An 80 year old takes classes. Last night, I finished the 4th and final session of a class, sponsored by the Haberman Institute, and taught by Rabbi Alana Suskin, on the basic theme of how the Covid pandemic changed Judaism in America. As you probably know, when Covid hit, American synagogues tended to discontinue live, in-person services, and move to on-line platforms, either direct screening or through Zoom. Judaism has certain rules that one can say were violated as a result of this transformation. For one thing, certain prayers and rituals require the presence of a “minyan”, or ten adult Jews (in Orthodox circles, ten adult Jewish males). For another, on Shabbat and certain holidays, activities denoted as “work” are prohibited by Jewish law (Jewish law tends to be defined strictly by Orthodox congregations, more liberally by Conservative congregations, and viewed as non-binding by Reform congregations). Using electronic devices (microphones, computers, etc.) is defined as “work” for this purpose.

Rabbi Suskin’s class discussed the concept of a minyan, its origin, its history, its purposes. She then discussed the concept of emergencies (of various sorts) under Jewish law and tradition, relying on Talmudic and rabbinic sources. What constitutes an emergency, such that Jewish law (either the requirement of a minyan or the requirement to avoid “work” on Shabbat and holidays, for example) can be violated? And if it can be violated, how do you determine what would be permissible and what would not be? She gave us a number of Orthodox and Conservative sources, at various times of history (including the current Covid period) to form the basis to discuss this. The general goals would be to conform to Jewish law, except when doing so would be impossible or would put members of the community in danger. But how do you define the limits.

Throughout the Covid period, Zoom and streaming were used by congregations. But some congregations would not use these vehicles on holidays or Shabbat, while others would. And some congregations permitted Zoom or streaming attendees to be considered part of a minyan, while some would not. And how do you decide when the emergency has ended? Like in so many other topics, the answers are not clear.

An 80 year old also Zooms with friends. I do so everything Thursday morning, as part of a group, self-named as the Mavens. Each Thursday about 30 Mavens (who used to meet in person at Beth El Synagogue in Bethesda, and are now in the processing of slowing going back at least to a now-and-then in person session) meets on Zoom, with one member giving a presentation and leading a discussion. This morning, my friend Bert Foer presented on the continuing breakdown of the wall between religion and government, drawing largely on Supreme Court cases over the years. As expected, he did an excellent job, and will be sharing his text with the entire group of about 50. I am not going to summarize his points, but here are the ones I raised in the question and answer session: (1) if the large Bladensburg Cross, which the Supreme Court blessed, which is only public ground in suburban Maryland should not have been so blessed (as Bert contends), why is it OK to have a national Christmas tree on the Ellipse, or a large Channukah menorah? Or White House Christmas decorations? (2) If the government can override religious objections (of the traditional Church of the Latter Day Saints) against polygamy, or override human sacrifices (as they surely would if a neo-Aztec religion developed), both being against a more important moral standard, why shouldn’t government be able to outlaw abortion (even if some religions countenance it) on the same grounds, and (3) if the Supreme Court outlaws same-sex marriage on Constitutional grounds in the future, how could the new Defense of Marriage Act, when finally passed by Congress, override that determination, as the role of the Supreme Court is, in part, to rule on the constitutionality of Congressionally passed legislation?

And, for the second time this week, an 80 year old has lunch with friends. This time with two lawyers, like me St. Louis natives, and with whom I have worked in years gone by. Our ages are 88, 80 and 70. The specifics of our conversation is of importance really only to the three of us. But there was one thing that I found of interest. To be put in the folder dated “Coincidences”. One of the three has been writing a book set in St. Louis. I asked whether it was fiction or fact. She told me it was “creative fiction”. Or did she say “creative fact”? It doesn’t matter; I don’t know what either really is, or whether they would differ from each other. But she asked us if either of us remembered a Chinese restaurant in Olivette MO named Chu Wah, and if so did we know exactly where it was located. Neither did. But our 88 year old friend said that he remembered, from his time in St. Louis a Chinese restaurant in University City called Shanghai. And I chimed in that I didn’t remember either; that the Chinese restaurant I always ate ate was the Lotus Room in Brentwood. My guess is that none of these restaurants exist today.

So I decided to Google “Chu Wah Olivette”, and I found someone else who had asked the universe if they remembered Chu Wah. There were 41 comments on his question. But one struck me. I am paraphrasing a bit when I say it said: “Yes, I remember Chu Wah in Olivette and I remember when its owner opened the restaurant after closing the Shanghai in University City, but I always ate at the Lotus Room in Brentwood.” There you go.