While he was funny, the jokes got stale after the fifth year. You’d have to go way way back to the Beis Grinky days to see some good original humor.

Rule 4: Know Your Limits

It’s really important to know when you’re not being funny or your just forcing it. If your idea is lame, then drop it and move on. If you have a good idea and need help with details, get some help. Personally, I’ve done my best shticks while collaborating with people like Ben and Avraham. Friends can tighten up details, and make sure it’s funny to other people besides yourself.

Rule 5: Safek Shtick Lehumra

If you’re unsure if it’s funny or offensive, use discretion. There is no shortage of lame, unfunny, and insulting shticks out there, and we don’t need another one. If you need filler, go for the surreal. Some people might think it’s lame, others will be too drunk to notice. Odds are someone will be offended by any given shtick. You don’t have to be overly sensitive, but avoid gratuitous attacks.
Again, if you’re not sure how it will be received (or worse, you are sure), better to leave it out.

Rule 6: There is NOOOOOO Rule 7

Don’t take yourself too seriously – this post included.
If you have your own suggestions or warnings, add them to the comments.
I’m about to become even more reclusive³ as I go on a non-stop writing binge until Spring Break. Expect blogging to be slow for the next two weeks or so unless something comes up.
Purim Sameach

1. Or at least not in time for Purim. I might post some of them later, but we’ll see.
2. Although, I must give props to Ben for this one.
3. Yes, that’s possible.

I’m trying to work on shticks, but my blogging time has been getting filled up with halakhic questions. And yes, Torah takes priority over Purim shticks.

Today is the Fast of Esther, which is observed a few days earlier than usual because of Shabbat. Around fast days, Rabbis constantly get asked what time the fast ends. When I give my answer, I usually hear the follow-up question, “Why are you 30 minutes (or more) earlier than everyone else?”
In Ta’anit 12a R. Hisda says that any fast which doesn’t last until sunset is not considered a fast. Logically then, a fast that does end at sunset is considered a fast, and sunset is therefore the minimal time for ending fast.

Rosh (Ta’anit 1:12) explains that sunset here doesn’t mean the beginning of sunset, but rather the end of sunset – called tzeit ha-kochavim the halakhic definition of nightfall. However, Rosh doesn’t provide any reason for this stringency.

Tosafot (Avoda Zara 34a s.v. Mit’anin L’shaot, Zevachim 56a s.v. Minayin L’dam, Menachot 20b s.v. Nifsal B’Shekiat) admit that the gemara in Ta’anit does mean the beginning of sunset, since elsewhere “sunset” means the beginning of sunset, but the practice developed to be stricter and to wait until nightfall. Sefer Kolbo (61) cites the Rif¹ as saying that many people end their fast immediately at sunset, following the gemara in Ta’anit. Despite this, Sefer Kolbo follows the custom of the Tosafot on the grounds that we are not experts in determining the conclusion of sunset, and is therefore strict to wait until nightfall.² Finally, Tur (Orach Hayim 562) and Beit Yosef (Orach Hayim 562:6) both define this instance of “sunset” as “nightfall”

The Vilna Gaon (OH 562:1) references Pesahim 54b where there is a debate as to whether fast of the 9th of Av ends at sunset, implying that it is certainly permitted on every other fast day. I have been told from several that the Vilna Gaon does rule the fast ends at sunset, but I have not seen the source inside.³
R. Ovadia Yosef acknowledges the inconsistent definitions of “sunset” as either referring to the beginning or end of sunset (Yehaveh Da’at 5:22) . He concludes that the generally accepted custom is to wait until nightfall, but those who wish to end earlier have on whom to rely (Yabia Omer 6 O.H. 31).

My sense is that the Bavli clearly defines a fast ending at sunset, not at nightfall. This is the most consistent reading of the Talmud; even Tosafot agree with this reading of the gemara in Ta’anit. Sometime between the Rif and Rosh, the custom changed and interpretations changed to match the custom.⁴ At any rate, the halakhic end for the fast is at sunset. The later stringency is not based on halakha, but on minhag (custom). This isn’t to say that minhagim could or should simply be ignored, but the talmud defines objective rules for how customs work within the halakhic system. Thus, the laws of fasting post-sunset are not inherent to the laws of fasting, but the laws of observing customs. At some point I’ll write more about that in detail, but until then see my shiur on minhagim and of course Rambam’s Introduction.

To find the exact times in your area, see the OU’s or kashrut.com’s zemanim calculators.

1. Kolbo doesn’t cite a source for this Rif, and a Bar Ilan search didn’t find it.
2. Rabbeinu Yerucham (Toldot Adam 18:1:163c), Tashbetz Katan (1), Sefer Yirei’im (274), Maharif (6), and a whole slew of others follow the stringency of Tosafot and Rosh.
3. Neither Bar Ilan nor the UC Library have been helpful.
4. I have no time to do a full History of Halakha report on this, but if you want to, I’d love to see what you find.

Before I get to the shticks this year, I want to write about the dangerous practice of drinking on Purim. Each year, some people overdo it and wind up sick, hospitalized, or worse. The problems are exacerbated by Rabbis who encourage and sometimes force students to drink regardless if the students have the alcohol tolerance or are of the legal drinking age.

On the other hand, the Talmud seemingly requires excessive drinking; in which case, even 13 year olds would be obligated. Lets begin with the relevant passage from Megillah 7b:

This is loosely translated as “Rava said: a man is obligated to get drunk on Purim until he does not know the difference between “cursed Haman” and “blessed Mordechai.” This of course, requires an immense degree of intoxication. Some major halakhic works simply cite this dictum without qualification (Rif 3b, Shulhan Aruch Orach Hayim 795:2). Consequently many take this statement at face value, and therefore drink and encourage others to get inebriated, under the assumption that they are fulfilling a rabbinic commandment.

I’ve found several sources on the web which deal with this issue in one way or another, but I’ve found most of them to be lacking in real analysis. What I will show here is that while this statement might be obligatory, it does not require the degree of drinking which is commonly practiced.

(For readability, I will be sacrificing some precision in translations).

James Hitchcock writes a wonderful article in February’s First Things titled The Enemies of Religious Liberty. (Read the article)
Dr. Hitchcock cites several examples where people claiming to promote freedom and personal freedom, will deny others the right of religious observance – when their positions disagree with them.
For a quick refresher, see The First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The problem of course is at what point does the “freedom” to worship become a federal “establishment” of a religion? Or from the opposite perspective, when do federal laws prohibit the free exercise of religion?
One doesn’t have do much research to see how issues like school prayer and gay marriages reveal the conflicting ethics and “rights” of their proponents.
Even the ACLU can’t seem to make up its mind. In their statement on religious liberty, they claim, “the free exercise clause of the First Amendment guarantees the right to practice one’s religion free of government interference,” and that the “ACLU will continue working to ensure that religious liberty is protected by keeping the government out of the religion business.” In practice, they repeatedly appeal to the courts to restrict prayer if held publicly.
As Dr. Hitchcock notes, for many legal scholars religious freedoms are only granted where the secular culture allows. If there is any conflict or “divisiveness,” the personal freedom of religion bows to the ethics governing the secular society.
Dr. Hitchcock also writes a column for Women for Faith and Family which “issues occasional public statements on matters of concern to Catholic women, their families or religious communities.” Should provide some interesting reading for the elusive spare time.