In Honor and Memory of My Father and Teacher Leonard Konigsburg

On April 29, 2007 (11 Iyyar 5767) my father and my teacher, Leonard Konigsburg went to claim his portion in Olam Habah. I dedicate these lessons to my father who was an inspriation in my life and through his gentle teachings became the founder of the Konigsburg Rabbinic Dynasty.

Monday, May 26, 2008

27-5768: Mitzvah N-29

Talmidav Shel Aharon
27-5768: Mitzvah N-29
May 26, 2008

Negative Mitzvah 29 – This is a negative commandment: Do not swear in vain.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “You shall not take the name of the Lord your G-d in vain.” (Ex. 20:7). A vain oath is divided into four categories: 1. If one swears to a change in something known: for example, if he swears about a man that he is a woman or about a stone that it is gold. 2. if he swears to no purpose; for example, he takes an oath about a stone that it is a stone. 3. If he takes an oath to fail to observe a mitzvah. 4. If he swears to do something which is impossible to fulfill; for example, that he will not sleep for three days in a row, or that he will taste no food for seven days in a row. Over every one of these oaths, if he swore it willfully, he should receive whiplashes; and if it was unwittingly, he is free of penalty. If someone says a benediction in vain [needlessly] or he utters the name of G-d to no purpose, he violates the injunction, “You shall not take the name f the Lord your G-d in vain.” It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.

When it comes to using G-d’s name, there are two possible uses. One is to invoke holiness and the other is using it improperly for shock value. The purpose of a vain oath is either for its shock value or else we have to assume that this person is a fool. Let’s take a look at the four examples. In the first case, he does not have to swear at all. Anyone can see for themselves what the correct answer is. Why should he have to use G-d’s name to prove that a man is a woman or a stone is really gold? It is easy to prove him right or wrong without his taking an oath. An oath would only be necessary if there was no other way to know the status; For example, if the person in question was missing at sea or if the stone in question were lost.
In the second case he is taking an oath about something that is already known to everyone. A proper oath would be to testify about something that nobody else would know. The testimony is the only proof of that can be obtained. If everyone knows the information and it is accepted by the court as true, then what reason would he have to swear in G-d’s name? In the third case, he is taking an oath to disobey the law. He thus gets stuck in a dilemma, should he keep the law, he breaks his oath (and the law), if he keeps his oath he has broken the law. The mitzvah is more important and the oath is in vain. Finally, in the last case, the oath is in vain because it can never be fulfilled. It is one thing to promise to give ten percent to charity if one wins a million dollars. This is a legitimate oath. But if he promises to give a million dollars to charity and does not have that kind of money to give, then the oath is in vain. All of these oaths are vain oaths. They are not only a waste of time, breath and court resources, but there is no holiness that comes from them. It is only the shock value of making such an oath and this is the sin involved.
We see the same issues arise at the end of the teaching, when it is extended to blessings or curses. There are some who interpret this prohibition against blessings broadly, explaining that you can only say a blessing one time. Such people get themselves in trouble if they forget if they said the blessing or not or discover that they may or may not have said it correctly. I prefer to keep this interpretation narrow. It is not an issue to me if one forgets if the blessing was said to say it over. The intention of the blessing remains the same; to bring holiness into the moment of prayer. If one is teaching a blessing than it is also permitted to say the blessing over and over again to learn it properly. If one has said the blessing and then leads others in the same blessing, I still believe that holiness is still being brought into the world. If one is making fun of the blessings or is mindlessly repeating it over and over this would be a violation of this mitzvah. (This is why we don’t make popular music out of the words of a blessing).
Cursing through the use of G-d’s name, with its ability to shock and without any aspect of holiness, is always a sin.
I should also mention that these laws do not apply to every name of G-d. There are actually dozens of names for G-d that appear in sacred literature. There are only seven names whose use is regulated by this mitzvah, and only the Hebrew words make one liable. This includes the four letter name of G-d that is never pronounced as well as Elohim and Shaddai. These names, in Hebrew, must be not be destroyed but placed in a Geniza (a special place for sacred texts) and may not be used in vain.

Monday, May 12, 2008

26-5768: Mitzvah N-28

Talmidav Shel Aharon
26-5768: Mitzvah N-28
May 12, 2008


Negative Mitzvah 28 – This is a negative commandment: Do not make gashes or incisions in one’s flesh in idol-worship or [in grief] over one’s dead.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “you shall not gash yourselves” (Deut. 14:1). Whoever cuts his flesh in grief over his dead violates this prohibition, whether he makes the gash by hand or with an instrument. In idol-worship, however, if he uses an instrument his is punished by whiplashes, but if he uses his hand, he is free of penalty. Included in this law is the warning not to separate into agudot, (groups). This teaches us that there should not be two religious courts in town, one following one practice and one following another practice. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.

The first part of this commandment is pretty easy to explain. First of all, in Judaism, we do not own our bodies. Our bodies are a gift from G-d and we use them as long as G-d is willing to let us. In this sense, we only rent our bodies for the duration of our life and we have, therefore an obligation to take care of our bodies. When we get sick, we must seek healing. We need to eat healthy foods, exercise and make sure our body is as healthy as can be. Drugs and excessive alcohol are forbidden as is tobacco. We are not permitted to over pierce our body or decorate it with tattoos. It only follows that we cannot scar or maim our bodies, especially in the name of an idol or on behalf of the dead. Cutting for idols is clearly forbidden and the punishment is set. Ritual gashing is done with a ritual knife, so if one gashes by hand, then this law does not apply. Gashing for the dead is a sign of grief so it does not matter how you do the slashing, it is all forbidden. Just as one should not spend too much to bury the dead, I can see here a similar problem. Just how much pain should I endure to show how much I loved the one who died? The more gashes, the more blood, the more love? We can see where this is going. Jewish law would have us rip our clothing to mourn the dead, one rip, over the heart. That is all that is allowed. Our grief is enough pain without the added pain of gashing our bodies.

The second part seems to be honored in the breach more than in reality. I can think of few times in Jewish History where the Jewish People were not divided into camps. Orthodox, Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist are only the most modern divisions. In Israel there are Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities, Hasidic and Mitnagdic, and the Hasidim are divided into even smaller camps. The sages were divided into the schools of Hillel and Shammai, into political camps of Pharisees and Sadducees. The priests who worked in the Temple were divided into “families” who were rivals of each other. You get the picture. We are not a very unified people. The trick is not to divide into sects that don’t talk to each other and who do not intermarry with each other. We may divide ourselves into groups that don’t agree with each other, but there are only rare moments in Jewish History where we were so divided that we stopped talking and intermarrying with each other. Underneath it all, we are still Jews.

The most famous schism was the one that opened up between Rabbinic Judaism and the Jews who were followers of Jesus of Nazareth. Eventually, there was no reconciliation possible and the two groups moved off in separate ways and began to see each other as new religions. Other than this one historical event, we may not agree on much but we agree that we are all Jews. The rest is just details. In Israel today, there is a movement against the official “Rabbanut” because they are becoming so particular in how one proves one is Jewish, that the rest of the country is almost in rebellion against them. We will see how it plays out. In any event, our communities, both here and in Israel have many different rabbinical courts. The Hafetz Hayim is making his pitch for Jewish unity, but that is an ideal, not the reality of Judaism, neither in history nor today.

Tuesday, May 6, 2008

25-5768: Mitzvah N-27

Talmidav Shel Aharon
25-5768: Mitzvah N-27
May 5, 2008


Negative Mitzvah 27 – This is a negative commandment: Do not prophesize in the name of an idol. Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “and make no mention of the name of other gods” (Ex. 23:13). His death (if one does prophesy so) is by strangulation, even if he spoke in the name of an idol and was in accord with Halacha (definitive law), to declare the defiled unclean and the pure clean. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.
We can understand the prohibition against idolatry when it is commanding us to do something that is forbidden by Jewish law. But here, the real issue is when an idol commands us to do exactly what G-d would have us do. This sounds like a rather innocuous idol. What could be the harm in it? Does it really matter if we say we worship G-d or an idol as long as, in the end, we have the same moral laws and the same religious activities? If the result is the same, who cares how we get there?
I almost sounds like someone in a cult declaring that there is no difference between what they promote and what we already have. It is only slowly, over time that differences become apparent and we are encouraged to slowly “evolve” our understanding of Judaism to fit with the “new” or “ancient” “improvements” that the new religion entails. After all, this is how Christianity separated itself from Judaism, by slowly, over time, changing the rules for those who professed to be followers of Jesus. It is a time-honored way of enticing people away from the faith of their ancestors.
It is all the more effective if there is a “Jew” who is doing the enticing (and we can see why an group like Jews for Jesus uses “rabbis” in their churches) it makes it all the more comfortable when one begins and the changes can be slow and small until a whole new religion is being practiced.
Again, I want to state that Judaism does not see Christianity and Islam as pagan religions and they would not fall under this ban if someone were to teach a class, for example in Islamic theology. Those who don’t like what other Jews are teaching as differences in Jewish law have also abused it. One does not incur the death penalty for not holding a “glatt” standard when it comes to Kashrut.
Jews have been enticed for thousands of years to come and join other faiths that were “almost” the same as what we already practice. Our response has always been the same, “You can worship how and whom you please but for me and my family, we will follow the Lord our G-d and the G-d of our ancestors”.