There is a picture on Yeshiva World News of Presidential-hopeful Senator John McCain on his most recent visit to the kotel, or Western Wall. Now, the mere fact that Senator McCain took the time to visit one of the world’s holiest sites is admirable. I do not believe, as many claim, that his visit should be viewed as being nothing more than part of a well devised plan aimed at attracting Jewish voters, especially considering that McCain is himself a religious man. Indeed, according to this article, Senator McCain, while neither a “born-again” Christian nor a baptized one, has been for many years attending the North Phoenix Baptist Church in Arizona. Additionally, Senator McCain, on more than one occasion, has expressed his profound belief in God. As such, I believe his visit to be one of sincerity and not publicity.
Nonetheless, looking at this picture angers me; the reason, of course, is that he is wearing a kippah, or "skullcap." Now, one might question the actual harm caused by his kippah wearing. Indeed, one might ask both what the problem is and what all the fuss is about. One could opine, after all, that Senator McCain’s kippah donning does nothing more than display his respect for the Jewish people and their sacred sites.
Ok - I’ll tell you what the fuss is about; I’ll tell you why him wearing a kippah bothers me. Simply because: HE IS NOT JEWISH. Now to those who will shout at me, insisting that plenty of religious gentiles wear head coverings – you’re absolutely correct; many, in fact, do. But last I checked, Senator McCain is not one of those people; he is not someone who routinely displays his constant cognition of God. Such a fact does not, of course, in any way make him "less" of a person; to say so would be not only ludicrous but elitestly chauvinistic as well. Nonetheless, it is a reality, and I would, in fact, very much bet that he does not wear a head covering while attending church. So, if indeed his status quo is to leave his head uncovered – why digress now? Why now should he cover his head while visiting the kotel, regardless of the sanctity of the location? (Which is a separate issue in itself – but let’s assume, for argument’s sake, that the kotel complex does have sanctity.)
The source for wearing a kippah has been mentioned on this blog before. Its source is the gemara, or Talmud, in Kiddushin 31a, which says that the purpose of wearing a kippah is to keep ourselves cognizant of God at all times. Now, if Senator McCain has decided to add this (admittedly beautiful) kippah to his daily dress code then I would have no problem with him wearing it whatsoever; after all, one does not need to be Jewish in order to wear a kippah and show cognition of God. But that is not the case here. Senator McCain has not suddenly decided to complement his current mode of dress.
Rather, this situation reeks of the forcification (yes, I just coined that word) of Jewish standards on other people. And while I admittedly do not know whether he was asked to wear this kippah by some representative Jew (similar to when those bishops visited the kotel last November – they were asked to either remove or cover their crosses by the kotel Rav; indeed, his trip would have been undoubtedly planned in advance and well publicized) or if he simply decided to act on his own and make a kind gesture, I nonetheless find the act repulsive and unnecessary. He is not Jewish and therefore needs not wear a kippah. It’s that simple. There are no two ways about it.
Before concluding I would like to make it inescapably clear that I do not fault Senator McCain for anything here – please do not get that impression. What bothers me is the fact that he somehow found it seemingly necessary to wear a kippah at the kotel. Why? Was he pressured into doing so? I suspect so, even if the pressure was subliminal at best. Thus, when it comes down to it, him wearing a kippah was a response to a need, a response to a (subliminal) request. Why else do it? Why else adopt foreign, unnecessary standards? After all, how does placing a kippah on one's head change anything? Or, in other words, what would doing so accomplish for Senator McCain?
Nonetheless, looking at this picture angers me; the reason, of course, is that he is wearing a kippah, or "skullcap." Now, one might question the actual harm caused by his kippah wearing. Indeed, one might ask both what the problem is and what all the fuss is about. One could opine, after all, that Senator McCain’s kippah donning does nothing more than display his respect for the Jewish people and their sacred sites.
Ok - I’ll tell you what the fuss is about; I’ll tell you why him wearing a kippah bothers me. Simply because: HE IS NOT JEWISH. Now to those who will shout at me, insisting that plenty of religious gentiles wear head coverings – you’re absolutely correct; many, in fact, do. But last I checked, Senator McCain is not one of those people; he is not someone who routinely displays his constant cognition of God. Such a fact does not, of course, in any way make him "less" of a person; to say so would be not only ludicrous but elitestly chauvinistic as well. Nonetheless, it is a reality, and I would, in fact, very much bet that he does not wear a head covering while attending church. So, if indeed his status quo is to leave his head uncovered – why digress now? Why now should he cover his head while visiting the kotel, regardless of the sanctity of the location? (Which is a separate issue in itself – but let’s assume, for argument’s sake, that the kotel complex does have sanctity.)
The source for wearing a kippah has been mentioned on this blog before. Its source is the gemara, or Talmud, in Kiddushin 31a, which says that the purpose of wearing a kippah is to keep ourselves cognizant of God at all times. Now, if Senator McCain has decided to add this (admittedly beautiful) kippah to his daily dress code then I would have no problem with him wearing it whatsoever; after all, one does not need to be Jewish in order to wear a kippah and show cognition of God. But that is not the case here. Senator McCain has not suddenly decided to complement his current mode of dress.
Rather, this situation reeks of the forcification (yes, I just coined that word) of Jewish standards on other people. And while I admittedly do not know whether he was asked to wear this kippah by some representative Jew (similar to when those bishops visited the kotel last November – they were asked to either remove or cover their crosses by the kotel Rav; indeed, his trip would have been undoubtedly planned in advance and well publicized) or if he simply decided to act on his own and make a kind gesture, I nonetheless find the act repulsive and unnecessary. He is not Jewish and therefore needs not wear a kippah. It’s that simple. There are no two ways about it.
Before concluding I would like to make it inescapably clear that I do not fault Senator McCain for anything here – please do not get that impression. What bothers me is the fact that he somehow found it seemingly necessary to wear a kippah at the kotel. Why? Was he pressured into doing so? I suspect so, even if the pressure was subliminal at best. Thus, when it comes down to it, him wearing a kippah was a response to a need, a response to a (subliminal) request. Why else do it? Why else adopt foreign, unnecessary standards? After all, how does placing a kippah on one's head change anything? Or, in other words, what would doing so accomplish for Senator McCain?
In truth, people can dress however they damn well please - I really couldn't care less about what floats peoples' rubber ducks. But I do care about why they do it - if dressing a certain way makes one happy, then great; go ahead. Dress like Austin Powers and walk around asking people if you make them randy all you want. But if you dress like Austin Powers only because others expect you to then something has gone awry.
Guys and gals - kippahs are "mandated" for Jews, not for anyone who simply happens to be visiting our places of worship. Deal with it - enough with the insecurity! What does asking other people to conform to our standards accomplish besides our own ego-boosting?
15 comments:
Tzvi,
I disagree with your sentiments.
Firstly, Kippah is not even a Chiyuv MiDerabanan. See Rabbi Obadiah Yosef's Teshuva on the matter in which he essentially concludes that you don't have to wear a Kippah over the course of the day, but you should try to when making a blessing. It is a mostly cultural symbol, not a Halakhic one.
That said, if President McCain's wife were with him, and was showing off her cleavage along with her low rider jeans, I assume you would be horribly disappointed by this. She would be disrespecting the place. However, I could simply take the "Tzvi Feifel" approach and say "[s]he is not Jewish and therefore needs not" be decently clothed," but most people would not approve of this. A Kippah, whether you like it or not, is a cultural symbol, which now means "showing respect." Just as you wouldn't want her to go in bare bodied, McCain felt uncomfortable going in bare headed. It is only a cultural symbol in the first place (which in no way precludes it form also serving as "a sign of respect"). The whole idea of his visit (besides for the political votes acquired) was to show his support/respect for the Jewish cause, and what better way to do this then to personally don their cultural symbols.
Had they forced him to make a Bracha or keep Shabbat, then this would be an entirely different discussion.
The development of religious symbols is attested to in various different sources. Scholars believe that Chanukah is mostly an integration of the equinox (Gemarah AZ), the Seder is an integration of the Greek Symposium (qua Philo and others), and the Temple is on the site of a Jebusite Temple (See II Shmuel 24). The Bat Mitzvah was taken from Reform practices, the flowers in Shul are taken from pagan fertility rites. The theme of martyrdom has been developed through literary devices throughout Jewish history (see Gerson Cohen "Studies in the Variety of Rabbinic Cultures), Tzitzit were worn on 4 cornered garments in the ancient times (toga like garments, see the discovery of Tziztit at the Bar Kokhba caves or Qumran), Tfillin comes from the cultural period in which symbols on arms were widespread (see Chumash Etz Hayim articles in back) etc. etc. etc.
The point is, all religions, Judaism included, take various cultural symbols, whether of their own or other people, and develop them over time. The Kippah is just another example.
Simcha,
First, thanks for commenting!
Now down to business. Thanks for pointing out Rav Yosef's Teshuva. However, I admittedly don't see its relevance here. Regardless of whether a kippah is a chiyuv or a cultural symbol, the point is that it's meant for Jews.
And even you have to admit that there is a huge difference between someone dressing disrespectfully and someone dressed non-offensively who happens to not be conforming to the standards of others. Meaning, I think that everyone would agree (perhaps not?)that going to kotel without a kippah is not disrespectful. Whereas going in super tight and revealing clothes clearly is. Thus, a distinction must be drawn. So, the "Tzvi Feifel" rule is to judge every case individually and to use one's brain. Context is key. In this case, a kippah was completely unnecessary because it's a standard that Jews have, not Gentiles, even if you want to say that it's little more than a symbol.
And I highly doubt that he felt uncomfortable going bare headed. I mean, come on. And anyway why should he feel uncomfortable? I'd be willing to be that during his visit there were plenty of other tourists without kippahs on their heads. So what would he be uncomfortable about?
Either way, I think it's rediculous that a kippah is a sign of respect - the mere fact that he's going there should suffice! Why don a head covering when you don't believe it's necessary? Because other people expect you to - that's why he did this. Because this seemingly shows his respect. But that's absolutely rediculous, if you ask me.
And regarding your many examples of cultural symbols - great. But all that tells me is that a kippah is a symbol - a (now) Jewish symbol, not a gentile one. As such, I believe that making him wear one is inappropriate and rediculous (although I definitely hear your argument).
Tzvi-
1. ridiculous is spelled with an "I" not an "E." i was going to let it go, but you kept using it, so i had to speak up.
2. do you realize that this whole post is based on your perception of what mccain did? you have no idea why he did it. it could have been pressure like you said or because he wanted to show respect, by donning the kippah, a cultural symbol like your friend, simcha, said. so my opinion on the matter is just take it easy, because you dont know either way and even if he did don it due to pressure then what does your anger help?
3. i pray to G-d that you dont dress like austin powers and ask people if you make them randy, and to be honest, i think i would have problem with any jew who did that(but that really isnt the point of your post, just commenting.)
Tzvi,
As Anon 4:07 pointed out, all this is speculation. Yet I can give 3 very good reasons why McCain would don a Kippah:
a) If he is trying to show good will to Jews, going to their holy site in their garb is a good way to do this. You may say "why not just go to the site" but the response is "why not do it this way, there is nothing wrong with it, and the point is visually catching"
b) There is a big problem in Christian - Jewish relations today, that Christians capture Jewish symbols (the holocaust for instance). As such, McCain may have wanted to show that he was coming qua Jews and not qua being a Christian.
c) Head coverings play a major role in society and culture outside of Judaism. When non-Jews stand in the presence of their deceased they remove their head coverings. At other times they don head coverings. The pope and the bishops wear head coverings. That said, it was a safe bet by McCain to assume that, since all the Jews are wearing a Kippah, it wouldn't hurt for him to do it too.
MCCAIN DID NOT DO THIS OUT OF HIS OWN VOLITION
IF YOU HAVE EVER BEEN TO THE KOTEL YOU WOULD KNOW THAT EVERYONE IS ASKED TO WEAR A KIPPAH, REGARDLESS OF THEIR DENOMINATION, BY THE PEOPLE WHO WORK BY THE KOTEL.
Hey Tzvi! Cool blog - I got linked from your Facebook Page.
I didn't read the entire shakla v'tarya between you and Simcha, but I tend to agree with Simcha. I've always viewed non-Jews wearing kippot as innocuous signs of respect, rather than spiritual declarations.
There's really no discussion of this issue in the sources. I did find a maamar Chazal in Kallah Rabati 2:2, that describes having an uncovered head as "azut tekifa". If that's the case, then a non-Jew in a holy Jewish site might have to cover his head to avoid offending. (This strikes a chord: could you picture a visitor at the kotel with an uncovered head?) Once, he's wearing a head covering, a kippah is the only thing that would be appropriate and respectful at a holy Jewish site.
Anyways, interesting post! ttyl
Anonymous May 6, 2008 4:07 PM
---
1. Oops - too bad there's no spell check on comments. Thanks for pointing that out!
2. And yes, I realize that this is all speculation. BUT, I do have reason to believe that the kippah donning was in response to a request. First, as anon 11:53 pointed out, people in general are requested to put kippahs on their heads when they go to the kotel - thats why they have those paper head coverings there. Second, perhaps you recall the whole scandal last novemeber when the bishops were not allowed to go near the kotel b/c they refused to cover their crosses (I agreed with them that they should not have had to). Well anyway, there are certainly precedants regarding people being forced to dress a cetain way. And I therefore feel comfortable in asserting that he was asked to.
However, I will acknowledge that if he donned the kippah simply of his own accord, then I would not be upset.
3. Please do not using the alias "anonymous" - if you do not have a google or blogger account (or don't wish to use it), please choose a nickname and comment with it consistently. Thanks for commenting!
Simcha - if we do assume that he merely donned the kippah of his own accord to show his good will to the Jews (although I doubt it cause then why not wear the kippah during the whole Israel trip, why just wear it at the kotel) - then yes, perhaps your first reason is true. If so, however, then I bemoan that reality, that external things such as mode of dress count more than ones actions, especially when one's mode of dress is so trivial, and in this case, unnecessary.
Your second reason makes sense.
I have a problem with your third possibilty, however, as the question at hand is not whether it would hurt for him to don the kippah. Ok, so the pope and bishops do cover their heads - big deal. That they do would only would be relevant if McCain was wondering if doing so would harm him.
-----
The point is this: McCain put on a kippah went he went to the kotel, but it did not, from what I can tell, remain on his head for the remainder of the trip. Thus, it's clear that he did this because he was at the kotel and not merely to show good will. And in attempt to not offend anyone and "keep to the standards" he donned the kippah. It's donning was unnecessary, however, as he is not a Jew and is therefore not "obligated" to wear one. And since he is not "obligated," we should not expect him to do so. On the contrary, we should make it quite clear that such actions are unnecessary and that his good will is more than enough.
Tzvi,
Most Jews in Israel do not wear a Kippah on an average day, yet when they enter the Kotel, they almost naturally go to the little booth on the side and don one (I know from my way to many "Mesorati" relatives and family friends in Israel). If anything, McCain did what must have seen to him the most mainstream Jewish approach.
A quick story - a close family member of mine once organized an event with a then ambassador and now former prime minister of Israel. To begin the ceremonies they presented him with a silver Mezuzah. His response was... "Mah Zeh" - he had no idea what a Mezuzah was. This is the prime minister of Israel we are talking about, you expect more from the president of USA?
Simcha -
That's irrelevant - I made it clear in the post that I do not find fault in Senator McCain's actions. Rather, it is whomever asked him to put the kippah on that has caused me to react so.
Regardless, McCain's a smart guy, and I'd be willing to bet that he understood full well the reasons for donning the kippah: He undoubtedly realized that donning a kippah was, in the eyes of many, 'required' by the location, and therefore put it on.
There are a few misconceptions in Simcha's comment that need correcting.
"Scholars believe that Chanukah is mostly an integration of the equinox (Gemarah AZ),"
The primary sources - Maccabees and the military victory, Nach on the inauguration of bayit sheni, the olive harvest which historically occurred around Chanukah time - all provide solid connections unrelated to the solstice. The gemara in AZ is most likely just a "drash", it is talking about Adam Harishon after all.
"the Seder is an integration of the Greek Symposium (qua Philo and others),"
Karpas and maybe two of the four cups come from the Symposium. Of course, those are the least significant parts of the Seder. Pesach, matza, maror, and haggadah are all straight from the Torah.
"and the Temple is on the site of a Jebusite Temple (See II Shmuel 24)."
II Shmuel 24 describes a Jebusite owned threshing floor (a flat open space where they would process wheat, on a hilltop so that wind would carry away the chaff). I'm not sure how you figure that a threshing floor is actually a temple.
"The Bat Mitzvah was taken from Reform practices,"
Agreed. I also wonder where the bar mitzvah (as a formal ceremony) came from.
"the flowers in Shul are taken from pagan fertility rites."
Maybe, but it seems likely that the flower custom postdates the disappearance of pagan religion (unless you count Christianity as pagan :-) ) Given that this custom generally exists only on Shavuot, re-enactment of Bikkurim seems a more likely source.
"The theme of martyrdom has been developed through literary devices throughout Jewish history (see Gerson Cohen "Studies in the Variety of Rabbinic Cultures),"
Did you copy and paste this sentence from somewhere else? It doesn't match your writing style nor contribute to your argument.
"Tzitzit were worn on 4 cornered garments in the ancient times (toga like garments, see the discovery of Tziztit at the Bar Kokhba caves or Qumran),"
Ah yes, ancient Jews wore tzitzit too.
Tfillin comes from the cultural period in which symbols on arms were widespread (see Chumash Etz Hayim articles in back) etc. etc. etc.
I haven't seen those articles, but if you're an Orthodox Jew I hope you'd say that originally God commanded us to "tie them on our arms" and we wear tefillin to fulfill that command, not to copy neighboring peoples' customs.
Tzvi,
You're an idiot. Plain and simple. Whether or not McCain wears a head covering all the time, or whether or not he is even aware of the reason for wearing it, the fact that he did is a sign of respect for our traditions. He didn't have to; in fact, there have been many people who have visited the kotel over the years, in positions of power, who haven't. But the fact that he was willing to, even only for the duration of his visit, set aside his personal beliefs in order to show respect for another's, is not only OK, it's admirable. Get off your high horse.
"He didn't have to; in fact, there have been many people who have visited the kotel over the years, in positions of power, who haven't."
Ok, Sam, I question your use of commas to surround "in positions of power." Thats number one.
Number two, you are just wrong. No one should have asked John McCain to wear a kippa--Tzvi is completely correct. And if John McCain did it of his own accord, there was simply no need for it. He's not Jewish and should NOT have tried to appear Jewish. I think that it's perfectly respectful to appear in front of the Kotel as you are; he's not Jewish he should not try to appear so.
Check out any news service to see the Democratic candidate take his shot at kippah-wearing!
Post a Comment