Pacific Jewish Center | Rabbi » New York Times

Solar Eclipse In Judaism

rabbifink — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 18:18:40 +0000

Last week the world witnessed another wonder of our universe, the Solar Eclipse. This eclipse was visible from Southeast Asia and was the longest eclipse in 18 years and will remain the longest for the next 123 years.

The eclipse has long been associated with mythology and supernatural acts. If you are a fan of the TV show, Heroes, you know what I mean.

In Southeast Asia, many Hindus were gripped by fear. According to Hindu tradition, the eclipse can cause harm to unborn children. Many ancient cultures attached mythological meaning to solar eclipses. Today, we know that the eclipse is part of the solar pattern that is predictable to the second.

What about Judaism? What do we say about the solar eclipse?

The Talmud in Sukkah (29a) gives us a clue.

The Rabbis taught: An account of four things the sun is [eclipsed]: An improperly eulogized head of Jewish court, a betrothed girl who is raped and her cries go unheeded, [...], and two brothers killed on one day.

What in the world does this mean?

Is this more mythology?

The 19th Century German Torah Scholar, Yaakov Etlinger, writes in his Aruch L’Ner, that the Talmudic Rabbis certainly knew eclipses were natural phenomena running their course. (He proves this with inferences from within the text which are too tedious and lost in translation to English). It is similar to what Nachmanadies writes with regard to the Biblical promise after the Great Flood that God would not flood the world again, and he sealed the promise with the rainbow. Of course, the rainbow always existed, it is a natural phenomena. Nachmanadies explains that the rainbow is a sign, a reminder to us and in a different sense to God that He made a promise never to destroy His world again.

Simililarly, when a solar eclipse occurs and the light is temporarily removed from the physical world we are reminded of the moral implications of a dark world. A world in which good leaders are quickly forgotten, women are treated as objects and blood is spilled within one family, is a world of darkness.

When we see the eclipse we are to remember that it is our job as human beings to bring light into our world. The light of morality, mindfulness and sensitivity will protect our society from these terrible social ills mentioned in Sukkah. It is important to recognize what a world we would have if there was no moral light. If our world was thrust into spiritual darkness just as the physical world is thrust into sudden solar darkness during an eclipse our world would be quite different. Seeing this occur in the natural world “enlightens” us to provide that light and prevent the spiritual darkness from overcoming the light.

I think it is absolutely magnificent to live a life where we find meaning and messages from every part of our lives. A life where each moment makes a difference and each of our choices can change the world.

Equally magnificent is the sheer physical beauty of the solar eclipse.

Thanks for reading this post. In appreciation I have provided some of the best footage (seen on NYTimes.com) of last week’s eclipse. Enjoy it – you deserve it.

What Is The Appropriate Reaction?

rabbifink — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:02:18 +0000

This post has been cross-posted to DovBear. – more discussion there.

In addition to my work as the Rabbi at Pacific Jewish Center at the Shul on the Beach I am also a Law Student at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. I am part of the evening program and completed my first year of evening classes in May.

In December I was subjected to mid-terms in each of my courses. Many Law School exams are long fact patterns that require the student to analyze the facts and apply all the law that is relevant to the facts and then argue why the law should or should not apply to those facts. Usually these fact patterns are fiction and these essays are typically 3 – 4 hours in duration.

My torts professor gave us a very interesting fact pattern. The basics of the case were, two young boys named Israel and Jacob enter an elevator on their way to school. Along the way the elevator malfunctions and the boys are suspended between the 10th and 11th floor. The doors malfunction as well and the doors are opened. The younger boy, Jacob is 5 and he tries to jump from the stuck elevator to the 10th floor below. Jacob jumps and does not “stick the landing“. Unfortunately, he stumbles off the 10th floor and plummeted 10 stories beneath the elevator down the shaft to his death. Israel is eventually rescued.

There were many more legally operative facts in the fact pattern and our professor wanted us to analyze the claims against the building landlord, owner and elevator maintenance company.

It was a pretty shocking case for all of us. When we returned to school after the break our professor told us that the fact pattern was basically a true story with some of the facts changed to make a clearer essay. Immediately I “googled” “Jacob Israel Elevator”. I found the original NY Times article with the tragic story.

Yesterday the Times had another article on the ongoing litigation. Apparently, the defense wants young Israel, who is 10 and traumatized to testify. This is horrible as any memories of the tragedy could alter his psychological well being tremendously. The case is being litigated as you read this.

I told this entire saga to two people I know. They are both very caring and sensitive people. They both had the same reaction and that reaction is what prompted this post.

When I told the story over, both people had serious looks on their faces and clearly empathized with the poor child.

Then I told them, by the way, the little boys were Chasidish children from Williamsburg.

They both had the same second reaction. Their jaws dropped and they exclaimed Oy! That’s terrible! A much harsher reaction reaction than before they knew the boys’ ethnicity.

At first I was disturbed. Do we care more about some poor Chasidish kids from Williamsburg than anyone else? Is this tragedy worse to us because they are Jewish?

Is this a good attitude? Could this bother non-Jews and provoke anti-semitism?

Or, perhaps it is normal for us to care more about our Jewish brethren. Maybe, we should feel more compassion for our fellow Jews. After all, it is a rule of Jewish law that we are responsible for one another.

This has been gnawing at me for a little while now. Should we care more about a Jewish tragedy than a non-Jewish tragedy?

Even if we are allowed to care more about a Jewish tragedy should we try and mask our feelings to be more politically correct?

Aren’t we outraged when non-Jews do not care about Jewish tragedy as much as non-Jewish tragedy?

Where Is The Outrage? | The Plight of Middle Eastern Jewry

rabbifink — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:43:46 +0000

This post has been cross posted to DovBear – great discussion there.

Do Anglo/American Jews care enough about our middle-eastern Jewish brothers and sisters?

Yesterday DovBear posted a really great Op-Ed piece from the NY Times.

In fact. before checking his blog I even emailed the article to him as I assumed he would find it interesting.

Of course, I was too late as it had already been posted!

What occurred subsequent to his posting of the article was even more interesting.

But first let’s go to the NY Times column. An exiled Egyptian Jew recounts the persecution his family experienced in Egypt. His issue is that President Obama took the time to mention the suffering of Palestinians and ignored the suffering of middle-eastern Jews outside of Israel. A worthwhile read.

DovBear posted the article and it got very little attention from the commenters. As opposed to a three day running argument about Mesorah (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3) that got hundreds and hundreds of comments.

On Twitter DovBear posted this observation:

Egyptian Jew criticizes Obama in Times oped. TBF [to be fair], when was the last time any Ashkenazi Jew shed a tear for what happened to MidEastJews?

I responded with my experience:

R’ Herman Neuberger dedicated YEARS of his life to save Iranian Jews. TBF – he not only shed tears, but years and saved thousands.

Which DovBear countered with a hilarious (and sad) take:

kol hakovod [kudos] for your yachid [individual]. Average cholent fresser [eater] from flatbush doesn’t know and doesnt care.

It seems to me that DovBear is right. Where is the outrage from Ashkenazic Jews? Why does it seem like we don’t care?

The rest of this post is dedicated to bringing awareness to the plight of middle-eastern Jewry and an invitation for those of you may have first hand information regarding living as a Jew in Iran, Iraq, Egypt or any other middle-eastern country to contribute.

My first step was to contact a grandson of the aforementioned Rabbi Herman Neuberger.

Eli Neuberger relayed the following history of Iranian Jewry that is related to his grandfather’s involvement. (I have edited his comments for brevity, grammar and overall fluidity.)

The traditional Iranian Jewish schools were run by an umbrella organization called Otzar HaTorah.In the mid 70′s the Shah and his government decided to nationalise all religious schools, Jewish and Islam alike in order to curb the radical influence that was gaining traction amongst the Muslims. My Grandfather was approached by a Mr. Sasson from London, to travel to Iran to negotiate with the Government in order to minimize secular influence on religious studies.

While in Iran, my Grandfather visited the community in Shiraz. He thought that if a group of promising Iranians would come to learn at the Ner Israel Rabbinical College (NIRC), where he was the Dean. Then they could return to Iran and become the Klei Kodesh (spiritual leaders) that could lead the community.The first group arrived in 1977.

Meanwhile in 1979 the Shah was overthrown by radical Islamists.The students in NIRC could not expect to return home. At the time, many Iranian Jews were able to leave Iran and when they arrived in Austria, Italy etc. they were granted refugee status and were able to continue on to the US.

The situation became far more dire in 1980 when the Iran-Iraq war started.Boys as young as 12-13 were sent to the front lines to be used as mine sweepers. Many Jews were smuggled to Turkey or Pakistan. These trips were fraught with danger, even after they were able to leave Iran. My grandfather was instrumental in assuring good treatment in Turkey and safe passage to Europe. He made many trips to the corridors of power in DC to speak to Congressman,Senators and Diplomats to be able to insure this continuing clandestine exodus.

Many of the boys that made the harrowing trip came to study Torah in NIRC.

All this good work was done behind the scenes and with very little fanfare.

According to the never accurate Wikipedia, Rabbi Neuberger was instrumental in saving 60,000 Iranian Jews.

I contacted another friend of mine, Natan Davoodi. His family is Iranian (in LA they are called Persian).

He told me that as far as he knows the non-Jews only tolerate the Jews of they can exploited for the benefit of the non-Jew. That doesn’t sound very good.

I would be remiss if I did not mention Roger Cohen. A NY Times columnist, Cohen has a thing for the Iranians. He thinks all is honky-dory in Iran. He writes about it here and here. Absolute disgrace.

I would like to hear from you if you know of any injsutice to Jewish people in middle-eastern countries (outside of Israel). Just telling those stories will get the ball rolling.

We are all brothers and sisters and there is no excuse for ignoring their plight.

Human Beings Are Social Beings

rabbifink — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 01:00:03 +0000

I have had my critiques of David Brooks from the NY Times.

But today, I think he got it right. Really right. Like, 100% right.

He was asked about the “Big Three”. No, not GM, Ford, Chrysler. No, not Harvard, Yale, Princeton. Not, Clemenceau, Wilson, George either.

The new Big Three is Guns, Gays and Abortion.

Brooks was asked his opinion of why the trend in the country is towards Gay rights, the trend is to ignore Gun rights and the trend is against Abortion after the first trimester. In the “asker’s” opinion, there seems to be tension pulling these issues from opposite sides. One is trending “left”, one is trending “right”, and one is not trending at all.

What she really wants to know is why isn’t the left or right winning on all these issues? How come they are trending in three different directions.

Brooks answers very profoundly and eloquently. His basic premise is that Americans seek to maintain the social fabric of their existence.

Most Americans have gay friends, co-workers, relatives, neighbors etc. and therefore it preserves the social fabric of the American’s existence to provide rights for their gay acquaintances.

Guns is a rural vs. urban issue so it depends on where you live that you seek to preserve your social environment. Thus, there is little movement on this issue.

Finally, on abortion, he proclaims most Americans are torn by the issue. We are uncomfortable imposing any opinion on our fellow Americans because it is such a sensitive issue. Thus, most people fall in the middle and trend slightly to the left or the right but are not vocal about it. Therefore, change is not likely on the abortion issue.

Wow. Brooks really did a great job explaining how our country works. Really, he has explained how humans work. How our world works. We care about our social environments and we try to preserve them.

Truthfully, humans are social beings. This is what really separates man from beast. We interact in a more complex way than any other being in our world.

We consider any hominid existence prior to the establishment of a social environment such as cities as prehistoric. History begins when we begin to socialize our existence.

We continue socializing in our lives to this very day.

When we meet new people we are socializing.

When we have guests join us for a meal we are socializing.

When we use social networking tools like Twitter, Facebook and blogs we are socializing.

I believe that the synagogue is a social place. Certainly, our Shul on the Beach is a social place. Yes, we worship in shul, but that could technically be done solo.

We are mandated by Halacha to create and foster houses of worship and to attend them as a group to appeal to the social needs of man.

So come join us!

How To Avoid "Holier-Than-Thou" Syndrome

rabbifink — Wed, 06 May 2009 18:44:50 +0000

I saw a very interesting column in the New York Times today.

The column presents some evidence that a large chasm exists between what an individual will claim they would do in a given situation and what one would actually do in that given situation.

In other words our actions betray our feelings of righteousness. (How funny is it that the columnist’s named is Benedict? well, it made me smile…).

As I was reading the article, which I highly recommend I kept thinking: Why is this idea so natural to me? Where else have I seen this?

The answer was really obvious.

The article talks about the “holier-than-thou” effect. People overstimate how they would behave if they were in a specific situation. For example, most of us probably think that we never take steroids if we were athletes, or that if we were investment bankers we never would have inflated the market for personal gain, or any other time you have been morally horrified.

The truth is, that most of us would have made the same decisions. How do we know? By setting people up.

Like 83% of college student at Cornell believed they would buy a flower to benefit cancer research and that only 56% of their peers would buy a flower.

In reality only 43% actually bought flowers. That is very few.

The article then veers into murky waters.

One practice that can potentially temper feelings of moral superiority is religion. All major faiths emphasize the value of being humble and the perils of hubris. “In humility count others as better than yourself,” St. Paul advises in his letter to the Philippians.

The article concludes that those who are religious have an even higher percentage of individuals who think they will outperform their peers in moral challenges.

Maybe the element of humility is not the key to avoiding “holier-than-thou” effect.

In Judaism we have a basic precept to avoid this problem.

One who sees someone sin must concoct an excuse or rationale for the wrongful behavior they witnessed. We are not permitted to think that someone else did wrong. It is irrelevant and mostly harmful to ourselves. There is a couple of great books that train us how to do this. You learn how to judge others favorably.

Further, we also have the following rule. “Do not judge your friend until you stand in his place”. This is exactly how to avoid “holier-than-thou” syndrome. Don’t think about it. You are incapable of making a moral judgment as an outsider. Until you are in the exact same situation you cannot possibly assess whether the other person made a good or bad judgment. In truth, you will never stand in his place. You will never know what his state of mind or affairs was. Nor do any two people have the same challenges.“Do not judge your friend until you stand in his place”.

Finally, we have another rule to avoid the “holier-than-thou” effect. “Do not trust yourself to avoid sin until the day you die”. We must be vigilant until our final moments because we can always fall. When you are aware that you are susceptible to failure, you are more likely to stay off the high horse. It also shortens the gap between those who are good and those who they think may not yet be so good. You can fall at any time. Don’t get “holier-than-thou”.

Now it all makes sense. The columnist helped me review these rules by showing how without these rules society runs a huge risk. It makes me more thankful to have been taught these ideas and now I am sharing them with you.

Live by these rules and I guarantee you will find more things to smile about, more things to brighten your day and more way to bring happiness to others.

No related posts.

Genius: The Modern View and the Torah View

rabbifink — Fri, 01 May 2009 23:35:13 +0000

The most emailed column on NYTimes.com today is this column on genius. In this Op-Ed column, from David Brooks the old question of nature vs. nurture is raised.

Are there people born with elevated talents and skill or are some people the lucky ones who were in the right place at the right time and were nurtured into their high level abilities?

I am not sure what compelled Mr. Brooks to write this column, it seems random and disconnected from today’s news.

It did remind me of a couple of posts I had written in the very early stages of this blog.

I started this blog in December 2008 and I had just read Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers. Judd Magilnick sent me a column written by David Brooks with his opinion of the book. Brooks held that Gladwell was oversimplifying things and Gladwell was ignoring much of our innate abilities.

It seems like Brooks has had a change of heart. Today he writes that genius is not inborn, rather is a byproduct of effort.

(Please make up your mind.)

I am not here to nitpick at Brooks. I was just thinking about all this and it made me want to articulate the Torah approach to this issue.

“We hold these self-truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal”. – United States of America Declaration of Independence.

I do not agree. Not all people are created equal. Everyone deserves equal respect, everyone deserves equal opportunities for happiness, but not everyone is equal in every way.

Some people are born rich, some poor. Some people are born intelligent and some are born dumb. Some people are tall, short, handsome, beautiful, fat, skinny, light, dark, left handed, right handed, American, Somali, Christian, Buddhist, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, funny, bland, fast, slow, common sensical, socially awkward, the list does not end…

Our starting place in life is predetermined by our family and our genes. What we do from that moment on is the result of the choices that we make.

The only thing in which we are all equal is in our opportunity to make choices.

We can make ourselves into anything if we make the right choices to get there.

The thing that we cannot control is where we begin. Our job in life is to take our talents, preferences, abilities, intellect, insight, physical gifts and make the right choices.

So, genius is not pure nature, but nature helps.

The Torah approach is that we make ourselves into what we are but our circumstances that we cannot control weigh heavily. We cannot choose where or when or to whom we are born, all we can do is make the right choices with our slice of the universe.

Mozarts, Einsteins, Michael Jordans are born different. They are born with talents that not everyone has. But so are many other people who never amounted to anything. They may have been born to situations that prevented them from working on those talents or maybe they never even knew that they had those talents.

Finally, Brooks is right on the money in terms of repetition and practice being the most important skill one can possess. Gladwell talks about this in terms of the 10,000 hour rule. “Practice makes better”, and the more one can practice the greater one can hone their talents.

In Yeshiva, Talmudic skills of analysis are worked on for years. Hours of studying with the same logical method for months and years makes an impact. Most adults who went through the Yeshiva system are able to study Talmud like second nature. In fact many have the custom of studying 1 folio per day. This is called the Daf Yomi and it is only possible because for nearly all adult observant Jews, the study of Talmud became second nature. We all have different levels of intellect, but the hours that we have put into developing our skills trumps our intelligence or lack thereof. Talmud study is a skill that is almost expected in observant Jews repertoires – it is only possible because of the time and effort made practicing the skill.

I have witnessed this in Law School as well. Lawyering is a skill that must be developed. To see and understand issues and how to apply the law to facts are skills one must acquire in the first year of law school. My entire section is bright; everyone is smart, the key is to develop the skills for good lawyering.

The only way to develop those skills is with practice. Reading and discussing cases is part of the development, exam writing and memo writing are other ways of honing these skills. We need to spend time, effort and work hard to develop those skills.

First one to 10,000 hours wins…

What Do Boys Want?

rabbifink — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:28:54 +0000

The NY Times has a very interesting article chronicling the research that Disney has been conducting to figure out what boys want.

Disney has had unprecedented success marketing to young teenage girls. With TV shows about pop-stars and princess and fairy lands, young teenage girls flock to Disney. But what about the boys?

Disney has been doing their homework. Apparently, boys are sick of pure violence in their shows. Boys don’t want more pointless TV. Boys want meaning.

Who knew?

For years marketing execs and TV stations have assumed that boys want reckless abandon and wild play. Disney has discovered that stuff has its place but, it all must fall within a framework of meaning.

Boys want to empathize with the boy who is a mediocre basketball player. Boys want to witness his struggle and feel his pain.

The new Disney channel and website geared towards boys will hit these points. Boys will get their version of Disney called Disney XD which hones in on these aspects of boys needs.

Boys want a struggle while girls want pop-stars. Who knew? Disney knew.

In truth we all covet meaning in our lives. Disney will be offering programming that adresses this meaning. But what about us? We need meaning as well. Where do we find meaning?

Torah provides meaning and purpose. If you are looking for something to provide meaning to your life try some Torah. We provide Torah at the Pacific Jewish Center. There is Torah all over this blog. Just click the podcasts on the top of this page. You’ll find classes on all types of life topics and ideas. Disney knows we need meaning… and it is all right here.

Matza in the NY Times and In Our TImes

rabbifink — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 21:16:46 +0000

To be fair I have had my share of criticism of the New York Times. I don’t call them anti-Semitic though, that just reminds me of Uncle Leo in the Shower Head Seinfeld episode. Uncle Leo’s burger is medium instead of rare so he assumes the chef must be an anti-Semite… That doesn’t stop these guys from going in that direction. (I found them in a google search result, I have never heard of them before…) Maybe Unlce Leo writes for the “American Thinker”.

And when the NY Times has an article that paints Jews in a positive light I feel equally compelled to raise the issue,

A few days ago the NY Times “Bitten” blog ran a great article on April 1st / Fools Day, (tongue in cheek I suppose, but one never knows) about how Matza is just like Pizza – only better! The article takes a few stabs at the price of Shmura Matza (near $20 a pound) which is a legitimare gripe and gives a decent description of the process by which matza is fashioned and baked.

The line that makes the article is the close.

Shmura matzoh is an authentic product — not the re-creation of one — and authenticity is to be prized, especially when it tastes so good.

Pesach is the most celebrated Jewish holiday. Varioations and modern reincarnations of the Seder are everywhere we turn. I think that the original, authentic Seder is powerful enough and vast enough for years and years of discussion that we don’t need new versions. The original has plenty to offer us. But at least for everyone the Matza remains authentic. The Matza does not get adulterated.

The Seder reenacts and reminds us how the Jewish tribe became a nation. The Jewish people remain a nation because its precepts and tenets remain viable unchanged.

It’s a shame that the celebration of the birth of the Jewish people by many Jews would be unrecognizable to those who experienced the very first Seder. The authentic Seder tastes so good – we don’t need to change it! There are plenty of ways to bring your creativity to the traditional Seder.

The Matza reminds us all of what a Seder is all about – authenticity..

Irresponsible Journalism From the New York Times

rabbifink — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 22:26:10 +0000

the NY Times has a section in their online newspaper called “The Lede”. It is often chock full of interesting links and thought on the news of the times. I have been inspired to post links to The Lede before in my blog post about “Bus Ads in London proclaiming there is no GD”.

Today, The Lede has a tremendously misleading post about women’s rights. Women have been fighting for equality of rights in America for years. Their right to vote was only recently (relatively) added to the Bill of Rights. Title VII and Title IX are recent acts of legislature to attempt to enforce equality for women.

It is not as if the United States has ALWAYS treated women equally. But now that we do treat women equally in America we are permitted to look down upon anyone who does not (sarcasm emphasized).It is so short sighted to act as if women have been equal to men in the United States forever. It also, somehow, gives rise to the right to point at any other culture which does not share our equality of women. I think it is deplorable that any culture not give women access to all rights that exist for men.

Many people point to Judaism as a culture which looks down upon women. In fact one of the egregious acts which The Lede cited was a Jewish newspaper using Photoshop to remove 2 women from a photo of Knesset members. The press has portrayed this as some sort of protest against women in government. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The newspaper is distributed exclusively in the very religious neighborhoods where men do not look at women who are not their immediate family. Never. This is not a matter of rights, it is a matter of being careful with their sexuality. These people are holy people. These people do not want to have thought of women racing through their minds. These people want to maintain a purity which can only be achieved by removing all distractions from their lives. It is to admired and yet, it is not a lifestyle for most of us. They do not ask that we behave this way, they do not punish those who think differently, they merely feel that looking at women could be bad for their souls.

Personally, I don’t think this is the right way to observe Judaism. I do not approve of this way of life. I explain it only to demonstrate that these are peace loving people who try to keep to themselves and do not wish to look at women.

I have a different way of approaching women in Judaism and I will be talking and writing about it in the coming weeks. One who looks into the stories of the Torah and Talmud sees women as being above men. Men are constantly deferring to women in the Torah, as we shall learn together.

The Lede feels that this is somehow newsworthy to the point that it is in the same article as flogging women and homosexuals in Pakistan and a severe curtailing of rights in Afghanistan. That is preposterous. No one is hurt by men wishing not to see women. Women have the same rights as men. It is not out of chauvanism or disrespect that holy men refrain from looking at women. Yet, it somehow reaches the same level of audacity as flogging women and homosexuals!!!

Shame on The Lede for this article. It really bothers me. And yet, I disagree with the mentality of those very religious Jews – but I respect their culture. The NY Times does not.

You Have Got to See This! | It's about Lego

rabbifink — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 23:34:05 +0000

I love Lego. My brother and I spent countless hours in our childhood building magnificent Lego creations. My son Rami has recently added Lego building to his skill set – he is quite good!

If I had to choose one toy to play with I would certainly choose Lego. It is the perfect toy.

Don’t believe me? You need to check this out…

This New York Times Opinion piece will show you what Lego is all about. This guy did a great job.

In addition although we love LA and don’t want to live in New York, there is a nostalgia that always will be associated with NYC. Just ask Kobe Bryant. He says his favorite (and most succesful in recent memory) place to play is New York. New York is a special place but there is no way I would trade this for this. (It’s been 80 degrees for a couple weeks now). As I mentioned previously it’s not just about the weather but it sure is nice…

Our (more) Casual President

rabbifink — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:36:44 +0000

You may have noticed I steer clear of politics. This post is NOT about politics. It is about the last three presidents. It is more about their attitudes than anything else. Again, this is not about politics.

Even before this New York Times article hit the streets I had made the same observation. It seems that Presidents Obama and Bush differ on more than just politics. President Obama’s White House has a decidedly different feel.

The article mentions different dress codes and different schedules. I remember when President Bush took office there was much fanfare about his changes in the White House as well. In fact I was able to find a New York Times article from 2001 written shortly after President Bush took office. The article about President Bush lauds the new regime (at the time) for returning formality to the White House. Meetings ended on schedule, aides were well dressed formal rules of cordiality were expected and the atmosphere was a professional one. This was a stark contrast to the Clinton years where the Government reflected the freewheeling president. Bush sought to put respect back into the Presidency. He followed a president that many found it hard to respect. Bush used the dress code to symbolize that break.

President Obama is breaking off from President Bush’s formality. The dress code is gone and Mr. President himself is often at meetings with his jacket off. His day starts later and he is frequently seen wandering the halls of the White House. Very informal. Obama follows a president who many felt was too stubborn. Obama is trying to make a break from the Bush presidency. He too is using the dress code to symbolize that break.

I also find it fascinating that these 2 New York Times articles are so similar in their tone. They are excited about the change and think the new way is so great while the old way was ineffective. That is the power of the media. They know how to make good news bad news and bad news good news.

All this dress code talk has absolutely nothing to do with the success or failures of being a president. This has nothing to do with foreign policy, economics or size of the government. What we are noting here is the difference in office structure and atmosphere. I am all for casual; I prefer casual. However, I do think that the highest ranking civilian in our country should be more formal. I am little disappointed that the new president has changed the dress code and is now less formal. I remember feeling just the opposite when Bush reversed the Clinton dress code. My opinion is unrelated to any other area of his presidency. I just wish he would have kept the jeans wearing aides out.

The way we dress influences how we act. When you are dressed formally you are more likely to act formally. I want my president formal. Call me old-fashioned but that’s just me…

All About Manners

rabbifink — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 20:28:33 +0000

This NY Times article written by a pediatrician follows the usual course of “today’s generation has bad manners, but it is not a new problem, it has always been this way… etc.”. The doctor recommends a book called Miss Manners’ Guide to Rearing Perfect Children. Great title by the way. Perfect? Really? Where do I sign up? Maybe a bit of hyperbole there…?

The aforementioned book makes one very important point that we have been underlining over and over again in our Messilas Yesharim classes. The idea that we are all born as selfish children. The book has its own approach to dealing with this issue. I raise the issue here to remind myself that that childishness that we are born with, the child inside us, he never grows up, he is with us until we leave this earth. Our challenge is to channel that child and not allow the selfishness inside us dictate our decisions. When we recognize that the child inside us that used to say “gimme, gimme” and if it had the chance would eat jellybeans for every meal is actually still inside us we can begin to deal with it. The child’s message changes from jellybeans to newer more sophisticated version of jellybeans. But he is still there and always will be there. Our job is to the boss of that child and allow our adult, mature loving selves to persevere. You may find some real good advice in the Messilas Yesharim classes in this regard.

Well, actually the doctor’s favorite part of the book is to me a big mistake as well the root of these problems in the first place! Here is the excerpt from the article where the doctor praises Miss Manners approach…

“I like Miss Manners’ approach because it lets a parent respect a child’s intellectual and emotional privacy: I’m not telling you to like your teacher; I’m telling you to treat her with courtesy. I’m not telling you that you can’t hate Tommy; I’m telling you that you can’t hit Tommy. Your feelings are your own private business; your behavior is public.”

The message here is that you can think whatever you want just you need to keep it to yourself. This is actually good advice as a last resort but it cannot be the right way to develop good people. The only way to develop good people is to develop the skills necessary to be good people. Hiding your feelings is a useful tool but it is not the most important skill in becoming a good person.

The missing ingredient here is trying to see the good in others as opposed to finding their flaws and then “hating” them for it – privately of course. If a child says that they dislike someone then the way to help correct that behavior is by helping the child see all the good that the other person does and all the nice things about that other person. This is a very rare and very basic skill. If we only see bad in the other person to the point that we feel negatively towards them then we need to adjust how we view them. We can do this and this is actually developing the adult in us and taking charge of our child inside us.

Imagine if the entire world was teaching their children to see the good in other people instead of the negative. The world would definitely be a better place! Not to mention all the therapy and other side-effects that would be avoided by people not having to suppress their negative feelings!

I am going to start imagining that world now, so I will end this post…

Seen On A Bus Ad In London: "There’s Probably No God…" and Humanists

rabbifink — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 19:44:33 +0000

I live in Los Angeles where we are famous for our billboards. I grew up near New York City famous for its Madison Avenue and advertising. Normally the danger of these advertisements is the images they supply. The images are designed to be salacious and titillating. Apparently London has another whole set of issues they need to deal with on their bus advertisements.

I have a problem with the tone of the advertisement. “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life”. There is a flaw in the logic here. A logical fallacy that cannot be ignored is evident. The argument assumes that if one believes in God then they are worrying and if there is no God then you have no worries. This is false on both accounts. In fact I would say that if there is a God then you don’t need to worry as God must have some sort of plan using Godly wisdom which we cannot fathom. If there is no God then your worries are real. You are part of a random universe subject to the randomness of time. Now that is something to worry about!

The concept for the ads comes from, ironically enough, a blog post. The blogger is upset that London buses were promoting Biblical scriptures. Not everyone believes in God so she found the ads offensive. This I agree with. Scripture on buses reminds me of one of Pacific Jewish Center community member Milton Simon’s favorite ideas. “I have the truth, and you must obey”. Meaning plastering scripture on the side of a bus tells the non-believer that he is a) a bad person and b) going to hell. I find this offensive as well.

The good news is that a blog post can have a big impact!

Behind all of this, is the surging movement of Humanists. They are behind these ads as well as some others which are not as offensive. The ads which are running on Washington D.C. buses read “Why believe in God? Be good for goodness’ sake”. Interesting concept. The truth is that this would be nice. People actually being good for goodness’ sake. But again another fallacy exists in this ad. Belief in God is not so that we should be “good”. We believe that goodness does exist without God. I gave a lecture about this and you can hear / download it on this blog. God is just there to give us a hand so that we know what good is in a given situation. Sometimes it’s too hard for us to know what “good” is. Yes, most of time we have an intuition as to what it is right and what is good. We need God’s higher wisdom to help us out when we don’t know what to do! It happens. Also, sometimes we want to grow. Sometimes we want to be better than good. How can we work on ourselves to be better? We are given instructions in this regard from God as well. So it is nice for the world to be good for goodness’s sake but we want more that just good. We want a life of growth. And we can have it!

Post edited on December 1, 2010.