Pacific Jewish Center | Rabbi » Seinfeld

Andrew Bynum Parks in an Illegal Spot and Teaches Us About Secular Laws vs. Religious Laws

rabbifink — Thu, 21 Jul 2011 22:19:54 +0000

Lakers center Andrew Bynum found himself on the local and national news for the wrong reasons this week. It seems that Bynum makes the news every off-season for some reason or another.

This is the second time he made news in a shopping mall parking lot. Last time it was Kobe Bryant saying to ship him out on video while in a parking lot. This time, Bynum was caught on camera parking his car in a handicapped spot.

In the grand scheme of things, it is not a big deal. People do it all the time. Who could forget the time George Costanza needed a parking spot in a pinch so he pulled into the handicapped spot?

Of course, the Bynum haters have used this to prove how immature Bynum is. It’s hard to take such criticism seriously because Andrew Bynum is only 23 years old. At that age, being immature is normal.

The incident resonated with me for a completely different reason.

Laws in secular countries, like the USA, are man made rules. For every rule there is a reaction, punishment, fine and stigma associated with the breaking of the rule. Commit murder and the punishment may be the death penalty, or life without possibility of parole (ie death in prison). Get caught speeding, you get a fine for a few hundred dollars. Skip out on paying your taxes, risk jailtime and a heavy fine.

The punishments may be deterrents, forms of retribution, attempts to rehabilitate or simply incapacitation. If you are willing to pay the price, there’s nothing really stopping you from breaking the law. It’s a risk / reward analysis.

If someone is able to afford speeding tickets, they can choose to speed and pay the fine is they get caught. For Andrew Bynum the risk of getting a ticket (he didn’t) did not outweigh the reward of parking up close. Is this immature? Sure. Is it a reasonable way of thinking within our system? I think so.

But when contrasted with a system of religious law, like Jewish law, another possibility enters the picture.

In Jewish law, there is a moral imperative to follow the law. This means that even if you want to break the law and take your punches and suffer the eternal punishment, you have acted immorally. In fact, the rabbis teach us that if someone says “I will sin and then repent, even the forgiveness attained on Yom Kippur won’t forgive that sin”. In religious law, the act is wrong. The punishment is incentive to do the right thing. But the law represents the right thing.

Now, I am not advocated a system of religious law in any free country. That would be a terrible idea. How can there be freedom when there is a system of law that only works for some people? (And calls non-believers heretics / infidels etc.?)

But if I had all the money in the world, there would still be an imperative for me not to take that handicap spot. Jewish law requires giving up a seat (or in this case, parking spot) for anyone elderly or infirm. Parking in the spot might be okay, but if someone who needs the spot comes by and is forced to take a different spot, I (may) have violated the law. Religious law superimposed on top of secular law can work very well. In this case, there would be no risk / reward analysis. It would not matter if I was willing to pay the price. If it is wrong, I cannot do it. Driving recklessly would fall under the same category. In Jewish law, one is not permitted to put their life in danger. Driving too fast is dangerous. Even if I am willing to pay the fine, I can’t drive so fast that it would dangerous because it is wrong to do so.

Andrew Bynum acted in a way that is consistent with how secular law works. Having a religious law to superimpose on those laws could go a long way to not rationalizing breaking the law.

How timely are the words of the Chief Rabbi of the UK, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks on this week’s Torah portion:

The Torah sets forth a… way, in which people obey the law because they have voluntarily undertaken to do so. This is a society based not on power or the pursuit of self-interest but on freely embraced moral obligation.

Link: NBA

HT (Rabbi Sacks quote): @howielb

The Sales Pitch

rabbifink — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:23:30 +0000

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

I read an important column on a good website yesterday.

It wasn’t on NYTimes.com or Yahoo.com or ESPN.com (some of my favorite sites to link from) this article was on Vosizneias.com. VIN is a Orthodox Jewish blog with editorials and news. I recommend checking it out when you have a chance.

The column I read was a great perpective on Baal Teshuvas and their integration into the Frum community. In particular the column focused on various reactions of the BT (I use the term adoringly) when encountered with other (supposedly) Frum Jews who are not living up to their own standards.

Some BTs “can’t handle the truth” and wind up right where they started – wonderful secular people. Other BTs are more adept at maintaining their Frum lifestyle despite the disappointment. The article then enumerates some of the great things that BTs have contributed to the Frum lifestyle. Like manners, healthy eating, special education, etc.

While there is room for debate on whether the Frum community can attribute these “innovations” to BTs I am happy to give them the credit.

The article concludes by thanking the Frum community for showing them a way of life they love and appreciate.

I have two main points that I want to make in relation to this article.

1- The fake sales pitch the Frum From Birth Kiruv Rabbis spew.

2- The BTs reaction to the reality check.

I cannot stand the sales pitch that Frum people have no problems and Torah life is free from all social ills. It is simply not accurate. Please don’t use it!

In fact, the Torah is a guidebook for flawed people. If people were able to just become perfect then the Torah would give us one time instructions to “fix” our flaws and then we would be good to go! But instead, the Torah gives us instructions to develop our character through Mitzva observance with specific tasks. Some tasks only come around once in a lifetime, or once every 50 years, or once every seven years, or once a year, or once a month, once a week, once a day, and even every second. The clear message is that we need constant work because humans will eventually fall.

The Talmud explicitly states: “Do not believe in yourself (righteousness) until the day you die”. The human being is designed to fail without constant work and guidance.

I believe the honest sales pitch (and yes it is a sales pitch and that’s okay) is: Humans are flawed, we all need guidance, the Torah provides guidance. Some of it is obvious, some of it is hidden, but we believe that the Torah lifestyle is a guide for life. If you want a guide, you can buy in. We are all trying to use the guide as best as we can and we feel our lives are more enriched by using the guide. Maybe you will too.

Perhaps more important is the reaction of the BT. I sent this email to Judd Magilnick, a Pacific Jewish Center board member and he offered some great insight.

First, many “not yet” BTs back off from greater commitment by rationalizing that they saw a Frum person who lacked derech eretz (common courtesy). Judd says this is the Yetzer Hara talking but Frum folks need to realize that they are being judged and should act accordingly.

I once heard that R’ Moshe Feinstein asked why we ask in Ahava Rabba that Hashem give us the ability to understand, listen to and teach Torah. Should the teaching part be reserved for teachers and rabbis? Why does veryone say it? And R’ Moshe answers that we are all teachers. We are teaching others about how the Torah wants us to behave every time we act.

Judd’s next point was even better. Why should an impious Frum person affect one’s opinion of Torah? The analogy is if one sticks his wet finger in a socket he is going to get a shock. That doesn’t indicate a flaw in elecricity! And like electricity Torah has the power to do great good and it also has the power to cause ill. It depends on its user.

So (potential) BTs, if you can use Torah for good why would you let it bother you that someone else is abusing it? One has nothing to do with the other!

As a Rabbi in shul of mostly BTs and potential BTs I hear this kind of rhetoric often. “If he’s a Frum person he shouldn’t do X or Y etc”. It is disheartening but I have one response.

I always quote Rabbi Wein: “Don’t judge Judaism by its Jews”.

Additionally, I don’t pitch anything other that learning more Torah and experiencing a Shabbos meal. One should make their personal decisions based on an informed view that can only come from one’s own study. The Shabbos meal is just to make it a little more personal and less abstract. That’s all.

So, I am looking for insight, do people really judge Torah by its Jews?

Is there an “accurate” (non-cynical) sales pitch?

Anything else in the original column that struck you?

Recess + Litigation = Big Problem

rabbifink — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:23:08 +0000

“Oh I can be quite litigious” - Cosmo Kramer

As Law Student I read about 25-30 cases per week. All of the cases I read this year are lawsuits. Whether they deal with torts and damages, contract disputes or property issues “A” is always suing “B”. The lawsuit is the basis of the American Legal system. It allows any victim of a social or financial injustice to seek and recover damages for harms suffered. There is a downside however.

In Broward County Florida there is no running during recess. The county is ever fearful of increased law suits aiming to recover damages for injuries sustained by children during recess. 189 suits were settled in the past 5 years in Broward County. So now during recess children can play with their PSP or Nintendo DS. No one gets hurt, no on gets sued. Is this a good thing? (no, not for the lawyers…for them it is good!)

Obesity is one of the greatest preventable health risks facing our society today. Now children cannot even get cardio exercises during recess! I don’t think this is going to help too much. There is another social problem that arises from restricting children’s movement and not allowing them to get hurt. When children are so protected that they never feel any pain they are not prepared for the inevtiable disappointments and trials of life. Part of growing up is dealing with pain and disappointment on a child’s scale. Then as we mature we can use our experiences from dealing with problems as a child to help us as adults. Taking away opportunities for pain is actually taking away opportunities for growth.

I propose a Constitutional Right to Recess. Barring lawsuits except in cases of gross negligence or recklessness by the districts. We need our children to be strong and able to deal with adversity. Bubble wrapping them will cause more harm than good.

Winners and Losers | A New Yorker Cartoon (and I get it, and it is funny!)

rabbifink — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 21:13:14 +0000

Thanks to The Seinfeld Episode: The Cartoon whenever I see The New Yorker magazine I check to see if the cartoons are actually funny. One of my professors mentioned a New Yorker article last night about inaugural addresses so I went to check it out online. This cartoon was inset in a completely different article I was reading (which I did not “get”) and I just had to blog about the cartoon (which i do “get”)!

Don’t we all miss the days when a winner won and a loser lost?

Now it seems there is no winning and no losing. We are almost more concerned that the losers not feel bad than the winners feel good. When my younger brother played in Little League as a 6 year old the rule was “no keeping score allowed” but he always knew who won anyway… I guess they think that means that we are all winners.

I think that it may mean that we are all losers!

Seriously, rewarding success is very important and we need to balance that with making certain that people don’t get too down about their lack of success. One place that has preserved this quite effectively is Loyola Law School. We are graded on a hard curve which results in a handful of “A” students, a few more “A-” students and mostly “B+” – “C” students. Only the best get the “A”. But the rest can get that really nice trophy in the cartoon…