A. The source is Kiddushin 20a. In the literal sense it probably means that an employer is at his/her workers’ mercy. The workers know the business cannot continue without them, and they can be tempted to exploit this fact. That is why Jewish law has strict rules designed to prevent workers taking advantage of their employer. They have to work efficiently and energetically and not waste their employer’s time or money. But at the same time the employer must not take advantage of an employee. A boss must not behave like a tyrant or bully, believing (and telling the staff) that their and their families’ lives are in his/her hands and they have to accept what he says or else they’re out.

Labour/management issues are central to Jewish ethics. Neither party is permitted to exploit, cheat or undermine the other. The employee must not feel like a slave; nor, in the colourful rabbinic phrase, is it right that the employer has the feeling of having acquired a master. Both parties need each other. They should feel they are partners, crucial (and appreciated) parts of a team. The question of who pays the wages is not the main issue. Armies need generals; they also need privates. Teams need captains; they also need players. Orchestras need conductors; they also need instrumentalists. Schools need teachers; they also need pupils.

The alpha and omega – or alef and tav – of good labour/management relations is the way they speak to one another. It must always be with respect, propriety and restraint. The Jewish model is Boaz and his reapers in the Book of Ruth; when Boaz came into the field he said, “The Lord be with you”, and they responded, “The Lord bless you” (Ruth 2:4).

As a warning to a boss who speaks to the staff in a high-handed fashion and throws his weight around, Jewish ethics would quote another passage in the Talmud, “Whoever shames his fellow human being in public is as if he has shed his blood” (Bava M’tzia 58b).

In today’s economic climate, when CEOs take away huge salaries whilst retrenching large numbers of staff, there is also a stern warning in the Book of Isaiah, “Woe to those who join house to house” whilst God “looks for righteousness (tz’dakah) and behold, a cry (tz’akah)” (Isa. 5:8,7). A CEO or employer who does not heed the cry of the members of the staff team is like “those who have ears but do not hear” (Psalm 115:6).

The first thing that has to be protected if a business is facing difficulties is the staff. The last thing a CEO should want is a multi-million personal pay packet; as the Yiddish phrase says bluntly, you can’t sleep in two beds at once or eat two meals at the same time. So what if other CEOs are taking out massive salaries? If there is spare money around, the moral thing is to use it for the benefit of the whole staff team.

A. Deism: belief that God is completely beyond the universe.
Theism: belief that God is both within and beyond the universe.
Pantheism: belief that God is identical with Nature.
Panentheism: belief that everything is in God.

Each concept has its own history and its own proponents. Deism and pantheism are problematical for Judaism. Chassidism tends towards panentheism.

A. A person was studying a page of the Talmud. A friend saw what he was doing and noticed which page it was. A week later the same friend came by and was astounded to find that it was still the same page that was open. “Haven’t you moved on?” he asked. “Moved on?” came the reply; “Why should I move on? I like it here!”

Now something which actually happened to me when I was a professional youth worker. When a group of teenagers objected to the conventional Shabbat services because they were boring, they said they wanted to create their own service. I said, “Go ahead!” They sat and thought and planned and got busy. One suggested this change, another suggested that one. Eventually they were ready to conduct their service. I said nothing aloud but I grinned inwardly when the service they produced was identical to the standard Shabbat service!

Both stories show you get used to certain ways of doing things and in time they define who you are and what you stand for. Changing the Siddur has been tried in non-Orthodox movements but without dramatically better results than the prayerbook of tradition. True, they have shortened the services and brought in more vernacular prayers, but if they had worked from within the halachah they could have found halachically sanctioned ways of addressing the same issues. In some cases they have changed the theology, for instance by rejecting references to a personal Messiah, resurrection of the dead and the rebuilding of the Temple, but on most of these questions their own adherents are apathetic. Recent attempts to rework the Siddur have tried to be gender inclusive, though I cannot see how it is an improvement to refer to God without Biblical terms like “Father” and “Lord”.

We are moulded by our history and tradition, and if this is how Jews have always spoken of God it is part of our identity.

A. Arizal is the name popularly given to Rabbi Isaac ben Shlomo Luria, 1534-1572. Because his ancestry was German, Ashkenazi is often added to his name. Hence Ari is the initials of Ashkenazi Rabbi Yitzchak, though it could also be Eloki Rabbi Yitzchak, “the divine Rabbi Yitzchak” or, as a nickname, Ari meaning lion (of the kabbalists). Zal is the abbreviation for zichrono livrachah, “his memory be a blessing”.

One side of the Luria family settled in Poland, the other in Israel. Isaac Luria’s father was told by Elijah the prophet that his son would bring kabbalah to the world and save the Jewish people from suffering. Shlomo, the father, died when Isaac was a child and the family moved to Cairo where they had rich relatives. There Isaac was already writing rabbinic works as a young age; at 15 he married his patron’s daughter. Acquiring a copy of the Zohar, the handbook of the mystics, he spent long periods studying kabbalah in seclusion. Some years later he moved to Tz’fat (Safed) and took over kabbalistic leadership from Rabbi Moses Cordovero. His disciples included Rabbi Chayyim Vital, who like Luria taught that to come close to the Divine Presence one has to love all human brings. Luria insisted on strict compliance with Torah ethics, including the prompt payment of workmen. There are several Sabbath z’mirot composed by him.

Luria died in 1572. He left little written work; his ideas flowed forth so freely that it was hard to systematise and record them. His disciples collected and embroidered the facts of his life and gathered and disseminated his kabbalistic teachings. In liturgy, Luria preferred the Sephardi tradition and enriched it with his mystical interpretations. His liturgical and other practices were adopted by the Chassidim and the Ashkenazi kabbalists.

A. The Queen of Sheba was probably the most famous Biblical queen, but she was not Jewish. Hers was a prosperous realm in south-west Arabia, and when she “heard of the fame of Solomon because of the name of the Lord”, she paid a visit to Jerusalem and was amazed at his wisdom and his magnificent palace. The story, told in I Kings 10, is embroidered in apocryphal and rabbinic literature and in Josephus.

Some of the Jewish queens in the Bible, such as Michal, the wife of David, were not highly regarded by history. Others, like Jezebel, the wife of Ahab, were considered as outright wicked women.

Post-Biblical Jewish queens had a better reputation. Two in particular who were referred to in Talmudic literature were respected for their piety and political abilities, such as Salome Alexandra (Sh’lomtzion), who ruled Judea in her own right from 76 to 67 BCE. Her husband Yannai had supported the Sadducees at a time of great tension with the rival Pharisees. 50,000 people lost their lives in the struggle, according to Josephus; to mark his victory the king had 800 of his opponents crucified and many of the surviving Pharisees left Judea to save their own lives. The king himself did not survive for long. Stricken with a mortal illness, he urged his wife to make peace with the other side. She not only brought back the Pharisee exiles but ruled so wisely in her own right that the nation was calm and at peace, and there were such wonderful harvests that the grains of corn were said to be as big as olives. Her brother, Rabbi Shimon ben Shetach, ensured that the Pharisees would support her, and he is credited with “restoring the Torah to its ancient glory”. Because of Salome’s piety the sages regarded her as having saved Judaism.

The second famous Jewish queen was Helen, wife of king Monabazus of Adiabene. Sympathetic to Judaism, she and her family helped the Jews to stand out against Rome. Helen herself became Jewish towards the end of the last century BCE, as did her son, Izates. Deciding on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, she brought with her a number of golden gifts for the sanctuary. However, she found the country in the grip of famine, and the queen and her son, who was now the ruler of his country, imported food to alleviate the starvation. Five of her grandchildren came to Jerusalem with her to learn Hebrew and be instructed in Judaism. On her death she was interred in Jerusalem, as was her son the king, who had died shortly before. The rabbis had a high opinion of her courage and determination and recorded that one of her descendants was a student of the great Rabbi Akiva.

A. The original custom was that only the first person called to the Torah would say the opening blessing and the last one called up would say the closing blessing. Those called up in between would not say a b’rachah. Hence the person called up last had a special privilege.

Two other explanations are possible. The last person called up had the additional honour of rolling up the Torah and so he was doubly blessed. In addition the final aliyah is the one through whom the Torah reading becomes complete. By way of analogy, think of the rejoicing when on Simchat Torah we rejoice at the completion, not of merely one section, but of the whole Torah.

There is a Jewish philosophy of eating, which began with the Bible. From that time onwards the analysis of food became a mental obsession. Eating properly was urged for reasons of physical health, psychological well-being, and mental acuity. A person who was hungry could not function well. It was good for the soul too: a weakened body could not serve God. Food was a basic element of the Jewish pattern of living. It was important for Jewish identity, since living and acting in a Jewish way reinforced one’s commitment to the Jewish tradition. It was good for one’s ethical character: Maimonides said that instead of gluttony and lust, people needed to master their appetites and not regard eating and drinking as the be-all and end-all of existence. It enabled a person to hallow every act of every day, making the table an altar and the home a sanctuary.

It was also part of the fabric of Jewish life. Through Sabbath and festival meals one tasted the sweetness of the occasion. Life cycle events made a shared meal into part of the ceremony, uniting the family and supporting the poor and lonely. The domestic emphasis that was a necessary part of keeping kosher strengthened the home and family and enhanced the woman’s role in Jewish observance.

Food was part of community religious life. The structure of kosher food supervision was an important community agency. Community officials included not only rabbis and teachers but also slaughterers and supervisors. Communities were centred around synagogues and schools, and also shops and market stalls, where communal affairs were often discussed as passionately as around committee tables. The characteristic word “kosher” gained an extended meaning; apart from food, religious appurtenances had to be kosher, as did one’s ethics and attitudes. To be “a kosher person” was a mark of character.

It was not just what one ate that mattered, but how. Food had to be treated with respect, especially bread, salt, meat and wine, since all these figured on the Temple altar in Jerusalem. One had to eat with clean hands and a quiet mind. Meal times had a cultural quality. A host rejoiced in giving hospitality because it was an opportunity for religious conversation. A blessing had to be recited before eating, and an after-meal Grace. Abraham the patriarch, renowned for his hospitality to wayfarers, told his visitors, “It is not me you should thank, but God.”

The word “kosher” means fit or proper. It comes only once in Hebrew Scripture, when Queen Esther asks her royal husband if a plan is kosher in his eyes. In later Hebrew, however, hardly any word is so ubiquitous. The kosher rules require the following:

1. The only meat and poultry that a Jew may eat must come from a species permitted by the Torah. Permitted animals must be quadrupeds, which chew the cud and have cloven hoofs. Animals, which are prohibited, include the pig, camel, horse and rabbit. Permitted birds include chickens, ducks, geese and turkeys, but not birds of prey.

2. Permitted animals and poultry must first be slaughtered “as I have commanded you” (Deut. 12:21) by a trained specialist (a shochet), according to set rules which ensure that slaughtering (shechitah) is done by one swift, sharp cut. The shochet is responsible to supervisors appointed by the rabbis. Certain parts of the animal may not be eaten, i.e. the blood, the hindquarter fat and the “sinew of the thigh vein” (Gen. 32:33). In most communities, only the forequarters are eaten.

Animal welfare groups occasionally raise objections to shechitah, but Professor Harold Burrow of the Royal Veterinary College, London, stated, “I am unable to persuade myself that there is any cruelty attached to it… I would raise no objection to any animal bred, reared or owned by me being subjected to this method of slaughter”. Lord Horder declared that shechitah “is fraught with less risk of pain to the animal than any other method at present practised”. Sir Ian Clunies-Ross of CSIRO said, “Those who oppose this method of slaughter are actuated, no doubt, by humane motives; they are, however, ill-informed of the physiological facts”.

3. As blood may not be consumed (Lev. 17:11), meat and poultry must be kashered, i.e. soaked in cold water for half an hour, salted on all sides and placed on a grooved and sloping or perforated board to let the blood run off, then rinsed. This method would not be effective with liver, which is so full of blood; the liver is therefore covered with salt and then grilled by means of an open flame.

4. Fish must have fins and scales (Lev. 11:9-10). Shellfish may not be eaten.

5. Meat and dairy products and their derivatives may not be cooked or eaten together nor may any benefit be gained from mixing them (these prohibitions are derived from the Biblical command, “Do not seethe a kid in its mother’s milk”, found in Ex. 23:19 and 34:26 and Deut. 14:21). The kosher kitchen separates milk and meat foods, utensils, cutlery, etc., often by means of colour coding.

6. As bread sometimes contains ingredients from non-kosher sources, it needs supervision. In order to be eaten with either meat or milk meals, bread should be pareve (“neutral” – see section 8 below).

7. After eating meat, an interval must elapse before eating dairy foods. The strict view requires an interval of six hours; a common custom reduces this to three hours. After dairy foods, which are more easily digested than meat, one may eat meat after a brief interval and rinsing the mouth, though hard cheese requires the full interval.

8. Foods, which contain neither meat nor dairy ingredients, are called pareve (“neutral”). Pareve foods include fish, eggs, fruit, grains and vegetables. Pareve foods may be eaten at either meat or milk meals, though it is customary not to serve fish with meat. Eggs from non-kosher species may not be eaten, nor may an egg with a blood spot on the yolk be used. Fruit and vegetables are normally no problem unless they have an added protective coating, which may be non-kosher, and vegetables need to checked for insects or bugs.

9. Cheese manufacture requires kosher supervision, as hard and many soft cheeses contain rennet, which may be an animal derivative.

10. Many insist on chalav yisra’el (rabbinically supervised milk), but many authorities rely on strict government standards of production and inspection and allow any milk.

11. Since wine is part of religious worship, the manufacture of wine and other grape-based drinks requires supervision. This also ensures that no admixtures from animal sources or milk-based cultures are introduced. The use of any enzymes that are grain-derived would render the wine unacceptable for Passover use. Non-grape based spirits may be used without rabbinic certification.

12. Cakes and biscuits must use only kosher oil, margarine, icing, etc. Chocolates and confectionery must not contain animal fat.

13. Additional laws apply on Passover (Pesach), when grain products and their derivatives are not permitted. Separate Pesach utensils, crockery, cutlery, etc., are required.

Though meat is now a crucial element in the kosher laws, vegetarianism may have been God’s original design for human beings (Gen. 1:29); meat eating was allowed later as a concession to human weakness and subject to careful safeguards. The messianic visions in Isaiah (e.g. 11:7) and elsewhere envisage a return to the original plan, with no violence or killing of any kind, including the traditionally sanctioned slaughter of animals for food. There is a view that in the rebuilt Temple even the sacrifices will be vegetarian.

There are levels of supervision of kosher food. Some prefer to take the stricter view of everything. The correct term for strict kashrut is m’hadrin – “scrupulous”. Whatever level of supervision one upholds, it is essential to look for kashrut certification (kashrut authorities publish lists of acceptable products) and not rely on one’s own often-inexpert judgment. In particular one should not merely go by lists of ingredients (e.g. terms such as “vegetable shortening”) printed on packaging. Manufacturers do not always list all their ingredients; the consumer is unlikely to know the source of the ingredients or the nature of the manufacturing processes; nor can one be certain whether a particular batch may have utilised an alternative ingredient, which is problematical from the kashrut point of view.

Everywhere in the Jewish world there is a new interest in keeping kosher (indeed many non-Jews, especially in the U.S., also tend to prefer kosher food because they believe it is healthier and fresher). The kosher market is small but growing. Newly-weds are deciding on kosher homes even when they were not brought up in way. Children are coming home and insisting that their parents go over to kashrut. Reform synagogues are installing kosher kitchens. People who always kept kosher are raising their kashrut standards. Almost every family makes their life-cycle events kosher. Community organisations take it for granted that public events are under kosher supervision. More people are buying more kosher products than ever before. Max Routtenberg, an American rabbi, has said, “It has become quite kosher to be kosher”. In Australia, only a minority of Jews is strict with kashrut at home and away, but the overall trend towards kashrut is marked.

Why do observant Jews concern themselves so greatly with the minutiae of kashrut? The Torah attaches no rationale to the food laws other than to say, “You shall be holy people” (Lev. 11:45 etc.) – i.e. kashrut is part of a spiritual pattern. For those who need more convincing than the assertion that the wise Creator knows best, one can add three inter-related dimensions: the mystical – what and how one eats influences one’s whole being; the ethical – human beings must cause the least possible pain to the animal kingdom and must curb the instinct to violence; and the symbolic – every religious practice enables a person to articulate some values and standards and to reject others.

A. In theory, science, technology or genetics are neither good nor bad. It depends on their aim, purpose and results. Thus, the possibility of modifying genes to correct a hereditary defect like haemophilia is an exciting positive development. But will genetic engineering be exploited and commercialised for ends that are neither socially desirable nor ethically acceptable? What happens, for instance, if the rich who can afford it get all the advantages, or the wicked who enjoy it manipulate people’s characteristics in order to create a master race?

There is an excellent essay on the subject by Fred Rosner in “Jewish Bioethics”, edited by himself and J. David Bleich (chapter 28). He points out that there are, even in the hands of the most benign ethical scientists, also risks that unexpected or accidental alterations may occur: “One must contemplate the possibility of accidental release into the environment of organisms carrying extraneous genetic material and/or the infection of plant or animal life with these bacteria. Recombinant DNA may be taken up by human cells in such a way as to produce cancer or other diseases.”

There is halachic research being done on this as on so many other major modern issues. An example is the work that is being carried on in the subject of human cloning. But for the moment one must echo the words of Lord Jakobovits, who urges that immediate attention be given by scientists, ethicists and religious teachers to clarifying the complex moral issues involved and establishing firm ethical guidelines to prevent “abuses and excuses” (“Jewish Medical Ethics”, pp.264-6).

One hopes that the twentieth century has taught us how dangerous it is to let science get out of control, and that the world is becoming responsible enough to heed the advice of King Solomon, “Righteousness exalts a nation, but wrongdoing is a disgrace to a people” (Proverbs 14:34).

A. Lions were known in Biblical times. The lion had several Hebrew names, especially arieh. In Jacob’s final message to his sons (Gen. 49:9) he calls Judah gur arieh – “a lion’s whelp”. The Biblical lion was probably not the great African lion but a smaller variety, though it still symbolised strength, majesty and valour. Israel as a whole are compared to a lion (Num. 23, 24). Both David and Solomon are stated as having killed a lion (Judges 14, I Sam. 17). Lions were part of the decoration of the Temple (I Kings 7:29) and golden lions stood on either side of Solomon’s throne and on both sides of its steps (I Kings 10:19-20). A lions’ den plays a major role in the story of Daniel.

In rabbinic tradition, God’s voice is powerful like the roar of a lion (Ber. 3a), and lions are introduced into many other stories and contexts. The Talmud calls it the king of beasts (Hag. 13b: is this the first time this phrase is used?). The Mishnah urges a person to be as brave as a lion to do the Divine will (Avot 5:20). In time the lion became a common motif in Jewish ceremonial art and is usually the only specific creature used in synagogue decoration; it very frequently flanks the Ark curtain, Torah covers and Torah breastplates. Clearly it represents dignity, majesty and strength. But is this the reason for its association with Jerusalem? This is a possibility, but it must be pointed out that the Biblical name Ariel used for Jerusalem several times in Isaiah 29 may mean, not “lion of God”, but “altar-hearth of God”.

A. Mikvah means “gathering” or “collection” of water. A mikvah is a small pool constructed according to ancient rules. It contains 40 se’ahs (a se’ah is about 3 gallons) of natural water – from rain, a natural spring, etc. – though it may be topped up with tap water and heated. The water level reaches the chest of an average person. Steps and a hand-rail lead down into the mikvah.

The lead-up to the wedding is busy for everyone, especially the bride. She often finds she hasn’t a moment to herself. Not only to think about the ceremony, but to be ready for the destiny that lies ahead. In a sense, the moment of aloneness comes when she immerses in the water of the mikvah and offers the deepest prayer of her heart that she and her future husband may be united in love and happiness all the days of their lives.

The mikvah is an essential institution, along with the synagogues, yeshivot, schools, libraries, a Beth Din, Chevra Kadisha and Jewish shops, which together make Jewish living possible. In some ways it is even more essential, because it consecrates Jewish marriage and family life to the purpose of Jewish commitment and continuity.

From Biblical times, immersion in the mikvah was an act of spiritual dedication. The Kohen Gadol (high priest), for example, had to immerse himself in order to conduct the Yom Kippur rituals. Today a mikvah is used by a bride before marriage, a married woman after her monthly period, a mother after childbirth, and a person (male or female) converting to Judaism. In some communities it is also used by men in preparation for sacred occasions, especially the High Holydays. Ancient mikva’ot have been found in many places including Masada, evidence that the mikvah was used throughout history.

Immersion is not intended to fulfil a hygienic purpose, since one must be physically clean before entering it. Its significance is spiritual, ushering in a new phase in a person’s life. For the bride it consecrates the marital union. Within marriage it acknowledges the privilege of love and intimacy which enables a couple to enjoy each other and create new life. Abstinence from sex during menstruation and for seven “clean” days thereafter ensures fresh excitement in a marriage every month.

Some ask, why do we need rituals in order to feel spiritual? The answer is that this is the genius of Judaism, ritualising and dramatising great ideals to ensure that concepts and values do not vanish into thin air. An additional contribution made by the mikvah is to celebrate the feminine life cycle. The rhythms of life are sacred for every Jew, and especially for the Jewish woman.