text:
Transcendentalism

Transcendentalism is a philosophical, spiritual, and literary movement that developed in the late 1820s and 1830s in the New England region of the United States. A core belief is in the inherent goodness of people and nature, and while society and its institutions have corrupted the purity of the individual, people are at their best when truly "self-reliant" and independent. Transcendentalists saw divine experience inherent in the everyday, rather than believing in a distant heaven. Transcendentalists saw physical and spiritual phenomena as part of dynamic processes rather than discrete entities.

Transcendentalism is one of the first philosophical currents that emerged in the United States; it is therefore a key early point in the history of American philosophy. Emphasizing subjective intuition over objective empiricism, its adherents believe that individuals are capable of generating completely original insights with little attention and deference to past transcendentalists. Its rise was a protest against the general state of intellectualism and spirituality at the time. The doctrine of the Unitarian church as taught at Harvard Divinity School was closely related.

Transcendentalism emerged from "English and German Romanticism, the Biblical criticism of Johann Gottfried Herder and Friedrich Schleiermacher, the skepticism of David Hume", and the transcendental philosophy of Immanuel Kant and German idealism. Perry Miller and Arthur Versluis regard Emanuel Swedenborg and Jakob Böhme as pervasive influences on transcendentalism.

Origin
Transcendentalism is closely related to Unitarianism, a religious movement in Boston in the early nineteenth century. It started to develop after Unitarianism took hold at Harvard University, following the elections of Henry Ware as the Hollis Professor of Divinity in 1805 and of John Thornton Kirkland as President in 1810. Transcendentalism was not a rejection of Unitarianism; rather, it developed as an organic consequence of the Unitarian emphasis on free conscience and the value of intellectual reason. The transcendentalists were not content with the sobriety, mildness, and calm rationalism of Unitarianism. Instead, they longed for a more intense spiritual experience. Thus, transcendentalism was not born as a counter-movement to Unitarianism, but as a parallel movement to the very ideas introduced by the Unitarians.

Transcendental Club
Transcendentalism became a coherent movement and a sacred organization with the founding of the Transcendental Club in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on September 12, 1836, by prominent New England intellectuals, including George Putnam, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Frederic Henry Hedge. Other members of the club included Sophia Ripley, Margaret Fuller, Elizabeth Peabody, Ellen Sturgis Hooper, Caroline Sturgis Tappan, Amos Bronson Alcott, Orestes Brownson, Theodore Parker, Henry David Thoreau, William Henry Channing, James Freeman Clarke, Christopher Pearse Cranch, Convers Francis, Sylvester Judd, Jones Very, and Charles Stearns Wheeler. From 1840, the group frequently published in their journal The Dial, along with other venues.

Second wave of transcendentalists
By the late 1840s, Emerson believed that the movement was dying out, and even more so after the death of Margaret Fuller in 1850. "All that can be said", Emerson wrote, "is that she represents an interesting hour and group in American cultivation." There was, however, a second wave of transcendentalists later in the 19th century, including Moncure Conway, Octavius Brooks Frothingham, Samuel Longfellow and Franklin Benjamin Sanborn. The transcendence of the spirit, most often evoked by the poet's prosaic voice, is said to endow in the reader a sense of purpose. This is the underlying theme in the majority of transcendentalist essays and papers—all of which are centered on subjects which assert a love for individual expression. The group was mostly made up of struggling aesthetes, the wealthiest among them being Samuel Gray Ward, who, after a few contributions to The Dial, focused on his banking career.

Beliefs
Transcendentalists are strong believers in the power of the individual and are primarily concerned with personal freedom. Their beliefs are closely linked with those of the Romantics, but differ by an attempt to embrace or, at least, to not oppose the empiricism of science.

Transcendental knowledge
Transcendentalists desire to ground their religion and philosophy in principles based upon the German Romanticism of Johann Gottfried Herder and Friedrich Schleiermacher. Transcendentalism merged "English and German Romanticism, the Biblical criticism of Herder and Schleiermacher, the skepticism of Hume", and the transcendental philosophy of Immanuel Kant (and of German idealism more generally), interpreting Kant's a priori categories as a priori knowledge. Early transcendentalists were largely unacquainted with German philosophy in the original and relied primarily on the writings of Thomas Carlyle, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Victor Cousin, Germaine de Staël, and other English and French commentators for their knowledge of it. The transcendental movement can be described as an American outgrowth of English Romanticism.

Individualism
Transcendentalists believe that society and its institutions—particularly organized religion and political parties—corrupt the purity of the individual. They have faith that people are at their best when truly self-reliant and independent. It is only from such real individuals that true community can form.

Even with this necessary individuality, transcendentalists also believe that all people are outlets for the "Over-Soul". Because the Over-Soul is one, this unites all people as one being. Emerson alludes to this concept in the introduction of the American Scholar address, "that there is One Man, – present to all particular men only partially, or through one faculty; and that you must take the whole society to find the whole man". Such an ideal is in harmony with Transcendentalist individualism, as each person is empowered to behold within him or herself a piece of the divine Over-Soul.

In recent years, there has been a distinction made between individuality and individualism. Both advocate the unique capacity of the individual. Yet individualism is decidedly anti-government, whereas individuality sees all facets of society necessary, or at least acceptable for the development of the true individualistic person. Whether the Transcendentalists believed in individualism or individuality remains to be determined. Whitman embraced all facets of life, which seems more like individuality, which is more in tune with what the Indian spiritual tradition advocates; i.e. the True Individual, the yogic attainment of true individuality.

Indian religions
While firmly rooted in the western philosophical traditions of Platonism, Neoplatonism, and German idealism, Transcendentalism was also directly influenced by Indian religions. Thoreau in Walden spoke of the Transcendentalists' debt to Indian religions directly: "In the morning I bathe my intellect in the stupendous and cosmogonal philosophy of the Bhagavat Geeta, since whose composition years of the gods have elapsed, and in comparison with which our modern world and its literature seem puny and trivial; and I doubt if that philosophy is not to be referred to a previous state of existence, so remote is its sublimity from our conceptions. I lay down the book and go to my well for water, and lo! there I meet the servant of the Brahmin, priest of Brahma, and Vishnu and Indra, who still sits in his temple on the Ganges reading the Vedas, or dwells at the root of a tree with his crust and water-jug. I meet his servant come to draw water for his master, and our buckets as it were grate together in the same well. The pure Walden water is mingled with the sacred water of the Ganges."

In 1844, the first English translation of the Lotus Sutra was included in The Dial, a publication of the New England Transcendentalists, translated from French by Elizabeth Palmer Peabody.

Idealism
Transcendentalists differ in their interpretations of the practical aims of will. Some adherents link it with utopian social change; Brownson, for example, connected it with early socialism, but others consider it an exclusively individualist and idealist project. Emerson believed the latter. In his 1842 lecture "The Transcendentalist", he suggested that the goal of a purely transcendental outlook on life was impossible to attain in practice: "You will see by this sketch that there is no such thing as a transcendental party; that there is no pure transcendentalist; that we know of no one but prophets and heralds of such a philosophy; that all who by strong bias of nature have leaned to the spiritual side in doctrine, have stopped short of their goal. We have had many harbingers and forerunners; but of a purely spiritual life, history has afforded no example. I mean, we have yet no man who has leaned entirely on his character, and eaten angels' food; who, trusting to his sentiments, found life made of miracles; who, working for universal aims, found himself fed, he knew not how; clothed, sheltered, and weaponed, he knew not how, and yet it was done by his own hands. ... Shall we say, then, that transcendentalism is the Saturnalia or excess of Faith; the presentiment of a faith proper to man in his integrity, excessive only when his imperfect obedience hinders the satisfaction of his wish."

Importance of nature
Transcendentalists have a deep gratitude and appreciation for nature, not only for aesthetic purposes, but also as a tool to observe and understand the structured inner workings of the natural world. Emerson emphasizes the Transcendental beliefs in the holistic power of the natural landscape in Nature: In the woods, we return to reason and faith. There I feel that nothing can befall me in life, — no disgrace, no calamity, (leaving me my eyes,) which nature cannot repair. Standing on the bare ground, — my head bathed by the blithe air, and uplifted into infinite space, — all mean egotism vanishes. I become a transparent eye-ball; I am nothing; I see all; the currents of the Universal Being circulate through me; I am part or particle of God. Influenced by Emerson and the importance of nature, Charles Stearns Wheeler built a shanty at Flint's Pond in 1836. Considered the first Transcendentalist outdoor living experiment, Wheeler used his shanty during his summer vacations from Harvard from 1836 to 1842. Thoreau stayed at Wheeler's shanty for six weeks during the summer of 1837, and got the idea that he wanted to build his own cabin (later realized at Walden in 1845). The exact location of the Wheeler shanty site was discovered by Jeff Craig in 2018, after a five-year search effort. The conservation of an undisturbed natural world is also extremely important to the Transcendentalists. The idealism that is a core belief of Transcendentalism results in an inherent skepticism of capitalism, westward expansion, and industrialization. As early as 1843, in Summer on the Lakes, Margaret Fuller noted that "the noble trees are gone already from this island to feed this caldron", and in 1854, in Walden, Thoreau regarded the trains being built across America's landscape as a "winged horse or fiery dragon" that "sprinkle[d] all the restless men and floating merchandise in the country for seed".

Influence on other movements
Transcendentalism is, in many aspects, the first notable American intellectual movement. It has inspired succeeding generations of American intellectuals, as well as some literary movements.

Transcendentalism influenced the growing movement of "Mental Sciences" of the mid-19th century, which would later become known as the New Thought movement. New Thought considers Emerson its intellectual father. Emma Curtis Hopkins ("the teacher of teachers"), Ernest Holmes (founder of Religious Science), Charles and Myrtle Fillmore (founders of Unity), and Malinda Cramer and Nona L. Brooks (founders of Divine Science) were all greatly influenced by Transcendentalism.

Transcendentalism is also influenced by Hinduism. Ram Mohan Roy (1772–1833), the founder of the Brahmo Samaj, rejected Hindu mythology, but also the Christian trinity. He found that Unitarianism came closest to true Christianity, and had a strong sympathy for the Unitarians, who were closely connected to the Transcendentalists. Ram Mohan Roy founded a missionary committee in Calcutta, and in 1828 asked for support for missionary activities from the American Unitarians. By 1829, Roy had abandoned the Unitarian Committee, but after Roy's death, the Brahmo Samaj kept close ties to the Unitarian Church, who strove towards a rational faith, social reform, and the joining of these two in a renewed religion. Its theology was called "neo-Vedanta" by Christian commentators, and has been highly influential in the modern popular understanding of Hinduism, but also of modern western spirituality, which re-imported the Unitarian influences in the disguise of the seemingly age-old Neo-Vedanta.

Major figures
Major figures in the transcendentalist movement were Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, Margaret Fuller, and Amos Bronson Alcott. Some other prominent transcendentalists included Louisa May Alcott, Charles Timothy Brooks, Orestes Brownson, William Ellery Channing, William Henry Channing, James Freeman Clarke, Christopher Pearse Cranch, John Sullivan Dwight, Convers Francis, William Henry Furness, Frederic Henry Hedge, Sylvester Judd, Theodore Parker, Elizabeth Palmer Peabody, George Ripley, Thomas Treadwell Stone, Jones Very, and Walt Whitman.

Criticism
Early in the movement's history, the term "transcendentalists" was used as a pejorative term by critics, who were suggesting their position was beyond sanity and reason. Nathaniel Hawthorne wrote a novel, The Blithedale Romance (1852), satirizing the movement, and based it on his experiences at Brook Farm, a short-lived utopian community founded on transcendental principles.

In Edgar Allan Poe's satires "How to Write a Blackwood Article" (1838) and "Never Bet the Devil Your Head" (1841), the author ridicules transcendentalism, elsewhere calling its followers "Frogpondians" after the pond on Boston Common. The latter story specifically mentions the movement and its flagship journal The Dial, though Poe denied that he had any specific targets. Poe attacked the transcendentalist's writings by calling them "metaphor-run mad", lapsing into "obscurity for obscurity's sake" or "mysticism for mysticism's sake". In Poe's essay "The Philosophy of Composition" (1846), he offers criticism denouncing "the excess of the suggested meaning... which turns into prose (and that of the very flattest kind) the so-called poetry of the so-called transcendentalists".

title: Transcendentalism


text:
Double decker

A double-decker is a vehicle that has two levels for passengers or cargo, one deck above the other. Such vehicles include:
 * Aerial tramway
 * Bilevel rail car a rail passenger vehicle consisting of 2 levels
 * Bombardier BiLevel Coach
 * Bombardier MultiLevel Coach
 * Dome car
 * Double-deck aircraft
 * Double-deck elevator
 * Double-decker bus
 * Double-decker tram
 * Superliner (railcar)
 * Autorack (US) or car transporter (UK), a railway vehicle for transporting cars or other road vehicles
 * Car carrier trailer or auto carrier, a road trailer for transporting cars or other road vehicles
 * Two-decker is a sailing ship with 2 decks armed with cannon.

A double-decker may also refer to:
 * Double Decker (chocolate bar)
 * Double-decker sandwich, such as a club sandwich or Dagwood sandwich, with two layers of meat and condiments sandwiched between three pieces of bread
 * A multi-level roadway such as those found in Chicago
 * A multi-level bridge
 * A double-decker outhouse
 * Double Decker, a 1984 Hong Kong film
 * Double Decker (2011 film), a 2011 Kannada-language film
 * Double Decker! Doug & Kirill, a 2018 Japanese anime series

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Double decker


text:
Talk:Nintendo Entertainment System

Mário & Luigy
Hola a todos sólo quería decir que mi Hijo menor, que ya tiene 27 años, de nombre Luigy finalmente encontró a su Mario. Luigy está saliendo con un muchacho que se llama Mario. Son de lo más lindos los dos. Hacen una bonita pareja. 2600:1700:6F10:76C0:FCC3:EEAA:1761:7BA5 (talk) 22:46, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

In West Germany
which company distrubuted the NES in West Germany, can anyone tell me? Hewwoh (talk) 21:23, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

idk maybe its time to split the famicom and nes pages again
1. the famicom is two years older than the nes

2. it wasnt just released in japan, according to super mario wiki it was officially released in hong kong and taiwan

3. famicom and nes are two pages on japanese wiki, and they got a fundamentally different game library

4. they look nothing alike. only thing in common is hardware

imho it should be split again Memphis1525 (talk) 16:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

 * General oppose. As noted about, only thing in common is hardware. They are the same system, just with different housing and marketing based on geographical areas. -- ferret (talk) 16:42, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * what about the hong kong thing tho, they got both nes AND famicom. did you read the other points Memphis1525 (talk) 16:48, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Opposed. They're the same system. Sergecross73   msg me  20:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The differences can be summarised within the scope of a single article. If we split this into two articles we'd have to duplicate 90% of the content on both. Popcornfud (talk) 04:19, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * make it like mario wiki then Memphis1525 (talk) 04:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * here are the links
 * https://www.mariowiki.com/Family_Computer
 * https://www.mariowiki.com/Nintendo_Entertainment_System Memphis1525 (talk) 04:47, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes, Mariowiki. The thinking man's Wikipedia. Popcornfud (talk) 04:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't believe Mario wiki is something to aspire to. That's not an improvement at all. Sergecross73   msg me  14:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * okay fine
 * this place is super western biased lol. not everyone lives in america Memphis1525 (talk) 15:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * This isn't a western thing. There is no functional difference between the Famicom and the NES beyond exterior design. It makes no sense to discuss them separately -- though making sure to discuss the national impact of the Famicom in Japan and the NES in the US/North America. M asem  (t) 17:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Nintendo Entertainment System


text:
Restraint

Restraint may refer to:

A form of control

 * Restraint, or self-control, a personal virtue
 * Medical restraint, form of general physical restraint used for medical purposes
 * Physical restraint, the practice of rendering people helpless or keeping them in captivity by means such as handcuffs, ropes, straps, etc.

Arts, entertainment, and media

 * Restraint (book), a non-fiction book on international relations by Barry Posen
 * Restraint (2008 film), an Australian thriller directed by David Deenan
 * Restraint (2017 film), an American horror directed by Adam Cushman

Legal terminology

 * Judicial restraint, a theory of judicial interpretation that encourages judges to limit the exercise of their own power
 * Prior restraint, a government's actions that prevent materials from being distributed
 * Restraint on alienation, in property law, a clause that seeks to prohibit the recipient of property from transferring his or her interest
 * Restraint of trade, a restriction on a person's freedom to conduct business
 * Vertical restraints, agreements between firms or individuals at different levels of the production and distribution process

title: Restraint


text:
Mu isamaa, mu õnn ja rõõm

"Mu isamaa, mu õnn ja rõõm" (lit. "My Fatherland, My Happiness and Joy") is the national anthem of Estonia. It was adopted as the national anthem in 1920.

The lyrics were written by Johann Voldemar Jannsen and are set to a melody composed in 1848 by Fredrik (Friedrich) Pacius which is also that of the national anthem of Finland: "Maamme" (Vårt land, which was the unofficial anthem of the Grand Duchy of Finland). The only differences between the two anthems are their key signature and the repetition of the last four lines of each verse in the Finnish anthem. It is also considered to be an ethnic anthem for Livonian people with text "Min izāmō".

History
The song was first presented to the public as a choral work in the Grand Song Festival of Estonia in 1869 and quickly became a symbol of the Estonian National Awakening.

"Mu isamaa, mu õnn ja rõõm" was officially adopted as the national anthem of Estonia in 1920, after the Estonian War of Independence.

In 1944, the Soviet Union occupied Estonia, and "Mu isamaa, mu õnn ja rõõm" ended up being banned by the Soviet government. The Soviet Estonia had its own regional anthem. Yet the people of Estonia could often hear their former national anthem, as Finland's state broadcaster Yleisradio, whose radio and television broadcasts were received in northern Estonia, played an instrumental version of the Finnish national anthem, identical to this song, at the conclusion of its broadcast every night.

title: Mu isamaa, mu õnn ja rõõm


text:
Physical restraint

Physical restraint refers to means of purposely limiting or obstructing the freedom of a person's or an animal's bodily movement.

Basic methods
Usually, binding objects such as handcuffs, legcuffs, ropes, chains, straps or straitjackets are used for this purpose. Alternatively different kinds of arm locks deriving from unarmed combat methods or martial arts are used to restrain a person, which are predominantly used by trained police or correctional officers. This less commonly also extends to joint locks and pinning techniques.

Purpose in humans
Physical restraints are used:
 * primarily by police and prison authorities to obstruct delinquents and prisoners from escaping or resisting British Police officers are authorised to use leg and arm restraints, if they have been instructed in their use. Guidelines set out by the Association of Chief Police Officers dictate that restraints are only to be used on subjects who are violent while being transported, restraining the use of their arms and legs, minimising the risk of punching and kicking. Pouches carrying restraints are usually carried on the duty belt, and in some cases carried in police vans.
 * to enforce corporal punishment (typically a form of flagellation) by impeding motions of the target (usually prisoner), as is still practiced in penal functions of several countries
 * by specially-trained teachers or teaching assistants to restrain children and teenagers with severe behavioral problems or disorders like autism or Tourette syndrome, to prevent hurting others or themselves
 * approximately 70% of teachers who work with students with behavioral disabilities use a type of physical restraint (Goldstein & Brooks, 2007)
 * often used in emergency situations or for de-escalation purposes (Ryan & Peterson, 2004)
 * many educators believe restraints are used to maintain the safety and order of the classroom and students, while those who oppose their use believe they are dangerous to the physical and mental health of children and may result in death (McAfee, Schwilk & Miltruski, 2006) and (Kutz, 2009).
 * Individuals with Disabilities Education Act has stated that "Restraints may not be used as an alternative to adequate staff" (McAfee, Schwilk & Miltruski, 2006, p. 713). Also, "restraint may be used only when aggressive behavior interferes with an individual's own ability to benefit from programming or poses physical threat to others" (McAfee, Schwilk & Miltruski, 2006, p. 713).

 * by escapologists, illusionists and stunt performers
 * to restrain people who are suffering from involuntary physical spasms, to prevent them from hurting themselves (see medical restraints)
 * controversially, in psychiatric hospitals
 * restraints were developed during the 1700s by Philippe Pinel and performed with his assistant, Jean-Baptiste Pussin in hospitals in France

 * by a kidnapper (stereotypically with rope or duct tape and a gag) or other material
 * for eroticism

Misuse and risks
Restraining someone against their will is generally a crime in most jurisdictions, unless it is explicitly sanctioned by law. (See false arrest, false imprisonment).

Restraint has been misused in special education settings resulting in severe injury and trauma of students and lack of education from spending school hours restrained.

The misuse of physical restraint has resulted in many deaths. Physical restraint can be dangerous, sometimes in unexpected ways. Examples include:
 * postural asphyxia
 * unintended strangulation
 * death due to choking or vomiting and being unable to clear the airway
 * death due to inability to escape in the event of fire or other disaster
 * death due to dehydration or starvation due to the inability to escape
 * cutting off of blood circulation by restraints
 * nerve damage by restraints
 * cutting of blood vessels by struggling against restraints, resulting in death by loss of blood
 * death by hypothermia or hyperthermia whilst unable to escape
 * death from deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism due to lack of movement

For these and many other reasons, extreme caution is needed in the use of physical restraint.

Gagging a restrained person is highly risky, as it involves a substantial risk of asphyxia, both from the gag itself, and also from choking or vomiting and being unable to clear the airway. In practice, simple gags do not restrict communication much; however, this means that gags that are effective enough to prevent communication are generally also potentially effective at restricting breathing. Gags that prevent communication may also prevent the communication of distress that might otherwise prevent injury.

Medical restraints
A survey in the US in 1998 reported an estimated 150 restraint related deaths in care environments (Weiss, 1998). Low frequency fatalities occur with some degree of regularity. An investigation of 45 restraint related deaths in US childcare settings showed 28 of these deaths were reported to have occurred in the prone position. In the UK restraint related deaths would appear to be reported less often. The evidence for effective staff training in the use of medical restraints is at best crude, with evaluation of training programmes being the exception rather than the rule. Vast numbers of care staff are trained in 'physical interventions' including physical restraint, although they rarely employ them in practice. It is accepted that staff training in physical interventions can increase carer confidence.

Japan
Japanese law states that psychiatric hospitals may use restraints on patients only if there is a danger that the patients will harm themselves. The law also states that a designated psychiatrist must approve the use of restraints and examine the patient at least every 12 hours to determine whether the situation has changed and the patient should be removed from restraints. However, in practice, Japanese psychiatric hospitals use restraints fairly often and for long periods. Despite being required to certify every 12 hours whether a patient still needs restraints, Japanese psychiatric hospitals keep patients in restraints for a much longer time than hospitals in other countries. According to a survey conducted on 689 patients in 11 psychiatric hospitals in Japan, the average time spent in physical restraints is 96 days. Meanwhile, the average time in most other developed countries is at most several hours to tens of hours.

The number of people who are physically restrained in Japanese psychiatric hospitals continues to increase. In 2014 more than 10,000 people were restrained-the highest ever recorded, and more than double the number a decade earlier. It is thought that some of that increase includes older patients with dementia. As a result, the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare has revised its guidelines for elderly people in nursing homes to have more restrictions against body restraints. The changes will take effect on 1 April 2018.

Deaths have been reported from their use, including that of Kelly Savage, an Assisted Language Teacher from New Zealand, in 2017.

United Kingdom
The Millfields Charter is an electronic charter which promotes an end to the teaching to frontline healthcare staff of all prone (face down) restraint holds. Despite a UK government statement in 2013 that it was minded to impose a ban on such techniques in mental health facilities, by 2017 the use of restraints in UK psychiatric facilities had increased.

Face down restraints are used more often on women and girls than on men. 51 out of 58 mental health trusts use restraints unnecessarily when other techniques would work. Organisations opposed to restraints include Mind and Rethink Mental Illness. YoungMinds and Agenda claim restraints are "frightening and humiliating" and "re-traumatises" patients especially women and girls who have previously been victims of physical and/or sexual abuse. The charities sent an open letter to health secretary, Jeremy Hunt showing evidence from 'Agenda, the alliance for women and girls at risk', revealing that patients are routinely restrained in some mental health units while others use non-physical ways to calm patients or stop self-harm. According to the letter over half of women with psychiatric problems have suffered abuse, restraint can cause physical harm, can frighten and humiliate the victim. Restraint, specially face down restraint can re-traumatise patients who previously suffered violence and abuse. "Mental health units are meant to be caring, therapeutic environments, for people feeling at their most vulnerable, not places where physical force is routine".

Government guidelines state that face down restraint should not be used at all and other types of physical restraint are only for last resort. Research by Agenda found one fifth of women and girl patients in mental health units had suffered physical restraint. Some trusts averaged over twelve face down restraints per female patient. Over 6% of women, close to 2,000 were restrained face-down in total more than 4,000 times. The figures vary widely between regions.

Some trusts hardly use restraints, others use them routinely. A woman patient was in several hospitals and units at times for a decade with mental health issues, she said in some units she suffered restraints two or three times daily. Katharine Sacks-Jones director of Agenda, maintains trusts use restraint when alternatives would work. Sacks-Jones maintains women her group speak to repeatedly describe face down restraint as a traumatic experience. On occasions male nurses have used it when a woman did not want her medication. "If you are a woman who has been sexually or physically abused, and mental health problems in women often have close links to violence and abuse, then a safer environment has to be just that: safe and not a re-traumatising experience. (...) Face-down restraint hurts, it is dangerous, and there are some big questions around why it is used more on women than men".

title: Physical restraint


text:
Joseph B. Soloveitchik

Joseph Ber Soloveitchik (יוסף דב הלוי סולובייצ׳יק Yosef Dov ha-Levi Soloveychik; February 27, 1903 – April 9, 1993) was a major American Orthodox rabbi, Talmudist, and modern Jewish philosopher. He was a scion of the Lithuanian Jewish Soloveitchik rabbinic dynasty.

As a rosh yeshiva of Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary (RIETS) at Yeshiva University in New York City, The Rav, as he was known, ordained close to 2,000 rabbis over the course of almost half a century. Some Rabbinic literature, such as sefer Shiurei HaGrid, refers to him as הגרי"ד, short for "The great Rabbi Yosef Dov".

He is regarded as a seminal figure by Modern Orthodox Judaism and served as a guide and role-model for tens of thousands of Jews, both as a Talmudic scholar and as a religious leader.

Heritage
Joseph Ber Soloveitchik was born on February 27, 1903, in Pruzhany, Imperial Russia (later Poland, now Belarus). He came from a rabbinical dynasty dating back some 200 years: His paternal grandfather was Chaim Soloveitchik, and his great-grandfather and namesake was Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, the Beis HaLevi. His great-great-grandfather was Naftali Zvi Yehuda Berlin (The Netziv), and his great-great-great-great grandfather was Chaim Volozhin. His father, Moshe Soloveichik (note different spelling of last name), preceded him as head of the RIETS rabbinical school at Yeshiva University. On his maternal line, Soloveitchik was a grandson of Eliyahu Feinstein and his wife Guta Feinstein, née Davidovitch, who, in turn, was a descendant of a long line of Kapulyan rabbis, and of the Tosafot Yom Tov, the Shelah, the Maharshal, and Rashi. Rabbi Soloveitchik's mother, Pesha, was a first cousin of Rav Moshe Feinstein.

Early years, education, and immigration
Soloveitchik was educated in the traditional manner at a Talmud Torah, an elementary yeshiva, and by private tutors, as his parents realized his great mental prowess. According to a curriculum vitae written and signed in his own hand, in 1922, he graduated from the liberal arts "Gymnasium" in Dubno. In 1924, he entered the Free Polish University in Warsaw, where he spent three terms, studying political science. In 1926, he came to Berlin, Germany, and entered the Friedrich Wilhelm University. He passed the examination for supplementary subjects at the German Institute for Studies by Foreigners, and was then given full matriculation at the University. He took up studies in philosophy, economics, and Hebrew subjects, simultaneously maintaining a rigorous schedule of intensive Talmud study.

According to the CV, among his "highly honored" teachers in university, bearing the title "Geheimrat" (literally: Privy Counselor), were Professor Dr. Heinrich Maier (1867-1933) and Professor Dr. Max Dessoir, along with Professor Dr. Eugen Mittwoch and Professor Dr. Ludwig Bernhard. He studied the work of European philosophers, and was a life-long student of neo-Kantian thought.

He wrote his Ph.D. thesis on the epistemology and metaphysics of the German philosopher Hermann Cohen. Contrary to most biographies, which erroneously state that in 1931, he received his degree, he actually passed his oral doctor's examination on July 24, 1930, but graduated with a doctorate only on December 19, 1932, as he had requested an extension to allow him to expand his thesis. Documents exist to support this assertion, located by Marc B. Shapiro in the University of Berlin archives.

In 1931, he married Tonya Lewit (1904-1967), who had earned a Ph.D. in Education from Jena University. Chaim Ozer Grodzinski served as his mesader kiddushin in Vilna.

During his years in Berlin, Soloveitchik became a close disciple of Chaim Heller, who had established an institute for advanced Jewish Studies from an Orthodox perspective in the city. He also made the acquaintance of other young scholars pursuing a similar path to his own. One such figure was Yitzchak Hutner, who would become the rosh yeshiva of the Yeshiva Rabbi Chaim Berlin, also in Brooklyn, New York. Both of them developed a system of thought that bridged the Eastern European way of traditional scholarship with the new forces of modernity in the Western World. Among the other personalities with whom he came into contact were the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Professor Alexander Altmann, Yehiel Yaakov Weinberg, Rector of the Hildesheimer Rabbinical Seminary, and Professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz.

Boston
In 1932, Soloveitchik emigrated to America and settled in Boston, where he referred to himself as "The Soloveitchik of Boston." In that year, he opened a yeshiva known as Heichal Rabbeinu Chaim HaLevi or the Boston Yeshivah. Initially it mainly served lay people and their children, but starting in 1939 it was augmented by advanced students and staff who had fled the outbreak of World War II in Europe.

Soloveitchik pioneered the Maimonides School, one of the first Hebrew day schools in Boston in 1937. When the school's high school was founded in the late 1940s, he instituted a number of innovations in the curriculum, including teaching Talmud to boys and girls studying in classes together. He involved himself in all manner of religious issues in the Boston area. He was at times both a rabbinical supervisor of kosher slaughtering - shechita - and an educator, gladly accepting invitations to lecture in Jewish and religious philosophy at prestigious New England colleges and universities. Rabbi Soloveitchik was also the head of Boston's Council of Orthodox Synagogues (also called the Vaad Ha'ir). His son-in-law, Isadore Twersky, was an internationally renowned expert on the writings of Maimonides, and succeeded Professor Harry Austryn Wolfson to the Nathan Littauer chair of Jewish History and Literature at Harvard University.

New York
Soloveitchik succeeded his father, Moses (Moshe) Soloveichik, as the head of the RIETS rabbinical school at Yeshiva University in 1941. He taught there until 1986, when illness kept him from continuing, and was considered the top Rosh Yeshiva (never, however, a formally recognized position at YU) from the time he began teaching there until his death in 1993. He was the first occupant of the Leib Merkin Distinguished Professorial Chair in Talmud and Jewish Philosophy at RIETS.

He ordained over 2,000 rabbis, many of whom are among the leaders of Orthodox Judaism and the Jewish people today. In addition, he gave public lectures that were attended by thousands from throughout the greater Jewish community, as well as regular classes at other New York institutions.

Soloveitchik advocated more intensive textual Torah study for Jewish women at the Stern College for Women, giving the first class in Talmud inaugurated at Stern College. He attracted and inspired many young men and women to become spiritual leaders and educators in Jewish communities worldwide. They, in turn, went out with the education of Yeshiva University to head synagogues, schools, and communities, where they continue to influence many Jews to remain - or become - committed to Orthodoxy and observance. Meir Kahane was highly influenced by his lectures.

Torah Umadda synthesis
During his tenure at Yeshiva University, in addition to his Talmudic lectures, Soloveitchik deepened the system of "synthesis" whereby the best of religious Torah scholarship would be combined with the best secular scholarship in Western civilization. This later became known as the Torah Umadda - "Torah and secular wisdom" philosophy- the motto of Yeshiva University.

However, Rav Ahron Soloveichik disputes this claim, saying: "That the Rav had a positive attitude toward worldly wisdom is beyond question. The same positive attitude towards worldly wisdom was expressed by all the Gedolei Yisrael from Rav Saadia Gaon up to the Gaon of Vilna. A talmid of the G'ra says in the translation of the Euclidean geometry that the G'ra had said 'Ka'asher yechsar lo I'Adam yad achat b'Chochmat haolam kein yechseru lo meah yados baTorah.' If a person is deficient in worldly wisdom he will inescapably be deficient in one hundred measures in Torah wisdom. However, there is a great divergence between having a positive attitude towards worldly wisdom and being committed to mada. Being committed to mada implies a belief that mada is an ikar in life. My brother did not consider mada as an ikar in Yahadut. As a matter of fact my brother never in his lectures mentioned the expression Torah Umada; nor did he ever mention in his essays Ish Hahalacha and Ish Emunah. If anyone who has a positive attitude towards worldly wisdom tries to synthesize Torah with philosophy then Rav Saadiah Gaon, the Chovat Halevavot and the Rambam and the Gaon of Vilna were also attempting to synthesize the Torah with philosophy. Obviously such an allegation would reflect chutzpah and foolish nonsense." He argues that the Rav used his worldly knowledge to enhance his Torah and his teaching, but did not agree that Mada was Ikar that must be synthesized with Torah. (See below "Debate over world view" under "Other views and controversy" for more on this issue.)

Through public lectures, writings, and Soloveitchik's policy decisions for the Modern Orthodox world, he strengthened the intellectual and ideological framework of Modern Orthodoxy.

In his major non-Talmudic publications, which altered the landscape of Jewish philosophy and Jewish theology, Soloveitchik stresses the normative and intellectual centrality of the halakhic corpus. He authored a number of essays and books offering a unique synthesis of Neo-Kantian existentialism and Jewish thought, the most well-known being The Lonely Man of Faith which deals with issues such as the willingness to stand alone in the face of monumental challenges, and Halakhic Man. A less known essay, though not less important, is "The Halakhic Mind - An essay on Jewish tradition and modern thought," written in 1944 and published only 40 years later, without any change, as the author himself stresses.

The Lonely Man of Faith
In The Lonely Man of Faith, Soloveitchik reads the first two chapters of Genesis as a contrast in the nature of the human being and identifies two human types: Adam I, or "majestic man," who employs his creative faculties in order to master his environment; and Adam II, or "covenantal man," who surrenders himself in submission to his Master. Soloveitchik describes how the man of faith integrates both of these aspects.

In the first chapter, Adam I is created together with Eve, and they are given the mandate to subdue nature, master the cosmos, and transform the world "into a domain for their power and sovereignty." Adam I is majestic man who approaches the world and relationships—even with the divine—in functional, pragmatic terms. Adam I, created in the image of God, fulfills this apparently "secular" mandate by conquering the universe, imposing his knowledge, technology, and cultural institutions upon the world. The human community depicted in Genesis 1 is a utilitarian one, where man and woman join together, like the male and female of other animals, to further the ends of their species.

In chapter two of Genesis, Adam II, on the other hand represents the lonely man of faith - bringing a "redemptive interpretation to the meaning of existence." Adam II does not subdue the garden, but rather tills it and preserves it. This type of human being is introduced by the words, "It is not good for man to be alone" - and through his sacrifice (of a metaphoric rib), he gains companionship and the relief of his existential loneliness - this covenantal community requires the participation of the Divine.

Halakhic Man
In Halakhic Man, Soloveitchik propounds the centrality of halakha in Jewish thought. His theological outlook is distinguished by a consistent focus on halakha, i. e., the fulfillment and study of the divine law. He presents the halakha as the a priori basis for religious practice and for the theological foundation for Jewish thought. Soloveitchik emphasizes halakha's "this-worldly, here-and-now grounding," as opposed to religious approaches that focus on the nature of the transcendent realm. This work argues that Jewish piety does not, therefore, fit familiar models of Western religiosity, and presents a phenomenology of this religious type. Here, "Halakhic man," as a result of his study of Torah and his observance of the commandments, develops a set of coherent attitudes towards intellectual activity, asceticism, death, esotericism, mysticism, creativity, repentance, and providence. He also underscores the necessity for individual self-creation as the divinely assigned task of the human being.

Halakhic Man has become well read in the Orthodox Jewish community, but its psychology and model of Jewish law was rejected by most of non-Orthodox Judaism; one of the most prominent critiques is from Abraham Joshua Heschel, who wrote:

"Ish Ha-halakhah? Lo haya velo nivra ela mashal haya! [Halakhic Man? Such a Jew has never existed!] Soloveitchik's study, though brilliant, is based on the false notion that Judaism is a cold, logical affair with no room for piety. After all, the Torah does say 'Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and soul and might'. No, there never was such a typology in Judaism as the halakhic man. There was - and is - an Ish Torah [Torah man] who combines halakhah and aggadah, but that is another matter altogether. When I came to Berlin I was shocked to hear my fellow students talking about the problem of halakha as a central issue. In Poland it had been a foreign expression to me. Halakhah is not an all-inclusive term, and to use it as such is to restrict Judaism. 'Torah' is the more comprehensive word."

Halakhic Mind
Halakhic Mind is a four-part analysis of the historical correlation between science and philosophy. Only in its fourth and last part does the author introduce the consequences on the Halakha of the analysis performed in the previous three parts.

Departure from the traditional Brisker view of Zionism
Despite their religious disagreements, Soloveitchik was proud of his connections to the Soloveitchik rabbinic dynasty, speaking fondly of his "uncle" Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik (the "Brisker Rov"). To his relatives and namesakes who now lived in Jerusalem, where they had established their own branch of the Brisk Yeshiva, he was respected for his genius in Talmudic scholarship which few could challenge or disparage, despite their very differing views on Zionism (the "Briskers" in Jerusalem being staunch anti-Zionists). See the paragraph on "Zionism" below for a discussion of Soloveitchik's Zionist viewpoint. Recent research published by Shlomo Pick indicates that his father Moshe Soloveitchik maintained a close relationship with Religious Zionist (Mizrachi) circles in Warsaw, prior to the father's departure for Yeshiva University and the son's departure for the University of Berlin in 1923.

Relations with Agudath Israel
After Soloveitchik left Agudath Israel, the organization's leadership was mostly quiet when it came to public statements involving Soloveitchik. Moshe Feinstein, who was Soloveitchik's cousin, maintained very warm and profoundly respectful relations with him. They corresponded and spoke (at least) on the eve of every Jewish holiday. Yitzchak Hutner referred to him as a "gadol" (a foremost Torah scholar of the time). Aaron Kotler, whose public policy in relation to American Jewry was far more right-wing than Soloveitchik's, was introduced by Soloveitchik at a Chinuch Atzmai dinner, and this later became famous as an instance of unity among the Orthodox leadership. Agudath Israel's mouthpiece, the "Jewish Observer," also mentioned Soloveitchik as one of the greatest rabbis of the generation when detailing a cable which was sent by various leading Rabbis to former Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol requesting the government to put a stop to Christian missionary activity in Israel. In May 1993, Nisson Wolpin penned an obituary for Soloveitchik in the Jewish Observer. The article was criticized for being a mere page long as instead of the Jewish Observer's usually comparatively long obituaries, for the obituary not being mentioned in the table of contents, and portraying Soloveitchik as not clarifying his views enough. Moshe David Tendler, a son-in-law of Moshe Feinstein, wrote a scathing attack on Wolpin's piece, which was published both in The Community Synagogue of Monsey's newsletter and the Algemeiner Journal.

Soloveitchik did not sign Feinstein's proposed ban on interfaith dialogue. Instead, he published a path-breaking essay expounding his views on the subject, entitled "Confrontation." He also did not sign the ban by America's foremost rabbis against participating in the Synagogue Council of America. It has been debated whether his refusal to sign was because he believed in participating in the SCA, or because he was not happy with the way the ban was instituted.

Despite the Agudah's comparative silence on Soloveitchik and his stances, the Jewish Observer has often criticized the Rabbinical Council of America in which he served and his more modern students, including Rabbi Norman Lamm, Shlomo Riskin and Lawrence Kaplan.

Relations with Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson
Herschel Schacter, Sholem Kowalsky, Julius Berman; Menachem Genack, and Fabian Schoenfeld (all students of Soloveitchik) have asserted that Menachem Mendel Schneerson and Soloveitchik met for the first time while they both studied in Berlin. Soloveitchik told Kowalsky he "was a great admirer of the Rebbe." Schoenfeld quoted Soloveitchik as having told him that when he was studying at the University of Berlin, "I can testify that [Schneerson] never missed going to the mikva one single day." In 1964, Soloveitchik paid a lengthy visit while Schneerson was mourning the death of his mother. Their conversation during this visit lasted approximately two hours. Soloveitchik later visited again following the death of Schneerson's mother-in-law. In 1980, accompanied by his student Herschel Schacter, Soloveitchik visited Schneerson at Chabad headquarters in Brooklyn on the occasion of a celebration marking the 30th anniversary of his leadership. The visit lasted close to two hours after which Soloveitchik told Schacter his opinion of Schneerson: "He is a gaon (genius), he is a great one, he is a leader of Israel."

In the recently published Seventy Conversations in Transit, R' Aaron Adler recounts that "The Rav had hoped to write a running commentary on the Sefer Tanya. To which he felt his understanding of the text rivaled that of the Lubavitcher Rebbe zt"l."

Debate over world view
Many of Soloveitchik's students became leaders in the Modern Orthodox community. These students tend to espouse very distinct world views.

One of the most iconoclastic is David Hartman of Jerusalem, whose support for pluralism has gained him serious backing in non-Orthodox streams and who has brought Soloveitchik's thinking to the non-Orthodox. The institution he founded, the Shalom Hartman Institute, is a home for serious thinkers from Orthodoxy, Conservative/Masorti, Reform and even secular scholars, and trains hundreds of Jewish community leaders annually. Avi Weiss and Saul Berman, who represent liberal Modern Orthodox institutions such as Yeshivat Chovevei Torah and Edah, are somewhat further to the right of Irving Greenberg, Riskin and Hartman, but still very liberal in comparison to most Orthodox thinkers (Weiss has classified this approach as "Open Orthodoxy").

Many students of Soloveitchik represent a centrist approach to Modern Orthodoxy (which Lamm has coined "Centrist Orthodoxy") such as Rabbis Aharon Lichtenstein, Benjamin Blech, Henry Hoschander, Lawrence Kaplan, and Norman Lamm. The Torah UMadda Journal, Tradition magazine, the Rabbinical Council of America, Efrat, Yeshiva University, Bnei Akiva, the Orthodox Union, and various post-high school yeshivot and seminaries in Israel (i.e. Yeshivat Hakotel and Yeshivat Har Etzion) are largely, if not mostly (but almost never monolithically) populated by "Centrist Orthodox" Jews.

Further to the right in the spectrum of Orthodoxy lie Rabbis Yehuda Parnes and Abba Bronspiegel, both of whom resigned from teaching positions in Yeshiva University to join right-wing alternative Lander College. A few of Soloveitchik students identify themselves and Soloveitchik's teachings with the Haredi world, such as Moshe Meiselman, Soloveitchik's nephew and Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshiva Toras Moshe in Jerusalem; Mosheh Twersky, one of Soloveitchik's grandchildren and a teacher at Toras Moshe; Michel Shurkin, also a teacher at Toras Moshe.

Integration with secular society
Since his death, interpretations of Soloveitchik's beliefs have become a matter of ongoing debate, somewhat analogous to the long-standing debate about Samson Raphael Hirsch. Some Haredim and some on the right wing of Modern Orthodoxy believe that Hirsch only wanted Jews to combine an observant Jewish lifestyle with learning the surrounding gentile society's language, history, and science, so that a religious Jew could operate in the surrounding secular society. However, this is not a universally held opinion among right-wing Orthodox Jews (see, for example, the writings of Shimon Schwab and the biography of Hirsch by Eliyahu Klugman). Similarly, some scholars of Soloveitchik's philosophy maintain that an eclectic pragmatic approach was adopted by Soloveitchik as well. According to this view, Soloveitchik did not approve of Jews learning secular philosophy, music, art, literature or ethics, unless it was for purposes of obtaining a livelihood or outreach.

In contrast, liberal leaning scholars believe that this understanding of Soloveitchik's philosophy is misguided. This issue has been discussed in many articles in Tradition: A Journal of Orthodox Thought, published by the Rabbinical Council of America. According to this view, Soloveitchik believed that it was permissible for Jews to learn secular philosophy, music, art, literature and ethics for their own sake and encouraged this.

Professor Yitzhak Twersky, a son-in-law of The Rav, pointed out in a eulogy published in the journal Tradition in 1996 that Soloveitchik's philosophy could be paraphrased as follows: "When you know your [Jewish] Way—your point of departure and goals—then use philosophy, science and the humanities to illumine your exposition, sharpen your categories, probe the profundities and subtleties of the masorah and reveal its charm and majesty; in so doing you should be able to command respect from the alienated and communicate with some who might otherwise be hostile or indifferent to your teaching as well as to increase the sensitivity and spirituality of the committed."

Own criticism of his students
Soloveitchik stated that although he felt that he successfully transmitted the facts and laws of Judaism to his students, he felt that he failed in transmitting the experience of living an authentic Jewish life. He stated that many of his students "act like children, and experience religion like children. This is why they accept all types of fanaticism and superstition. Sometimes, they are even ready to do things that border on the immoral. They lack the experiential component of religion, and simply substitute obscurantism for it ... After all, I come from the ghetto. Yet, I have never seen so much naïve and uncritical commitment to people and to ideas as I see in America ... All extremism, fanaticism, and obscurantism come from a lack of security. A person who is secure cannot be an extremist." (A Reader's Companion to Ish Ha-Halakhah: Introductory Section, David Shatz, Yeshiva University, Joseph B. Soloveitchik Institute).

Revisionism
Shortly after Soloveitchik's passing, Lamm, in a eulogy for Soloveitchik delivered on April 25, 1993, urged his audience to "guard ... against any revisionism, any attempts to misinterpret the Rav's work in both worlds [the world of Torah and the world of Madda(Science)]. The Rav was not a lamdan who happened to have and use a smattering of general culture, and he was certainly not a philosopher who happened to be a talmid hakham, a Torah scholar ... We must accept him on his terms, as a highly complicated, profound, and broad-minded personality ... Certain burgeoning revisionisms may well attempt to disguise and distort the Rav's uniqueness by trivializing one or the other aspect of his rich personality and work, but they must be confronted at once." (Lawrence Kaplan Revisionism and the Rav: The Struggle for the Soul of Modern Orthodoxy, Judaism, Summer, 1999).

Relations with non-Orthodox Judaism
Soloveitchik was a life-long critic of all forms of non-Orthodox Judaism, including Reform Judaism and Conservative Judaism. He believed that these denominations were in significant error where they differed from Orthodox Judaism. He compared religious dialogue with Reform and Conservative leaders to dialogue between Pharisees and Karaites, considering it ridiculous. One of the major differences was in regard to the mixed seating in the synagogue. Consistent with the traditional rabbinic understanding of this issue, Soloveitchik ruled that it was forbidden to pray in a synagogue without a separation between the sexes (mi-d'orayta, a Pentateuchal prohibition), and without the use of a mechitza, a divider between the men's and women's sections (mi-derabbenan, a rabbinical prohibition). The effect of this was to prohibit prayer in any Reform synagogue and in many Conservative synagogues. His responsum on this question was also directed at the small number of Orthodox synagogues that were adopting mixed-sex seating. He was vociferous on this issue. Soloveitchik believed that Reform and Conservative rabbis did not have proper training in halakha and Jewish theology, and that due to their decisions and actions, they could not be considered rabbis, as Orthodox Jews traditionally understood the term. However, in practice, he sometimes granted non-Orthodox rabbis some degree of validity with respect to communal affairs (see examples below).

Soloveitchik developed the idea that Jews have historically been linked together by two distinct covenants. One is the brit yi'ud, "covenant of destiny," which is the covenant by which Jews are bound together through their adherence to halakha. The second is the brit goral, "covenant of fate," the desire and willingness to be part of a people chosen by God to live a sacred mission in the world, and the fact that all those who live in this covenant share the same fate of persecution and oppression, even if they do not live by halakha. Soloveitchik held that non-Orthodox Jews were in violation of the covenant of destiny, yet they are still bound together with Orthodox Jews in the covenant of fate.

In 1954 Soloveitchik issued a responsum on working with non-Orthodox Jews, Orthodox, Conservative and Reform Jews in the United States: Second article in a series on Responsa of Orthodox Judaism in the United States. The responsum recognized the leadership of non-Orthodox Jews in Jewish communal institutions (but not their rabbis in the Orthodox sense of the term), and concluded that participation with non-Orthodox Jews for political or welfare purposes is not only permissible, but obligatory.

The Council of Torah Sages of Agudath Yisroel countered with a ruling that such cooperation with non-Orthodox Jews was equivalent to endorsement of non-Orthodox Judaism, and thus was forbidden. In 1956 many Yeshiva leaders, including two rabbis from his own Yeshiva University, signed and issued a proclamation forbidding any rabbinical alumni of their yeshivot from joining with Reform or Conservative rabbis in professional organizations.

Soloveitchik declined to sign the proclamation, maintaining that there were areas, particularly those relating to problems that threatened all of Judaism, that required co-operation regardless of affiliation. His refusal emboldened other Modern Orthodox rabbis, and the Rabbinical Council of America and Union of Orthodox Congregations then joined the Synagogue Council of America, a group in which Orthodox, Reform and Conservative denominations worked together on common issues. (The Synagogue Council of America ceased operating in 1994.)

In the 1950s Soloveitchik and Saul Lieberman, in parallel with other members of the Rabbinical Council of America and Conservative Judaism's Rabbinical Assembly, engaged in a series of private negotiations; their objective was to found a joint Orthodox-Conservative beth din that would be a national rabbinic court for all Jews in America; it would supervise communal standards of marriage and divorce. It was to be modeled after the Israeli Chief Rabbinate, with only Orthodox judges, but with the expectation that it would be accepted by the larger Conservative movement as legitimate. Conservative rabbis in the Rabbinical Assembly formed a Joint Conference on Jewish Law and devoted a year to the effort.

For a number of reasons, the project did not succeed. According to Orthodox Rabbi Bernstein, the major reason for its failure was that the Orthodox rabbis insisted that the Conservative Rabbinical Assembly expel some Conservative rabbis for actions they took before the new Beit Din was formed, and the RA refused to do so (Bernstein, 1977). According to Orthodox Rabbi Emanuel Rackman, former president of the RCA, the major reason for its failure was pressure from right-wing Orthodox rabbis, who held that any cooperation between Orthodoxy and Conservatism was forbidden. In an account prepared in 1956, Rabbi Harry Halpern of the Rabbinical Assembly's Joint Conference wrote that negotiations between the Orthodox and Conservative were completed and agreed upon, but then a new requirement was demanded by the RCA: that the RA "impose severe sanctions" upon Conservative rabbis for actions they took before the new beth din was formed. The RA "could not assent to rigorously disciplining our members at the behest of an outside group." Per Halpern, subsequent efforts were made to cooperate with the Orthodox, but a letter from eleven Rosh Yeshivas was circulated declaring that Orthodox rabbis were forbidden to cooperate with Conservative rabbis (Proceedings of the CJLS of the Conservative Movement 1927-1970 Vol. II, pp. 850–852).

Until the 1950s, Jews of all denominations were generally allowed to use the same communal mikvaot (ritual baths) for the purposes of converting to Judaism, observing the rules of niddah in regard to laws of marital purity, ritually cleansing dishes, etc. However the Haredi movement increasingly denied the use of mikvaot to non-Orthodox rabbis for use in conversions. According to Walter Wurzburger, Soloveitchik counselled Orthodox rabbis against this practice, insisting that non-Orthodox have the option to use mikvaot (Wurzburger, 1994).

Zionism
Soloveitchik was the pre-eminent leader of politically conscious pro-Zionist modern Orthodox Judaism. Out of respect for his stature, many leaders and politicians from Israel sought his advice and blessings in state affairs. Reputedly, he was offered the position of Chief Rabbi of Israel by Prime Minister Ben Gurion but quietly declined. Despite his open and ardent support for the modern State of Israel, he only visited Israel once, in 1935, before the modern state was established. Yosef Blau has written that Soloveitchik's non-messianic Zionism was philosophically similar to that of Yitzchak Yaacov Reines (see Tradition 33.2, Communications).

On Yom ha-Atzma'ut (Israel's Independence Day), 1956, Soloveitchik delivered a public address at Yeshiva University entitled, "Kol Dodi Dofek; The Voice of My Beloved Knocks." The address, which has become a classic of religious Zionist philosophy, enumerates and elaborates upon the instances of God's tangible presence in the recent history of the Jewish people and the State of Israel. It also issues a clarion call to American Orthodoxy to embrace the State of Israel, and to commit itself and its resources to its development.

Affiliated organizations
In his early career in America, Soloveitchik joined with the traditional movements such as Agudath Israel of America and the Agudat Harabanim - the Union of Orthodox Rabbis of North America. In fact, Soloveitchik was on the first Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah of America. However, he later removed himself from the former organizations, and instead joined with the Mizrachi Religious Zionists of America (RZA) and became Chairman of the centrist Orthodox Rabbinical Council of America's (RCA) Halakhah Commission (the other two members are the time were Rabbis Hayyim Heller and Samuel Belkin).

Family and last years
During the 1950s and 1960s, until his wife's death in 1967, Soloveitchik and some of his students would spend summers near Cape Cod in Onset, Massachusetts, where they would pray at Congregation Beth Israel.

After the passing of his wife in 1967, Soloveitchik began giving additional lectures, open to the public, during the summer months in Boston.

Soloveitchik's daughters married prominent academics and Talmudic scholars: his daughter Tovah married Aharon Lichtenstein, former Rosh Yeshiva at RIETS who made Aliyah to become Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Har Etzion in Israel; his daughter Atarah (died February 24, 2023) married Isadore Twersky, former head of the Jewish Studies department at Harvard University (who also served as the Talner Rebbe in Boston). His son Haym Soloveitchik is a University Professor of Jewish History at Yeshiva University. His siblings included Samuel Soloveichik (1909-1967), Ahron Soloveichik (1917-2001), Shulamith Meiselman (1912-2009), and Anne Gerber (1915-2011). His grandchildren have maintained his heritage and also hold distinguished scholarly positions, such as Mosheh Lichtenstein, Yitzchok Lichtenstein, Esti Rosenberg and Mayer Twersky.

As he got older he suffered several bouts of serious illness (Alzheimer's disease preceded by Parkinson's disease).

Works by Joseph Soloveitchik

 * Halakhic Morality: Essays on Ethics and Mesorah Edited by Joel B. Wolowelsky and Reuven Ziegler. Maggid Books, 2016.
 * Confrontation and Other Essays Edited by Reuven Ziegler, Maggid Books, 2016.
 * Three letters by Soloveitchik on seating in the synagogue are contained with The Sanctity of the Synagogue, Ed. Baruch Litvin. The Spero Foundation, NY, 1959. An expanded third edition of this book is Edited by Jeanne Litvin. Ktav, Hoboken, NJ, 1987.
 * Confrontation, Tradition 6:2 p5-9, 1964. Reprinted in "A Treasury of Tradition," Hebrew Publishing Co, NY, 1967.
 * The Lonely Man of Faith, Tradition, vol. 7#2, p56, 1965. This essay was published as a book by Doubleday in 1992, reprinted by Jason Aronson in 1997, and reprinted in a revised edition by Koren Publishers Jerusalem in 2011.
 * Sacred and Profane, Kodesh and Chol in World Perspective, Gesher, Vol. 3#1, p5-29, 1966. This article has been reprinted with expdanded notes in Jewish Thought, Volume 3 #1, p55-82, 1993
 * The Community, p7-24;Majesty and Humility, p25-37; Catharsis, p. 38-54; Redemption, Prayer and Talmud Torah, p55-73; A Tribute to the Rebbetzin of Talne, p. 73-83 are all printed in Tradition 17:2, Spring, 1978.
 * Several of Soloveitchik's responsa for the RCA Halakha commission are contained in Challenge and mission: the emergence of the English speaking Orthodox rabbinate, L. Bernstein, Shengold, NY, 1982.
 * Halakhic Man Translated by L. Kaplan, Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia PA,1983
 * The Halakhic Mind Seth Press, New York NY, 1986
 * Fate and Destiny: From Holocaust to the State of Israel Ktav Publishing, Hoboken NJ 1992 and 2000.
 * The Voice of My Beloved Knocketh translation by Lawrence Kaplan in Theological and Halakhic Responses on the Holocaust, Eds. Bernhard H. Rosenberg and Fred Heuman. Ktav/RCA, Hoboken, NJ, 1993
 * Family Redeemed: Essays on Family Relationships, Edited by David Shatz and Joel B. Wolowelsky. Ktav, Hoboken, NJ, 2004.
 * Out of the Whirlwind: Essays on Mourning, Suffering and the Human Condition, Edited by David Shatz, Joel B. Wolowelsky and Reuven Ziegler. Ktav, Hoboken, NJ, 2004.
 * Worship of the Heart: Essays on Jewish Prayer, Edited by Shalom Carmy, Ktav, Hoboken, NJ, 2004.
 * Emergence of Ethical Man, Edited by Michael Berger, Ktav, Hoboken, NJ, 2005.
 * Community, Covenant and Commitment - Selected Letters and Communications, Edited by Nathaniel Helfgot, Ktav, Hoboken, NJ 2005.
 * Festival of Freedom: Essays on Pesah and the Haggadah, Edited by Joel B. Wolowelsky and Reuven Ziegler. Ktav, Hoboken, NJ 2006.
 * Kol Dodi Dofek, Translated by David Z. Gordon. Edited by Jeffrey Woolf, New York: Yeshiva University and Hoboken, NJ: Ktav 2006.
 * The Lord is Righteous in All His Ways: Reflections on the Tish'ah Be'Av Kinot, Edited by Jacob J. Schachter, Ktav, Hoboken, NJ 2006.
 * Days of Deliverance: Essays on Purim and Hanukkah, Edited by Eli D. Clark, Joel B. Wolowelsky, and Reuven Ziegler. Ktav, Hoboken, NJ 2006.
 * Abraham's Journey: Reflections on the Life of the Founding Patriarch, Edited by David Shatz, Joel B. Wolowelsky and Reuven Ziegler. Ktav, Hoboken, NJ 2007.
 * Vision and Leadership: Reflections on Joseph and Moses, Edited by David Shatz, Joel B. Wolowelsky and Reuven Ziegler. Ktav, Hoboken, NJ 2012.
 * And From There You Shall Seek (U-Vikkashtem mi-Sham), Translated by Naomi Goldblum. Ktav, Hoboken, NJ 2008.
 * On Repentance (Hebrew "Al haTeshuva," Jerusalem 1979); the major points of Rabbi Soloveitchik's teachings on teshuvah (repentance), based on his annual series of lectures on this theme, as redacted by Prof. Pinchas Peli.

Adaptations

 * Shiurei Harav—A Conspectus of the Public Lectures of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Ed. Joseph Epstein. Hamevaser, Yeshiva University, 1974.
 * The Koren Mesorat HaRav Kinot, Koren Publishers Jerusalem & the Orthodox Union, 2010.
 * The Koren Mesorat HaRav Siddur, Koren Publishers Jerusalem & the Orthodox Union, 2011.

Legacy of his hashkafa (worldview)

 * Rabbi Norman Lamm, A Eulogy for the Rav, Tradition 28.1 1993
 * Rabbi Walter S. Wurzburger, Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik as Posek of Post-Modern Orthodoxy, Tradition Volume 29, 1994
 * Joseph Soloveitchik, article in the Encyclopaedia Judaica, Keter Publishing
 * Seth Farber, Reproach, Recognition and Respect: Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik and Orthodoxy's Mid-Century Attitude Toward Non-Orthodox Denominations American Jewish History, Vol. 89,#2 193–214, 2001.
 * Zvi Kolitz Confrontation: The Existential Thought of Rabbi J.B. SoloveitchikKtav, Hoboken, NJ, 1992
 * Simcha Krauss, The Rav on Zionism, Universalism and Feminism Tradition 34:2, 24–39, 2000
 * Alan Todd Levenson, "Joseph B. Soloveitchik's 'The Halakhic Mind'; a liberal critique and appreciation," CCAR Journal 41,1 55–63, 1994
 * Aharon Ziegler, Halakhic Positions of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik Jason Aronson Inc., 1998.
 * Aharon Ziegler Halakhic Positions of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Vol II Jason Aronson Inc., 2001
 * Aviezer Ravitsky, Rabbi J.B. Soloveitchik on Human Knowledge: Between Maimonidean and Neo-Kantian Philosophy, Modern Judaism 6:2 157–188, 1986.
 * David Hartman, Love and Terror in the God Encounter: The Theological Legacy of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik Jewish Lights Publishing, 2001
 * Ephraim Chamiel, Between religion and Reason - The Dialectical Position in Contemporary Jewish Thought, Academic Studies Press, Boston 2020, part I, pp. 16–55.
 * Jeffrey R. Woolf, 'In Search of the Rav', BaDaD, 18 (2007) 5-28.
 * Jeffrey R. Woolf, "Time Awareness as a Source of Spirituality in the Thought of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik," Modern Judaism, 32,1 (2012), 54–75.

Cooperation with non-Orthodox Jews

 * Rabbi Norman Lamm, Seventy Faces, Moment Vol. II, No. 6 June 1986-Sivan 5746
 * Rabbi Mayer E. Rabinowitz Comments to the Agunot Conference in Jerusalem, July 1998, and on the Learn@JTS website.
 * Rabbi Louis Bernstein The Emergence of the English Speaking Orthodox Rabbinate, 1977, Yeshiva University
 * Rabbi Emmanuel Rackman, letter in The Jewish Week May 8, 1997, page 28.
 * Joseph Soloveitchik Orthodox, Conservative and Reform Jews in the United States: Second article in a series on Responsa of Orthodox Judaism in the United States, 1954
 * Jack Wertheimer, Ed., Tradition Renewed: A History of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, Vol. II, p. 450, 474, JTS, NY, 1997
 * Proceedings of the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Conservative Movement 1927-1970, Vol. II, Ed. David Golinkin, The Rabbinical Assembly, 1997

Awards

 * 1985: National Jewish Book Award in the Jewish Thought category for Halakhic Man
 * 2010: National Jewish Book Award in the Modern Jewish Thought and Experiment for The Koren Mesorat HaRav Kinot

Resources

 * Lonely Man of Faith Symposium
 * "Lonely Man of Faith" audio series from WebYeshiva.org (archived on YUTorah.org)
 * The Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik Institute
 * Classes given by Rav Soloveitchik in MP3 format
 * Video Lecture on Rabbi Dr. Soloveitchik by Dr. Henry Abramson
 * Lecture notes and live audio
 * Partial Bibliography of works by and about Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik Zt"l
 * Bibliography of his writings and resources on the Web
 * Maimonides high school founded by Soloveitchik in 1937
 * Published volumes of Soloveitchik's Talmud classes
 * The Toras Horav Foundation
 * Audio Shiurim of Rav Soloveitchik at bcbm.org
 * Shiurim of the Rav on Brachos
 * Obituary: Jewish Observer
 * Obituary: New York Times
 * Article: My Long Lonely Journey to the Rav by Yisrael Kashkin
 * TheRav.Site: Resources on Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zt'l

title: Joseph B. Soloveitchik


text:
Psittacus

Psittacus is a genus of African grey parrots in the subfamily Psittacinae. It contains two species: the grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus) and the Timneh parrot (Psittacus timneh).

For many years, the grey parrot and Timneh parrot were classified as subspecies; the former as the nominate, the latter as P. e. timneh. However, in 2012 the taxa were recognized as separate species by BirdLife International on the basis of genetic, morphological, plumage and vocal differences.

These parrots are found in the primary and secondary rainforest of West and Central Africa. They are among the most intelligent birds in the world. They feed primarily on palm nuts, seeds, fruits, and leafy matter, but have also been observed eating snails. Their inclination and ability to mimic speech and other sounds have made them popular pets.

Taxonomy
The genus Psittacus was introduced in 1758 by the Swedish naturalist Carl Linnaeus in the tenth edition of his Systema Naturae. The genus name is Latin for "parrot". Linnaeus included all 37 of the then-known parrots in the genus and of these George Robert Gray designated the grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus) as the type species.

Species
The genus now contains only two species:

Some aviculturalists recognize third and fourth species, but these are not distinguishable in scientific studies.

Breeding
Grey parrots are monogamous breeders which nests in tree cavities. The hen lays 3-5 eggs, which she incubates for 30 days while being fed by her mate. Young leave the nest at the age of 12 weeks. Little is known about the courtship behaviour of this species in the wild.

Longevity
Like many large parrots, greys are long-lived birds. The Animal Ageing and Longevity Database states the longest reliably recorded longevity for the species in captivity as 49.7 years. Also acknowledged are claims of captive grey parrots reaching the ages of 73 and 93, whereas the World Parrot Trust lists a longevity of 50–60 years for a grey in captivity. The Guinness Book of World Records listed a grey parrot that allegedly lived in captivity for 72 years as the longest-lived specimen for the species.

Illness and disease
The grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus) has been known at times to contract a non-infectious inflammatory lung disease called lipid pneumonia. Lipid pneumonia can be classified as exogenous or endogenous depending on whether or not the animal inhaled outside material. A necropsy shows that the lungs of a grey parrot with endogenous lipid pneumonia (EnLP) are firm with a diffuse grey discoloration. EnLP is a common illness in other animals as well. The grey parrot is also one of the three parrots that scientists found to commonly suffer from dehydration. Scientists have used plasma osmolality to find more information about the form of dehydration grey parrots have. Another disease that the grey parrots get is cardiomyopathy, which is a heart disease usually presented at a young age. The cause is having parents of the same breed. Some other common symptoms in these birds are weakness, coelomic cavity, and retardation. The grey parrot has been known to contract beak and feather disease virus (BFDV) which causes a highly contagious, and sometimes fatal, psittacine beak and feather disease in parrots. In a PCR-based study, Chlamydiosis, an infectious disease of avians, was found to infect the grey parrot. In the study 253 clinical samples were taken from 27 bird species belonging to seven orders. Thirty-two (12.6%) samples were positive for Chlamydi and two new genotypes were discovered: Chlamydophila psittaci and Chlamydophila abortus. Another ailment that grey parrots commonly suffer from is hypocalcemic-induced seizure activity. Birds between 2–15 years of age contract it, due to a lack of calcium. A symptom of the syndrome can be unsteadiness while standing or falling off a perch along with neurological anomalies or problems.

Intelligence
"Birds appear to offer, in their behavior, neurophysiology, and neuroanatomy a striking case of parallel evolution of consciousness. Evidence of near human-like levels of consciousness has been most dramatically observed in African grey parrots."

Unlike other parrots, wild greys have been documented imitating the calls of several other species.

Irene Pepperberg's research with captive greys, most notably with a bird named Alex, has scientifically demonstrated that they possess the ability to associate simple human words with meanings, and to intelligently apply the abstract concepts of shape, colour, number, zero-sense, etc. According to Pepperberg and other ornithologists, they perform many cognitive tasks at the level of dolphins, chimpanzees, and even human toddlers. As well as labeling objects, Alex could verbally express what his wants were, suggesting that grey parrots know the difference between features and feelings. In general, it has been shown that grey parrots are able to learn relatively quickly, though they are limited to simple and non-abstract mediums of thinking. They have been shown to be able to make cognitive inferences, but, like apes, have inter-individual differences in intelligence. For example, in one experiment involving food hidden under cups, it was shown that greys can identify where the food is, usually if shown its original location at first.

Pet greys may learn to speak within their first year, but many don't say their first word until 12–18 months old. Timnehs are generally observed to start speaking earlier, some in their late first year. Both subspecies seem to have the same ability and tendency to produce human speech, but vocal ability and proclivity may range widely among individual birds. Grey parrots tend to use more specific calls for different species coming their way which can be known as stimulus specificity, since there is a stimulus vocalization the birds have.

A study published in 2011, led by Dalila Bovet of Paris West University Nanterre La Défense, demonstrated grey parrots were able to coordinate and collaborate with each other to an extent. They were able to solve problems set by scientists—for example, two birds could pull strings at the same time to obtain food. In another example, one bird stood on a perch to release a food-laden tray, while the other pulled the tray out from the test apparatus. Both would then feed. The birds in question were observed waiting for their partners to perform the necessary actions so their behaviour could be synchronized. The parrots appeared to express individual preferences as to which of the other test birds they would work with.

In an experiment about local enhancement in grey parrots, food was visibly hidden under two separate cups. The experimenter then lifted the first cup and either removed what was under it or put it back. This was then done again in several different combinations, the cups were lifted in a different order and the food was removed or put back in a different order. Instead of remembering which cup had the food, the birds would show preference to the one that was touched last.

Another series of experiments further tested grey parrots' cognitive abilities. In general, most animals cannot associate sounds with objects, such as food, placed into a cup. While originally only the great apes and young human children were known to make this association with ease, it was found that grey parrots, under most conditions, can also associate sounds with the presence of an object. For the most part, grey parrots performed more successfully if the cup was shaken horizontally before it is given the choice of selecting which contained food; however, further experimentation indicated that it is not a requirement and proved that grey parrots have very high cognitive abilities.

Vocalisation
Wild grey parrots often whistle, click, or make other sounds. A grey's owner should expect to hear regular renditions of microwave ovens, telephones, alarm clocks, video games, and other electronic sounds, as well as dripping water, wild birds, and any other sound often heard by the parrot. Greys have even been known to repeat the profanity they heard from an owner even after they no longer live with that owner. Greys also have the ability to mimic, and distinguish between, the different voices they hear. Grey parrots use different alarm calls for different predators coming their way.

In an experiment to test the vocalizations of grey parrots, four bred in captivity were placed in an aviary. Throughout the day they spent time in a room with toys and came into fairly regular contact with the humans taking care of them. The noises that these parrots could hear consisted of the calls of canaries in the laboratory, people cleaning, doors squeaking, etc. In the next 3 years, the parrots made over 50,000 vocalisations. What was interesting was that, although they were bred in captivity, the sounds they made were not only ones of their immediate surroundings. They also made calls similar to those of other captive grey parrots in different locations and even wild grey parrots.

Status and conservation
More rare than previously believed, the grey was uplisted from a species of least concern to near threatened in the 2007 IUCN Red List. A recent analysis suggests up to 21% of the global population may be taken from the wild annually, primarily for the pet trade. In 2012, the species was further uplisted to vulnerable. The species is endemic to primary and secondary rainforests of West and Central Africa. Grey parrots depend on large, old trees for the natural hollows they use for nesting. Studies in Guinea and Guinea-Bissau have found that greys' preferred species of nesting trees are also species preferred for timber. The relationship between the status of the species and the status of primary forest is positive: where the forests are declining, so too are populations of grey parrots.

The grey parrot is listed on Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). This requires both that exports be accompanied by a permit issued by a national authority and that a finding be made that the export is not detrimental to the species in the wild. With exports totaling more than 350,000 specimens from 1994 to 2003, the grey parrot is one of the most heavily traded CITES-listed bird species. In response to continuing population declines, exceeded quotas, and unsustainable and illegal trade (including among range states), CITES included the grey parrot in Phase VI of the CITES Review of Significant Trade in 2004. This review has resulted in recommended zero export quotas for several range states and a CITES decision to develop regional management plans for the species.

In the United States, importation of wild-caught grey parrots is prohibited under the US Wild Bird Conservation Act of 1992. In the European Union, an EU Directive of 2007 prevents importation of this and any other wild-caught birds for the pet trade.

Aviculture
These intelligent mimics can make interesting pets and companion parrots. They have a devoted following among parrot owners. However, the same qualities mean they require a special commitment by their owners to provide frequent one-on-one interaction and supervised time out of their cages. They must be kept stimulated and busy by people and toys or they may become stressed and develop self-destructive behaviors. Greys require large cages, varied diets that include fresh foods, and plenty of safe and chewable toys. If not provided with these items, these parrots can quickly develop unpleasant behaviours and may eventually develop health problems (such as feather-plucking) that are difficult to remedy.

Even the healthiest, happiest pet parrot will generate a fair amount of mess and noise. Like most parrots, they are not domesticated, and even a well-socialized, hand-raised, aviary-bred bird is usually only one or two generations removed from its wild predecessor. Despite this, there is a long history of these parrots being kept at pets by the ancient Greeks, wealthy Roman families, King Henry VIII, Portuguese sailors, and others.

Cultural depictions

 * The character 'Gerard' in Michael Crichton's novel Next is a transgenic grey parrot with the capability of doing math.
 * The character 'Madison' in Dick King-Smith's novel Harry's Mad is a grey parrot.
 * The character 'Methuselah' in Barbara Kingsolver's novel The Poisonwood Bible is a grey parrot.
 * The children's book Friendly Feathers: Life with Pierre, an African Grey Parrot by Fran Smith, illustrated by Deon Matzen, is about a grey parrot. ISBN 978-0-615-22232-5
 * The bird owned by the character 'Linus Steinman' in the novel The Final Solution by Michael Chabon is a grey parrot.
 * In the book, We'll Always Have Parrots by Donna Andrews, a grey parrot helps protagonist Meg Langslow apprehend the antagonist.
 * In the book, Sick as a Parrot by Liz Evans, the parrot in the title is a grey parrot.
 * Cat Marsala, the main protagonist in "Hard Christmas" by Barbara D'Amato, has a pet grey parrot named Long John Silver.
 * In the book Somebody Else's Summer, Bilbo was a grey parrot which belonged to George Carr.
 * The character 'Polynesia' in Hugh Lofting's  Doctor Dolittle children's novels is a grey parrot. In the film version, the character was played by a blue and gold macaw.
 * In Thomas Bernhard's play Immanuel Kant, the philosopher praises his Psittacus erithacus without end, saying only he understands his logic.
 * Mercedes Lackey's short stories "Grey" and "Grey's Ghost" feature a grey parrot that has a remarkable bond with her owner.
 * Web Comic Matthew Inman; also known as "The Oatmeal", wrote a web comic about his pet grey parrot. I have firsthand experience with an undead parrot

title: Psittacus