#shoftim

[hyperpotamianarch]

#Orev true

This is a tag by @spot-the-antisemitism, definitely a typo from "Prev true". However, since we're both Jewish I'm going to take it as them confirming that a raven/crow is correct about something. Or possibly that ‘Orev, the Midianite prince, was correct about something - heaven knows what, though.

Sharing it here to not derail the original post.

[eretzyisrael]

[girlactionfigure]

[rabbiaharon]

Shalom Aleichem!

Today I wanted to address something I have seen all too often, regarding the Torah approach to politicians - not only non-jewish politicians (particularly and especially), but even Jewish politicians. In addition, there is an issue which applies to all idolaters (I will explain the context of this term later on!), including all non-jewish politicians who fall into that category.

First of all, in Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (167:14), there is a rule stating that a Jew is forbidden to give a gift to a non-Jew that they do not know, based on the posuk “do not give them grace” (לא תחנם) which our sages explain to mean “do not give them a free gift” (לא תתן להם מתנת חינום). This being a scripturally-sourced injunction, it does not depend whatsoever on who or what kind of a person that idolater is, provided that you do not know them personally. Giving a gift to an idolater you have a working relationship with is considered under this halacha to be a purchase, as they have either already paid you or helped you in some way (and the gift is in appreciation), or there will be some personal benefit as a result of the gift.

Furthermore, the Kitzur rules (167:15) that it is also prohibited even to compliment an idolater that you do not know personally, as it also falls under the category of “do not give them grace”. This applies even complimenting their appearance, and, as the Kitzur says “How much moreso to compliment their actions”. However, it is permitted to compliment their appearance in certain situations, if you are intending not to compliment them, but to compliment Hashem for creating such a beautiful creation. The Kitzur clarifies at this point (167:16) that we are permitted to take care of the non-jewish poor (in other words, they aren’t included in the category of idolaters who you cannot give a gift to), because of darkei shalom.

The category of who is considered an “idolater” is delineated in the Rambam (Maimonides) in his magnum opus, in The Laws of Kings and Wars (Chapter 8): This includes anyone among the non-jews who does not keep the 7 Laws of Noah because they were given to Moshe at Mount Sinai to give over to the nations (A relatively high bar to reach, as someone who does not keep the Laws of Noah because they don’t know about them, someone who keeps them because they are logical, and even someone who keeps them becaues they were given to Noah, are all categorized equally as idolaters).

The ruling in 167:14-15 applies to all people classified as “idolaters”, certainly including non-Jewish politicians, who you would be hard pressed (if not frankly unable) to prove are keeping the 7 Noahide Laws because they were given to Moshe. While there may be heterim (exceptions) for individuals to donate to political campaigns (regarding the ruling of 167:14), as they don’t represent individuals but rather ostensibly collections of policy that you may want implemented in your area, it is always best to donate first to Torah Institutions rather than political campaigns. However, this idea does not extend to the question of complimenting individual idolatrous politicians, like the candidates currently running for federal office in this country. You can certainly vote according to your conscience, but know that complimenting your pick, especially regarding their actions (saying “Oh, this individual is/was so good for Israel!” Or “This person will be better to support Torah in this country”) would definitely constitute a violation of the ruling in 167:15.

In Masechta Avos in the Mishnah, there are 2 mishnayos which deal with the question of our interaction with any politician, one in the first chapter, in the name of Shamaya (“Don’t become familiar with the government”), and an additional mishnah, brought without a name in the second chapter. The conclusion of the first mishnah, written by Shamaya, is explained by the Bartenura as follows:

”’Do not become familiar with the government’ in order to receive any sort of authority from it. Another explanation is ’do not become familiar with the government so that you will not violate the expectations of your maker‘, as happend with Doeg HaEdomi. ’government’, using the term rashus (permission), indicates the government’s ability to do what it wants, regardless.” This applies even with Jewish politicians, especially those that do not keep Torah.

The second explanation of the Bartenura is especially notable in the case of idolaters in government, as following them and trying to become close to them would almost inevitably lead to the violation of the aforementioned halachos in Shulchan Aruch.

The second Mishnah is stated as a stam (a mishnah without an attached name) meaning that the compiler of the Mishnah (Rebbi Yehuda HaNasi) intended it to represent an absolute teaching, universally applicable in all relevant situations, rather than the opinion of one particular Rabbi:

”Be careful around the government, as they will not befriend a person except for their own needs; they seem like friends when it is to their own benefit, but do not stand by a man in his time of need.”

The Bartenura explains that this Mishnah advises people who are involved with the needs of the Jewish Community and the Jewish people, who need to be acquainted with authorities in order to facilitate the community’s ability to live and thrive, that the government is not our friend. The government isn’t thinking about the Jewish people, they’re only thinking about themselves. This is a poignant lesson that has been proven all too clearly over the past 10 years, with world leaders giving platforms to antisemites to broadcast their hate… as well as local and national leadership legitimizing, emboldening, and endorsing antisemitic organizations and protests. For us, though, it’s important to remember that we don’t have to rely on them, nor have we ever. We have an advocate above who can and will judge us favorably and support us in our time of need. If we want to be redeemed, if we want to leave our exile… We just have to reach higher.

Good Shabbos.

[geostatonary]

Tonight in Torah study: Shoftim - 8/14/23

We continue deeper into Deuteronomy. A big theme this portion was around jurisprudence- we open with an admonition to judges to judge impart

tonight in torah study we discuss jurisprudence, the basic units of testimony, kindness in allowing people to leave your armies, and ramban's pitch for a murder mystery television series

[parshapoem]

Shoftim

two witnesses to kill a man two cast the first stone two witnesses to marry them joy sings in Jerusalem.

two witnesses, earth and sky for a promise for forever both may it be in this world and in the world to come.

[supportjewishart]

Deborah, A Prophetess by Arthur Szyk (1946)

[hyperpotamianarch]

So hey, why not write another Tanachic post, since I brought it up recently! This time about Gid‘on-Yeruba‘al, the Judge.

(I don't want to ramble about it too much, but "judge" might be a misleading translation. The Shoftim were a type of leaders, and similar roles existed across Canaanite culture as well. Qart-Hadast/Carthage was led by Suffetes during their war with Rome - or, in their language, 𐤔𐤐𐤈𐤌, Shoftim.)

Anyway, Gid‘on is especially interesting due to his other name. Yeruba‘al is a theophoric name. And not just any theophoric name, but one referring to Baal, a god whose worship is explicitly and repeatedly condemned in the Tanach. So it's a bit weird that a Tanachic hero would carry his name, wouldn't it? Well, the Tanach itself actually explains that: the "yeru-" part means "he will fight with", so the actual idea is that if Baal has anything against him (which one might expect, since Gid‘on destroyed his altar), he can fight with him himself, no need for human intervention. This is obviously a retroactive interpretation of the name, but I'm not sure I want to get into that.