In Bad Faith 2- Real Book Review - Cinderella Kicks the Sukka

 

Author’s note – This post is one part of an in-depth review of Dassi Erlich’s book In Bad Faith. If you are not up to date, it is helpful to see the following earlier posts:

Malka Leifer Debacle (Overview of this entire episode)
Irreversible Damage
The [Dis]Honest Truth
In Bad Faith – A Book[cover] Review

 

 

Intro - Kicking the Sukka

In a recent post, I quoted the prophetic opening Gemara in Masechet Avoda Zara. Let’s review it:

 

In the future to come the Holy One shall bring a Torah scroll and set it in His lap and proclaim, “For each one who occupied himself with it, he may come and receive his reward.” Immediately all the nations of the world will gather and come in pandemonium…

 

The Gemara continues that first enters the kingdom of Rome. They proceed to tell Him all the great things they did to enable the Jews to learn Torah such as building public markets. The Holy One says to them, “Fools of the world! All that you did, you did for your own purposes. You built marketplaces to situate harlots, etc.”

After Rome, the kingdom of Persia enters after them. Like Rome they proceed to tell HKBH all the great things they did to enable the Jews to learn Torah such as building bridges. The Holy One says to them, “Fools of the world! All that you did, you did for your own purposes. You built bridges to collect from them tolls, etc.”

I concluded that post with a comment:

Don’t kick the sukkah on the way out.

What does this mean?

For this, we must see the conclusion of that piece of Gemara.

The Gemara concludes that the wayward nations who are called "fools of the world" will beg G-d to give them the opportunity to fulfill the Torah anew. G-d will respond: "Idiots of the world! Those who prepared on Friday will have what to eat on Shabbos. Those who do not prepare on Friday, of what shall they eat?” Despite this, He will graciously give them another chance. “I have a very easy mitzvah for you to perform and it is called Sukka. Go and do it."

 

Immediately everybody will take and go to his roof and build a sukka. Whereupon HKBH will intensify the sun as in the height of summer and each one will kick down his sukka and leave…and G-d will laugh at the nations.

 

Before that closing line, the Gemara asks: Why is this to be held against them? The Halacha is that if one is in distress (מצטער) he may leave the sukka?!

 

The Gemara responds: It is permissible to exit the sukka - but do they have to kick it on the way out?

 

At long last, I completely read through Dassi Erlich’s vitriolic book. Once we understand the Gemara in Masechet Avoda Zara, we can also understand the real Dassi Erlich and in what way her book was written In Bad Faith.

I obtained the Kindle edition and read it during very private moments. I am not sure whether the pagination of the Kindle edition is identical to the printed version. To be safe, if I refer to any specific pages in the book, I am referring to the Kindle edition page. It may not be the same page number in hardcopy.

The reader can easily divide the book into two distinct parts:

Part 1 – The Passive Part – This is the first two thirds of the book up until about page 226. This part is primarily focused on all the things that happened to Dassi Erlich up to and including when her older sister passed away in 2014.

Part 2 – The Active Part – This is the last third of the book from page 227 to the end. This part is primarily focused on Dassi's actions against Malka Leifer and the Adass community. (Yes, she depicted disclosing her ordeal earlier in Chapter 10 and related her police report in 2011 in Chapter 15 so there is a little bit of overlap, but not much.)

As such, we can say that Part 1 describes why she was מצטער in the “Sukka” and left it.

Part 2 describes how she made sure to kick it on the way out.

To properly analyze her book, it needs to be viewed from three perspectives:

The secular irreligious viewpoint – How does it look to the world at large? (Secular, irreligious readers can do this better than I, but I will take a stab at it.)

The Jewish religious viewpoint – How religious Jews are supposed to see it? (This is what I am here for and the main purpose of this blog post.)

The pragmatic viewpoint – What is the book expected to accomplish, and does it indeed accomplish it? (This should be self-evident, but I will testify.)

Let us look at this step by step.

 

The Secular Viewpoint

On the Amazon book page, to date, her book received 78% five-star ratings out of 200 votes. Moreover, only 3% rated it less than 3 stars. Additionally, Dassi’s Facebook page portrays a slew of interviews and book signings with very enthusiastic audiences and a lot of fanfare. In secular terms, her book is clearly a big success.

To save myself typing, I will copy/paste some very positive (five-star) reviews that are listed in Amazon. Here’s one from the US:

Profoundly moving. Compellingly written. An incredibly important work for pioneering and lifting those wrongly pushed down, and enlightening and inspiring others to do their bit. Big reminder of being brave enough to question, for the good of oneself and generations of others

And here’s one from Australia:

One incredible circumstance this lady has been through. (I think she meant to write “What incredible circumstances”- YH) It was powerful, disturbing and important to read. Thank you for making it a very easy hard read. I’m very very grateful.

From the viewpoint of a secular reader, I agree with these reviews. I would very likely also give it five stars. The book is very well written and well organized. It grips the reader and does not overburden them. It is very human and “touches our souls”. And it certainly has the reader cheering for the protagonist – and leering at the antagonists.

Dassi is a modern-day Cinderella and Oliver Twist. She is the wretched, abused quasi-orphan who has risen up from the cinders and triumphed over adversary. Not only that, but she also triumphed in her long hard battle for justice.

Justice! What better virtue can there be than this?

She has turned herself into a heroine princess (without Prince Charming) and a champion of justice for the abused and down-trodden. No, she did not lose a glass slipper, but she broke the glass sukkah ceiling. Perhaps, she will soon meet her true Prince Charming and live happily ever after.

Kol Hakavod!

I already wrote that secular readers can praise the book better than I can. And they have. My place is to discuss the religious viewpoint. It’s a bit different. Here it comes.

 

The Jewish Religious Viewpoint

From the religious viewpoint, Dassi’s Cinderella story is nothing but a fairy tale.

I already elaborated on the flaws of this book when I gave my protracted review of the book cover before I even read it. Please see that review HERE.

That review was premised on a preliminary post titled The [Dis]Honest Truth. Please see it HERE. The crux of the [Dis]Honest Truth is that we all know that even if the basic structure of a story is totally factual, if the façade is false or misleading, then the whole story is as well.

From the book cover, we are expected to see a story of evil and deception and sinister cults with dark shameful secrets that Dassi is going to reveal to the world.

She does nothing of the kind.

As I read through the book looking for the perverse evil, I didn’t see any of it at all in Part 1. I only saw it in Part 2 in the actions taken by Dassi Erlich. In Part 1 – all 226 pages – all I saw was what the book is really about.

Mental illness.

This book is merely a tale of mental illness and the extensive damage that it can generate.

Throughout the book, there are three primary characters and several secondary ones. The three primary characters are: Dassi Erlich herself, Dassi’s unnamed mother, and Mrs. Leifer.

The secondary characters are Dassi’s ex-husband, her sister, Dalia, who passed away, and, thirdly, the Adass school as an entity.

The common denominator between the three primary characters is that all of them are suffering from some degree of mental illness. The secondary characters, all of whom impacted Dassi’s early life, are not.

The first five chapters, which make up about 20% of the book, are all about her abusive childhood at home. These chapters, and her entire childhood, were dominated by one person – her mother. Her mother certainly personifies the wicked stepmother in Cinderella.

Interestingly, her mother’s name is not mentioned at all throughout the book. On the one hand, there is certainly no need for it and, to a minor extent, it may somewhat mitigate the severity of Dassi’s loshon hara. But, on the other hand, we understand that a person without a name is not really a human. They are a “thing”, an “it”. And, sure enough, In the very first chapter of the book, Dassi introduces her as “The monster”. At least, that is the title of the chapter. The chapter displays the bold title “The monster” and the immediate opening two words of the chapter are, “My mother…”

We read about her mother for the next five chapters and what Dassi writes is horrifying. I bet it could rival “Mommy Dearest”. (I haven’t read Mommy Dearest so I’m just guessing, but from what I was told about it, it sounds very similar.)

As I was reading through it, I was shocked by how exceedingly abusive the mother is shown to be. It is clear to me that no stable person can act this way. Thus, only two avenues are possible: (1) the description of her mother isn’t factual and Dassi is telling us momma bubba maases or (2) the mother is very unstable and every word is true.

Indeed, I have no reason to doubt that Dassi is telling the truth (I have also gotten some verification from other people), so this tells me that her mother is suffering from some very severe totally undiagnosed mental disorders. As a DIY psychologist, I see clear signs of narcissism (NPD) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) along with paranoia and what used to be called schizophrenia. This is a lethal cocktail that is bunched together under the umbrella term “borderline personality disorder” (BPD).

Yet, in the first five chapters, Dassi makes no acknowledgement of this and just refers to her mother as “The monster”. Now, an intelligent reader who is knowledgeable about mental disorders (like any DIY psychologist) will recognize all the way through that this is a case of severe mental illness, and can have some sympathy, or at least understanding, for the anonymous mother. But a simple-minded reader is just going to see the wicked step-mother in Cinderella (who also happens to be anonymous). Dassi gives no reason for a reader to think otherwise.

In chapter 6, Dassi tells us that, as a teenager, her older sister showed her a book about dealing with a loved one with BPD which opened her eyes to the world of mental illness. But, I find the emotion she expressed about it to be very disturbing. In page 72 she writes:

It was the first time we had entertained the notion that perhaps our mother had a problem; perhaps the abuse wasn’t our fault.

Although she is 100% correct to realize that the abuse wasn’t their fault, and indeed it wasn’t, it looks like she stopped short of another realization. With the degree of mental illness that her mother had, which seems as extreme as it could be, and that she did not know she had it, maybe it isn’t her mother’s fault, either!

Of course, as a child Dassi can’t see it and, in her narrative, her childhood feelings are accurately portrayed. However, she is not supposed to be a child anymore. Now she is a grownup and understands mental illness. She is suffering from it herself. Now she is old enough to know that her mother is possessed by a swarm of demons just like she is.

So, why does she have to portray her mother as a monster? What is the toelles for this lashon hara?

What’s more, we all know that this kind of mental illness is not congenital. People aren't bornthis way. Something has had to trigger it. It does not seem possible that her mother had a warm loving upbringing herself. Something must have happened in her childhood. There is much room to suspect that even her mother is a victim of abuse. I surmise that if Dassi would delve into it, she may be able to find it – if she hasn’t done so already.

While we’re at it, we may as well check out the wicked stepmother in Cinderella.

So, even after the acknowledgement of her mother’s mental illness that was revealed in chapter 6, Dassi has no apologetics for her mother. Only for herself and her sisters. She leaves the reader with the impression that her mother unequivocally belongs in 7734. This is just one of Dassi’s sins in what I called Part 1 of the book. 

The second sin, and the bigger one, is the one I discussed in my earlier review. It is the demonizing of the Adass Community and Orthodox Judaism. I explained in my first review how it is clear that this is Dassi’s true goal with her book.

I am exceptionally bothered by Chapter 2. As she does with the title of entire book, she does again with the title of Chapter 2 – Growing up Adass. Although she devotes the first 2½ pages of the chapter describing the history of the Adass Community, the next 15 pages after that have absolutely nothing to do with the Adass community! It is all about the incessant, harrowing abuse she suffered at home at the hands of her mother (the monster). The abuse she described was not related to the Adass community, nor was there any abuse inflicted by any community member outside her home (we haven’t reached high school yet). There was absolutely nothing abusive about the Adass community. The Adass community is in no way responsible for the abuse that she suffered at home.

Don’t get me wrong. Religious zeal, in any religion, can be weaponized to be a catalyst for abuse. Religion involves rules and discipline and fire and brimstone. As such, people with OCD and NPD and paranoia (fear of purgatory) and a need to control others will find in the tenets of their religion the perfect pretenses for extreme controlling behavior. It goes with the territory, but it is not the fault of the religion - at least, not our religion. The religion is not meant to be practiced in conjunction with borderline personality disorder.

Indeed, in the next chapter, she describes a trip to her cousins in New York who were just as Ultra-orthodox as she was. They didn’t even speak English. Yet, she said she had free access to a pantry full of food as did the whole family.

Likewise, in the following chapter Dassi tells us about her friendship with another Adass family, the Fromers. On page 47, after she tells us how Mrs. Fromer surprised her with a bat-mitzvah chocolate cake (covered with sprinkles) she writes:

I loved the Fromer house,…I played with five little kids, no one ever screamed, and their mother trusted me and told me I was wonderful. I would continue visiting the Fromers every week…my time there helped me realize the meaning of a family. Family didn’t have to mean abuse…

Her Hasidic cousins weren’t abused. The Fromers weren’t abused. But, they were just as religious. How could this be?

 

The answer is that the Jewish religion, Orthodox or ultra-Orthodox, is not abusive. Mental illness is abusive. Mental illness can make religious life abusive. It can make the Sukkah very, very uncomfortable. But the problem is not the Sukka. It is the very hot sun.

But yet, with the derisive title of her 17-page second chapter, Growing up Adass, Dassi is fraudulently and deviously planting in to the minds of her gullible readers that the Adass community is the source and core of her abusive childhood. This cannot be true. The Fromers also grew up “Adass”. But they’re not like Dassi.

Let’s move on to the next emotionally disturbed character – Mrs. Malka Leifer.

Dassi introduces us to Mrs. Leifer in chapter 6, but Mrs. Leifer does not become a “Monster” until the next chapter. All the alleged abuse that she claims to have suffered is bottled up in this 8-page chapter. I don’t want to undermine it and I don’t want to challenge it. I will assume that at least some of it happened, and it certainly should not have.

But one thing is clear. Dassi tells us that Mrs. Leifer justified her abusive behavior in the name of [misguided] motherly love and perhaps that it is good training for marriage. Nevertheless, nowhere in this chapter did Dassi claim that any of the abuse was performed in the name of religion or sanctioned by it. Dassi was well-schooled in the religion, as she frequently indicates throughout the book. She claims that she “instinctively” knew that this behavior was wrong. She definitely knew that it was not part of religious observance.

Although I will agree that there was a strong abuse of authority and betrayal of trust on the part of Mrs. Leifer, it is hard to say that this is extensive abuse. Nobody was injured and nobody was forced. After soaking in the five long chapters of domestic abuse from her mother that began at birth, Mrs. Leifer’s activities pale in comparison.

I want to point out that the legal charges against Mrs. Leifer included rape and digital penetration. According to Dassi’s reports, Mrs. Leifer stimulated her intimate area. Nevertheless, her description of her wedding night (page 111) indicates that this did not affect her virginity. As such, how much of a penetration could there have been?

Even though Mrs. Leifer is clearly a functional and sociable person, unlike Dassi’s mother, there seems to be evidence of her own set of emotional issues. The way Dassi describes Mrs. Leifer as a dominating person, indicates a need for power and control. There are signs of low self-esteem, narcissism, and some amount of paranoia as well.

She is not as extreme or as horrible as Dassi’s mother, but they do seem to share some of the same issues. They just played out differently. In the way that Dassi’s mother was very extreme in a malicious direction, Mrs. Leifer was very extreme in a benevolent direction. She was too warm and loving.   

And, just as I maintain by Dassi’s mother, this kind of behavior is not congenital. It has to be triggered by some type of personal trauma. I have written many times in several posts that I suspect that Mrs. Leifer also suffered some level of abuse in her youth, and that we armchair judges ought to take this into consideration. Nobody wants to hear of it.

Of course, the third character to suffer from severe mental health issues and childhood trauma is Dassi herself. She is certainly suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), as she reports outright on page 222. This comes with all the trimmings. She prefaces the book with an episode of a near suicide attempt and she devotes a chapter to her ordeal with self-harm and sporadic withdrawal from society. I also see some signs of narcissistic behavior and manipulation.

As such, the first 200 pages or so of Dassi’s book is nothing more than an account of the damaging consequences of mental illness. It’s not an indictment on religion. Yet, Dassi is compelled to make it out to be so.

Why is this?

It’s because she cannot dwell in the Sukkah. She needs to kick it on the way out.

After the first 226 pages, the remainder of her book is a very detailed account about what she calls her valiant struggle for “justice”. Her compulsion to ensure that Mrs. Leifer is torn from her home and family and shlepped all the way back to Australia to face “justice” – i.e., punishment and retribution.

How bold and brave and selfless. The call of justice!

However, my function here now is to review the book from a Jewish religious perspective. And there is one major problem.

In Judaism, this is not the definition of justice.

Judaism does not define justice as retribution and revenge. It defines it as fairly adjudicated compensation.

Many, many people like to accurately misquote the Biblical edict (Vayikra 24:20): 

A fracture in place of a fracture, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, as one gives to his fellow so shall be given back to him.

The reason I said it is accurate is because this is exactly what it says.

The reason it is a misquote is because most people who quote this verse are presenting in its literal context. If Abe breaks Ike’s arm, go and break Abe’s arm. If Ike knocks out Jack’s tooth, go and knock out Ike’s tooth.

Astonishingly, Chazal tell us this is not what it means. (Except for malicious homicide). Rashi tells us so. He writes:

So shall be given back to him – Our Rabbis explained that this does not mean to literally wound the perpetrator, but rather a monetary payment. They appraise the injured as if he is a servant with a market value. [The compensation for the physical wound is commensurate to the loss of market value. There may be additional compensation for other losses as well.]

Clearly, Dassi and her ilk do not respect the Rabbis.

Hence, every place in the Torah where it mentions the term justice – צדק, it means fairness in judicial procedure and fairness in compensation.

שמוע בין אחיכם ושפטתם צדק

צדק, צדק תרדוף

בצדק תשפוט עמיתך

מאזני צדק, אבני צדק, וכו'

The implications of these terms include the concept of presumption of innocence – ונקי וצדיק אל תהרג, and the obligation to be dan l’kaf zechus – בצדק תשפט עמיתך, see Rashi. Also, that a judge cannot be harsh to one litigant and benevolent to the other (Sifra).

It is never used with regard to punishment or retribution.

Yet, clearly, Dassi Erlich in her entire Part 2 (page 227 to the end), is not out for compensation. Indeed, she sued both the school and Leifer in court for compensation, but she does not consider this justice. She still needs to see Mrs. Leifer extradited to Australia, tried by a non-Jewish court, and imprisoned before she can claim any “justice”. She uses the word over 50 times (not including Justice Jack Rush or Ministry of Justice) in her book even after the Jack Rush court case.

She is not looking for compensation. She is looking for blood. We Jews do not call this justice. We call it revenge. Something that is forbidden in our Torah.

It is also a tale of religious intolerance. Needless to say, there is virtually nothing at all in the Part 2 of the book that has to do with the Adass School or community or the Jewish faith, save for her persecution prosecution of them. She makes it clear that she wants nothing more to do with the Sukka, and she needs to make sure to give it a good kick.

She devotes a lot of text to pompously malign the Adass community in the last chapter, not only for sins they did not commit, but with a total indifference to the fact that we define “justice” differently and play by different rules. 

It does not seem like she respects some of the aspects of justice that I noted, specifically presumption of innocence or to be dan l'kaf zechus. She may know for certain what happened but she has absolutely no regard for the fact that everyone else, including everyone at the Adass, do not. I may elaborate on this in an upcoming post.

We can now move on to the third perspective which I called the Pragmatic Viewpoint. What is the value of this book? What does it accomplish? Is it good for the Jews or bad for the Jews?

If it isn’t obvious, I will have to leave all of you guessing until the next post on this topic.

Stay tuned for more…

Delicacies from Yechezkel’s Shabbos Table – A Travesty of Justice (Kedoshim 5784)

 

 

לא תעשו עול במשפט; לא תשא פני דל; ולא תהדר פני גדול; בצדק תשפט עמיתך: – ויקרא י"ט, ט"ו

 

Do not do a travesty of justice; do not favor a poor litigant; do not venerate a prominent litigant; with righteousness judge your comrade.

 

In this single pasuk, there are four cautionary commands. Who is on the receiving end of these commands?

Since all four are grouped in this pasuk, it is a fair assumption that all four cautions are being told to the same subject – one who sits in judgement. After all, a judge is in the best place to perform a travesty of justice and to play favorites and distort the law. Most readers would take this for granted.

Sure enough, Rashi certainly takes this route. He explains the first segment as a declaration that a judge who corrupts the judgement is called all kinds of unsavory names. He explains the other three segments along those lines and tells us why even a straightforward judge may rationalize bending the law.

But, do we notice something that makes the opening segment stand out from the ensuing ones? Hint – it is only evident in the original Hebrew.

Yes, that’s right. The first segment is addressed to multiple people in the plural, whereas the following segments are only mentioned in the singular.

Rashi doesn’t seem to be bothered by this. Indeed, we can all easily dismiss it by saying that since standard litigation involves a panel of three judges, this is to be expected. Of course, this then begs the question as to why are all the ensuing segments in this pasuk addressed to a single person?

The Ohr HaChaim Hakadosh is indeed very bothered by this discrepancy. He presents several approaches. Firstly, he wants to say that the first segment of the pasuk is not being addressed to the judges but rather to the baalei din – the litigants. The pasuk is cautioning the litigants not to twist their stories. That is, not to bend or spin their stories with deceptive terminology to present an inaccurate picture. Just tell it like it is.

Once we say this, we can say that the following three parts of the pasuk are not really commands at all but rather cause and effect results. The pasuk is telling the baalei din, “Do not falsify or misrepresent your claims. As a result of being accurate, none of the individual judges will unjustly favor a poor man or unjustly flatter a prominent man. Each judge will be able to judge your comrade (the other litigant) fairly.”

The Ohr HaChaim suggests some other explanations including one that says the subject of the opening segment is indeed the judge. The pasuk is telling a judge not to do a travesty of judgement to mean as follows. There are times when one can perceive that applying the precise letter of the law is not leading to a just outcome. Due to some quirk in circumstances, following the precise law may turn out to be a travesty of justice. In this case, the judge must use his perception to give a proper and just ruling even against the letter of the law.

Ohr HaChaim does not go on to explain the subsequent segments. Actually, they seem to contradict the first one. In the first segment, the pasuk is giving license to the judge to go against the letter of the law for the sake of justice. But in the next segments, we are telling the judge not to distort the case in favor of the poor or powerful in the face of the letter of the law.

I suppose he may understand that the first segment is giving a judge a license to be “creative”, but this license can easily be abused. Hence, in the following clauses, the pasuk is saying that, although for the sake of true justice one can circumvent the written law, nevertheless, subjective rationalizations based on any litigant’s personal circumstances are not acceptable for this license.

If this is what he means, I have two issues. One is simply that I see it as a big “dochek” (stretch) to say the pasuk is allowing bending the law at all and then calling it back. Hard to know where to draw the line. The other issue is that in no way does this explain why the opening segment is plural and the following ones are singular.

I would like to suggest my own approach that, indeed, the entire pasuk is addressing the judge[s] and not the litigants.

Many of us know that for monetary claims, there is a Talmudic procedure for arranging a Beis Din. This is in Sanhedrin 23a and Choshen Mishpat 13:1. This is what is called a Zabl”a Beis Din. Zabl”a (זבל"א), is an acronym for זה בורר לו אחד – this one chooses one [judge].

It means that for a monetary case, each litigant chooses one judge and then the two judges jointly select the third. The Gemara succinctly states the reason for this system:

אמרי במערבא משמיה דרבי זירא, מתוך שזה בורר לו דיין אחד וזה בורר לו דיין אחד ושניהן בוררין להן עוד אחד, יצא הדין לאמיתו:

 

Here is what they say in the West (Israel) in the name of Rabi Zera – Out of one litigant choosing one judge and the other choosing a second and the two judges choosing a third, the resulting judgement is reliably exact.

Rema in Shulchan Aruch elaborates in the name of the Tur:

Each selected judge will do his utmost to present winning points in favor of the one who selected him to the extent that the law allows. The third [neutral] dayan listens to the arguments of the two “biased” judges and is able to rule with precision.

In the ancient Talmudic system, each litigant can choose a judge which we expect to be somewhat biased in his favor and will know all of the Halachos that can win his own case. Of course, this is offset by the capabilities of the opposing chosen dayan. This is what makes this system fair.

In this system, each of the two biased judges functions like a toen Rabbani for the one who chose him. These judges are well versed in Halacha so they know what to argue and should leave no legitimate claim unspoken. The third judge, who was jointly chosen by the other two, will be the tie-breaker and can determine which Halachic arguments are more relevant to this case. The resulting ruling should be fair and just and neither litigant will be able to claim that the court was totally biased against him and the deciding judge did not hear all of his arguments.

Despite this expected bias from the first two judges, Rema stresses that they are limited to the boundaries of the Halacha. They are not empowered to present spurious Halachic arguments or to push for a false ruling when they know the Halacha is not on their side. This is what he means when he writes, “to the extent that the law allows”.

Accordingly, I want to suggest that this is the intent of the pasuk. The pasuk is referring to a Zabl”a Beis Din where one litigant may be a poor person and another may be a prominent person. Each one chose a dayan that favors him.

The pasuk is telling these dayanim not to go overboard. Even if they have a vested interest, they still must function like judges and not like lawyers. So, first it talks to all three dayanim at once and says to them that as a cohesive panel of judges, the three of you must be sure not to corrupt the judgement. Hence,

 לא תעשו עול במשפט

Then it speaks to each of the three judges individually.

If one was chosen by a needy man, he can make whatever Halachic arguments that are applicable, but he cannot invoke non-related circumstances such as the neediness of the baal din. Nor can he rule in his favor for that reason alone.

לא תשא פני דל

Then, the pasuk speaks to the second dayan and tells him the same thing. You can make whatever Halachic arguments that are applicable, but you cannot invoke non-related circumstances such as the prominence of the baal din. Nor can you rule in his favor for that reason alone.

ולא תהדר פני גדול

Lastly, it speaks to the tie-breaker dayan. The pasuk is telling him that just in case any of the other dayanim overstep their bounds and transgress on their restrictions, he is not to swayed and must rule based on nothing but the merits of the case.

בצדק תשפט עמיתך

Although the Zabl"a procedure is still available today, it is very rarely used. A Zabl"a court is not so practical to set up since it involves a lot of time and bickering between the two sides. It can only work when both sides agree to go to Beis Din and this doesn’t usually happen until after the nitva receives a summons from an established Beis Din. Secondly, a makeshift Beis Din is usually not equipped with a mazkir or safra d’dayana or any staff or equipment or even a place to hold court. Thirdly, Zabl”a dayanim generally charge good money for their time and effort and they become prohibitively expensive.  

Today we usually rely on established prearranged Batei Din which have a fixed panel and are selected by one side or the other. Rarely by consensus. This is just one of many shortcomings of today’s Batei Din which I plan to write about in the near future, IYH. Sadly, the institution of Beis Din is not what it used to be or what it needs to be.

השיבה שופטנו כבראשונה ויועצנו כבתחילה והסר ממנו יגון ואנחה

Fools of the World - Here we Go Again!

This post is an exact copy of a post that I have posted twice before. The first time was on October 15, 2008 and the second time was again on June 15, 2010. In each case, I referred to a current news link of the time. 

14 years later and I only need to update the news link at the head of the post. Sadly, very sadly, nothing else has changed. 

Well, maybe something has changed. For once we are engaged in a full blown war. Even so, the noise from the leftists is not that we don't have enough soldiers. There is no lack of leftist chiloni draft-dodgers. It's the same old racket about "sharing the burden". See my previous post from last month.

Fools of the World

Re: Times of Israel Article - AG to tell High Court gov’t must get ready to draft yeshiva students

The opening gemara in Masechet Avoda Zarah (2a) says:

In the future to come the Holy One shall bring a Torah scroll and set it in His lap and proclaim, “For each one who occupied himself with it, let him come and receive his reward.” Immediately all the nations of the world will gather and come in pandemonium…

 

The kingdom of Rome will enter before Him first…The Holy One says to them, “In what way have you involved yourselves?”. They will say before Him, “Master of the World! We installed many markets, we made many bathhouses, we amassed much silver and gold, and all this we did for no purpose other than to enable [the people of] Israel to busy themselves in Torah.” The Holy One says to them, “Fools of the world! All that you did, you did for your own purposes. You built marketplaces to situate harlots, bathhouses to adorn yourselves, and the silver and gold is actually Mine...”

 

The kingdom of Persia enters after them. The Holy One says to them, “In what way have you involved yourselves?”. They will say before Him, “Master of the World! We built many bridges, we conquered many metropolises, we waged many wars, and all this we did for no purpose other than to enable [the people of] Israel to busy themselves in Torah.” The Holy One says to them, “Fools of the world! All that you did, you did for your own purposes. You built bridges to collect from them tolls, you conquered cities to conscript the inhabitants and their property for your military campaigns, and, as for wars, I am the One who manipulates wars…"

 

I have oft-times reflected on this passage and noted that the great super powers of the world will line up to apply for this reward. Edom (the US and Europe) and Persia (Iran). No doubt Russia and China will also submit their applications.

And what about the State of Israel?

Will the State of Israel that tries so hard to be like all other nations, will the State of Israel also line up to ask for the great reward? And what claim will they make?

My guess is that the State of Israel will be right there clamoring away with the rest of the nations. And, as with the rest of the nations, HKBH will ask them, “In what way have you involved yourselves?” And they will say before Him, “Master of the World! We gave military deferments to those who could prove that they are studying Torah. And we made sure that they will not be able to legally work as long as they received these deferments. We gave child allowances for the children of your people - although we halved the child allowances at the same time as bread and milk doubled. And we set aside a special budgetary allotment for Torah schools - to make it look like we are giving them extra money when in truth we are giving them less since we didn't think that they deserve the same basic funding as State schools and so we made sure they didn't get it. And all this we did for no purpose other than to enable [the people of] Israel to busy themselves in Torah..."

And what will happen? Will the Holy One smile and heap infinite reward on the State of Israel for their sincere efforts or, as He said to the rest of the nations, will He say to them, "Fools of the world! All that you did, you did for your own purposes..."?

Just don't kick the sukka on the way out.

Related posts:

Service with a Smile?

The Pnei Hador have told the nation/They won't stand for segregation...

The Enigma of the Sigma (Purim 5784)

 

Note – I recommend this related post: Divergence from the Womb

 

 

וְכׇל־עַבְדֵ֨י הַמֶּ֜לֶךְ אֲשֶׁר־בְּשַׁ֣עַר הַמֶּ֗לֶךְ כֹּרְעִ֤ים וּמִֽשְׁתַּחֲוִים֙ לְהָמָ֔ן... וּמׇ֨רְדֳּכַ֔י לֹ֥א יִכְרַ֖ע וְלֹ֥א יִֽשְׁתַּחֲוֶֽה׃

 

I am proud to call myself a DIY (Do-it-Yourself) psychologist. I even gave myself a doctorate from University of Google at Home (UGH). My thesis was on MBTI, Myers-Briggs Typology Indicator. If you are not familiar with MBTI, I urge you to look it up HERE.

I became a fan of MBTI ever since I learned about it in an honest-to-goodness psychology class that I really attended many years back. MBTI goes a long way in explaining what makes people tick and why “these” kinds of people simply cannot behave like “those” kinds of people and why we cannot expect folks who act “this way” or “that way” to ever change. It is often used by relationship counselors and therapists as a tool to help determine where couples share common ground and where and why they cannot connect on other issues and how to deal with these unchangeable conflicts.

I went so far as to write a term paper on MBTI for that class I attended in 2005. This is what I was calling my “thesis” in the opening paragraph of this post. You can see that paper and how I applied MBTI to our Avos HaKedoshim HERE.

It was very easy for me to identify myself as an “INTJ” (Introverted-Intuitive-Thinking-Judging) which makes a lot of sense because INTJs are the ones that go for this kind of thing. INTJs are the ones that need things to make sense. Their decisions are based on rational calculations and not on emotions. Because of this, we INTJs tend to come across as cold, unfeeling, non-compassionate types.

As long as we are not sociopaths, this is the furthest from the truth. We are conservatives and not liberals. We are not prone to indiscriminate or misplaced compassion like liberals or like those who have the F (Feeling) attribute are. We use our compassion sparingly. Since we are low on the F scale, we do not allow ourselves to be governed by our emotions. But we have them as much as anyone else.

Hence, I have been wearing MBTI and my personal INTJ status on my sleeve as a sort of identity card. Yep, I am a member of the “exclusive” INTJ club - for what it’s worth.

Note - There are a total of 16 MBTI combinations and each one can be considered its own “club”. INTJ is known to be among the rarer types. It is presented as the third rarest type overall (2.1%), but it is only the fifth rarest in males (4%). All this is in the worldwide population, but I believe the percentages are much different in the Torah world with a higher percentage of INTJs.

I consider this to be one of a sizable group of privileges. I believe it is a privilege to be Jewish and a privilege to be a male. I make a bracha on these two privileges every morning. It is certainly a privilege to live in Eretz Yisrael and especially in Yerushalayim. There should be a bracha for these as well. It is a privilege to be shomer Torah and mitzvos and a chareidi Jew by my definition. It is a privilege to be a husband, a father and a grandfather. It is a privilege to have good family roots (yichus) and an extended family.

These are the universal ones that almost anyone can agree with. But I have some strange ones. I also believe it is a privilege to be an INTJ and, as weird as this may sound, to be left-handed. I happen to prefer exclusivity (it’s an INTJ trait).

I thought this sums up the exclusive clubs of rare personality types, until I was introduced to…the wolf pack.

In recent years I sometimes saw the term “alpha male” associated with people like Donald Trump and Harvey Weinstein and Bill Clinton and even Bibi Netanyahu. Initially, I just assumed it meant something like a stereotypical masculine type. Well, men will be men. But something caught my eye when I saw a clip about up to 7 male types, starting with Alpha and Beta and going to Zeta. I was curious to see where I fit into this spectrum.

Before I go on, let me explain where this comes from. Apparently, in the animal kingdoms, the males of the species (and their mates) can be categorized into classes. This is primarily seen in social animals like wolves and primates that live in dens or colonies. These packs of creatures always have the leaders that take charge and bully everyone else around. These are known as Alpha. They are like the Rebbas. After that are those who protect and cater to the leaders. These are the Betas or the Gaboyim (or the distinguished Chassidim). After that are the tough enforcers that protect the whole group. These are the Deltas or the Vilde Bucharim. Lastly, we have the wimps that let everyone else kick them around. The ones that eat the shirayim from the Rebbas. These are called Omegas – the regular Chassidim.

This is known as the wolf pack hierarchy.

At some point some folks figured out that we can identify the same classes in human society. And so, people were soon being categorized as Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Omega. But, as humans are much more intelligent and complex, it was noticed that there are those who don’t seem to fit into any of these classes. If we look closely, we note that each of the four classes described has its position or function as part of the pack. They are all team players.

In human society there must be some independents who don’t fit any of these types; those who are “in business for themselves” and don’t take a position on the team. The lone wolves. And so, some additional classes were “invented”. (None of this is truly scientific, but it is certainly indicative).

The Alphas and maybe the Deltas are the super-aggressive ones and the Betas and Omegas are the passive ones. I don’t fit any of those. But as I perused through the descriptions of the classes, the class that defined me the best was the Sigmas. Apparently, we don’t really have these in wolves, but we do in people.

Sigmas are introverted Alphas. They live in their own world, but in that world, they are the leaders. The Sigmas are high achievers but are not looking for limelight. They don’t need validation from other people, no prizes, trophies, fame or fortune. They get what they want without taking it away from others. They avoid open competition or confrontation. They do not let anybody else control them or dictate to them. They are not interested in being a Rebba and do not need or want any chassidim.

In a word, they are passive-aggressive.

As I first read about these attributes and identified with them, my thoughts were that these are the basic attributes of a standard INTJ. So, I tried an experiment. I just Googled up the combination of words “Sigma male” and “INTJ”.

Bingo!

About 141,000 hits including more 10 minute You Tube clips than one could ever watch. At the top of the Google page was a “random” excerpt that read as follows:

Sigma males, also often described as “lone wolves”, tend to be independent, successful and self-reliant. They march to a different drum. Because many INTJs can be described this way, there is likely a strong overlap between the two groups.

I wrote earlier that INTJ Sigmas are introverted Alphas. I would also say that Sigmas are Alphas with a conscience. How so?

Well, let’s get a better picture of Alpha males.

An Alpha male is an achiever driven to success. The problem is that his definition of success is success in the eyes of everybody else. Not necessarily in his own eyes. The Alpha male craves power and recognition and to dominate others because this is what gives him self-worth. He seeks fame and fortune…and women. Lots of them. All at once.

He needs these things, and he will use any means at his disposal to attain them. He is interested in winning and not in playing fair. The fact that he is strong enough to obtain them makes it fair. Might makes right. Thus, if he can and thinks he will get away with it, he will cheat on his studies and on his business clients and on his relationships to get what he wants.

It’s a Nietzsche philosophy of survival of the fittest. Unless they have external ethical constraints, such as being afraid of getting caught and humiliated or of heavenly retribution if they are religious or of local law enforcement, or any other situation where they stand to lose more than they’ll gain, they will persist in their goals.

People of authority, lawyers, prosecutors, judges, and politicians are predominately Alpha. Professional athletes, mercenaries and, of course, violent criminals are almost exclusively Alphas. We won’t say that most Alphas are wicked or narcissistic, but most narcissists and wicked people are Alphas.

Sigmas have a whole different definition of success. To a Sigma, success means being successful in his own eyes. He doesn’t care what anybody else thinks. He is not interested in power, recognition, or fame. He only wants to feel good about himself. He doesn’t use women or fancy cars to show himself off, so he doesn’t need a personal harem of women or a sports car. He doesn’t mind fame and fortune (or women) as long as he knows that he earned it by legitimate efforts.

An INTJ Sigma will not cheat on his tests or his clients or on his relationships. It doesn’t matter if nobody finds out. He will know it and it will make him very, very uncomfortable. Getting things through deceit goes against his standards of achievement. Unlike the Alpha, he will feel like he didn’t really achieve it and it will give him no pleasure because this does not give him his kind of self worth.

Believe it or not, I am not talking about righteousness. Just like I wrote that not all Alphas are wicked, likewise, not all Sigmas are righteous. We play it straight because that is what makes us feel good and worthy, not because it’s the right thing to do.

You can imagine that most heads of state and US presidents will be Alphas. Most of them won’t care if the elections were fair or even if there were no elections at all. They want position and power, and they got it.

In my opinion, the only US presidents in the last 100 years who may be Sigmas are Harry S Truman and Calvin Coolidge and maybe Dwight Eisenhower. Nobody after them (I think Gerald Ford was a Beta). Interestingly, Coolidge, Truman and Ford were not even elected as presidents. They were all selected by their predecessors as Vice Presidents and initially reached the office without elections. Eisenhower, like Trump, was elected president without ever having served in any capacity of politics. I also think that Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln were Sigmas.

According to the Google sources, Sigma males are a rare breed of men. One source claimed that Alphas comprise about 24% of the general male population, Betas comprise about 26%, the other non-Sigmas collectively take about 47% leaving the Sigmas at about 3%. This makes a lot of sense being that INTJs are also about 3%. But I repeat, this ratio applies to the general population, but I think the numbers are different with us Jews.

One place where we won’t find a lot of Sigma males are in jury boxes. Sigmas are independent critical thinkers. They cannot be brainwashed. This is never good for the prosecution but is even too unpredictable for the defense. The moment a trial lawyer – invariably an Alpha – senses a Sigma, he’ll find a way to disqualify him (or her).

In general, Alphas are not very fond of Sigmas. There is an unspoken rivalry between them. This is because an Alpha needs to be dominant and the Alpha can dominate everyone but the Sigmas. Remember what I wrote that Sigmas cannot be controlled through intimidation or by communal brainwashing. They are the critical thinkers and will challenge any idea that is not logical to them.

וכִרְאוֹת֩ הָמָ֨ן אֶֽת־מׇרְדֳּכַ֜י בְּשַׁ֣עַר הַמֶּ֗לֶךְ וְלֹא־קָם֙ וְלֹא־זָ֣ע מִמֶּ֔נּוּ וַיִּמָּלֵ֥א הָמָ֛ן עַֽל־מׇרְדֳּכַ֖י חֵמָֽה׃

In fact, the Alphas actually feel threatened from Sigmas. It’s not because they fear the Sigma wants to take his imperial crown, the Sigma doesn’t want his crown. It’s because the Sigma will tell the world that the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes.

וְיְסַפֵּ֨ר לָהֶ֥ם הָמָ֛ן אֶת־כְּב֥וֹד עׇשְׁר֖וֹ וְרֹ֣ב בָּנָ֑יו וְאֵת֩ כׇּל־אֲשֶׁ֨ר גִּדְּל֤וֹ הַמֶּ֙לֶךְ֙ וְאֵ֣ת אֲשֶׁ֣ר נִשְּׂא֔וֹ עַל־הַשָּׂרִ֖ים וְעַבְדֵ֥י הַמֶּֽלֶךְ... וְכׇל־זֶ֕ה אֵינֶ֥נּוּ שֹׁוֶ֖ה לִ֑י בְּכׇל־עֵ֗ת אֲשֶׁ֨ר אֲנִ֤י רֹאֶה֙ אֶת־מׇרְדֳּכַ֣י הַיְּהוּדִ֔י יוֹשֵׁ֖ב בְּשַׁ֥עַר הַמֶּֽלֶךְ׃

To be up front, I get a strong feeling that Sigmas make most classes of people nervous and uneasy just by being who we are. They feel that we have something they don’t but can’t figure out what it is. I think the answer is that Sigmas, by definition, have a certain type of self-esteem that the other classes don’t. It is what defines us.

ּ֣כי מׇרְדֳּכַ֣י הַיְּהוּדִ֗י מִשְׁנֶה֙ לַמֶּ֣לֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵר֔וֹשׁ וְגָדוֹל֙ לַיְּהוּדִ֔ים וְרָצ֖וּי לְרֹ֣ב אֶחָ֑יו

I call this the stigma of the Sigmas.

As such, if there is one place you will find an abundance of Sigmas, it is in Hollywood. Hollywood is very two-dimensional that it portrays clear good guys (heros) and clear bad guys (villains). The good guys are very often the quiet unassuming underdog who eventually out maneuvers the hapless villain. As such, most of the villains personify Alphas and most of the heroes are Sigmas.

Now I can only relate to movies and television from my earlier years, a generation ago. I don’t know who today’s Hollywood heroes are.

I think the archetypical Sigma of all INTJ Sigmas is Mr. Spock from Star Trek – played by our Jewish Leonard Nimoy. The comic book and movie Batman checks all the Sigma boxes. I think virtually all the Hollywood roles played by Humphrey Bogart, John Wayne, Charlton Heston, Clint Eastwood, Al Pacino, Harrison Ford, and Anthony Hopkins are Sigma roles. Thus, it stands to reason that most of these guys are Sigmas in real life.

Fictitious detectives such as Lt. Columbo – also played by our Jewish Peter Falk, Sherlock Holmes, Charlie Chan and Hercule Poirot are also Sigma personalities. And let’s not forget Kwai Chang Caine - Mr. Kung Fu (David Carradine). Sigma extraordinaire.

So, along with all the other “privileges” I noted above, I think it is a privilege to be an INTJ Sigma. But I don’t want to be selfish. I want to share it. All the above relates to the world at large. But let’s get closer to home. How about us Jews?

As noted already, my personal observation is that we Orthodox Jews spawn a higher concentration of INTJs and Sigmas. Why is this?

Because we are different.

הֶן עָם לְבָדָד יִשְׁכֹּן וּבַגּוֹיִם לֹא יִתְחַשָּׁב

Firstly, let’s refer to my earlier term paper about MBTI. The essence of that paper was to display that most of our esteemed ancestors would fall into the INTJ personality type. This would certainly include Yitzchak Avinu, Yaakov Avinu, Yosef HaTzadik and Moshe Rabbenu. Even though Avraham Avinu and Aharon HaKohen were more of the extroverted type, I still would call them Sigmas. One doesn’t need to be INTJ to be Sigma, just it comes more naturally to INTJs.

I personally believe that there is a hereditary aspect to all of this. We are their descendants. But not this alone. It is nature combined with nurture. We are taught in cheder and Yeshivos to be individualistic and to think for ourselves. This was actually the compliment that Moshe Rabbenu said about us as a nation when he pleaded on our behalf and called us a stiff-necked people.

HKBH wanted us to be a segulah from all the nations (Shmos 19:5), I think He wanted us to be a Sigma from all the nations.

והייתם לי סגלה מכל העמים – אל תקרי סגלה אלא סיגמה (תורת יחזקאל)

Chazal call us one sheep between 70 wolves. I would characterize it a little differently - one Sigma wolf among 70 Alphas.

We are the white wolf of the family.

And there can be no doubt that all of our adversaries were Alphas – Nimrod, Yishmael, Eisav and Amalek, Lavan and Bilaam, Pharaoh, Nebuchadnetzer, Titus – all of them alphas. All of them thought they can dominate us, but it just doesn’t work.

Nothing is clearer than the standoff between Haman and Mordechai. The ultra-Alpha versus the ultra-Sigma. Haman had the yedei Eisav which seems to work against everyone else. But Mordechai had the kol Yaakov. This is something that only we have.

This is the struggle that we are fighting to this very day. Especially in this time of war. The whole Alpha-driven world is trying to dictate to us what to do. How many pundits have I heard claim that “Israel is in trouble because they are losing the sympathy of the world”? They will not admit the truth: Israel never had the sympathy of the world. We didn’t have it any more on Oct. 8 than we have now. It was all just lip service then. We haven’t lost anything. It was never there.

All the western nations are afraid of the Islamists making violent protests. So, the Western nations are telling us to “stop the genocide”. But it’s not genocide, it’s just a vicious war. It's just that since we are winning this war, b’Chasdei HaBorei, it suddenly becomes a “genocide”. And they are trying to force us to stop this false “genocide” using all kinds of vacuous threats and even international courts of "justice".

So, the United States doesn’t want to let us go straight into Rafah and, B’Ezras Hashem, win this war, to make the world a better place for everyone. Yet, they cannot threaten us with holding back military aid. They are afraid to do so because they know that if they cut us off, we will produce our own weapons (or buy them somewhere else) and go it alone. Then they won’t have any more leverage on us whatsoever. They will lose total control.

They are wearing no clothes.

As much as I am not a big chassid of Bibi, and I think he bowed down to Haman far too many times in the past, I think he has finally learned his lesson.

אין לנו על מי לסמוך אלא על אבינו שבשמים.

The only way to defeat Haman or Hamas is לא יכרע ולא ישתחוה.

 

If we stick with this, we can be zocheh to:

 

וּבִשְׁנֵים֩ עָשָׂ֨ר חֹ֜דֶשׁ הוּא־חֹ֣דֶשׁ אֲדָ֗ר בִּשְׁלוֹשָׁ֨ה עָשָׂ֥ר יוֹם֙ בּ֔וֹ אֲשֶׁ֨ר הִגִּ֧יעַ דְּבַר־הַמֶּ֛לֶךְ וְדָת֖וֹ לְהֵעָשׂ֑וֹת בַּיּ֗וֹם אֲשֶׁ֨ר שִׂבְּר֜וּ אֹיְבֵ֤י הַיְּהוּדִים֙ לִשְׁל֣וֹט בָּהֶ֔ם וְנַהֲפ֣וֹךְ ה֔וּא אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִשְׁלְט֧וּ הַיְּהוּדִ֛ים הֵ֖מָּה בְּשֹׂנְאֵיהֶֽם׃

 

And so, on the thirteenth day of the twelfth month—that is, the month of Adar—when the king’s command and decree were to be executed, the very day on which the enemies of the Jews had expected to dominate them, the opposite happened, and the Jews were dominant over their enemies.

נִקְהֲל֨וּ הַיְּהוּדִ֜ים בְּעָרֵיהֶ֗ם בְּכׇל־מְדִינוֹת֙ הַמֶּ֣לֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵר֔וֹשׁ לִשְׁלֹ֣חַ יָ֔ד בִּמְבַקְשֵׁ֖י רָֽעָתָ֑ם וְאִישׁ֙ לֹא־עָמַ֣ד לִפְנֵיהֶ֔ם כִּֽי־נָפַ֥ל פַּחְדָּ֖ם עַל־כׇּל־הָעַמִּֽים׃

 

Throughout the provinces of King Ahasuerus, the Jews mustered in their cities to attack those who sought their hurt; and no one could withstand them, for the fear of them had fallen upon all the peoples.

וְכׇל־שָׂרֵ֨י הַמְּדִינ֜וֹת וְהָאֲחַשְׁדַּרְפְּנִ֣ים וְהַפַּח֗וֹת וְעֹשֵׂ֤י הַמְּלָאכָה֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לַמֶּ֔לֶךְ מְנַשְּׂאִ֖ים אֶת־הַיְּהוּדִ֑ים כִּֽי־נָפַ֥ל פַּֽחַד־מׇרְדֳּכַ֖י עֲלֵיהֶֽם׃

Indeed, all the officials of the provinces—the satraps, the governors, and the king’s stewards—showed deference to the Jews, because the fear of Mordecai had fallen upon them.

 

וּמׇרְדֳּכַ֞י יָצָ֣א ׀ מִלִּפְנֵ֣י הַמֶּ֗לֶךְ בִּלְב֤וּשׁ מַלְכוּת֙ תְּכֵ֣לֶת וָח֔וּר וַעֲטֶ֤רֶת זָהָב֙ גְּדוֹלָ֔ה וְתַכְרִ֥יךְ בּ֖וּץ וְאַרְגָּמָ֑ן וְהָעִ֣יר שׁוּשָׁ֔ן צָהֲלָ֖ה וְשָׂמֵֽחָה׃

Mordecai left the king’s presence in royal robes of blue and white, with a magnificent crown of gold and a mantle of fine linen and purple wool. And the city of Shushan rang with joyous cries.

 

Dovid Hamelech told us:

וענוים יירשו ארץ והתענגו על רב שלום

 

The Sigmas will inherit the earth and delight on the abundance of peace.

 

לַיְּהוּדִ֕ים הָֽיְתָ֥ה אוֹרָ֖ה וְשִׂמְחָ֑ה וְשָׂשֹׂ֖ן וִיקָֽר׃