Halacha L’Moshe Mi Sinai
Lessons in Memory of my brother Dale Alan Konigsburg
April 27, 2005 – Number 5765-29

Taharat HaMishpacha I – Introduction

Religions can be many things. They can open doors to new understandings of the spiritual realm. They can help us understand ourselves and guide our motivations to higher causes. A good religion can make meaning out of our life and direct us to the right path in every aspect of our lives. If a religion is to last for the long run, for a thousand years or more, however, it must also speak to the human condition. It has to help us live better lives. There are three major drives found in all humanity. A long term religion has to help us with these three drives.
The first drive is hunger. When we are without food for long periods of time, finding something to eat will take over every other priority that we have. The second drive is for power and control. We want to have the power over our surroundings to bend them to our needs. The third drive is the sexual drive. The need not just to have children, but to have sexual pleasure as well. In the ancient world, there were three ways to deal with these drives. One way was Pagan, the second was Christian, and the third way was Judaism.
Paganism saw our hunger as an opportunity to worship. Eating was how we showed the gods that we appreciated all the many bounties they had given us. Over eating and over drinking were the signature rituals of Paganism. Power was a sign that the gods loved you. Power is money and the one whose crops grew heavy and whose cattle were fertile, were blessed by the gods. Sex was part of the magic practiced by pagan priests and priestesses. If we were fertile here on earth, it reminded to gods to be fertile as well and thus our agricultural produce would increase.
Christianity, as practiced by the early church, took an opposite approach. Gluttony and drunkenness were serious sins. Holy people often fasted. Power was the root of all evil and holy people took vows of poverty, giving all of their possessions to the church. The only reason for sex was to have children, otherwise it was the source of original sin. Holy people took vows of celibacy.
Judaism was different. When it came to food, we had the laws of Kashrut. Kashrut taught us that there are foods we can eat and foods that we can not eat. The drive of hunger may be strong, but it must not control our life. We must control it. No matter how hungry we are, there are food we are permitted and foods that are never permitted. When it came to power, we had the laws of Shabbat. Six days we can labor and earn money and take control of the world, on the seventh day, we rest and become a part of the world again. Six days we make the world into what we want, the seventh day we live with what we have. We are in control, not our drive. When it came to sex, Judaism gives us the laws of taharat Ha Mishpacha, the laws of family purity. They tell us when we are permitted to enjoy sexual relations and when such relations are forbidden. Once again, the drive does not drive us, we are responsible to control our drives.
Many people feel that these laws are no longer important in Judaism. They were sexist laws and in a modern society we don=t have any need for religion to get involved in our sex lives. We have this fear that if religion will tell us when we can perform this most intimate act of our humanity, than it will add levels of guilt and repression into moments that should be loving and free. Like every other aspect of human life, however, even our sexuality need the reminders that make up these laws of holiness in our family. We need to look at them again, with modern eyes and see that they are not as outdated sometimes as we feel they should be. They are not designed to make us feel that sex is shameful or dirty, rather they are designed to help us understand that sex is one of the holiest things we humans are capable of doing and that we should not take such actions for granted. We should always be looking for ways to bring more holiness into our intimate relations.
Next week: Taharat HaMishpacha II – Sex Laws

Halacha L’Moshe Mi Sinai
Lessons in Memory of my brother Dale Alan Konigsburg
April 19, 2005 – Number 5765-28

When Passover Falls on a Saturday Night

On all other Passover nights we begin the Seder right after the Arvit (Evening) service, this year we have to wait.
Passover falling on a Saturday night is not common but it does occur from time to time. Some rituals of Passover are moved aside because of Shabbat and others can not be moved. Rituals associated with the sacrifice of the Paschal Lamb take place even when the 14th of Nisan falls on Shabbat, but items related to later rituals must be done earlier so Shabbat will not be violated.
In a normal year, on the 14th of Nisan, in the evening, we search for Hametz with a feather and a candle in a ceremony called ABedikat Hametz. The next morning the Fast of the Firstborn is observed and a Siyyum is planned in order to cancel the fast. By 10 AM that morning the Hametz must be sold to a non-Jew and the crumbs that were searched out at night are burned before 11AM. After the Hametz is burned, one can not eat Hametz at all but one can also not eat Matzah until the Seder begins that night. This is to make sure that the first taste of Matzah for the season will be at our Seder. We spend the afternoon preparing for the Seder that begins when we light the festival candles after dark.
When the 14th of Nisan is Shabbat we have to rearrange the order of our preparations. On Thursday morning will be the Fast of the First Born, which will be interrupted, as usual by the Siyyum so that all will not have to fast. After the Siyyum, we will have a regular breakfast since eating Hametz will be allowed for quite some time.
Thursday night, after dark, will be ABedikat Hametz@ the Search for Hametz by candlelight with a feather. The crumbs collected will be sealed up for the morning.
Friday morning, at 10 AM we will sell the Hametz to a non-Jew. At Temple Sinai this means that once again we will sell our Hametz to our Chief of Police. While the contract will be signed that day, the sale will not be effective until 10 AM Saturday morning. We can not engage in signing and negotiating contracts on Shabbat so we have to do it on Friday morning. After the sale is signed, we will burn the Hametz that we sealed up the previous night. We will have a public burning of Hametz at about 10:45 AM so if you want us to add your Hametz to the fire. You must join us or drop off your Hametz before that time. 10 AM is the last time I can be appointed to serve as your Shaliach for the sale of Hametz. I have to execute the sale by 10 AM so you must designate me before that time in writing. Minyan that morning is at 8:00 AM and I will be there at that time. Remember to make your checks payable to me so I can deposit them in the Rabbi=s Fund so we can make our annual donation to the Police Athletic League. Hametz that is sold should be closed in boxes or in cabinets and sealed until after the holiday. It does not belong to you so you may not open it or use it during the holiday or you will be stealing food from the Chief of Police.
There are two options for Shabbat meals. We recommend that after 11AM on Friday, that all homes be Kosher for Passover and Hametz should no longer be eaten. Hamotzi on Friday Night and for Shabbat Lunch should be made over AMatzah Ashira@ AEnriched Matzah@ commonly known as Egg Matzah. One should not eat regular Matzah until Saturday night at the Seder. While there are some authorities that do not permit Hamotzi to be recited over Matzah Ashira, Conservative Judaism does not hold by that opinion and we follow the many other authorities that permit Egg Matzah and permit Hamotzi to be recited over it.
Another option permitted but not recommended, is to set aside just enough bread and Hametz food for Friday night dinner and Shabbat Lunch. Hametz may be eaten until 10 AM Saturday so Lunch will have to be rather early. Since the leftovers can not be burned on Shabbat they must be either crumbled up and strewn to the wind, or flushed away in the bathroom or taken out of the house as trash. It can no longer be used or maintained either on or after Passover. Cooking may not be done on Shabbat. Along side the Shabbat candles a 24 hour candle should burn. The flame from that candle should be used to light the Passover candles after Shabbat is over. Havdalah is part of the Kiddush at the Seder and is done over the Holiday candles so the candles should be lit close to the table. Other than Havdalah and the late start to the Seder, the Seder is done as usual.
For questions of Kashrut for Passover, consult your Rabbi. I wish all my on-line students a Kosher and Happy Pesach.
Next week: Taharat HaMishpacha

Lessons in Memory of my brother Dale Alan Konigsburg

April 11, 2005 – Number 5765-27

Judaism and Divorce II: The Procedure of Divorce

Until modern times, the procedure for Jewish Divorce was performed on the same day. The initiation of the Get, the writing of the Get, the delivery of the get was all done with all the parties present. Today, for many reasons, we have divided the process into three distinct parts that happen at three different times. Thus it can take up to a month to complete the process, and yet this should be viewed as a step forward in Jewish ritual. Let us examine the three parts and then we will discuss the change.
The initiation of a get can be done by either the Husband or the Wife by going to a Rabbi and asking for a Get. It is that simple. Most Conservative Rabbis will not write a get themselves, but have associated themselves with an expert in Gittin (the Plural of Get) called a “Messader Gittin”. Each Messader Gitten has a form that will need to be filled out. The information required is simple. We need the English name of the Husband and Wife, and all other legal and nicknames that both of them use on a regular basis (i.e. Robert, Rob, Bob, Bobby or Elaine, Elly, El, Lanie etc.) We will need the Hebrew/Yiddish name for the Husband and Wife as well as the Hebrew name of their Father. We will also need each father’s English name and all the legal and nicknames that the father uses on a regular basis. We will need to know if either party is a cohen or levi, if either party converted to Judaism. We will need the address and phone number of both the Husband and wife. We will need to know the date of the civil divorce and when and in which court it was recorded. We will need the English and Hebrew name of the Rabbi who will be delivering the Get. This may be the same Rabbi who is being called to initiate the get but if the wife is in a different city, it may be her Rabbi or a Rabbi who lives close by.
The Rabbi will also collect the money to pay for the Get at this time.
Before the information can be sent to Mesader Gittin, to write the Get, the Rabbi must call in the Husband and have him sign the form that he understands that a Get will be written and that he authorizes this writing and will not, in the future, rescind this authorization. His signature must be witnessed by two qualified witnesses that are not related to the Husband ( Usually the Rabbi and someone from his congregation will serve as witnesses). All of this is sent to the Mesader Gittin.
In the second part, the Get is actually Written. The Messader Gittin calls together a Bet Din, a Rabbinical Court that will oversee this Get. They commission a scribe to write the Get itself. The get is written on parchment with a quill pen. By tradition it has twelve lines. It states the location where the get is being written, not only the name of the city but a nearby mountain or river that will help locate the get. The language is basically the reverse language of the ketuba, the wedding contract. And states that the husband and wife are no longer in a “sanctified” relationship. It is signed by two witnesses from the Bet Din. A get is folded in a special way for delivery. Another form, a Haarsha-ah is created to identify that Get. It contains the names of those in the get and also a code by which the Get can be identified. It names the Messader Gitten as in charge of its delivery and any other Rabbis who will aid in delivering it. A blank form, “Record of Delivery” is enclosed with the Get and the package is sent to the Rabbi who will be delivering the Get.
The Rabbi who will deliver the Get then calls in the Wife. He also calls together a Bet Din of three people who are not related to the Husband, Wife or the Rabbi who is delivering the Get (The Rabbi is the Shaliach or Messenger of the original Bet Din from when the Get was written). The wife may bring a friend or relative to accompany her. First, the identity of the wife must be established by ID or if she is personally known to the Rabbi. Next the Hasha-ah and the Get are examined to make sure that the right Get is to be delivered. The main concerns about delivery are that the right people and the right Get come together. If not the couple are still married and that would be a disaster! Great care goes into making sure that all parts of the delivery are correct. The Get is read aloud, re-folded and given to the Shaliach. The Wife takes off any rings she is wearing and stands up. The Shaliach makes a declaration that by accepting this Get from her Husband she will be divorced and free to remarry if she chooses. He places the get in her cupped hands, and she walks a few steps toward the door to indicate that she has accepted the Get. She then gives the Get to the Bet Din who fill out the Record of Delivery form and return the entire package, Get, Haarsha-ah and Record of Delivery, to the Messader Gitten. When the Messader Gitten receives the package, he cuts the get to indicate it has been delivered, and issues a “patur” to the Husband to the Wife indicating that the divorce is finished and both are free to remarry. This patur will need to be shown to the Rabbi who will perform any future wedding.
Because the Get is a form of divorce, than any financial issues must also be resolved. We wait to deliver a Get until after the Secular divorce is final so all financial issues are resolved. When either the Husband or Wife refuse to accept the Get, the Get can not go forward. Such a couple remain married and can not remarry until the Get is delivered. Do not think that this can be used by one party to blackmail the other. There are ways for both the Husband and Wife to end the marriage without permission. These procedures are longer and harder but can be done. It is far simpler and easier for everyone when both parties, who already have a civil divorce, take care of the Jewish Divorce at the same time.
We can see how much easier it would be if all three parts of the process were done at the same time. It would take a few hours but we would need only one bet din and the Messader Gittin would not need a Shaliach. And yet, given modern divorce there are good reasons to divide the ceremony. First, often the Husband and Wife are no longer speaking to each other (or are not speaking civilized to each other) and it is better to keep them apart to prevent additional insults. Second, in our modern times, the Messader Gitten can be half way across the country and we can move the Get by overnight courier which helps make sure that the Messader Gittin for each community is qualified and well trained. We do not need the less qualified Rabbi just because he is in town. Finally, when the Husband and Wife were together, many Rabbis would try and reconcile the couple before they would write the Get. This was a major insult to both parties, who, having completed the Civil Divorce, were no longer interested in being together. It was particularly difficult when one of the parties was the victim of domestic violence. This three part process insures that each party is treated with dignity and there is little space for venting anger and resentment..

Next week: When Passover Falls on Saturday Night

Brenda Horowitz asks:
Is the concept of pikuach nefesh to be invoked only when the person is facing certain (or near certain) death? Or can it also be applied to circumstances when the contemplated action will improve the person’s quality of life . . . or perhaps even when it will only serve to make the person more comfortable?
I reply:
Pekuach nefesh, saving a life, applies only when the person is in danger of his or her life. Even if the danger is suspected or not certain, we take the course that will certainly prolong life. Improving the quality of life or making the person comfortable fall under the category of medical healing which is required by Jewish law if the person will have a greater quality of life or if that person can be made more comfortable

Lessons in Memory of my brother Dale Alan Konigsburg

April 4, 2005 – Number 5765-26

Judaism and Divorce

Deuteronomy 24:1 clearly states that divorce is possible under Jewish Law. It states simply “When a man takes a wife and possesses her. She fails to please him because he finds something obnoxious about her, and he writes her a bill of divorcement , hands it to her and sends her away from his house.” Here we have the rough form of what Divorce is all about in Judaism. These verses are also very difficult to understand. They leave many questions. “Does there have to be a reason for the man to divorce his wife? What is a “bill of Divorcement”? What does it say? What happens if the husband can’t write the document? Can someone else write it for him? What if the wife is not present, can someone accept it for her? Can either side be forced to participate in the get? Jewish Law tries to answer these questions and to dispel some myths about Jewish Divorce as well.
Deuteronomy sets the procedure as needing to come from the husband and end up with the wife. This is in keeping with ancient marriage practices where the husband “acquires” a wife. Now he will have to “unacquire” her through Divorce. The first myth is that only a man can initiate a divorce. Either party can initiate a divorce in Judaism that is, either side can ask for and end to the marriage. In order to end the marriage, the bill of divorcement must travel from husband to wife. This makes divorce, in Judaism, “no fault” While civil laws may determine if there are grounds for divorce, Jewish law only follows the law of the land. Either party can petition for a divorce and give no reason other than they no longer want to live together.
Divorce is not a sin in Judaism, but it is no great honor either. Judaism has a bias toward marriage and tries to get couples to reconcile. In modern times, when there is secular divorce, this reconciliation counseling is no longer needed. If the couple have divorced under secular law, There is no longer a reason to attempt the bring the couple together again. Since the marriage had a religious ceremony, then that ceremony must be reversed in a religious divorce ceremony. A secular divorce is not enough to permit remarriage in Jewish law.
Divorce in Judaism is a subset of Jewish Law that demands experts to oversee the process. Any rabbi can perform a marriage, but only a specially trained Rabbi can oversee a get. The reason is that if a Rabbi makes an error in a wedding, so the couple will be remarried and everything will be OK. In the case of divorce, if an error is made, the couple are still married, and if one party has remarried another person, they are guilt of adultery and if they have children, the children would be subject to “mamzerut” (a topic for a different time) Therefore the entire procedure is very formal so that there will be little the can go wrong.
The second Myth is that only the woman needs the get. In fact, a Rabbi will not perform a marriage to either a man or a woman who do not have a get terminating all previous marriages. The time to take care of the get is immediately after the civil divorce is final. It is possible to arrange for a get even years after the civil divorce is final, but it is often harder and can reopen old wounds. Many try and address issues where they feel they have been “wronged” by the civil courts and demand money and property before they will agree to the get. This is pure blackmail and the Rabbinic courts frown on this. The reason a get is written and delivered after the civil divorce is final is to prevent these financial issues from causing delays. To this end, many couples write into the civil agreement that withing a set time after the divorce is final in the civil courts, the couple must finish a Jewish Divorce as well. This may allow the civil courts from enforcing the participation in the Jewish Divorce since it is a stipulation in the civil divorce decree. It is best to consult a lawyer about this practice.
Once a divorce is final, and the parties remarry, if both parties should then divorce a second time, they are forbidden to remarry each other. Some authorities see this law as a way to prevent a husband from using his wife for prostitution.
When a Jew marries a non-Jew or a close relative who is forbidden to him by Jewish law, no get is necessary, the marriage is forbidden from the beginning and has no validity at all in Jewish Law. If a Jew marries a woman who has converted either before or after the wedding, or who lives with a Jewish woman without marriage but introduces the woman as “his wife”, these marriages are valid and do require a get.
Next week: Judaism and Divorce II: The Procedure of Divorce.
Brenda Horowitz comments about HMS 5765-23: You might want to comment on the following points about conversion:
Naming — Many parents who adopt and convert infants use the adoptive parents’ names, rather than Abraham/Sarah. That is, the child is X ben/bat adoptive dad v’ adoptive mom
Special naming issues when either adoptive parent is a Cohan or Levi — How do you state the child’s name in a way that makes it clear that the child is not a Cohen/Levi, but the adoptive parent is? Are there any special considerations when the family also includes biological children, who DO inherit the Cohen/Levi tribal status?
Finalizing the conversion — We are allowed to convert a child under the assumption that it is in his/her best interest; however, since it was done without his/her consent, it is considered conditional until the child formally accepts it upon/by becoming a Bar/Bat Mitzvah.
Perceptions of adoption and conversion in the Jewish community, especially in the case of interracial adoptions.
I respond: Brenda is correct about names, we try and use the names of Jewish parents when naming children who must be converted to Judaism. As for her other questions: There is no way to differentiate between the adoptive and non-adopted children of a Cohen or Levi. The child can only be informed that the title can not pass down to him or her. One can not convert anyone to Judaism without his or her consent. This would require a child to be legal age before the conversion would be finished. We make sure that circumcision (for boys) and immersion is performed as early as possible and we arrange for a proper Jewish education. At legal age (the time of Bar/Bat Mitzvah) the child does have the choice to continue as a Jew or “opt out” of our religion. Since Judaism does not recognize conversion out of Judaism, we can not put someone into Judaism without their consent and knowledge, even a child. The declaration to remain does not have to be formal. If the child were to have a Bar/Bat Mitzvah that would be evidence that they intend to remain Jewish and the conversion would be valid from the time of the immersion.
Finally, a Jew who converts to Judaism is a Jew. He or she is not a “convert” or anything less than a Jew. Racial, gender or any other issues have no bearing on this. Anyone who would comment on the background of any Jew who converted is guilty of a great sin, public embarrassment, and should be censored.

Lessons in Memory of my brother Dale Alan Konigsburg

March 28, 2005 – Number 5765-25

End Of Life Issues II: The Reisner Position

As I write this weeks installment, Terry Shiavo has been disconnected from her feeding tube for ten days. Her situation has prompted this series on the Halacha at the End of Life.
Last week we saw that Rabbi Elliot Dorff of the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Rabbinical Assembly take the position that sustenance and hydration are similar to medication and can be withheld from a patient who is in a persistent vegetative state (PVS).
Rabbi Avram Reisner, who also serves on the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, set out a different approach from the position of Rabbi Dorff. To Rabbi Reisner, only G-d can make the determination of when a patient will die. We are not allowed to hasten death nor are we to judge quality of life issues. A patient (or his/her surrogate) can choose between courses of treatment, but a patient can not choose to die. A terminally ill patient can not choose to take away hydration or sustenance unless the process has inherent risks (such as aspiration into the lungs or risky surgery). We can not however force a patient to eat against his or her wishes. There is no need to insist on food, water or medication if the situation is futile. Futile in this case means that death is very immanent. It applies only when the underlying disease is causing the death, not the refusal of treatment.
To Reisner, PVS is a special case. He notes that because of the lack of higher brain activity, many courts has held that patients with this condition have no conceivable life benefit from treatment and have permitted sustenance and hydration to be withheld or withdrawn. He asks the question “We do not accept the that burdensome life is dispensable, and such a patient is manifestly not in the process of dying. Does that mean we must maintain patients in such condition until their natural deaths?” … “Is such a life really life? Has not the soul departed while the body, in some aberrant glitch, refuses to shut down? If so, what courtesy do we owe such a soulless body – surely not all th reverence we accord human life?”
Reisner answers his questions be affirming that we don’t know at all if the body is soulless or not, for we have not good definition of soul nor can we measure if it still is in the body or not. He notes that the reason families often give for withholding medication, food and water is the horror of no longer having any interaction with the patient. In such a situation we just don’t know what it is that we should do and in all such cases, where there is great uncertainty as to what is going on, we make the presumption of life and we treat that life as we would any other life. Rabbi Reisner would not permit us to withhold food and water from such a patient.
Where Rabbi Reisner and Rabbi Dorff agree is on the need for advance medical directives. Judaism requires a person to seek healing but if such a person refuses healing, that is a matter between the individual and his/her G-d. It is therefore vital that a person spell out exactly what course of medical action he or she would like to have performed, or removed in the case where the patient could not speak for his or herself. It should also appoint a medical surrogate to make decisions either based on or strictly adhering to the medical directives. This would help insure that all wishes of the patient will be known to all involved in his or her care.
In consultation with the many physicians that I know, I would add that medical directives alone are not enough. It is also crucial that all members of the family be familiar with our wishes and directives. Hospitals and Doctors should not be relied upon to settle family feuds and squabbles. The most ironclad medical directive may be ignored if one or more members of the family disagree and refuse to abide by those wishes. It is very important that we personally instruct our spouse, children and parents about our wishes to minimalize confusion and conflict. In some cases it may even be important to consult the patient’s Rabbi.
As I noted before, Terry Shiavo is a Roman Catholic. She is not subject to Jewish Law. But her case is a reminder that while this may not be a decision we would want to leave to the courts or the government, it is an important religious issue, one that our faith and legal system attempts to guide us through.

Next week: Judaism and Divorce

Beryl Glansberg asks: I just have one question. Does this Talmudic view apply to Jews and non-Jews alike?
I reply: No, Jewish Law applies only to Jews

Lessons in Memory of my brother Dale Alan Konigsburg

March 21, 2005 – Number 5765-24

End Of Life Issues: Special series on Halacha in the news

I know I promised a different topic this week but with Terry Schiavo in the news there has been a great deal of interest in Judaism and these end of life issues. Terri Schiavo is a Roman Catholic but there are also Jews who also need to know what our faith has to say about such issues.
First of all, the most important Halacha in relationship to all health issues is the commandment to “choose life”. We are not asked if we wish to be born, and we are not asked when we should die. Such decisions are in G-d’s hand. We never give up when it comes to preserving life. G-d has placed great healing powers in our hands and we need to use them to help preserve life. That being said, Jewish Law also understands that there comes a time when healing is no longer possible, and then, we are permitted to let the natural progression of life take place, even if it means that the one who is ill will die. It is a mitzvah to bring healing, but when healing is no longer a possible, we can remove what is preventing the person from dying.
Judaism does not believe in active euthanasia, ala Dr. Kevorkian, but passive euthanasia is permitted. To this end, one may remove medical care that is preventing the person from dying. This does not mean that we also refrain from medications that will relieve pain and suffering. Only the medical aids that are keeping the person alive can be removed. This is based on a number of Talmudic references that permit the removal of impediments to death in the case of a patient who can not recover.
It is important that end of life issues should be written down in a document called “medical directives” Each state encourages patients to have such directives, together with a medical proxy, a person assigned to make medical decisions for the patient if the patient is unable to make these decisions for him or herself. The Conservative movement has such a document and it can be purchased through the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism Book Service (www.USCJ.org).
The question in Judaism is the same as the question in the Schaivo case. Does the removal of impediments to death include the removal of food and water (sustenance and hydration)? The Law and Standards Committee of the Rabbinical Assembly, the committee that examined these laws was in agreement on almost all aspect of end of life care except the case of removing food and water. So difficult was this issue that there was no resolution of the disagreement and both options are included in the movement’s Medical Directives.
The case for removing food and water from a terminal patient was made by Rabbi Elliot Dorff of the University of Judaism in Los Angeles. He claims that most authorities do not permit withholding food and water from a patient so the burden of proof is on the one who fails to provide these necessities. To do this he notes that the kind of food and water given to the patient who can not eat or swallow, this food and water are more like medicine than food. Just as a blood transfusion is not “eating blood” a prohibited act in Judaism, intravenous food and water is not food at all but medicine and as such it can be withheld.
Rabbi Dorff does note, however that for people in a persistent Vegetative state (pvs) like Terry Schiavo, presents a more difficult case. Such people do not need all kinds of medical equipment to stay alive, but they do need food and water. While they may have no functioning in their higher brain, they sill have enough brain stem activity to stay alive. Saving a life in Judaism does not have us judge the quality of that life. A patient with PVS presents us with a very difficult case. If we were not able to provide the food and water intravenously, than that patient would die. This means that the food and water are like medicine and we can withhold it. While we consider brain death to occur when there is no brain activity at all, if the doctor were to say that lack of higher brain function (neo-cortex) could be the sign of death and if such patients are dead, than food and water can be withheld. Because of issues relating to the diagnosis of PVS and Alzheimer’s disease, food and water should be provided for a period of time in order to be sure of the diagnosis.
There is another side to this discussion, that of Rabbi Avram Reisner. We will look at his position next week.

Next week: End of Life Issues II – The Reisner Position

Lessons in Memory of my brother Dale Alan Konigsburg

February 28, 2005 – Number 5765-23

Judaism and Conversion

While Judaism often acts as if it is a nation and a civilization, it is still, at its core, a religion. As a religion, it is only natural that some people will abandon their faith and some will join us from other faiths. On both sides Jewish law is very clear. Judaism recognizes no conversion out of our faith. A Jew who adopts another religion is still a Jew, a sinner perhaps, but still a Jew. Under the “Law of Return” of the State of Israel, it is my understanding that anyone who meets the definition of a Jew, no matter their actual faith at this time, is accepted as Jewish under the Law. The only exception is someone who is actively a part of that faith, for example, a born Jew who is now a religious leader in another faith. I will leave the definition of “who is a Jew” to a future lesson.
Judaism permits conversion into Judaism. At various times in our history, other governments have forbidden conversion into Judaism (I believe that some South American countries still prohibit conversion into Judaism, and there may be others) Jews have taken to keeping conversion into our faith quiet. We are not evangelical about our faith in spite of calls in the United States to promote conversion to offset losses from assimilation. There is a custom of turning away the prospective convert up to three time in order to be certain of their commitment to Judaism. Today it is more common to prolong the conversion process allowing ample time for the prospective convert to quit and return to their faith. There are also many reasons why a non-Jew would come for conversion. Perhaps they wish to marry a Jew, or maybe they have good friends that are Jewish and they wish to join them in worship. The reason really doesn’t matter. Judaism only accepts one reason for becoming Jewish, that Judaism is the religion they wish to practice for the rest of their life. Any reason is a good reason to study Judaism, but to finish a conversion, the convert must be ready to accept Judaism as his or her own religion.
Therefore, the first stage in conversion is the study of Judaism. Before one can proclaim that this is the religion I wish to practice, one must know what Judaism is all about. To learn all about Judaism may take 80 years or more (after all, we born Jews are still learning!) We can only begin to set up the framework of a lifetime of Jewish learning. This frame will take about a year to accomplish. The student must experience a year of celebrating the Jewish Holidays. Must learn rituals, customs and ceremonies, must understand Jewish History and learn basics of Hebrew Language. Many communities have 15-18 week courses in Basic Judaism that all candidates must take. A Rabbi must sponsor them in the class to answer their questions and to make sure they are comfortable and understand the process. When this class is over, there may be more sessions with the sponsoring Rabbi on issues of prayer, and the structure of Jewish Law. The candidate should also be attending services on Shabbat or weekdays on a regular basis and getting to know the other members of the community. When this education phase is nearing an end, the sponsoring Rabbi will ask if the student still wants to proceed with the conversion. If so a second part of the conversion begins.
The sponsoring Rabbi calls a bet din, a Rabbinic Court to assess the convert. They will ask the candidate about why he or she wishes to convert, what they have learned about Judaism and if they know enough about Judaism to make this decision. Since the candidate is seeking to enter that which he or she can never leave, we make sure that the desire to be Jewish and the understanding of Judaism is sufficient so that the decision to become Jewish is made with clear intention and full understanding of the meaning of the conversion. Once the Bet Din is satisfied that the candidate is making an informed decision to become Jewish, they ask three questions. 1. “Are you doing this of your own free will?” 2. “Do you understand that there may be times and places where, as a Jew, you will be despised and hated, and perhaps your life could be in danger?” and 3. “Do you understand that you are making this decision not only for yourself, but for any children you may have who will be born Jewish and will need, in the case of a boy, a brit milah, and for all children and Jewish education and you are prepared to provide this to all your children?” If the answer is yes to all three, the Bet Din is concluded and the third phase begins.
The convert must be fully immersed in a mikva or other proper body of living water. The immersion is done in the nude with a proper attendant of the same gender to oversee the immersion. After the immersion the candidate recites two blessings, one for the immersion and the shehechiyanu. At that point the student is Jewish (not a convert). Often there will be a ceremony back at the synagogue and there are certificates to sign and distribute. Such a Jew is a full Jew in every manner and it is improper and illegal in Jewish Law to recall at anytime their life before their conversion. They receive a Hebrew name and carry the name of the patriarch Abraham and the matriarch Sarah.

Next week: Jewish Divorce

Lessons in Memory of my brother Dale Alan Konigsburg

February 28, 2005 – Number 5765-22

Judaism and Sex IV: Teaching Sexual Values to the Next Generation

Sex Education is seen on one hand, as an important part of what being a parent is all about, and yet, on the other hand, is seen as one of the most difficult lessons we have to teach our children. Parents have a tendency to leave sex education to the school system, either the public schools or to private schools. There is a flaw in this system that parents just don’t seem to want to confront. Schools can teach the biology of sexual reproduction, but the value system that underlies human sexuality, depends on families to transmit them from one generation to another. Even a Jewish day school, which may share our outlook on most other aspects of life, can not, in the impersonal atmosphere of the classroom, teach sexuality to children. It is a lesson that belongs in the home in the hands of thoughtful parents.
The first step in this, and any other teaching situation, is for the parents to be able to articulate for themselves a sexual ethic. Since parents often had an incomplete or inadequate sexual education themselves, we need to be able to clearly state what we believe to be a proper sexual ethic. It has to also be the ethic that we live by; we can not be hypocritical when we go to teach our children. Society today gives us all kinds of ethics to choose from, and if we don’t articulate what we believe, a generic ethic, one that arises from movies, television and books will step in to fill the breach. Generic values such as these do not guide our children, they often only teach our children to think of sex as a commodity, a reason to buy clothing, cars or perfume and to believe that if they don’t have a certain amount of sexuality, they will be a failure in life. Judaism teaches that there is more to sex than biology and that sexuality is the most personal of values, one that should not be shared in public. This is why guidance from home is so crucial. We need to understand how we feel about intimacy so we can teach our children well.
Conservative Judaism teaches us that sexuality is one value in a society that balances many values. As such, it should fit smoothly in with the other values we teach. First of all, that a discussion on sexuality is indeed a religious discussion. Often we think that religion has little to say on sexuality, that religion frowns upon all aspects of sex, seeing this aspect of our lives as “dirty, animalistic, and profane” In Judaism this is far from the truth. Our sexuality, just like every other part of our life, is a gift from G-d. Therefore it can be a way of bringing spirituality into our lives. Sex, in Judaism is very much a religious discussion. We also consider humanity as an integrated whole. That food (and the laws of Kashrut) the quest for power (and the laws of Shabbat) go together with sexuality (and the laws of family purity). Sex is one way we express the idea that we are created in the image of G-d, with the G-d given gift of procreation. And yet, it is not a gift that we flaunt in public. Modesty is also a value that shapes our sexual life. People may speak to strangers on national television about their sexual life, but Judaism says that it is a part of our life that we only discuss with our sexual partners. There are also issues relating to respect for each other, honesty, health and safety as well as holiness.
Judaism feels that such values can be best expressed in the context of marriage. That promiscuity and culture that it engenders is an anathema to Jewish society. Adultery, in Judaism is a capital offense, against humanity and against G-d. Sex in the context of marriage is best for meaningful companionship and for providing a stable home for children. When a marriage does not provide this kind of companionship and sexual support, than divorce must end that relationship before a new relationship can begin. Conservative Judaism admits that non-marital sex is a part of society, but it continues to assert that sex within the context of marriage is the ideal. However, it is not a “zero sum game” that if a person, for a particular reason, engages in non-marital sex, the other values still hold, especially that of honesty, health and safety and fidelity. It is a most adult activity and not appropriate for teenagers and the immature.
We must also teach the difference between “social intimacy” and sexuality. Conservative Judaism does not frown upon holding hands, hugs and social kissing. These are a natural way for people to convey a host of feelings and to provide comfort and support for others. Other activities, that indicate a more personal relationship, rightfully belong in private.
Finally, there are also religious aspects to relationships as well. Conservative Judaism feels very strongly about dating and marrying only Jews. This is important not just for the continuity of our faith, but for the strength and longevity of the marriage. Sex and religion are bound to each other and, when they are in concert, they can make a strong healthy bond that will last a lifetime. Judaism depends upon such strong relationships, for only these families, built upon a meaningful and healthy sexual ethic, will enable our faith to speak to the next generation.
As a resource, The Rabbinical Assembly publishes a booklet, “This is My Beloved, This is My Friend, A Rabbinic Letter on Intimate Relations” available from The United Synagogue Book Service at www. USCJ,org Click on the links to the Book Service and it can be found in the Rabbinical Assembly section.

Next week: Judaism and Conversion

Lessons in Memory of my brother Dale Alan Konigsburg

February 21, 2005 – Number 5765-21

Special Edition:

I received an E-mail this week from Beryl Glansberg that warrants some extensive comment. Not because Beryl’s letter has any problems, but because it speaks to the way many people look to Jewish Law and Halacha. So while Beryl has raised an important issue, I want to pause this week to address the larger issues that she raises, issues that many people raise about Halacha everyday. Here is her letter:
(Last week I wrote:) “Homosexuality is forbidden in Jewish Law. There is a full review of this stand taking place in our movement as this is written.”(Beryl Replies:) I certainly hope so. This is an archaic view that truly alienates people that are born Jewish and want to be accepted into the Kehillah. As a people in crisis, with staggering intermarriage and divorce rates, logic would dictate that we do not chase people away and discriminate against them because of their sexual preference. I am not interested in Rabbinic Jewish law that was written to be applicable to a culture long ago.I certainly hope that our Conservative movement gets with the times and accepts these members of our Kehillah and supports them, just as they would a heterosexual.
While there are many good comparisons between the Torah and the Constitution of the United States, there is one fundamental difference between them. The Constitution was written by human beings and their words can be amended in times of need. The Torah, however we received it, is considered to be the word of G-d. It cannot be amended. The Torah also does not allow for any legislative body to create new laws or to change old ones. G-d’s law is as perfect as G-d. This is one reason we are so careful about every letter in a Torah scroll. We must not change one dot of the divine revelation. Therefore when the book of Leviticus calls homosexuality an “abomination” we have to deal with the law as it has been received. We cannot just change it to suit our needs. We cannot erase it because it makes us uncomfortable. We cannot ignore it because it is the word of G-d. We have no choice but to follow its teaching.
And yet, the Sages of the Talmud did have one way of keeping the Torah from becoming a stagnant law. For a law to be alive, it has to be able to adapt and change. As any good lawyer or lawmaker can tell you, there is yet one way to change even the Law of G-d, and that is through the actions of Rabbinic courts. It is these courts over the centuries, that have ruled on how laws are to be followed or not followed. Which ones were “qualified” out of existence, and which ones were magnified in order to effect an important change in society. People change, society changes and the law must change as well. Otherwise we would be saddled with laws that could be considered immoral or unethical. It has been the role of the Rabbi, and of the Rabbinic deciders (called “Poskim”) to make the rulings that keep our Torah alive and meaningful.
There are many considerations that go into this process. I classify them into four categories. 1. What is the law as we received it? 2. What are the modern issues it raises? 3. What are the implications for the individual Jew? And 4. What are the implications for Jewish society? These four categories must be in balance. If not, the poskim need to address the issue to bring them back into balance. The issue is not “a law applicable to a culture long ago” the issue is if the law is meaningful today. The issue is also not “getting with the times” but what is good for Judaism and for the Jews who take Halacha seriously.
What really got my attention was the notation, (and please Beryl, I don’t mean to pick on you, there are at least two dozen people who would easily agree with you and I address myself to them as well, you were just the one who wrote, and I do thank you for this opportunity to clarify the issue) “As a people in crisis, with staggering intermarriage and divorce rates, logic would dictate that we do not chase people away and discriminate against them because of their sexual preference” In fact, we could make a very compelling case that homosexuality would add nothing to the Jewish people because this particular sexual preference would not help in the least the growth of the Jewish people. Judaism depends on heterosexual families for the growth and continued viability of our people. And even these families are not having enough children to replace themselves. Jewish Society is very concerned with our low birthrate and our losses from the holocaust. Homosexual behavior will help little or not at all with this crisis in our society.
What are the issues? Why does the Torah condemn homosexuality as an “abomination”? What was it about this sexual behavior that warrants this strict terminology? Is it similar to other laws that forbid idolatry? If so, than perhaps we are talking about a different kind of homosexuality than the one forbidden by the Torah. If not, perhaps as a form of sexuality that has no hope at all of procreation, it is to be forbidden as one forbids other, non-heterosexual forms of sexual activity (Leviticus is full of such laws). What would be the impact on Jewish Society if homosexuality was permitted? Would we only permit monogamous homosexuality and shun promiscuous behavior as we do with heterosexuals? Should there be a “commitment ceremony” for these relationships and could we call it “kiddushin” (holy)? What is the impact this will have on individual homosexual Jews? Will changing this law help or hurt the vision that all Jews have toward Torah and Halacha? These are all important questions and these are the kinds of discussions now taking place at the Rabbinical Assembly’s Law and Standards Committee.
One thing is very clear. While homosexual behavior is not permitted in Jewish law, discrimination against anyone who is a gay or lesbian is also very much against Jewish law. Halacha is quite clear that the law applies to everyone equally. A homosexual Jew may not, according to Torah, be permitted to engage in homosexual behavior, but he can still hold a job, buy a home, and has the right to live without fear. Discrimination against anyone for any reason, including sexual orientation, is antithetical to Halacha and to any Jewish sensibility. Gay and Lesbian Jews are still Jews and have all the rights and privileges that come with being Jewish including being called to the Torah, leading services, serving as Rabbis and serving as Synagogue officers. Jewish Law may have a problem with their sexual orientation, but not with their humanity. Discrimination and hate are out of the question. There are many resolutions in Conservative Judaism that affirm this position. We do not discriminate against those who violate Shabbat and Kashrut in their daily lives, why should sexual orientation be any different?
Whatever may be my personal understanding of the law, I will wait until the poskim of our movement will publish their positions and then I will comment on what they have to say. It would be unfair for me or any other Rabbi to make rulings while the discussion is still underway. It is my hope that G-d will guide their discussions to an acceptable conclusion (or conclusions – it is very possible that there will be more than one opinion on this subject). I can assure everyone, however, that the discussions are being done with great sensitivity and great respect for people and for Halacha.
Next week we will continue with our series.

Next week: Judaism and Sex IV: Teaching Sexual Values to the Next Generation

Lessons in Memory of my brother Dale Alan Konigsburg

February 7, 2005 – Number 5765-19

Judaism and Sex II: Procreation and Birth Control

The first commandment in the Torah is given on the sixth day of creation. Humanity is commanded to “be fruitful and multiply”. In Judaism, it is a positive mitzvah to have children. The Talmud, in typical rabbinic style, asks the question how do we know when we have fulfilled this mitzvah? Their answer is that the mitzvah of P’ru Urvu (procreation) is fulfilled when a family has two children, a boy and a girl. This implies that if both children are the same sex, then the mitzvah is not fulfilled until there is at least one of each sex in the family.
This mitzvah was taken very seriously over the centuries. Any couple who did not have children after ten years had the option of divorce so they could remarry and have children. While this was indeed grounds for divorce, and in some cases, couples did end the marriage in order to have children, still, many couples found other reasons to stay married. Divorce was seen as an option but was not required. There is a famous story of a couple who went to the Rabbi for a divorce because they were childless. The Rabbi insisted that they have a party to end the marriage in the same way they had a party to begin the marriage. The husband, at the party, to show he was not angry at his wife promised her that she could take anything from the home that she desired. When he fell asleep later, she had him moved, bed and all to her father’s house. When he awoke she told him that of all the things in the house, HE was the one thing she wanted to keep the most. The went back to the Rabbi that day and affirmed their marriage.
The interesting twist on the Mitzvah of P’ru Urvu, is that this mitzvah is assigned only to men. Men must have at least two children, one of each sex. A woman is not so obligated. Why were women released from this mitzvah? I think it is a response from the Rabbis that pregnancy and childbirth are inherently dangerous for a woman, in fact, it could be fatal. The Rabbis could not require a woman to so endanger her life. In ancient times a man could have more than one wife, and indeed, the bible records marriages for the sake of having children (look at Jacob’s complicated marital life). By Rabbinic times multiple wives are no longer suggested and by the middle ages, it is expressly forbidden. What makes this twist in the law interesting is the implications regarding birth control.
Judaism has long noted that sexual activity is pleasurable even without the possibility of having children. Women and men were supposed to have happy and joyful sexual lives even if they had reached a time in their lives where sex would no longer lead to pregnancy, or even if medical reasons made fertility impossible. Sharing sexual pleasure with or without the possibility of having children is also a positive commandment. Birth control, therefore, is permitted in Judaism. It should be noted that sexual relations should only be between a husband and a wife. Adultery is a capital crime and pre-marital sex is not considered appropriate behavior.
Jewish Law has long favored barrier methods of birth control (diaphragms, foams etc.) used by women. This is because, as noted above, the man has a commandment to have children, not the wife. Therefore she can block his attempts if she so chooses. In today’s day and age, when there is a possibility of sexually transmitted diseases and AIDS/HIV it is important, if there is any concern for health, that condoms are permitted and may be required. If a disease is know to infect one party or the other, abstinence may even be required to protect the health of one’s partner.
Abortion is never permitted as a form of post-facto birth control. Abortion is permitted only when there are issues regarding the health of the mother. In cases where there is danger, the fetus, as potential life, is terminated to save the mother, who is really alive. Psychological health is also considered when assessing an abortion. Since every situation is different, the Rabbis leave the individual decision to abort or not, to the woman in consultation with her doctor and her Rabbi. Only when they deem it medically necessary, can an abortion be performed.

Next week: Judaism and Sex III: Modern Sexual Issues