Dilemmas On Screen: A Jewish Perspective

5. [Robin Hood] Can You Steal from the Rich to Give to the Poor?

Robin Hood is a legendary figure in English folklore, renowned as an outlaw who "robbed from the rich to give to the poor." His tales have been told for centuries, though Robin Hood’s historical existence remains unconfirmed. Set in medieval England, the story follows Robin, a nobleman (or in earlier versions, a yeoman) turned outlaw, who becomes the leader of a group of Merry Men living in Sherwood Forest. Together, they rob from the rich to give to the poor, challenging the tyranny of the corrupt Sheriff of Nottingham, and/or of Prince John, who usurps the throne in King Richard's absence.
Robin Hood's adventures are filled with archery, disguise, and daring rescues, symbolizing the fight against injustice and the hope for a fairer society, and Robin Hood in particular is renown for his bravery, cunning, and sense of justice.
The story of Robin Hood has been retold in countless poems, books, movies and on TV. We will approach the legend of Robin Hood generally, but we will occasionally refer to some of the more popular adaptations in recent history, such as the animated Disney version from the 1970s, and Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves with Kevin Costner and Alan Rickman.
This leads us into the following questions:
Is Robin allowed to steal from the rich to give to the poor? More specifically
Can Robin Hood steal from wealthy individuals, as opposed to the government?
What if the “rich” really means the government?
Does the calculus change because the government depicted is corrupt or run by illegitimate government officials? In other words, what if Prince John or the Sheriff are attempting to, or have already, usurped the throne?
Does the calculation change if Robin is a yeoman, as opposed to a nobleman? Does a nobleman have some form of authority that legitimizes the stealing?
Those are some of our questions. Let’s see what the Torah has to say.
 
I am excited to welcome Rabbi Avi Honigsfeld to this episode to answer our questions. Rabbi Avi is a dedicated spiritual leader and educator who received rabbinic ordination from Ner Israel Rabbinical College and holds a Master's degree in Counseling from Johns Hopkins University. Since moving to Dallas with his family in 2012, Rabbi Avi has actively engaged in teaching and Jewish outreach. Rabbi Avi founded the Richardson, Texas community in 2018 and expanded Jewish engagement and connection in the area.

4. [Lord of the Rings] Was Frodo's Failure A Moral Failure?

The Lord of the Rings is a story about a hobbit, or a halfling, named Frodo, who comes into possession of a powerful magic ring. One of its powers is that when a person puts it on, they become invisible. This ring turns out to be the One Ring, which was forged by the Dark Lord Sauron ages ago to take control of Middle Earth and everyone in it. In order to destroy Sauron, and save Middle Earth, the Ring must be destroyed.
The thing is, the Ring cannot be destroyed just anywhere or in any which way. It has to specifically be brought into Sauron’s home territory, Mordor, and thrown into the fires where the Ring was originally forged.
Frodo volunteers to undertake this task and is joined by a small fellowship who together embark on the quest to destroy the Ring.
Down the road, the fellowship breaks up. Frodo splits off from the group and is joined by his friend, Samwise Gamgee. Further down the road, Frodo and Sam are attacked by Gollum, a formerly hobbit-like creature. Gollum attacks them because, for centuries, he was in possession of the Ring, and he has become addicted to it and wants it back. The Ring has a corrupting influence on any individual who beholds it, and certainly anyone who possesses it. The longer a person holds it for, the more powerful the Ring’s corrupting effect.
That said, the Ring does not corrupt everyone equally, and it is noted that hobbits in particular appear to resist many of its corrupting effects.
Frodo is able to tame Gollum, and Gollum now serves as their guide to Mordor. Off they go and, long story short, Frodo eventually reaches Mount Doom. He stands exactly where he needs to, takes out the Ring, holds it above the fire. The moment of truth is here! If Frodo casts the Ring into the fire, Sauron will be destroyed, his powers will vanish and victory can be declared by the good guys.
But Frodo hesitates. The Ring has worked its corruptive magic on Frodo, and in the end, Frodo does not throw the Ring into the fire, while Sam watches. In the movies, Frodo says, “The Ring is mine.”
Frodo then puts the Ring on his finger and turns invisible and tries to escape. Gollum quickly spots Frodo, jumps on him, bites Frodo’s ring-finger off, and claims the Ring. Gollum falls off the cliff with the Ring and both are consumed by the fire. The Ring is destroyed!
This leads us into the following questions.
Was Frodo’s failure to destroy the Ring a moral failure? At the end of the day, he did not cast the Ring into the fire and, by his own admission, he chose not to do so!
In Tolkien’s quotes, we’ll see that Tolkien stated that it was impossible for Frodo to resist. But how do we understand Frodo? In the books, as we’ll see in this episode, Frodo said he chose not to destroy the Ring. Now Tolkien is saying, “actually, he had no free will.” Do we agree? As in, can a person be mistaken about whether he’s making a free will decision? How do we deal with this? We feel like we are choosing. But we’re not. What’s the Jewish perspective on this?
We repeatedly discuss in this episode the question of Frodo’s failure. We do not mean whether he, Frodo, succeeded in destroying the Ring or failed to do so; we are asking if he failed morally. Therefore, when we ask different iterations of “did Frodo fail”, what we are really asking is “was Frodo’s failure to destroy the Ring a moral failure; in other words, did Frodo fail morally?”
Let’s see how the Torah approaches this dilemma.
Note: Tolkien himself addressed this topic, seeing as he apparently received a number of inquiries about Frodo’s failure. We will be quoting a number of Tolkien’s personal views on the matter and, as an important caveat for the listener: I am obviously quoting specific selections of Tolkien’s writings and letters. It is not my intent to offend by being selective about my quotes, or try to cast Tolkien’s views in a different way than Tolkien intended. I am simply using these quotes to summarize the fairly long contents of Tolkien's letters as I understand them.
 
I am excited to welcome Rabbi Yoni Ganger to this episode to answer our questions. Rabbi Ganger has lived in Boston with his family for the last ten years working on the Harvard campus as the program director of MEOR, a Jewish outreach organization. He also runs a Jewish Young Professional program. In addition to Jewish education, Rabbi Ganger works as a therapist at the Center for Anxiety, a private practice therapy group with several offices in the Northeast that specializes in treating a wide variety of mental health issues using evidence-based treatments. Rabbi Ganger aims to weave psychology with Jewish wisdom both on campus and in his practice in order to best serve both his students and his clients. Please reach out at yganger@meor.org for any questions about Judaism, Psychology, or Lord of the Rings. 

3. [Good Will Hunting] Does Will Have A Moral Obligation To Use His Genius?

Good Will Hunting is a movie about Will, a genius who is 20 years old. Will is an orphan, poor, a blue-collar worker with blue collar friends living in a rough neighborhood. He works as a janitor at MIT and secretly solves math equations on the blackboards of classrooms and he does so effortlessly. We also learn that he was physically abused as a child, and has trust issues due to abandonment.
Will has three principal relationships in the movie.
The first is with Gerald Lambeau, a gifted MIT professor. The Professor finds out Will is in trouble with the law, and comes to an agreement with the judge that Will can avoid jailtime on condition that Will (i) does math with the Professor, and (ii) sees a therapist. Professor wants to help Will actualize his potential, and is harder on Will, but still seems to care about him. The Professor is less interested in focusing on Will’s emotional well-being and does not like making excuses for Will even though Will had a rough childhood.
The second is with Will's therapist, Sean, played by Robin Williams. Robin Williams enters the picture because Will mocks all the therapists the Professor sets Will up with, so the Professor finally brings in Robin Williams. Therapist is able to get through to Will (very slowly, and with challenges). Therapist wants Will to follow his heart, to play his hand, and is softer on Will, but still challenges him and asks Will, what do you want to do with your life? Will doesn't have an answer.
The third is with Chuckie, Will's best friend, who is played by Ben Affleck. Chuckie is like family. Will tells Chuckie that Will is excited to raise their families together once they each get married, Chuckie tells Will that if Will is still around in twenty years, Chuckie will kill him. Chuckie says, “You don’t owe it to yourself; you owe it to me" to cash Will's golden ticket and get out of here and go make a better life for yourself. This is a major impetus for Will to make a real move.
This leads us into the following questions, namely:
Does Will have an obligation, seemingly a moral obligation, to actualize himself? If he does, is it because he owes it to himself? Or is it because he owes it to others?
How do we resolve (i) being true to what one wants versus (ii) actualizing one’s own potential, and even being an asset to other people? The Professor, and Robin Williams, and Chuckie all appear to agree that Will would be “copping out” by not using his talents. Is that true?
As an educator, mentor, friend – to what degree do you push a person, and to what degree do you let go and let the person figure out what he wants to do?
With respect to pushing Will – is the Professor manipulating Will, as Robin Williams claims? When does “pushing” become “manipulation”? Sometimes, education has to be subtle. Subtlety doesn’t automatically mean “manipulation” – when do you cross the line?
It’s true that Professor can be dismissive of Will’s emotional problems. How do we balance that? How long do we have to wait for people to get over their issues and start taking responsibility and making decisions?
 
I am excited to welcome Rabbi Jack Cohen to this episode to answer our questions. Rabbi Cohen serves as the Director of Jewish Education and Community Engagement for Hebrew Academy High School in Miami, where he strives to teach Jewish philosophy and character development in a way that is relevant and resonant to 21st century teenagers. He also coaches and supports teachers in the school and works to be an educational bridge to parents and the broader community.
Rabbi Cohen has been teaching and mentoring young people for over fifteen years with a focus on building educational ecosystems of growth opportunities that allow participants to choose their own adventure.
Prior to his current role, Rabbi Cohen served as Director of Education for Olami North America and prior to that, as Director of Education for Olami Manhattan. He maintains a close connection with his own mentors, Rav Beryl Gershenfeld, Rosh Yeshiva of Machon Shlomo and Machon Yaakov, and founder of MEOR, and Rav Immanuel Bernstein, renowned author and lecturer.
Rabbi Cohen learned in the Mirrer Yeshiva and Yad Saadia Kollel in Jerusalem. He holds a bachelor's degree in physics and philosophy from the University of Pennsylvania and a master's degree in education (EdM) from Harvard.
He publishes articles about life wisdom from Judaism regularly on his website, www.theExpressionOfLife.com.
He also has a podcast called "Breakthrough!", which is available on Spotify. It is recorded every week in Aventura, Florida in an interactive ask-what's-on-your-mind format, at the following link: https://open.spotify.com/show/5H5WermZNbhVRum1P6I4KG?si=ayecu9_LScebFsd-Li2iHg

2. [Star Wars] Did Darth Vader Truly Redeem Himself?

Anakin Skywalker was picked up as a kid by the Jedi. He was expected to be the Chosen One who would bring balance to the Force. Anakin was a very powerful Force user. After many years of training, Anakin secretly married Padme Amadala, which went against Jedi rules. Anakin has dreams of Padme dying and is desperate to save her. He is eventually manipulated by Chancellor Palpatine (who is secretly Darth Sidious/the [future] Emperor) into turning to the Dark Side. Anakin proceeds to exterminate the Jedi and bring the Emperor to power.
Anakin is dubbed Darth Vader, and becomes the Emperor’s right hand man. Although it is not clear from the original trilogy (episodes 4, 5 and 6), Vader either commits, or is closely allied with those who commit genocide, including when the Empire destroys a planet full of people.
In the original trilogy, Luke Skywalker is the hope of the galaxy and is being trained to be a new Jedi. Predictably, Luke eventually fights Darth Vader, whom he eventually realizes is his father. Luke tries to convince Vader to return to the good side. Luke fails to do so, and subsequently defeats Vader, but refuses to kill his father. Instead, he appeals once more to Vader’s good side.
The Emperor offers Luke the opportunity to join the Dark Side and to kill Vader. Luke refuses on both counts. The Emperor tries to kill Luke. While Luke writhes in pain, screams, and begs his father for help, Darth Vader is clearly conflicted, looking between Luke and the Emperor, back to Luke, back to the Emperor.
Darth Vader then turns to the Emperor, picks him up and throws him down a shaft, killing the Emperor. This is considered a redemption moment for Vader. Luke uncovers Vader’s helmet, and it becomes clear that Vader is back to Anakin/good guy – “you were right about me”, he says to Luke, apparently referring to their earlier conversations where Luke appeals to Vader as Anakin, the good guy.
Luke, and clearly the audience, are meant to accept Vader’s act of redemption as genuine. Anakin is given a Jedi’s funeral and appears as a Force-ghost, apparently now accepted as a Jedi Knight.
This leads us into the following questions. Namely:
What does a person have to do to repent, from the Torah’s perspective? Did Darth Vader do that?
If Darth Vader did repent, is this repentance weakened because of his motivation? Vader did not repent the evil because it was evil; rather, Vader sees his son getting killed. If this new Jedi was not his son, but rather a total stranger to Vader, Vader (presumably) would not have redeemed himself.
Is there ever a point of return? Can a person ever go so far that they lie beyond the point of redemption
Remember, Anakin:
Played a key role in exterminating the Jedi, an international peace-keeping organization;
Leads an attack against the Jedi Temple;
Murders dozens of younglings (little kids training to be Jedi);
Murders countless people;
Is suggested to have committed mass murder and even genocide, by assisting the Empire in destroying entire planets
I am excited to welcome Rabbi Josh Livingstone to this episode to answer our questions. Rabbi Livingstone lives in Baltimore with his wife and children and has been involved in Jewish outreach and education for the last 18 years. He is currently the Director of Education at RAJE Maryland, which is an organization that works with young Jewish professionals in Baltimore. Rabbi Livingstone is also a marriage coach who specializes in working with husbands in both one on one and group settings with other husbands to help them improve their skills as a husband and improve their marriages. His Instagram handle is @the_husband_coach.
For questions, please reach out to joshlivingstone@gmail.com.

What is "Dilemmas On Screen: A Jewish Perspective"?

If you've ever watched a movie with a legitimate moral dilemma and wondered, "Honestly, I don't really know what the right thing to do is here" - so have we. We take those questions and dive into Judaism's perspective on those questions. What does the Torah have to see? Is it totally black-and-white? What circumstances might mitigate the dilemma? Join us for an interesting, thoughtful discussion and enjoy the Jewish take on these questions. 

1. [Harry Potter] Does Harry Owe the Dursleys a Debt of Gratitude?

Harry Potter is a wizard whose parents were murdered when he was a year old. Harry’s only living relative is his mother’s sister, Petunia. Albus Dumbledore, the Headmaster of Hogwarts, is the most powerful wizard alive, and was very close to Harry’s parents. Professor Dumbledore decides Harry should be raised by his aunt and her husband, Vernon.
Harry ends up living with his aunt, her husband, and their child, Dudley (who is the same age as Harry), for the next ten years. Harry was often underfed, was verbally and emotionally abused, and was often given a significant amount of housework and other chores. Harry then goes off to Hogwarts, per Dumbledore, “alive and healthy” and “not [as] a pampered little prince, but as normal a boy as I could have hoped under the circumstances.” Nonetheless, Harry returns to the Dursleys during the summer between school years. These summers are not pleasant for Harry.
Why did Dumbledore place Harry with such miserable, unloving people? Turns out, Dumbledore knew that he was condemning Harry to ten dark and difficult years. But Dumbledore’s priority was to keep Harry alive, and being raised by the Dursleys was the best way to accomplish that. The Dursleys accepted this responsibility, grudging though that acceptance may have been.
In this episode, we will explore the following questions:
Does Harry have an obligation to be grateful to the Dursleys for taking him in, despite the mistreatment? If he does, is this obligation mitigated given the mistreatment he suffered at the hands of the Dursleys?
What further obligation to be grateful does Harry have, given the magical protection the Dursleys provided for him by allowing him to call their house, “home”?
What if Harry earned an additional benefit of not being corrupted by fame, which may have occurred in another’s home where they did, in fact, care about Harry?
Rabbi Moshe Friedman will be our guest rabbi for this episode. Rabbi Friedman is a Jewish educator, musician, spoken word artist, video essayist, and author.  He has spoken and performed for audiences around the world, and continues to explore innovative ways of spreading Jewish wisdom through art, music, and media.  You can find his work at rav-mo.com and on his YouTube channel "Mensch Sense," at https://www.youtube.com/@menschsense1. His Instagram handle is @ravmo_.