A Gut un freilichen Purim to Everyone! The Rav זצ"ל in this shiur, published in the first chapter here, notes that Purim is both a serious and a deliriously happy day. So, a few notes in that light.
1) Purim Torah Number One: Today someone in shul started a discussion as to whether men are allowed to wear wedding rings. He told me that two rabbanim (both of whom I respect) are against it, unless the wife wants it. I hope this is Purim Torah. If it's prohibited, the wife's desires are irrelevant. As it happens, it's not assur. Why should it be? 1) It's not כלי אישה because we're talking about men's rings. 2) It's not a problem with the קידושין because we're no discussing double ring ceremonies (which are allowed, if properly done. IOW, the חתן gives the ring after שבע ברכות and it's made clear that this gift has no halakhic significance.) 3) It's not חוקות עכו"ם because it's a) not irrational b) not arrogant c) not done in order to assimilate. Ayyy, yeshivish people don't do it. Zollen mir zayn gezunt un shtark. That's irrelevant.
2) Pasque di Sangue Redux- For those of you who think that the book has no defenders. Think again. The noted post-Jew, Yehiam Shorek, has stood up for the exposing of nefarious Jewish practices. Ben Dror Yemini responds to him here. As for the Muslims, they're eating this up. Note this exchange on Egyptian TV (courtesy of MemriTV.)
3) Amalek Redux- The commandment to wipe out Amalek certainly poses moral questions. It is especially challenging in light of the famous comment by Reb Hayyim Brisker זצ"ל that nations who try to destroy the Jews attain the sttus of Amalek. Some of the issues are noted by Gil, here. So let's ask ourselves the following question: The Iranians (i.e. Persians) are planning to nuke the Jews of Israel and murder 6,000,000 Jews. That's a fact. The world will do absolutely nothing to prevent. That too is a fact. (See Caroline Glick's latest column.) So, do we hit first and kill untold numbers of Iranians, or do we do what the Leftists and the rest of the World would prefer, 'Go gently into that (not so) good night'? The trouble is that while the idea of dying for the salvation of mankind may have emerged from Judaism, we do not believe in it.
I promised hilarity. No go. I'll go open the bottle of Chivas I bought in the JFK duty free. Then we'll see what develops.
3 comments:
in ashkenaz grooms were given rings by their fathers-in-law
see je, s.v. "rings"
Thank you very much.
Also, the MB when discussing the halachos of Netilas yadaim discuss the difference between the stauts of rings for women and men (i.e. men can keep them on because they always keep them on, women must take them off because they sometimes take them off and they are therefor a chatzitza). If it were assur - why would the MB mention it?
Post a Comment