Exodus 2.0?

Letter from Concerned Elders of Israel

The author of this clever piece invited me to share it, but asked to remain anonymous. I will comment that it may well be closer to historical fact than parody, considering that 80% of the Jews perished in Egypt, and many of the remaining 20% pined for the good old days of galus. Our generation has a golden opportunity to correct this historic, tragic mistake.
Chananya
A newly discovered letter from Concerned Elders of Israel on the eve of the Exodus, translated for the benefit of the modern reader:

 

To our dear brethren in Goshen and throughout greater Egypt, peace be upon you. The developments of the last few months have been very exciting, and many of us have been caught up in the current events that seem, at first glance, to be miraculous, and too many, the beginning of the long-awaited redemption. However, it is also important for us to re-state and emphasize that it has been the unanimous opinion of our gedolim that we are to remain in galus until such as time as God Himself redeems us, and until that happens, we are to accept the yoke of gentile servitude without question, and we are forbidden to in any way rebel against our Egyptian masters and His Majesty, the Pharaoh. Such was explicitly told to us by our avos, Avraham and Yaakov, and repeated by Yosef Hatzaddik before he died.

 

Concerning the horrible plagues that have befallen this country in the last few months, we must remember that they can all be rationally attributed to a chain of natural consequences, and not necessarily a series of miracles, for after all, the Ribbono Shel Olam would only make beneficial miracles on behalf of great tzaddikim, like of those of generations past. There have been reports of an awesome mountain at the headwaters of the Nile, far to our south in the land of Ethiopia, that erupted and spewed thick red mud into the river, and it is this blood-like substance that forced all the frogs out of the Nile and killed the fish, and it was the piles of dead frogs and fish that in turn attracted all types of vermin, disease, and wild animals.

 

It is too soon for us to declare that these events have anything to do with our plight although they have distracted the Egyptians from forcing us to work as of late. Have the anthrax and hail done anything to actually help us leave Egypt? We must, unfortunately, be ready for these plagues to pass, and for the Egyptians to recover and begin subjugating us once more. We can anticipate this because Avraham Avinu was told that his descendants would be oppressed and subjugated as strangers in a land not theirs for 400 years, and by the count of our gedolim, it is more than clear that this galus has barely lasted 200 years. It is also wrong for anyone to attempt to calculate when the Redemption will come about, because when it does not happen as he predicts, it harms his emunah.

 

We have nothing against individuals who may feel that for them, eventually settling in the land of Canaan is right, but for most of us, it may not be so. Today, Eretz Canaan is a land full of idolaters and their idols; there are barely any Israelite religious institutions there, and the governmental authorities are not friendly to Israelites. At least here, the government sees to it that we are well-fed, with plenty of fresh fish and stewed meat, and plentiful vegetables, and does not seek to indoctrinate our children. Here agriculture is much easier, as the Nile provides the country with an unending water supply, whereas Canaan is dependent on seasonal rainfall, which, as we all know happened many times in the times of the avos, sometimes is not sufficient, leading to devastating famines. There are also reports that the land is inhabited by fearsome and belligerent giants, against whom we stand little chance in battle.

 

Concerning the most prominent advocate of this new, nationalist, redemptive movement, Moses, son of Harav Hagaon Amram ben Kehas, zatz’’al, we must exercise extreme caution. He may have yichus, but his ideas and pronouncements have been highly questionable.

 

Firstly, he still has to answer for his unusual upbringing. It has become known to us that he did not actually grow up at home with his distinguished parents and ybidla’’h siblings, but was actually raised in the royal household as the adoptive grandson of the very Pharaoh who first subjugated us and massacred are children! We have been told by reliable sources that even when he was just a young man, he engaged in subversive and rebellious activities against the Egyptian authorities, a grave prohibition under the law of the land and the commandments of our fathers. He disappeared from this country for decades, and only now, after reportedly marrying the daughter of a prominent idolatrous Midianite priest, he has come back telling us that which none of our gedolim have said, that God appeared to him and that he is His emissary of Redemption.

 

We do not need to remind you how bad it was for us when he first showed up, and instead of redeeming us, he incited Pharaoh to deprive us of the raw materials we so badly needed to complete our brick quotas, which remained as before. People claim to have seen Moses perform miracles, such as turning a staff into a serpent and summoning frogs and blood and the like. Alas, there are equally reliable reports of Pharaoh’s own magicians doing likewise, making this Moses not any different from or better than any of them.

 

Moses’s pronouncements also fly in the face of what we have been expecting from any traditional redeemer. We have been waiting to be led back to the promised land, but he wants to take us into the desert, to some mountain venerated by the same idolatrous Midianites. He has repeatedly demanded that Pharaoh let us go to this place in order to offer sacrifice to our God, and that by no means will we perform any form of traditional sacrifice here in Egypt, as that would offend our masters, but now he has changed his tune, saying that we will offer God sacrifice right here in Egypt, and that we will slaughter the animals that our masters consider sacred. We would not be surprised if Moses will soon claim that instead of building the Beis Hamikdash in Eretz Canaan, as we know we shall, we should build a temporary and portable mikdash in the desert next to his chosen mountain. We can only imagine what other halachic hiddushim he will try to spring on us if we follow him there.

 

Therefore, we call upon all of you to please exercise patience, caution, and reason. Moses wants all of us to, in the coming days, prepare goats and sheep for sacrifice, and to eventually apply the blood of those animals to our doorposts before the night when he says we will be driven out by Pharaoh. We have a chazaka that just as after the last events, Pharaoh did not let us go, so too after whatever happens next week he will not let us go, especially after a mass act of rebellion on our part. Adderabba, it could lead to a reprisal on their part, chas veshalom. Therefore, we will only begin to prepare for an Exodus from Egypt once we hear that Pharaoh himself has given his permission. We call upon all Beis Yisrael to do likewise.

Rabbi Avi Grossman Finds More Biblical Personage Parsimony

On the Identity of an Anonymous Prophet

I Kings 13:1:

And, behold, a man of God came from Judah to Beth-el by the word of the Lord, and Jeroboam was standing by the altar to offer.

Rashi and other commentators note that the sages (Sanhedrin 89) identify this prophet with Iddo/Jeddo, who, although otherwise absent from the book of Kings, is mentioned explicitly in a number of places in the book of Chronicles, and is perhaps the ancestor of the second prophet Zechariah (Zechariah 1:1). However, this identification can not be taken to be equivocal.

Right before this prophet’s appearance, we read about Jeroboam’s religious innovations (I Kings, 12:31):

He established shrines of high places, and appointed priests from among some of the people – who were not of the sons of Levi.

And after the prophet’s ominous death we find that Jeroboam had not learned his lesson (ibid, 13:33):

After this matter, Jeroboam did not repent of his evil path, but once again appointed from among some of the people priests of the high places; whosoever desired could be initiated into the service and be of the priests of the high places.

That is, originally Jeroboam appointed priests of his own choosing, and included himself, but later he took a more egalitarian approach, opening up his new priesthood to anyone.

Jeroboam and Rehoboam began their reigns simultaneously, and Abijah inherited the Judean throne after Jeroboam had reigned for most of eighteen years. In his short, (almost) three-year reign, he made war with Jeroboam, but before the battle began he delivered a stern rebuke to the ten tribes, admonishing Jeroboam for his innovations, including (II Chronicles 13:9):

Have you not rejected the priests of the Lord, the sons of Aaron and the Levites, and made priests for yourselves as the peoples of other lands [do]? Whoever comes to initiate himself with a young bullock and seven rams, will be a priest to a non-god!

Abijah referred to Jeroboam’s latter reform, which opened the priesthood to all. Yet, when concluding the account of Abijah’s reign, the Chronicler includes (ibid, 22):

And the rest of the acts of Abijah, and his ways and his matters, are written in the commentary of the prophet Iddo.

Thus, because Iddo recorded part of Abijah’s royal history, which included Abijah recounting Jeroboams latter innovations, he could not have been the anonymous prophet who died shortly after chastising Jeroboam for his initial innovations.

From Rabbi Avi Grossman, here.

אין כאן היתר להתאבד

כתובות י”ט א’:

חזקה אין העדים חותמין על השטר אלא אם כן נעשה בגדול אלא אנוסין מאי טעמא אמר רב חסדא קסבר ר”מ עדים שאמרו להם חתמו שקר ואל תהרגו יהרגו ואל יחתמו שקר אמר ליה רבא השתא אילו אתו לקמן לאמלוכי אמרינן להו זילו חתומו ולא תתקטלון דאמר מר אין לך דבר שעומד בפני פיקוח נפש אלא עבודת כוכבים וגלוי עריות ושפיכות דמים בלבד השתא דחתמו אמרינן להו אמאי חתמיתו אלא טעמא דר”מ כדרב הונא אמר רב דא”ר הונא אמר רב מודה בשטר שכתבו אין צריך לקיימו גופא אמר רב הונא אמר רב מודה בשטר שכתבו אין צריך לקיימו אמר ליה רב נחמן גנובא גנובי למה לך אי סבירא לך כר”מ אימא הלכה כר”מ אמר ליה ומר היכי סבירא ליה אמר ליה כי אתו לקמן לדינא אמרינן להו זילו קיימו שטרייכו וחותו לדינא.

רמב”ן:

הא דאמר רב חסדא קסבר רבי מאיר העדים שאמרו להם וכו’, ה”ק אע”ג דקיי”ל שאין לך דבר שעומד בפני פקוח נפש אלא ע”ז וג”ע ושפיכות דמים, מ”מ דינא הוא דליקטלו ולא יחתמו שקר ומדת חסידות היא ואי לא עבדי הכי משוו נפשייהו כרשיעי וקסבר רבי מאיר אפי’ בכה”ג אין אדם משים עצמו שאינו חסיד, ורבא קשיא ליה כיון דקא מודית שאין לך דבר שעומד בפני פקוח נפש אלא ע”ז וג”ע וש”ד ואי אתו לקמן מורינן להו למחתם, כי חתמי מנפשייהו היכי משוית להו רשעים כי היכי דנימא אין אדם משים עצמו רשע הואיל ואי אתו לאורויי מורינן להו לכתחלה שיעידו ואל יהרגו, ואיכא דאמרי דרב חסדא אמר קסבר רבי מאיר מדינא נמי יהרגו ואל יחתמו שקר, לפי שנמצא בברייתא חיצונית שלשה דברים אין עומדים בפני פקוח נפש ואלו הן ע”ז וג”ע וש”ד רבי מאיר אומר אף הגזל, ורבא אמר אנן ודאי קי”ל שאין לך דבר שעומד בפני פקוח נפש אלא שלשה אלו בלבד, ודילמא אתא קמי בי דינא דס”ל כרבנן ואורו ליה הכי, ולאו מילתא היא.

רשב”א:

קסבר ר’ מאיר עדים שאמרו להם חתמו שקר (ואל) [ואם לאו] תהרגו יהרגו ואל יחתמו שקר. פי’ לאו מדינא קאמר אלא מדת חסידות שנו כאן, וכיון דמשימין עצמם כדלא חסידים לא מהימני, והיינו דאהדר ליה רבא השתא אלו אתו לקמן לאימלוכי אמרינן להו זילו חתימי וכו’. ויש מפרשים דרב חסדא מדינא קאמר יהרגו ואל יחתמו שקר, מדתניא בתוספתא (שבת פט”ז הי”ד) שלשה דברים עומדים בפני פיקוח נפש ואלו הן ע”ז וגילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים ר’ מאיר אומר אף הגוזל, וכי אהדר ליה רבא השתא אלו אתו לקמן לאו לסבריה דר’ מאיר קאמר, דלדידיה הא לא אמרינן להו זילו חתומו, אלא הכי קאמר ליה והא אנן ודאי קיימא לן שאין דבר עומד בפני פיקוח נפש אלא שלשה אלה בלבד, ודילמא אתו לאמלוכי קמי בי דינא דסבירא להו כרבנן והורו להו למיחתם ואל יהרגו. ואינו מחוור, דרב חסדא טעמיה דר’ מאיר קא מפרש ולדידיה הא סבירא ליה דמשוו נפשייהו בהא רשיעי, ומאי קא מהדר ליה רבא דילמא אתו קמי ב”ד דאורו להו להתירא, והא ר’ מאיר לא חייש להכי. ועוד דלישנא דגמ’ לא משמע הכי.

שגגת תלמוד עולה זדון.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe’s ‘Constructive Ambiguity’ on Chassidic Antinomianism

Let’s quote the first paragraph of the last Lubavitcher Rebbe’s Foreword to the biography (by Nissan Mandel) of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi:

The moral person must strive to bring his conduct in full harmony with his conviction; to live up to the standards of morality and ethics which he would like others also to adhere to. This is particularly true of the Jewish religious person, since the Jewish religion is a way of everyday life, and considers the deed – the actual conduct in the daily life – as the essential thing and the ultimate purpose of knowledge. The Chassidic philosophy goes a step further. While considering the deed essential, it demands that the deed be permeated with vitality and inwardness. Insisting that there can be no substitute for the actual fulfillment of duty, Chassidus insists at the same time that each action be animated; that the act have a “soul.” It is only on this level that a person can achieve true harmony in every aspect of his daily life, physical, emotional, and intellectual; harmony of all his “components” – his Divine soul, animal soul, and physical body, as well as harmony with the world in which he lives.

The words insistence and demand “at the same time” convey more than mere stressing or encouraging or reminding. As he writes explicitly, “The Chassidic philosophy goes a step further”, period.

And as we said before, since subjective values are imputed ordinally, going “a step further” must sacrifice the all-important deed

Also, unlike one who adds a parsha to the “unharmonious” Tefillin or a new stalk to the “soulless” Arba Minim, Chassidus adds something to every one of the mitzvos and minhagim we observe, passuling each, all the while slandering Sinaitic Judaism as lacking vitality and inwardness, and falsely limiting the original “deed” to mechanical action alone.

So, Chassidus (or Chabad Lubavitch, at any rate) is an antinomian schismatic breakaway from historical Judaism and lies about it, to boot.

When You Give All Workers New ‘Rights’, Some Lose Their Job. OBVIOUSLY.

Could New Gig Economy Laws Prevent You From Working?

Designed to be helpful, some say the legislation is bad news for them

By Deborah Lynn Blumberg| March 16, 2020

In Fair Lawn, N.J., Kathy Wilder Bichler, 53, has come to rely on her flexible work schedule teaching English as a second language online to children in China. Freelancing for an online education platform means she can care for her disabled husband, Andrew. The money she makes supplements his insufficient Social Security disability payments.

But lately, Bichler has grown concerned that legislation in the works in New Jersey aimed at correcting what’s known as “worker misclassification” will jeopardize her family’s well-being. It’s designed to turn independent contractors into employees, to provide minimum-wage protection and benefits.

A similar bill became law in California in January (known as AB5) and others are under consideration in New York, Washington, Illinois and Massachusetts. A national version — the PRO Act — was resoundingly approved in the House of Representatives. The bills have largely been supported by Democrats, who say they’ll help protect workers’ rights, especially people like Uber and Lyft drivers who work so much for those companies that many say they’re essentially employees.

The intentions were good in creating legislation for gig workers, but already the California law has had an unexpected and wide-reaching negative impact on the state’s freelancers

If the New Jersey bill passes, Bichler says, it will become impossible for her to pay the bills and contribute to her kids’ college tuition, while putting her and her husband in a precarious financial situation heading into retirement.

Independent Contractors Are Worried

Like Bichler, many of the 15 million freelancers and independent contractors across the country — about one in 10 U.S. workers — are worrying about their livelihoods due to the gig-economy legislation.

Here’s what’s happening:

The bills define employee status for legal and tax purposes and would make it more difficult for workers to be classified as independent contractors. Without that classification, companies wouldn’t be able to hire people to perform freelance work. Instead, they would have to bring them on as employees.

The legislation could disproportionally affect middle-aged and older workers. Many of them depend on independent work after losing a job. Others freelance to ease into retirement, depending on the income as they care for their parents or to keep them afloat. Many older adults turn to freelancing after experiencing age discrimination. According to AARP, three in five older workers have seen or experienced age discrimination in the workplace.

From 2005 to 2017, the percentage of people 55 and older working as independent contractors jumped by nearly 19% according to a report from the Economic Policy Institute.

How a California Law Is Backfiring

Being able to work as a freelancer is “something I think about every day,” says Bichler. “Social Security disability doesn’t really go that far, and with my husband’s doctors’ appointments, me having a traditional job was really off the table.” Working from 4 a.m. to 9 a.m. lets Bichler attend medical appointments with her husband and manage his medications.

Already, since AB5 went into effect January 1, the company Bichler freelances for has said it will stop offering new work to contractors in California. Since January, freelancers across the state have suffered from lost work and reduced income, particularly freelance writers, who — according to the new law — can produce no more than 35 articles a year for a client before becoming classified as employees.

Bichler’s company is honoring current contracts with its California workers, but contracts are renewed every six months. She’s concerned it won’t renew with California freelancers and believes that if similar legislation passes in New Jersey, she’ll be sunk.

Some New Jersey freelancers are hopeful that legislators will tweak the legislation to better support them, however.

Meantime, Bichler is making contingency plans to relocate to another state. She’s also selling possessions to build a nest egg. “If it’s not nailed down, and I think somebody might buy it, I’m selling it,” she says.

The intentions were good in creating legislation for gig workers, but already the California law has had an unexpected and wide-reaching negative impact on the state’s freelancers — from writers to translators to musicians to therapists.

Many of them are happy with their work situations and say they aren’t being exploited. But companies are shying away from hiring them.

The Stiff ABC Test

That’s because of the part of the law revolving around what’s known as the ABC test, created in 1937 for California worker classification during the Great Depression. It requires all workers to pass a stringent, three-pronged test to qualify as an independent contractor.

The hurdles are greater than those already required by the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Department of Labor. The IRS test determining who is an independent contractor has evolved over the years to keep up with the changing nature of work.

“What company is itching for a flood of fifty- and sixtysomethings to come aboard?”

Under the ABC test, workers must be 1) free from the control and direction of the hiring entity; 2) perform work outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business and 3) be customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed. A company that misclassifies a worker — intentionally or not — is now subject to hefty fines.

What Freelancers Say

But some freelancers and independent contractors in their 50s and 60s say they can’t work as employees.

“The W-2 jobs are not there for us,” says Jen Singer, 53, a Red Bank, N.J.-based freelance writer, writing coach, ghostwriter and co-founder of Fight for Freelancers USA, a group opposed to the legislation. “That’s why we’ve created our own businesses.”

Freelancing allows Singer to care for her 82-year-old mother, who moved into assisted living last summer after her father died. Singer has freelanced for 25 years.

If Congress passes the national version of the California law, the PRO Act (introduced by Virginia Democrat Rep. Robert Cortez Scott and co-sponsored by more than 100 member), says Singer, millions of entrepreneurs and other freelancers would lose work and freelance businesses they’ve built.

“And what company is itching for a flood of fifty- and sixtysomethings to come aboard?” she says.

That bill is not expected to pass in 2020 in the Republican-majority Senate, but could later if the balance of power changes this fall.

In El Cerrito, Calif., Stephen Beale, 61, has felt the effects of AB5 firsthand. A journalist with 20 years of experience, Beale was laid off from a full-time editorial job at Agility PR Solutions last May. As he unsuccessfully searched for a full-time job, he decided to pursue freelance writing.

“AB5 has definitely made that difficult,” says Beale. “If the law weren’t in place, I would be very aggressively going after clients to get steady work.” Instead, he’s continuing to apply for full-time work, but believes potential employers see him as too old to bring him on full-time.

Beale has fallen behind on his rent, is behind on his credit card payments and is selling personal items so he can buy groceries and pay his utilities. He’s also created a GoFundMe campaign to raise money for his living expenses.

“AB5 is an overreaction to what was obviously a problem, but it’s causing a lot more problems than it solves. It’s a real mess,” says Beale.

From Next Avenue, here.