Thursday, February 18, 2021

Is the covid vaccine right for you?

B.H.

7 Adar, 5781

Crown Height, NY


Dear member of Anash, sheyichyeh:

In response to the various quasi-Halachic rulings being circulated in reference to the new covid vaccine, I am Halachically and morally obligated to relate the following*:

First and foremost, it is utterly reprehensible that “rabbis” are issuing medical instructions. This runs contrary to the Rebbe’s explicit directives on the matter (of 11 Shevat 5748). These rabbis have absolutely no medical training, and their “orders” are most troubling and perplexing.

Only a veritable expert can voice an opinion on the safety or effectiveness of the covid vaccine, not a rabbi (as communicated by a member of the Crown Heights Beis Din in a voice note on Friday, 30 Shevat, 5781). If a rabbi uses his rabbinic position to push a medical agenda marketing a medical procedure or the administering of a medical substance, his position is inconsequential, because, as pointed out, a rabbi is not authorized to issue such rulings.

As such, any rabbi who urges compliance to the government’s experimental mass-coercion of the new and untested vaccine should be disregarded. This is the clear instruction of the Torah, Toras emes and Toras chaim.

On the 11th of Shevat, 5748, the Rebbe stated:

"המענה הכללי לשאלות רבים ולדוגמא בעניני רפואה כעצת רופא מומחה ומה טוב שני רופאים מומחים ואם יש חילוקי דעות ישאלו שלישי ויעשו כדעת הרוב".

In light of this explicit instruction, to ask expert doctors, NOT RABBIS, I asked an expert doctor, Dr. Zev Zelenko MD if one should take the new covid shot, and he replied - “no.” I asked him if an elderly person or one whose health condition renders him in an at-risk category in reference to the covid virus - should such a person take the new covid shot, and he replied, categorically, “no.”

Since the Rebbe said that it is even better to ask a second doctor (although he indicated that this is not mandatory), Dr. Simone Gold MD was also asked if one should take the new covid shot, and she mimicked Dr. Zelenko’s opinion - no.

Although there was no difference of opinion between these two, I decided to find out the opinion of a third doctor, and then a fourth, and fifth, and… hundreds of medical doctors, medical experts, if one should take the new covid shot, and the answer was - “no.”

These doctors’ opinions are Halachically binding, and override any “rabbinical” authority who feels that his medical opinion has any relevance to the lives and conduct of others.

The so-called rabbinical authorities who issued this so-called rabbinical statement seem to be of the opinion that when the Rebbe said to seek “the eitza a rofeh mumcheh [the counsel of an expert doctor], and [from here-on in the Rebbe added in parentheses -] even better, two expert doctors, and if there is a dispute between the two, then ask a third, and follow the majority opinion” - that the Rebbe was instructing that even when turning to the first expert doctor, it should be one that follows the majority opinion.

This notion is misquoting, or even worse, twisting the Rebbe’s words.

The Rebbe instructed to turn to one expert doctor - of one’s own choice! Not the rabbi’s choice, not the Beis Din’s choice, not Dr. Fauci’s choice, and not any politician’s choice. The Rebbe mentions to follow the majority only when the second doctor - if one asked a second doctor altogether, which, as mentioned, is optional - disagrees with the first.

The Rebbe did not say to follow the consensus of the majority of medical experts in reference to any medical practice. On the contrary - in many instances, the Rebbe counseled against following the opinion of the majority of doctors. For example, routine ultrasounds during pregnancy, or cat-scans during pregnancy (except when there is an acute medical reason).

Furthermore, the Rebbe mentions (in the above source, in footnote 127), sourcing his directive to turn to a rofeh mumcheh, an expert doctor:

על יסוד הוראת התורה "ורפא ירפא", "מכאן שניתנה רשות לרופא לרפאות". "רשות" גם במובן של נתינת כח כו'. - "ובכלל פיקוח נפש הוא" (שו"ע יו"ד רסשל"ו). והזקוק לרפואה - הרי זה אצלו ציווי מן התורה ונשמרתם מאד לנפשותיכם).

The Rebbe expresses that the Torah’s instruction applies to the one who is zakuk to a refuah, the one who needs healing.

To suggest that a healthy person, who is not “zakuk lirifuah”, is obligated to follow the counsel of the majority of doctors to promote a “public health” agenda, or even one doctor - is absolutely absurd. I am utterly dismayed that I even need to be writing this, for it is plainly evident to any and all.

(See Igros Moshe Choshen Mishpat 2:76, in which Rabbi Moshe Feinstein explains that event in his preventative dietary recommendations (in הלכות דעות), the Rambam never wrote that any of these precautions were obligatory, or that an unhealthy food that causes disease is necessarily “forbidden.” Preventative medical advice for a completely healthy person, unless disregarding the advice is a direct, substantial, and acute causation for death, does not fall into the category of a religious obligation or prohibition. This seems to be the Rebbe’s opinion as well, in refusing to issue a prohibition against smoking.

In other words, it might be better to adhere to preventative precautions, but not obligatory).

Even in case of a person who is ill, in which case the Rambam (הלכות שביתת עשור פ”ב ה”ח) rules that if there is a dispute amongst doctors if fasting on Yom Kippur can endanger the person’s life, we can follow the majority of doctors’ opinion - Shulchan Aruch (and the majority of rishonim) does NOT rule like the Rambam! But rather, as the Alter Rebbe writes (אורח חיים סי’ תרי”ח ס”ה): 

אם שני רופאים אומרים שהוא צריך לאכול אפילו מאה אומרים שאינו צריך ואפילו אם גם החולה אומר שאינו צריך מאכילין אותו ואפילו אם האומרים שאינו צריך הם יותר מומחים והן מופלגים בחכמה נגד אלו השנים אין הולכין בספק נפשות אחר רוב חכמה ולא אחר רוב מנין דעות להחמיר אלא כיון ששנים אומרים שהוא צריך לאכול והן בקיאים בחכמה הרי הן חשובין כמו חכמים מופלגים כמו שמצינו לענין עדות ששנים חשובים כמאה מגזירת הכתוב.

We follow a minority opinion, even if the doctors who rule more cautiously are less knowledgeable than the majority opinion - if there is a reason to believe that the person’s life is in jeopardy, we follow the minority opinion. Even if merely two doctors opine that a person’s life is in danger, even if a thousand disagree, we follow the two!

In this case, it’s not just two, but, as mentioned, hundreds of medical doctors who have communicated their expert opinions that the vaccine may cause a loss of life for the recipient of the shot.

And sadly, this prognosis has indeed come to pass in the Jewish community at large, even amongst Anash, ר”ל.

We have already witnessed countless experiences - I personally know several people - who died shortly after receiving the shot. This is not “conspiracy theories”. This is empirical evidence, and factual observations.

Observing a death that follows a medical procedure, even without doing an autopsy (which is prohibited by Jewish law) and discovering the precise cause, is Halachically indicated. For example, if two babies in a family die after circumcision, there is a Halachic prohibition (יורה דעה סי’ רס”ג ס”ב וס”ג) to circumcise the third (“לא ימולו בניהן אלא ימתינו עד שיגדלו ויתחזק כחם”)!

No scientist is required to study the precise cause of death! The deaths speak for themselves! 

Furthermore, medical experts have officially acquiesced to the association of deaths with receiving the covid vaccine. As related by Dr. Zelenko, that 500 deaths related to the vaccine were reported by VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, co-managed by the CDC and the FDA) in America last week (although now they are over 1000). And experts say that this reporting system represents only one per cent of the injuries reported.

“Go do the math yourself,” the doctor concluded.

*

In regards to the definition of “rofeh mumcheh”, expert doctor, some have suggested that the government is authorized to decide which doctor deserves the title “expert”.

(Besides for the fact that Drs. Zelenko and Gold are licensed medical doctors, with all the accolades, as well as many hundreds more who oppose the vaccine -) 

This claim is simply incorrect.

In fact, there is absolutely no source for this in Shulchan Aruch, rishonim or poskim.

The only source for this from classical Halachic works is a rabbi named Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein who, in 1884, presented this notion in his work, Aruch Hashulchan. He wrote there that healers who are not licensed by the government who opine that a patient is fit to fast on Yom Kippur should be disregarded.

However, it is clearly evident that his statement has no relevance to our discussion.

Firstly, it should be noted that he also writes as an introduction to the laws of “geirim”, conversion (סי’ רס”ח):

דיני גרים בימים הקדמונים. ובמדינתינו אין לנו רשות לקבל גרים מדינא דמלכותא.

“The laws of conversion in ancient times, whereas in our times, we are not permitted to accept converts as per the law of the land.”

This was clearly written due to fear of the Christian and antisemetic government, as it carries no Halachic weight whatsoever. Dina dimalchusa dina applies only to financial matters, not issur v’heter, and not geyrus.

Furthermore, he only warns against following unlicensed doctors in reference to claiming that a patient is fit to fast on Yom Kippur. But if the said healers are testifying that the patient is unfit to fast, that his life would be in danger by fasting, then we should follow their prognosis - because ספק נפשות להקל, that their opinion creates a “doubt” in the patient’s viability if he fasts, and hence, we must heed their words!

But all this is simply academic, for there is no question that if a perfectly healthy individual is presented with a vaccine, in reference to which licensed medical professionals and experts, not just “quacky” healers, have indicated extremely troubling health risks, even a chashash sakonas nifoshois, then their opinion is to be taken into consideration, regardless of governmental licensing - and acted upon. And in this case, as mentioned, hundreds of medical experts with governmental licensing etc., have weighed in on the matter - and their opinions are frightening.

There is no question that in this case, we are Halachically obliged to heed the words of the minority, and resist this vaccine at all costs.

*

As far as Halacha is concerned, even if the dissenting minority opinion would have been communicated by doctors who are less authoritative than the majority - we still, as mentioned above, would follow the minority, even two doctors, who indicate that taking this vaccine can endanger the recipient’s life.

But it must be said that in the present situation, it is the doctors whose expertise is superior who are warning to the side of caution, that taking this shot is an endangerment to one’s life.

It is crucial that one understands this point. As the Rebbe said (quoted above), to seek “the counsel of an expert doctor”. A mumcheh means that he is an expert in the field about which one is seeking his or her advice. 

If one’s general practitioner isn’t knowledgeable as to the dangers or safety of this new vaccine - an entirely newfangled technology, the likes of which the doctor is likely to have not yet become acquainted, even slightly - then one must find a real expert. Unfortunately, at the present, “doctors of Anash” are not experienced enough in this field to be able to pass judgement.

The outspoken and self-appointed spokesman of the Gedalia Society, with all due respect, has no say in the matter, as has no mumchius in reference to this new shot. The same applies to the family doctors of Anash in Eretz Yisroel.

Herein lies another problem with the reliability of the true experts - the scientists and vaccine researchers and manufacturers. The precept that an אומן לא מרעא אומנותו – a professional is reliable and credible when it comes to his profession - applies only when (a) the professional will be held accountable if his product proves to be faulty or dangerous and (b) the professional has no political gain and does not attempt to advance a political agenda.

Neither of these stipulations can be applied in the case of pharmaceutical companies and their researchers:

(a) True, some Halachic authorities grant this said reliability of a professional to a doctor or hospital whose profession is to keep his patients alive, and can be sued for malpractice. However, the companies that produce and market this vaccine are NOT granted this reliability, since it is not legally culpable for an injury related to its products, as per legislation passed twenty five years ago (Childhood Vaccine Act of 1986). Likewise, medical professionals who represent governmental agencies are also not necessarily in the category of a professional to whom this reliability can be applied. Governmental agencies can have motives other than preserving life - motives can include popular opinion, fear frenzy of the masses, or usurping governmental control, as Lubavitch knows too well from its experience with the former Soviet Union and its “policies”.

(b)The Rebbe said that in reference to considering land for peace, we could not trust Israeli political analysts - but rather, military experts, whose sole interest is the security of the land and its inhabitants. Not funding from other nations, nor other ulterior motives.

Here is an excerpt from one sicha on the matter (Purim 5745), in which the Rebbe bemoans the Israeli politicians’ orders to discontinue military operations in the Lebanon War, disregarding advice from military experts:

‏"במלחמת לבנון, שלפי דעת כל המומחים בעניני צבא - הן דבנ"י והן (ועוד יותר) דאינם-יהודים - אם היו נכנסים לשם על מנת לסיים המבצע תיכף ומיד, אפשר הי' לסיימו במשך ימים אחדים (ועתה כבר מודים הכל בכך)...דיעה זו הושמעה גם מפי שר (שבעבר הי' איש צבא), בהדגישו אמנם, שדיעתו זאת היא רק ע"פ שיקולים צבאיים, אבל למסקנא, היות וגם הוא "פוליטיקאי" - ואצלו אין למעלה מפוליטיקה... - הנה מצד שיקולים פוליטיים אין לסיים המבצע!

- ע"פ הלכה, כאשר יש שאלה בענין השייך לצבא, יש להתנהג ע"פ הוראתם של המומחים לעניני צבא. אולם, תנאי עיקרי בדבר - שדעתו מבוססת רק על שיקולים צבאיים טהורים (שזוהי המומחיות שלו), שאז ע"פ הלכה יש חזקה דאין אומן מרעה אומנתו; משא"כ כאשר מחווה דעתו ע"פ שיקולים פוליטיים - ועאכו"כ אם לקח שוחד (ובפרט אם הבטיחו לו בגדי-שרד השוים כמה אלפי דולר... או כסא של שר (שעי"ז תהי' לו האפשרות לוותר על עוד ענינים כו') וכיו"ב) - אין לו שום סמכות ע"פ הלכה".

The military experts, the Rebbe explained, can be trusted for their professional opinion, as long as their sole professional concern is “purely” military (“שיקולים צבאיים טהורים”).

In the case of the new covid vaccine, pharmaceutical companies that manufacture and market the new vaccine are intimately involved with politicians and their interests, as well-known. Likewise, the expert researchers who work for these said companies are certainly most partial to their employers’ financial concerns.

However, this disqualification applies not only to the scientists and researchers employed by manufacturers or investors like Bill Gates, but even to our very own Gedalia Society and its spokesman, and even private practitioners in America or Israel, who even if they would have knowledge about this new vaccine, would be disqualified by their lack of “שיקולים רפואיים טהורים”.

How so? one might ask.

The answer is elementary.

When one approaches a “rofeh mumcheh” and requests his or her counsel, as per the Rebbe’s above-mentioned instructions, one is seeking counsel for one’s own refuah or health, not someone else’s. For example, if a person approaches his doctor to ask if he should take a certain antibiotic, or receive a vaccination for Hepatitis B, etc. - the question posed to the doctor is if this treatment is right for this particular patient, if it’s in his best interest and if it’s necessary for his health. If the doctor’s concern is for another patient or other patients, then, albeit a wonderfully altruistic and caring doctor (caring for the others, that is), his professional reliability for this patient is lacking.

Unfortunately, the nature of the global effort to flatten the curve and protect the most vulnerable is NOT the mumchius (professional expertise) one seeks when turning to his personal doctor. Doctors who prescribe a vaccine for the benefit of others, even if it’s the “better good” - the community’s wellbeing, which, as one of the members of the Beis Din claims and has said on occasion, is more important than an individual’s wellbeing - the doctor has lost the above-mentioned chazaka (Halachic reliability) that an אומן לא מרעא אומנותו. A professional is reliable and credible when it comes to his profession - not when he has abandoned the profession he was hired for, which is to heal (or prevent illness) for his patient, and, instead, has espoused a new profession, one that focuses on the community’s health (or whatever that means).

It is most painful to relate this fact, but there are many doctors, including the said self-proclaimed spokesman of the Gedalia Society, who routinely recommend vaccinations for the benefit and safety of others. Although this is a wonderful, humane, and sensible thing to do, to worry about the world community, the health of the weak and feeble in Chinatown or Oklahoma - it is NOT what the patient intends when approaching his physician about taking the particular vaccine.

In reference to other vaccines, it can be argued that there is some protection for the juvenile recipient as well, and this protection undoubtedly justifies the administering of the vaccine, notwithstanding that the doctor’s motive includes “public health”, a socialistic concept in collective and communal health care, viewing the community as one organism.

However, in reference to the covid vaccine, wherein younger individuals have 100% recovery rates, as Dr. Zelenko expressed on occasion (and wherein older individuals have extremely high recovery rates, especially when permitted to use the medication such as ivermectin and the Zelenko Protocol), the motive to vaccinate would be almost strictly for the benefit of the public, which is contrary to the interest of the patient, who seeks advice for his own health and the preservation of his own life.

As such, I am obligated to state for the record, in strict accordance with Halacha:

Any doctor or medical expert who believes in the philosophy of public health, and advises accordingly, is simply not reliable in this matter, for he has lost the above-mentioned chazaka, as explained. Likewise, the Rebbe’s above-mentioned directives would also not be applicable to such an “expert”, as this is not the “mumchius” the Rebbe refers to when using the term “rofeh mumcheh”.

And even if there is room to argue this notion (which there isn’t, but just for the sake of argument), we know that when in doubt, in matters of life and death (ספק נפשות), err to the side of leniency (להקל) - i.e. to preserve the life of the one in doubt. If a doctor whose chazaka of professionalism is in doubt advises to take an untested vaccine that has already caused numerous deaths and tragedies for its recipients, one should certainly disregard this advice and err to the side of preserving one’s own life.

(Just to make this more clear -

The public health agenda is focused on lowering deaths of the world community as a whole, not necessarily preserving the life of an individual. This philosophy claims that mass inoculation will lower the percentages of deaths from covid communally, and heighten the survival rate - say, for example, from 99.7 % survival rate to 99.8 % survival rate. By doing so, then, we are effectively saving millions of lives - even if the shot causes, in .1% of all cases, death to its recipient.

In other words, if we can save 2 million lives by forcing vaccinations, isn’t it worth it - even though along the way we’ll lose 1 million lives due to the vaccine itself? We have effectively and statistically saved 1 million lives - so the gain outweighs the loss.

It might be a wonderful concept, Quixotic and romantic, but it is a deviation to the said chazaka and professional reliability of a medical physician, who is hired for the expressed purpose of preserving his patient’s life, not to worry about lowering global percentages of covid deaths. If the doctor is advising this patient to receive the untested and new vaccine, which the CDC and FDA themselves have reported deaths and continue to increase their findings daily, relying on the probability that this patient, percentage-wise, will not be one of those few deaths, for the purpose of public health, to benefit others - his advice is to be disregarded).

It also must be added that the whole concept of professional reliability is not applied in every case. See Yoreh Deah siman 154 sif 1, for an example of when it does not apply.

*

In Crown Heights, there seems to be a rift between the two members of the Beis Din. The elder of the two, a seasoned rav and member of the original Beis Din, to whom the Rebbe referred as אביר שבאבירים, an outstanding and powerful rav, has not formally issued any statements in reference to the vaccine, but the news is circulating that he himself adamantly refused to take the vaccine. The younger rav, a new-comer to the Beis Din, in an audio recording released on Friday, Rosh Chodesh Adar, as mentioned above, conveyed that he would show neither support nor opposition to taking the vaccine, and suggested that the matter was “of a non-Halachic nature.”

Shocked and appalled, I humbly protest this fallacious and ill advised statement of this younger rav. The prohibition and mitzva of ונשמרתם מאד לנפשותיכם, protecting one’s life, is by all means a Halachic issue!

As such, במקום שאין איש, I am Halachically and morally obligated to address the severe Halachic nature of the question, and I will divide it into two parts:

  1. A person who is not in any serious risk of dying from covid, which is the vast majority of people.

  2. A person who believes he or she is at risk, due to age or health condition, etc.

So for starters, question (a) is indeed a profound one. Any medication or medical procedure can have side-effects. As evident in the small print on the box of Acetaminophen etc. This vaccine has unprecedented health concerns, as many medical professionals have communicated.

As such, if one is taking the vaccine simply in order to board an airplane or as an altruistic effort of achieving “public health” and saving others, the Alter Rebbe rules in Shulchan Aruch סימן שכ”ט ס”ח that one is prohibited to enter himself into even a sofeik sakana to save another of a vaday sakana. Even though there are opinions that permit it - in this case, however, there would be no such opinion, since there is no specific person being saved. It’s basically endangering one’s one life, albeit a sofeik, to save the “public”, which is not necessarily considered a vaday sakana for any specific Jewish individual. And even if it would, as mentioned the Alter Rebbe rules differently.

So the question is:

Is it permitted for a Jew to expose himself or herself to possible side-effects, in order to comply with a policy of “public health”, for the benefit of others? There have been numerous medical experts, both professional and academic, who stated concerns possible or even expected harm to fertility as well as other health issues. A medical doctor cannot rule on this question, as a medical doctor does not have the knowledge of Halacha and the fear of G-d needed to pass judgement on this matter. ONLY a rabbi can.

And the consensus is, based on the Alter Rebbe in both Orach Chayim and Choshen Mishpat - that it would be forbidden to take the vaccine for the purpose of saving others, and certainly if your motive is merely to board a plane or comply with governmental coercion.

Likewise, if one is (b) taking the vaccine because he believes HIS life is at risk by catching covid, there is still a serious shaala. There are drugs which have proven successful in treating covid, like Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, which do NOT have dangerous side-effects. The new vaccine, however, has proven on countless occasions to cause harm, even death in some cases. And long term effects to health and fertility are still unknown.

Even if one wishes to argue that the survival rate from the side-effects of the new covid vaccine, percentage-wise, is better than an elderly person’s chance of surviving covid - there is still a serious shaala here. Because the covid vaccine is self-inflicted, “שיביא הוא האונס עליו”, whereas dying of a disease is “אונס דאתי משמיא”, and the Radvaz points out in a teshuva (חלק ג’ תשובה 1052 אלף נ”ב). The danger presented by a disease which comes from Hashem, whereas chopping off a limb, for example, is bringing danger upon oneself, which is a far greater sakana!

A similar question is if a person were told that he has a deadly illness, and doctors recommend treating the illness with radiation or chemotherapy. In this case, it is perhaps worth the risk of being harmed by the therapy, for the person is already ill. And even then, there were great halachic authorities who opted out of chemotherapy or radiation therapy, like Rabbi Ushpal and others.

But here, the person afraid of catching covid is NOT ill. And the danger presented by catching covid is not a danger that is present at the moment (as discussed by the נודע ביהודה in mahadura tinyono Yoreh Deah siman 210, quoted by Rabbi Menashe Klein in Mishneh Halachos madur hatshuvas chelek vov, siman 203), there is no actual ספק סכנת נפשות לפנינו. Just a possibility that there will be one in the future. This sakana cannot be considered a sakana vaday that would permit a choleh to resort to doing a medical procedure that might also take his life. Small percentages of possibly catching covid and dying do not substantiate ACTUAL illness, and would not authorize a person to take a vaccine that has even small percentages of causing death. Because this vaccine is a procedure that the person brings upon himself, which could be tantamount to suicide.

The only “heter” that can possibly be rationalized in order to permit someone to take this vaccine is that his fear is so great, that he could NOW be classified as ill, and the vaccine would somehow calm his fears. However, I am skeptical if such a nonsensical notion can really be applied. A much more kosher option would be - to overcome the fear and continue living one’s life without fear! 

Even if an individual feels that he is at risk of dying from covid, and his fear mongering manages to “convince” him that the vaccine’s purpose is to protect his own life - there is another profound Halachic issue here. Every individual who takes the vaccine increases the pressure on the vast majority of others who are declining it. If the vaccine is NOT indicated for a person who is not at risk (which it isn’t) - this person who runs to take the vaccine is contributing to the mounting of pressure soon to be placed on the vast majority of others, for whom the vaccine is surely NOT indicated. This can have profound effects on the freedoms of all Americans, and most importantly, the freedoms of American Jews to study Torah freely, without being coerced to vaccinate their children. The children are certainly not at risk from covid 19, and their vaccination, together with all the possible side-effects, would be purely for others, and it has been announced this is indeed the plan, Heaven forfend.

*

The younger member of the Beis Din, in his voice recording last week, stated:

“I do see a major, major misconception about how we go about determining what’s the right path for us… The reason why there’s a lot of confusion is because we’re not going to the Torah to find out what the correct approach is, and we’ll come up with our own theories.”

In response to this statement, it must be made clear:

Indeed, there is no need to come up with theories. Medical experts have already communicated their explicit medical opinion, and their solemn warnings of frightening health concerns posed by this vaccine, we are obliged to take this opinion into consideration. And, yes, Halachically.

However, meeting someone who has arrived from Israel who has just taken the vaccine and complains of chronic weakness and suffers paralysis, or listening to a friend who communicates that he or she just got up from shiva after his or her father or mother died 22 minutes after taking the vaccine - is not “coming up with theories”. These are called first-hand observations, and no politician,  professional, or expert can deny such observations.

*

In the said recording, he also said the following:

“Torah made it very clear that when it comes to inyonim of refuah – of medicine, it is not up for us to make our decisions - what we think is right. And it’s certainly not up for us to do research. We’re not qualified to do research…”

This is not true.

“Refuah” is not a dictatorship.

A doctor can suggest a treatment, and often there are differences of opinions, as in the very issue being addressed herein. Refuah is not a “one size fits all” proposition. It is incumbent upon each and every individual to be aware of the possible harm the vaccine presents, and weigh this harm against the questionable gain. One should not be a brainless zombie, as the rabbi seems to be indicating. Such behavior has proven to be a most unadvised one in reference to one’s health and wellbeing, as every doctor can attest. An educated patient is the ideal patient.

And as mentioned, hearing about the demise of a close friend, who suffered cardiac arrest within 48 hours of receiving the second dose of the covid vaccine, or the likes, is not called “research”, and no “qualifications” are needed in taking this instance into serious consideration.

*

Also stated in the recording:

“The Torah not asking us to go onto WhatsApp groups and listen to every single rumor and shmuah that you hear out there… It is not your job to go and do research. It actually indicates a lack of bitachon when you start worrying about this and worrying about that and Googling it and looking it up and looking at Wikipedia to see what someone else wrote...”

This is true.

But the rabbi should have added, MOST importantly, listening to the media with its liberal bias, and sadly, the government sponsored media and agencies, who also have this bias. And most of all, the so-called Lubavitch news websites, like collive, anash.org, or chabad.info, all of whom have shown to have a bias. Their “news” and obvious slant attesting to their support of this untested covid vaccine, as such, should be considered inconsequential. 

And, as mentioned and repeated, speaking to a loved one of someone who has died shortly after taking the vaccine or has been injured by the vaccine, or meeting the injured himself - does NOT indicate a “lack of bitachon”. On the contrary, it indicates the epitome of bitachon, taking your health decisions seriously, and not blindly following the so-called Lubavitch websites, facebook, or google, who wish to cover up such injuries and tragedies. 

*

Also stated in the said recording, albeit parenthetically:

”The controversy regarding vaccinations and the potential sakana of vaccinations has been addressed hundreds of years ago by the poskim - the Zera Emes, the Tiferes Yisroel, and so on and so forth…”

True.

But these poskim discuss vaccinations that protect the recipient from catching a disease that threatens the life of the recipient, not to protect the public or vulnerable others. This newfangled concept has never been discussed in poskim.

*

In a seeming defense of the vaccine, he stated:

“The primitive methods of research or vaccines that they had in those days, were not as advanced as we have today.”

This is true.

However, he must also be aware that the new vaccine is a brand new concept, and in fact is not even a vaccine altogether, as experts have pointed out. Considering that this is a brand new frontier, and even experts are uncertain the reaction that might take place in a recipient’s bodily function, especially long-term effects - the research done thus far is sadly lacking.

Most importantly, it must be stated for the record, as related by many a professional doctor and medical expert, including Drs. Zelenko, Gold, etc.:

This new vaccine has NOT been deemed safe by the FDA, nor has it been approved for use.

Why not?

It hasn’t been tested enough! Its use has only been permitted “for emergency use”, in light of the announced, “raging” pandemic.

This is why the vaccine has not been advertised on-line. It is prohibited by Federal law to advertise any medication that hasn’t been approved safe by the FDA - even it may be used due to “emergency” policy. (The ones advertising the vaccine are the above mentioned “Chabad” websites, who, for some reason, feel it a moral obligation to promote an untested and unapproved  measure).

*

As the bottom line of the above-mentioned recording, the rabbi stated emphatically and categorically: “Listen to doctors!”

In accordance with this advice, may we all listen to the aforementioned doctors, medical experts of the highest caliber and governmental licensing, etc., who have warned us to stay away from this vaccine.

*

Several days ago, on the 4th of Adar, Rabbi Y.Y. Yaruslavski from Eretz Yisroel, the Halachic authority of Nachalat Har Chabad and Kiryat Malachi, issued a psak din that is most troubling, and I must humbly protest, in the strongest of terms. He seems to be oblivious about the nature of the vaccine, and this oblivion was the catalyst to write his tragic or almost humorous delineation:

He effectively wielded his Halachic authority and barred any “unvaccinated” Jew from attending prayer services in a Synagogue.

Here are his words:

...מצד ונשמרתם מאד לנפשותיכם, יכנסו לבתי כנסיות אך ורק אלו שהתחסנו או שיש בידם תעודת מחלים כנדרש. אלו שלא עשו חיסונים ואין בידם תעודת מחלים עליהם להמשיך להתפלל בבתי הכנסת הפתוחים בחצרות וכדו', ואסור להם להיכנס לבתי הכנסת הרגילים.

With much sadness, I am forced to announce that this “psak” carries absolutely no Halachic weight whatsoever, and that the rabbi is simply uninformed. He is abusing his position, and he and the movement he represents should be held accountable.

He also stated:

במענה לשאלת הרבים, הצורך להתחסן איננה בגדר רשות אלא חובה על פי תורה, ואין להתחכם עם כל מיני סברות שונות ומשונות שאין להם אחיזה במציאות. ומי שאינו מתחסן וגורם לאחרים לא להתחסן, אוי לו מיום הדין, וגורם לריבוי שפיחות דמים ר"ל כפשוט.

He effectively refers to any person who resists the vaccine as a murderer, and orders each and every Jew to take the vaccine according to Halacha.

The CDC states that even a vaccinated person can contract the virus, and pass it along. The sole purposes of the vaccine is to alleviate symptoms. The person can still catch covid and be a carrier. Clearly, the rabbi did not even bother to read the fine print and thoroughly understand the nature of this vaccine before making such a ridiculously strong delineation.

As I wrote above and at length, not only do I see no reason that would obligate any person to take this vaccine, as the rabbi erroneously wrote - but furthermore: 

It is entirely forbidden, על פי תורה, according to Halacha, for any Jew to subject himself or herself to this shot, as per the precept of ונשמרתם מאד לנפשותיכם (and one is obligated to do anything and everything in one’s power to guard one’s relatives and fellow community members as well - לא תעמוד על דם רעך).

As such, let the entire movement of Chabad Lubavitch be aware:

It is morally incumbent upon every Jew and surely every Lubavitcher to stand up and condemn Rabbi Yaruslavki’s directive, as is contrary to daas Torah, as described above, and to humanity.

If we do not see immediate action on the part of Merkas L’inyonei Chinuch and Lubavitch Youth Organization in Eretz Yisroel, distancing themselves from this ruling, it must be assumed that the said organizations approve of the ruling, a ruling that will alienate countless Jews from Judaism and that brutally effectuates a human experiment on fellow Jews.

With solemn earnestness yet fervent hope and joyous expectation for an immediate change, and moreover, an immediate redemption for mankind, the גאולה האמיתית והשלימה, and immediately in a most tangible and immediate sense -

תיכף ומיד ממש!

Rabbi Daniel Green,

Crown Heights


* This article includes material from a letter written on 3rd of Adar, and is in light of further statements from public figures in the Lubavitch community.


 

Tuesday, February 16, 2021

Response to statements made by representative of Beis Din on Friday

B.H.
3 Adar, 5781

Dear fellow resident of Crown Heights, sheyichiyeh:

In light of a voice note sent out on Friday, 30 Shevat, 5781, from a member of the Crown Heights Beis Din, and having read the transcription of anash.org, I am morally and Halachically obliged to point out the following:

1) The rabbi made it very clear that a rabbi could not voice an opinion on the safety or effectiveness of the covid vaccine.
This is true.
If a rabbi uses his rabbinic position to push a medical agenda marketing a medical procedure or the administering of a medical substance, his position is to be disregarded, because, as pointed out, a rabbi is not knowledgeable about medical issues. This instruction surely raises serious questions about some rabbis, especially those in the Holy Land, who have issued such “rulings,” urging compliance to the government’s experimental mass-coercion of the new vaccine.

2) He said that people have recently been asking questions in reference to taking or not taking the vaccine, and indicated that he refuses to answer such questions, stating that these questions brought to him were “clearly… of non-halachic nature.”
Untrue.
There is clearly a profound Halachic issue in regards to this vaccine, more so than with any other vaccine in history. The rabbi must be aware that any medication or medical procedure can have side-effects. Surely he has noticed the small print on the box of Acetaminophen etc. Vinishmartem m’od linafshoseichem, protecting one’s life, is by all means a Halachic issue.
The vast majority of people are not at risk of losing their life to covid. There are also medications that have proven effective in treating covid, and do not have dangerous side-effects.
If so, there is a profound Halachic dilemma in permitting any individual to take this vaccine, one that has unprecedented doubts as to its safety.
Furthermore, even people who are not at all in a category of risk for covid are being urged to take this vaccine, which exacerbates the serious nature of the abovementioned Halachic hesitation exponentially:
Is it indicated, or even permitted, for a Jew to expose himself or herself to possible side-effects, in order to comply with a policy of “public health”, for the benefit of others? There have been numerous medical experts, both professional and academic, who stated concerns possible or even expected harm to fertility as well as other health issues. The rabbi surely must be aware of these experts’ studies and findings. A medical doctor cannot rule on this question, as a medical doctor does not have the knowledge of Halacha and the fear of G-d needed to pass judgement on this matter. ONLY a rabbi can. In fact, the Alter Rebbe himself rules differently in two different places in Shulchan Aruch (Choishen Mishpot Hilchos Nizkei Guf V’nefesh sif 7 and Orach Chaim siman 329 sif 8).
Even if an individual feels that he is at risk of dying from covid, and his fear mongering manages to “convince” him that the vaccine’s purpose is to protect his own life - there is another profound Halachic issue here. Every individual who takes the vaccine increases the pressure on the vast majority of others who are declining it. If the vaccine is NOT indicated for a person who is not at risk (which it isn’t) - this person who runs to take the vaccine is contributing to the mounting of pressure soon to be placed on the vast majority of others, for whom the vaccine is surely NOT indicated. This can have profound effects on the freedoms of all Americans, and most importantly, the freedoms of Amercian Jews to study Torah freely, without being coerced to vaccinate their children. The children are certainly not at risk from covid 19, and their vaccination, together with all the possible side-effects, would be purely for others, and it has been announced this is indeed the plan, Rachmona litzlan.3)

3) The rabbi stated: “I do see a major, major misconception about how we go about determining what’s the right path for us… The reason why there’s a lot of confusion is because we’re not going to the Torah to find out what the correct approach is, and we’ll come up with our own theories.”
True.
We do not need to come up with theories. However, when medical experts communicate their medical opinion, and their solemn warnings of frightening health concerns posed by this vaccine, we are obliged to take this opinion into consideration. And, yes, Halachically.
However, meeting someone who has arrived from Israel who has just taken the vaccine and complains of chronic weakness and suffers paralysis, or listening to a friend who communicates that he or she just got up from shiva after his or her father or mother died 22 minutes after taking the vaccine - is not “coming up with theories”. These are called first-hand observations, and no politician,  professional, or expert can deny such observations.

4) He stated: “Torah made it very clear that when it comes to inyonim of refuah – of medicine, it is not up for us to make our decisions - what we think is right. And it’s certainly not up for us to do research. We’re not qualified to do research…”
Untrue.
“Refuah” is not a dictatorship.
A doctor can suggest a treatment, and often there are differences of opinions, as in the very issue being addressed herein. Refuah is not a “one size fits all” proposition. It is incumbent upon each and every individual to be aware of the possible harm the vaccine presents, and weigh this harm against the questionable gain. One should not be a brainless zombie, as the rabbi seems to be indicating. Such behavior has proven to be a most unadvised one in reference to one’s health and wellbeing, as every doctor can attest. An educated patient is the ideal patient.
And as mentioned in my response to item #3, hearing about the demise of a close friend, who suffered cardiac arrest within 48 hours of receiving the second dose of the covid vaccine, or the likes, is not called “research”, and no “qualifications” are needed in taking this instance into serious consideration.

5) He stated that “when it comes to the words of a professional - ‘uman lo mareih umonaso’ – we have a klal that a professional is reliable and credible when it comes to his profession. A professional has a very high standard of belief. And when it comes to doctors – doctors’ words are to be trusted. We put aside Shabbos, we put aside Yom Kippur when it comes to a matter of pikuach nefesh. And how do we determine if it’s pikuach nefesh or not – very often based on what doctors are saying. And the definition of a doctor is a doctor who’s a mumcheh, who’s a professional.”
True.
Credence is given to experts in their fields. However, the outspoken and self-appointed spokesman of the “Gedalia Society” who is pushing the vaccine is NOT an expert in the field of this new covid vaccine, nor is he an expert in treating covid altogether, and his opinion can therefore be disregarded. Thank G-d, there are medical experts who have treated covid with a degree of success, whose opinions, as such, carry weight. One of them is Dr. Zev Zelenko MD, who is also a Lubavitcher Chasid, and certainly a rofeh mumcheh and rofeh yedid. He has stated vehemently his medical and professional opinion, that it is NOT indicated to take this new covid vaccine, for any person, for any age.
The reliability of a professional is granted to a doctor whose profession is to keep his patients alive, and can be sued for malpractice. However, the companies that produce and market this vaccine is NOT granted this reliability, since it is not legally culpable for an injury related to its products, as per legislation passed twenty five years ago (Childhood Vaccine Act of 1986). Likewise, medical professionals who represent governmental agencies are also not necessarily in the category of a professional to whom this reliability can be applied. Governmental agencies can have motives other than preserving life - motives can include popular opinion, fear frenzy of the masses, or usurping governmental control, as Lubavitch knows too well from its experience with the former Soviet Union and its “policies”.
Furthermore, professional reliability is not always applied in every case, and a Halachic authority is needed to determine when it can or can not be applied. See Yoreh Deah siman 154 sif 1, for an example of when it does not apply.

6) He stated: “The poskim say, going back to the Beis Lechem Yehuda, and many other poskim, that doctors should be doctors that are licensed by the government because the government has a licensing system of which doctors are quacky doctors and which doctors are real.”
Untrue.
There is no basis in poskim for this statement. The Beis Lechem Yehuda doesn’t mention the word “government” altogether. The Aruch Hashulchan mentions that healers who are not licensed by the government who opine that a patient is fit to fast on Yom Kippur should be disregarded. However, he concludes that if such healers opine the contrary, that the patient’s life can be endangered by fasting, then “chosh’shin lidvarav” - the patient should eat, since sofeik nifoshois lihokeil. There is no question that if a perfectly healthy individual is presented with a vaccine, in reference to which medical professionals, not just “quacky” healers, have indicated extremely troubling health risks, even a chashash sakonas nifoshois, then the opinion is to be taken into consideration, regardless of governmental licensing. And in this case, hundreds of medical experts with all the accolades and governmental licensing, have weighed in on the matter - and their opinions are frightening. 

7) He suggested: “The Torah not asking us to go onto WhatsApp groups and listen to every single rumor and shmuah that you hear out there… It is not your job to go and do research. It actually indicates a lack of bitachon when you start worrying about this and worrying about that and Googling it and looking it up and looking at Wikipedia to see what someone else wrote...”
True.
But the rabbi should have added, MOST importantly, listening to the media with its liberal bias, and sadly, the government sponsored media and agencies, who also have this bias. And most of all, the so-called Lubavitch news websites, like collive, anash.org, or chabad.info (and recently, even chabad.org), all of whom have shown to have a bias. Their “news” and obvious slant attesting to their support of this untested covid vaccine, as such, should be considered inconsequential. 
And, as mentioned in items #3 and #4, speaking to a loved one of someone who has died shortly after taking the vaccine or has been injured by the vaccine, or meeting the injured himself - does NOT indicate a “lack of bitachon”. On the contrary, it indicates the epitome of bitachon, taking your health decisions seriously, and not blindly following the so-called Lubavitch websites, facebook, or google, who wish to cover up such injuries and tragedies. 

8) He said: “When a person has a question of refuah, he’s supposed to approach a doctor. The same doctor, that a person would go to for any other area, the doctor that you would trust chas v’shalom for heart conditions or for yene machla or for whatever it is. That same type of doctor is the one you should be going to asking the particular question that’s affecting you and us right now.”
Untrue.
If the doctor isn’t knowledgeable as to the dangers or safety of the vaccine - an entirely newfangled technology, the likes of which the doctor is likely to never have become acquainted, even slightly - then go find a real expert. Unfortunately, at the present, doctors in Crown Heights are not experienced enough in this field to be able to pass judgement.

9) He said: “One should practice what the doctors are saying, or what rov – majority of mainstream doctors are saying, which is the attitude of Torah.”
Untrue.
One does not follow a “majority of mainstream doctors” when the matter involves sakonas nishois. In fact, the Alter Rebbe paskens in siman 618 that we follow the minority: If even two doctors opine that a person’s life is in danger, even if a thousand disagree, we follow the two. In this case, it’s not just two, but hundreds of medical doctors have communicated their opinions that the vaccine may cause the loss of life. And sadly, this prognosis has indeed come to pass in the Jewish community, Rachmana litzlan.

10) He stated, parenthetically: ”The controversy regarding vaccinations and the potential sakana of vaccinations has been addressed hundreds of years ago by the poskim - the Zera Emes, the Tiferes Yisroel, and so on and so forth…”
True.
But these poskim discuss vaccinations that protect the recipient from catching a disease that threatens the life of the recipient, not to protect the public or vulnerable others. This newfangled concept has never been discussed in poskim.

11) He stated: “The primitive methods of research or vaccines that they had in those days, were not as advanced as we have today.”
True.
But the new vaccine is a brand new concept, and in fact is not even a vaccine altogether, as experts have pointed out. Considering that this is a brand new frontier, and even experts are uncertain the reaction that might take place in a recipient’s bodily function, especially long-term effects - the research done thus far is sadly lacking.

12) His bottom line: “It is incumbent upon people to go listen to doctors.”
True.
As mentioned above. This bottom line is of essence to each and every one of us.
As such -
Please join us tonight, Tuesday night at 7pm, as we will “go listen to doctors” of the highest caliber, who will discuss the safety of this new vaccine.
Go to HealthyCrownHeights.blogspot.com for a Zoom link.

Sincerely,
Rabbi Daniel Green,
Crown Heights

Monday, December 28, 2020

Save the child!

Hey, with all this talk of aborted fetal tissue in the new covid vaccine, here is an observation on last week's Haftora, a rather intriguing one (Kings I chapter 3):

Then came two women, harlots, to the king, and stood before him.

Alone in one house, both had given birth, but one had inadvertently lain on and killed her son. Rising in the middle of the night, the mother of the dead baby switched the two infants. When the other mother rose in the morning, she realized that this dead one was not her son.

As the two mothers argue it out in front of King Solomon, each refers to the infant as her "son."

King Shlomo hears their claims, repeats them, and then surprises us all:

"Fetch me a sword," he says. And they brought a sword before the king.

"Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other."

Here, as you can see, the king uses the word "child," yeled.

And what happens next, of course, is famous:

The woman whose son was the live one says to the king, for her compassion was aroused for her son - "Give her the living child, and by no means slay him." But the other says, "Let it be neither mine nor yours, divide it."

Peculiarly, the word for "child" the first mother uses here is not the same word "yeled" that the king used, but rather, "yalud," the passive participle - which literally means "a born one."

Then the king promptly rescinds on his sword idea, and states powerfully:

"Give the living 'yalud' to the first woman," repeating this precise choice of vocabulary that she used – "and do not slay him. She is his mother!"

So here is a possible understanding as to the yeled/yalud phenomenon:

Notwithstanding that "yeled" is the standard noun used to describe a young one – "yalud" stresses that this child was in fact born.

Dividing the "yeled," the king suggests, is the right thing to do. The claimants are harlots, so there are no paternal claims of responsibility for this infant. Only two questionable mothers. Since neither has any concrete proof of possession, the king steps in and decides what to do with the ownerless "child", a mere object - the object of a dispute. Indeed, government has the authority to settle such disputes - cut it in two, the king delineates.

"Give her the living yalud," the true mother cries. This is not just an object. This is in fact "a born one." He is a living, born person. His life is not a commodity. He isn't just the object of a financial dispute, and he can't be divided.

When the true mother touches upon this meaningful, life-empowering consideration of the child as a born person, while the other woman acquiesces to the government's consideration of "her" baby as mere property, Shlomo knows what to do. This, of course, was his plan.

"Give her the yalud," he rules. "She is his mother."

A lesson for our times:

Your child does not belong to you. Nor does it belong to society. And it certainly doesn't belong to the state. In fact, it is not an "it" altogether. It is a he or she, and he or she belongs to G-d alone.

(Even an unborn fetus, in fact, belongs to G-d, as does its mother. And purposefully killing it in the womb is murder. Nonetheless, during its stay in its mother's womb, it hasn't yet been born – and for a Jew, status of its human life is not yet as pronounced until birth. Hence, albeit incorrect, it is still conceivable to discuss "ownership" of this life. And by Jewish law, the mother's life comes first.

But once the baby is born, his or her life cannot be sacrificed even to save all of humanity!)

This having been said, let every parent proclaim to the powers that be:

I don’t care who you are – the Dept. of Health, the Center of Disease Control, that governor of New York, the Prime Minister of Israel, or King Solomon himself:

Keep your sword to yourself!

The "sword," of course, in our case, is a syringe, loaded with formaldehyde, aluminum, substances extracted from an aborted fetus, mercury, or other wonderful ingredients, called a vaccine. In many cases, the vaccine is meant to protect society, but is of no meaningful benefit to its recipient.

This is a problem.

Society doesn't own the recipient; it doesn't own me, it doesn't own you, and it doesn't own our children either. G-d owns us all, and He says that every individual life is meaningful. G-d says it is immoral to compulsorily sacrifice an individual's life or wellbeing for what some consider a statistical benefit to society.

For government to forcibly execute any medical procedure that can conceivably harm the juvenile recipient, or recipient of any age for that matter, for the purpose of "the common good" - is downright evil!

It's time for all G-d-fearing and ethically inclined New Yorkers to stand up and protest the evil and vile "law" of forcing any vaccination – whether it be an untested covid vax, a flu shot, hepatitis B, or any of them for that matter.

***

With this Haftora we finished off Parshas Mikeitz, and went right into Parshas Vayigash, wherein a similar dispute continues – the dispute over a Jewish child.

Vayigash eilav Yehuda, and Yehuda stepped forward to powerfully protest the government's taking possession of Binyamin. This was Yehuda's big moment. He needed to correct his major transgression that transpired two parshios ago.

You see, Yehuda and company put their little brother in a pit, leaving him to die. "The pit was empty - it had no water," and water represents Torah.

In other words:

Almost two years ago, the entire Jewish community of New York sat by as thousands of children were put in a pit, thrown out of yeshiva, left to die a spiritual death!

 And now, two years later, "Yehuda" has his chance to reverse this misdeed and save a Jewish soul.

"Give me back the child," Yehuda roars, and the government backs down.

And so, all you Yehudas out there in this Empire State – it's time to step up to the plate. Let us realize our egregious error, gather together and protest the heinous law that was passed almost two years ago that lead to the mess we are all in today. A complete governmental take-over of our religion – our schools, our shuls, our lives!

It's not enough to resist the restrictive and politically-motivated covid courtesies and frightening new covid vax. It's not enough to protest masks, restaurant closures, interference with religious education or worship. We have to go back to the original meddling into religious education that began in 2019. New York's revoking religious exemptions must be stopped. Our religious freedom and the future of American Jewry depends on it. 

Wednesday, December 2, 2020

Get rid of the mask, or get a nose job

Brief introduction:
Yesterday, I may have been a victim of discrimination. In 770, of all places.
I walked into shul early in the morning, around 6:30 am, and there were some senior yeshiva students still sitting at a table, a little under the influence of L'chaim and the effect of an all-night Chassidic farbrengen. They invited me to say L'chaim with them, but I declined, as I didn't think they meant on a cup of coffee, which is what I was holding in my hand. Having walked past them, around ten seconds later, I suddenly was pelted with a bowl of chatzilim (eggplant salad).
So I must say that I felt a little like Lot's wife. You know what happened to her, right? She was a-salted. Well I was a-mayonnaised. Luckily I wasn't hurt. It was nothing more than a "smear" campaign, and they actually missed, for the most part.
I don't know why I merited to be the bochurim's target practice that morning, but my hunch is that it had to do with my vocal anti-mask position.
So therefore, I would like to share a quick dvar Torah in this regard:
 
In Shir Hashirim 7:5, Hashem praises the Jewish People, and says - אַפֵּךְ֙ כְּמִגְדַּ֣ל הַלְּבָנ֔וֹן צוֹפֶ֖ה פְּנֵ֥י דַמָּֽשֶׂק
"...Your nose is as the tower of Lebanon, looking out to Damascus."
Rashi queries, "I cannot explain this to mean a nose, neither in reference to its simple meaning nor in reference to its allegorical meaning, for what praise of beauty is there in a nose that is large and erect as a tower?..."
But alas, with the advent of covid face-covering courtesies, we can now answer this scriptural rhinal perplexity:
What's praiseworthy about a prominent and visible nose? But of course! When a person's nose is covered, his face is rather unattractive and even scary. Perhaps the verse speaks prophetically of our unprecedented times, when seeing someone's nose is a novelty! King Solomon praises the person who is not ashamed of his nose, and proudly displays it like the visible and sightly tower of Biblical times.
However, the symmetry of a nose, of course, not just its prominence, would be its main beautifying feature - as expressed by the Mitzudos Dovid, who also translates the word literally, "your nose," symbolizing the nose of the Jewish People, and explains as follows:
"Your nose will be impeccably straight and without any crookedness, like a tower that stands in the forest of Lebanon that looks out towards Damascus which is adjacent to it, and that tower is built with extreme symmetry. And it represents the "shofeit" (Jewish leader) of the times, who is the תואר פני הדור, the celebratory "countenance" of the generation, just like the nose that is the central feature of one's face; this leader will be straight without crookedness, just like this tower."
This commentary is extremely telling, and reveals a deeper understanding of the inexplicable schnozzle-covering that seems to have become in style in our unbearable covid times. Perhaps the present-day nose-covering reflects on our spiritual necessity to obscure our "nose", the Jewish leaders of our time, who seem to be totally bent out of shape, as crooked as they come. These rabbis sit by while our yeshivas get closed, the tell, erroneously, us to wear masks while we pray and study Torah, to conform with all our politically-inclined "medical" decrees against Judaism and against humanity, and seem to be clueless as to the peril our religion and our liberties are now in.
So here's my suggestion:
Instead of trying to keep our current metaphoric nasal deformity out of sight, let's just get a nose job! New Jewish leaders! ASAP.

Putting things into perspective - a short story for my father's birthday

On the anniversary of the birthday of my beloved father on 27th of Shevat, הריני כפרת משכבו, I present the following story: In 1990, I flew ...