Update: See the comments at the Talmud Blog.

The first video is Clarence describing how he met Bruce, the second is of Jungleland, a song that features Clarence’s most famous sax solo.

The prayer at military memorial ceremonies for Israel’s fallen soldiers – Yizkor (Remember) – will open with the traditional “May God remember his sons and daughters,” Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz ruled this week. The statement followed an ongoing argument between religious and secular groups on whether the prayer at these memorials should open with “May God remember” or “May the people of Israel remember.”

Mostly Kosher points out that this is a decades-old disagreement. (Also see here. [Hebrew])

However anyone who reads the Ha’aretz story, might miss an important fact. The text was actually changed in 1967. The original prayer of Yizkor was based on the text written by Berel Katznelson for those who fell at Tel Chai (Trumpeldor in particular). Being non religous he naturally wrote “The Nation of Israel” and not “God”. In 1967 Rabbi Goren, Chief rabbi of the IDF changed the text of the service to “God” – similar to the text read on Yom Kippur. So why is Ha’aretz suddenly digging up a 40 year old fight? The simple answer is that despite Harav Goren changing the official text, the army never fully changed the words it used in the service. For 40 odd years you could more or less hear either text based on who was giving the service. In the last few years as the older soldiers who were conducting the official memorial services retired, the new conductors all started using the official text. Hence the sudden interest.

Yael Zerubavel, in her excellent book, Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National Tradition (p. 45), described the influence of Tel Ḥai on Zionist culture and memory:

The military Yizkor prayer was specifically addressed by Charles S. Liebman and Eliezer Don-Yihya in their book, Civil Religion in Israel: Traditional Judaism and Political Culture in the Jewish State (pp. 119-120):

The Yizkor prayer of Berl Katznelson is another example of the secularization of either biblical verses or religious texts. Abraham Joshua Heschel addressed this in his book Man’s Quest For God (pp. 57-58):

It has become a habit with modern movements to decapitate Biblical verses. Some such decapitated verses have become famous slogans. The name of the Bilu movement is an abbreviation of O house of Jacob, come ye, and let us walk (Isaiah 2:5); the essence of the verse, in the light of the Lord, was omitted. Disciples of Ahad Ha’am proclaimed Not by might, nor by power, but by spirit (Zechariah 4:6). Yet the prophet said by My spirit. The Jewish National Fund has as its official motto The land shall not be sold for ever (Leviticus 25:23); the end, for the land is Mine, was omitted. During the last war the popular slogan among Russian Jews was I shall not die, but live (Psalms 118:17); the continuation, and declare the deeds of the Lord, was dropped.

I would also add that the line from the popular Hanukkah song, “Who can tell the mighty acts of Israel” (מי ימלל גבורות ישראל) [Psalms 106:2], is actually “Who can tell the mighty acts of the Lord” (מי ימלל גבורות יהוה).

Update I: Uri Heitner writes about this episode here (Hebrew). He is against making “May God remember” the official version of the military Yizkor, arguing that the peoplehood of Israel is within the consensus, while the belief in God isn’t shared by everyone. He also writes about the importance of emphasizing Jewish peoplehood when it is being attacked from numerous quarters.

סיבה נוספת לשמירה על הנוסח המקורי, היא הביטוי “עם ישראל”. יש המערערים על הביטוי הזה. יש המנסים להגחיך אותו, להציג אותו כביטוי “ימני”, רחמנא לצלן. דורון רוזנבלום מרבה לחזור עד לזרא על התזה שלו, אודות מאבק תרבותי בין ישראל ל”עמישראל”. ועוד לא הזכרתי את מכחיש העם היהודי, המוטציה האנטי אינטלקטואלית שלמה זנד, שכתב ספר ה”מוכיח” שהעם היהודי הוא המצאה, ובנה סביבו קהל מעריצים שוטים. די בהנפת היד הזאת על המונח “עם ישראל”, כדי שהחברה הישראלית תתעקש לקדש אותו, כמושג מאחד ולא מפלג.

Update II: See this post (Hebrew) by David Assaf.

Update III: See this post (Hebrew) by Hillel Gershuni.

Dr. Yalow, a product of New York City schools and the daughter of parents who never finished high school, graduated magna cum laude from Hunter College in New York at the age of 19 and was the college’s first physics major. Yet she struggled to be accepted for graduate studies. In one instance, a skeptical Midwestern university wrote: “She is from New York. She is Jewish. She is a woman.”

Read the obituary for a discussion of the important discoveries that she was a part of.

Another interesting aspect of her life was how she and her collaborator in research, Solomon A. Berson, encountered resistance to their new theories.

Their early work met with resistance. Scientific journals initially refused to publish their discovery of insulin antibodies, a finding fundamental to radioimmunoassay. The discovery, in 1956, challenged the accepted understanding of the immune system; few scientists believed antibodies could recognize a molecule as small as insulin. Dr. Yalow and Dr. Berson had to delete a reference to antibodies before The Journal of Clinical Investigation accepted their paper, and Dr. Yalow did not forget the incident; she included the rejection letter as an exhibit in her Nobel lecture.

Sometimes people who are supposedly critical scholars can be as orthodox as anyone else.

The first are two similar comments that were written in two different responsa. The first is a well-known responsum of his about the eruv in Manhattan (Igrot Moshe, OH 4:89). For a longer discussion about this responsum see this post by Rabbi Josh Yuter. Rav Moshe didn’t think that it was permissible to build an eruv around Manhattan, but he also wouldn’t come out against those who did support the eruv.

אבל הא כבר אמרתי שאין בידנו למחות ביד המקילין וכשיתקנו הרי יהיה מותר לאיזה שיטות, גם הם רבנים גדולים ומי ימחה בהם מכיון שסוברים לפי הכרעתם שיכולין לתקן והם ראוים להוראה.

But I already said that it is not within our power to protest against those who are lenient, and when they build the eruv it will be permissible according to some approaches. Also, they are respectable rabbis, and who should protest against them, since they are holding according to their decisions that one is able to build an eruv, and they are qualified to make decisions.

Rav Moshe says something similar in a responsum on conversion (Igrot Moshe, YD 1:159). In this responsum he took a stricter stand towards performing certain conversions, but he was again unwilling to speak out against those with whom he disagreed since the convert may have been sincere.

אך מ”מ אולי גיורת זו תקבל המצות ולכן איני אומר בזה כלום לכתר”ה כי יש הרבה רבנים בנוא יארק מקבלין גרים כאלו וממילא אין לי לומר בזה איסורין אבל אני אין דעתי נוחה וגם דעת אבא מארי הגאון זצ”ל לא היה נוחה מזה אבל לא אמינא איסורים בזה וכתר”ה יעשה כפי הבנתו ודעתו וכפי הדוחק. וספר אחיעזר שהביא כתר”ה לא ראיתיו עדין.

But nevertheless, maybe this convert accepted upon herself the commandments, and therefore I am not going to comment on this at all to you, since there are many rabbis in New York who accept converts like these, and I am not going to pronounce this forbidden. But I am not comfortable with it, and also my learned father ztz”l was not comfortable with this, yet I am not going to pronounce this forbidden. You should follow your own understanding and opinion according to the situation. I have yet to see the book Ahiezer that you brought.

Rav Moshe was willing to both respect the opinions of other rabbis, and also to encourage the rabbi asking the question to make a decision for himself. The last line is also interesting. Rav Moshe rarely quotes other responsa collections, so it isn’t very surprising that he didn’t have Rabbi Chaim Ozer Grodzinski’s responsa collection Ahiezer.

The last responsum is from Igrot Moshe, OH 5:12. This responsum addresses whether one needs a mehitzah at a house of mourning, or whether separate seating is sufficient.

שאלת אם צריך מחיצה כשמתפללים במקום שאינו קבוע לתפלה, למשל, בבית אבל רח”ל. אם צריכות הנשים לילך לחדר נפרד, או שדי בהפסק אוויר. ונראה שלדינא הנשים בבית אבל צריכות ללכת לחדר אחר. והטעם דבית אבל הוי מקום שפתוח לרבים, שצריך בו מדינא תמיד הפרדה בין הנשים לאנשים, וכל שכן בשעת תפילה, כמבואר בתשובתי בא”מ או”ח ח”א סימנים ל”ט – מ”א. אבל אם למעשה הנשים אינן מסכימות לעזוב את החדר, נחשב זה לאקראי, ואין להמנע מלהתפלל מחמת זה. אבל בבית חתן מדינא אין צורך במחיצה, שאינו פתוח לרבים, אלא רק לבני המשפחה. לכן די בכך שילכו האנשים המתפללים לזווית אחת שיוכלו לכוין שם, ושם יתפללו.

You asked whether one needs a mehitzah in a place that is not set aside permanently for prayer, for example, a house of mourning (God forbid). If the women need to go to a separate room, or if a separation of air is enough. It seems that according to the law, women in a house of mourning need to go to a separate room. The reason is that the house of mourning is open to everyone, and according to the law it always need a separation between men and women. All the more so at the time of prayer, as I elucidated in Igrot Moshe OH 1:39-41. But if in reality the women do not agree to leaving the room, it will be considering temporary, and you shouldn’t let this prevent you from praying. But in the house of a groom, according to the law there is no need for a mehitzah, since it is not open to the public, but just for the family. Therefore, it is enough if the men just go to a corner of the room and pray there.

The rest of the responsum is interesting, including a comment about women who used to come into the beit midrash in order to say the mourner’s kaddish. In the section that I brought above, Rav Moshe states what he thinks is the law, but in some sense he also anticipates the possible objection of women, and writes that if they do object, there is another option available.

Below is an article written by Prof. Pinhas Hacohen Peli that was published in the now defunt magazine Ha-Doar after Rabbi Feinstein’s death. May we merit more gedolim like Rav Moshe who are confidant enough to refrain from criticizing those who are more liberal than they are.
Pinhas HaCohen Peli-Rav Moshe Feinstein