" ... They won't publish it, they never publish Karen's letters, they are far too devastating—and so we do. ...



maybe this could be an interesting extension of your blog,
a section entitled:

Letters The New York Times never prints



and invite readers who have e-mailed their letters in response to any of the many biased NYT articles and letters, to send them to you for review and possible inclusion on your blog

(maybe as your blog gets famous enough,
the NYT will start to consider publishing letters that are cc'd to Seraphic Secret 8^) )

Exdemexlib:

Outstanding idea! Thanks so much.

Okay folks, letters that you've sent to the NY Times that have not been published, send 'em here.

BTW Exdemexlib, love your name. Describes yours truly too.

What do you expect from a newspaper that even finds fault with how Israel grows flowers: "And a country in love with flowers and proud of 'making the desert bloom,' in its own disputatious way, is letting much of its land go to seed."

Brava Karen!

BTW, can you even find a lawyer to sell chametz? Who would pay for such a thing? Do they discount their rates? Or do you have to pay $300/hr to sell your crackers?

I didn't even realize that you were supposed to donate to the shul in thanks for the Rabbi's chametz selling services. After reading that article, I think I may have been getting the deal of the century. :-P

The Jonssons love Karen. Go girl!

And what's wrong with letting the earth rest again? As a person who is liberal in many ways I think it's a pretty lovely thing to do.

Fern:

Funny, Erlanger objects to how Israel grows her flowers. I suppose he admires how Hamas destroyed the Jewish Greenhouses in Gaza. Yup, that was progressive politics.

And remember Erlanger's description of how the Arabs burned the synagogues in Gaza?

Smoke and flames rise from the synagogues in Gaza...

Notice the passive voice

It just happened, spontaneous combustion!

At no point does this, ahem, journalist, point out the simple fact that the Palestinians burned every synagogue to the ground.

Julius Streicher is an amateur compared to this guy.

Alice:

Now you see why I fell in love with Karen in 4th grade.

they would slit each other's throats.

If only they would limit themselves to each other's throats.

Several additional points about the article:

1. It is well rounded, in the sense that he derides the law of Shmitta as costly and antiquated, but also derides the means we have developed to circumvent it when the need arises. He thinks that both the prohibition and the dispensation are absurd. Most of us only get to make fun of one side.

2. He does not note that most Orthodox Jews believe that the Biblical Shmitta law lapsed with the destruction of the Temple and the dispersion of the Jews in 70 A.D., and that the Shmitta law we have now is a rabbinic ordinance. Obviously, Rabbinic enactments are subject to modification as need arises.

3. Like most non-religious people, he feels that the religious people aren't religious enough. If he believed in Shmitta, he would never sell his land! We, on the other hand, have standards that allow (with certain limitations) compromise when the cost of a religious law is too high, such as in cases of danger to life or limb, or great financial loss, or even an abstract danger to the health of society.

>>We, on the other hand, have standards that allow (with certain limitations) compromise when the cost of a religious law is too high...>>

Ok...I'm out of my depth here, but this comment is interesting since the problem with this theological point indicates that the man is more comfortable with islam, which is being "sold" in its original 7th century form. So...he prefers unadulterated islam which finds beheading infidels OK, but modern Judaism which accomodates our present means of living is subject to scorn. Bizzare. You have to wonder about how peoples' minds work.

Suek, I was unclear in my third point. What I meant was that Erlanger seems to be saying that if he were religious, he would never compromise on the rules, and that those who do are hypocritical. In fact, Orthodox Judaism does make a great number of compromises to enable us to survive and function in society; many orthodox women would never walk outdoors without covering their hair, but they wear wigs that are almost indistinguishable from their natural hair. Men wear teeny yarmulkes. We have a mechanism that enables us to charge interest. And yes, the sale of chametz before Pesach and of the land for Shmittah are also concessions that we'ver decided to make. In fact, our lunar calendar is adjusted every couple of years to reconcile it with the reality of a solar year.

The Muslims wouldn't stand for any of this. The biggest obstacle that prevented the combination of Muslim and Jewish kashrut certification organizations was the fact that we allow annulment of non-kosher if the combination was inadvertant and the proportions are greater than sixty to one, but they are more frum than us and THEY DON'T.

But you know what? The Torah, like most legal systems, has built-in loopholes precisely so that intelligent and sincere people can find ways to live in difficult circumstances while remaining faithful to the law. There are limits to this, of course. There are certain essential elements of faith and law that must remain pristine and inviolate. Shmittah is not one of them.

Like most non-religious people, he feels that the religious people aren't religious enough.

I once had a non-observant Jew at the house who was very critical of the mechanism of eruv. He derided it as a "loophole." He of course carried on Shabbos without benefit of an eruv.

In fact, our lunar calendar is adjusted every couple of years to reconcile it with the reality of a solar year.

This is not a "compromise," it's a Biblical command; "shemor es chodesh ha'aviv," which means "safeguard the springtime month," i.e. of Nissan by ensuring that it remain in the springtime. This is the commandment to intercalate the lunar year.

Regarding our reconciliation of lunar and solar years, it's true that we are obligated to do so, and do not do it as a compromise. I just see it as emblematic of the difference between the Islam and Judaism. Islam's lunar calendar is absolute and uncompromising in that it totally ignores the solar year, so their holidays are not synched with the solar year at all; one year Ramadan is in the fall, one year in the spring. We, on the other hand, have a lunar calendar that is manipulated in order to reconcile it with the solar year, so Pesach is always in the Spring. It's as if we are told to do something which is specifically Jewish, but to do it in a way that accepts and incorporates the reality of the seasons.

I hear you. It's an interesting point, and it carries through in other aspects of Islam worship as well.