Not only is it acceptable to freeze eggs before beginning treatment so that she and her husband will still be able to have children later, but it is proper to do so (and would be the same if the question were a man wanting to freeze sperm before beginning treatment that could cause sterility, since it is being done for the sake of procreating).

 

It is a great mitzvah to have children, and doing this will enable her to still have healthy children down the line. Furthermore, I love the way this shows a sense of confidence and affirmation of life in the face of serious health challenges and dangerous treatments.

 

My deepest blessings for a speedy recovery and a happy, healthy family in the future.

 

          This issue has been addressed extensively by leading Orthodox rabbis. Many point to the rabbinic law that one may not gain any benefit from an object used to administer capital punishment, and must therefore bury it, as well as the law that one may not gain any benefit from a corpse. While relevant for our discussion, these laws only prohibit benefit from the object or corpse itself, not the information that is obtained from them.  Similarly, despite rabbinic prohibitions against performing autopsies, there is no prohibition against utilizing the information gained from them once it has been learned. Indeed, the Talmud records much information that resulted from viewing cadavers or even immoral experiments (see for example the discussion in Nida 32b of the knowledge gained from Queen Cleopatra’s abortion experiments).
          Another oft cited source is Maimonides’ explanation of the rabbinic praise for King Hizkiyahu’s decision to get rid of an ancient book of cures “Sefer HaRefuot.” Maimonides argues that King Hizkiyahu destroyed this work, despite the value Judaism places on medical knowledge, because it contained modes of treatment that the Torah does not allow for use in healing (i.e., idolatrous or illicit behaviors). Maimonides explains that we may utilize the knowledge gained from these procedures, but are forbidden from actually taking part in them themselves, as he writes, “one may learn in order to analyze and teach. However, when people destroyed their path and began to cure themselves through these means, he removed the practices and hid them away.” According to this approach, we may not take part in forbidden practices   – such as idolatry, for example - even for the sake of healing or saving a life. But once such procedures have been done, we may study the results in order to figure out how to apply the knowledge gained in a permitted manner.  Furthermore, we know that it is axiomatic in Judaism that in order to save a life, almost all means must be exhausted.

          Some scholars have expressed concern that utilizing such information may encourage more immoral studies and may seem to imply a certain degree of acceptance of such methodologies. Others advocate using the knowledge gained, but not citing the immoral source in order to deter future such experimenters, similar to King Hizkiyahu’s decision to hide the book of cures. On the other hand, it is argued that most of the Nazi experiments were so grotesque that we need not be concerned that anyone will try to replicate them or that we are not sufficiently deterring others from them. Others argue that making use of Nazi-obtained data, while still condemning the Nazis and their method of obtaining this data, at least allows us to ensure that these individuals did not die in vain. However, others feel that those people who were martyred because they were Jewish, in sanctification of God’s name, did not die in vain, regardless of whatever medical knowledge can be gleaned from their lives. The debate goes on and on and there is no simple solution.

               In conclusion, while we must condemn these horrific practices and do whatever we can to ensure that they are never repeated, we may make use of the scientific knowledge gained from them, while remaining ever cognizant of the sanctity inherent in these holy people’s lives, and their deaths.

Without knowing you or your unique circumstances it is impossible to give a fully appropriate answer. However, in response to the primary question being asked:  It would not be permissible to use an iPhone on Shabbat for these purposes.

Firstly, while technology can be a tremendous blessing, it is also causing people to turn to devices for tasks that we used to be able to do on our own. Instead of relying on your iPhone to recite prayers and study Torah, or even a Siddur and Chumash for that matter, since you have no other choice on this particular Shabbat, why not do your best to say the prayers that you know by heart and discuss what you remember about the Torah portion? After all, though it is ideal to recite all of the prayers, there is still value in reciting just some, such as the Shema.

Secondly, although it sounds noble to use an iPhone for this purpose on Shabbat, you would be putting yourself into a tempting situation to check Email, go online or make phone calls with just one touch of the finger.  Since this device is used all week long for such activities, one may easily slip into them on Shabbat as well, without much thought, thereby going from using the device for noble and holy purposes to using it for mundane weekday reasons.  Much of the beauty of Shabbat lies in the fact that it gives us a respite from the swiftness of our daily pace and other obstacles to meaningful interpersonal and spiritual connections. Using such a device on Shabbat may appear to have valid reasons, but is not in consonance with the spirit of the day, and can easily slip into activities which are certainly not suited for the holy Sabbath.

Thirdly, doing what we consider to be a Mitzvah via forbidden means is similar to the Talmudic concept of a “Mitzvah Haba’ah B’Aveirah” (a Mitzvah that is brought about through a transgression). Therefore, while it is laudatory to want to pray and study Torah, since doing so in this manner would be forbidden it would not fulfill a Mitzvah.

While it is very easy to rationalize numerous technologies that might seem to enhance Shabbat, the best way to truly carve the Sabbath into a sanctified island of time is not to rely only on our own judgment about what actions seem appropriate.  Personal needs or emotions often cause us to mislead ourselves into rationalizing behaviors that are not actually conducive to experiencing the sanctity of Shabbat.  However, by following communal norms and traditional rabbinic guidelines, we are enabled to experience true transcendence and go beyond ourselves, ultimately connecting to the Divine. Therefore, you should not use your iPhone for this reason on Shabbat, and I believe that in the long run you will be much better off for it.

Although your question is best addressed by a discussion in person, and with a rabbi who knows you and your family, I will share some initial thoughts to help you think through these challenging questions.

I certainly empathize with the pain inherent in your question, but I do not think that cremation would be an effective or appropriate manner of identifying with your relatives who were murdered by the Nazis.

Cremation has always been antithetical to the Jewish ideal of natural burial in the ground, and I can only assume that the notion of being cremated was antithetical to the core values of your relatives.  Choosing to be buried in the traditional Jewish manner would thus be the best revenge you could take against the Nazis.  Furthermore, enemies of the Jewish people have cremated Jews throughout history as a symbolic way of trying to completely destroy us forever. Intentionally doing this to yourself in order to identify with Hitler’s victims would thus be granting him a posthumous victory.  Indeed, one of the great rabbis who was imprisoned in a concentration camp was asked a haunting question about this issue during the holocaust, by a Jew who was pretending to be German.  The Jew wondered if it would be better to have himself cremated rather than be buried with a cross, surrounded by Nazi corpses.  The rabbi responded that this manner of burial would still be preferable to cremation!

 

While your concern about being buried in proximity to both of your husbands is certainly valid, it does not seem to me that having ashes placed in each location would adequately address the problem.  First, some may have the impression that while part of you is in both places, you are in neither place completely. Second, because people often don’t treat cremated remains with the same respect as intact bodies, there is a major potential problem of cremated remains being misplaced.  These remains lack permanence, and there is no guarantee that your ashes will actually remain in both locations alongside your husbands’ graves in perpetuity.

In terms of your question related to Jewish values for choosing which spouse to be buried next to, when there is no specific preference the following guidelines are often taken into account:

 

(See also “Cremation or Burial: A Jewish View” By Kornbluth)

This question is addressed by the Code of Jewish Law (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 366). The conclusion is that although there is value to being buried with one’s family (as Jacob requests in Genesis 47:30, “bury me with my fathers”), if one has to choose between a family plot and their spouse, they should be buried next to their spouse, since a spouse is considered a closer relative than parents.   This assumes that your wife has not stated a preference or that she prefers to be buried with you, but if she would rather be buried in her family’s plot, then her preference should be respected. (See Badei HaShulchan 366; Aruch Hashulchan YD 366:2; Kol Bo Al Aveilut 2:9)

There are many different customs as to when one should unveil the monument over a grave. Not only is it permissible to wait until after the first year has passed, many authorities encourage this.  The reasons given for waiting until after 12 months since the deceased was buried are:

1) The monument itself is a symbol of importance, which is seen as inappropriate during the mourning period while there is still pain.

2)  One purpose of the monument is so that the deceased will not be forgotten from one’s heart, but during the first year the memory of the departed is still vivid, as many mourning practices ensure, so we are not concerned about the possibility of forgetting them so soon. 

However, many argue that the purpose of the monument is for the deceased and their honor, and it is proper to give them this respect as soon as possible. For this, and other reasons, most authorities encourage the monument to be erected, at least partially, right after one gets up from sitting shiva, and then completed, if necessary, before the 30^th day. Some even allow one to leave their house during shiva in order to prepare the monument because they view creating it as soon as possible to be very important.

That said, we must acknowledge that there are many customs as to when to construct the monument over a grave, ranging from right away, to one year (which in my experience is the most common custom), to only after one year has passed.  Therefore, one should follow whatever the prevailing custom is in their community, but if there is a compelling reason that one needs to wait until after a year, they may certainly do so.

(See: Kol Bo Al Aveilut pg. 379)

Jewish law does not directly address the permissibility of taking part in combat sports such as boxing, but provides us with principles from which we can infer an answer.

Jewish law generally categorizes risk taking into three categories: minimal, moderate, and high risk.  Activities in everyday life that carry minimal risk and are commonly undertaken by the majority of society need not be avoided.  On the other hand, placing oneself into a situation of very high risk is generally forbidden.

It seems that combat sports such as boxing fall into the middle category of “moderate risk.”  Jewish law regards activity in this category as being permissible only when there is a compelling reason for it.  One such compelling reason could be earning a living, as Rabbi Yechezkel Landau wrote over two hundred years ago when he ruled that it is forbidden for a Jew to be a hunter (Noda BiYehuda, Y”D 10).  After explaining that hunting is a form a cruelty and an inappropriate activity, as well as unnecessarily endangering oneself, he goes on to allow it only for a person for whom it is their profession and they have no other choice.  Similarly, in our times, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein allows participation in professional sports, despite the risks involved, if the activity is undertaken in the pursuit of a livelihood (Igerot Moshe Ch”M 1:104).  Authorities in Jewish law extend this permission to other valid reasons for exposing oneself to moderate risk, beyond simply earning a living. However, it should be pointed out that Rabbi Feinstein’s permissive ruling is regarding “playing ball,” and though he does not say which type of ball game, we can assume that it is not as dangerous as boxing.

Based on the above, it seems that if a combat sport is truly dangerous, it should be avoided unless one really has no other means of making an equally good living.  This type of sport should not be encouraged, both because of the danger involved to the player (not to mention those whom he or she is playing against) and because it involves cruelty, which goes against Jewish values. On the other hand, if the sport is not full contact (and thus not very dangerous), and is done for the sake of learning self-defense techniques or other important skills, then even if it is not for the sake of earning a living, it may be permissible and even encouraged. Each situation must be judged on a case-by-case basis using some of the above principles as well as rabbinic guidance.

Thank you for sharing your painful question. From my perspective, it is wonderful for you to attend these dinners, and I do not believe that you should bow out at the next invitation. Allow me to explain:

I thus feel that while in-depth theological discussions and religious comparing and contrasting might not be beneficial to your friendship, your attendance at these enjoyable meals should be warmly welcomed. I hope you will enjoy many more Shabbat dinners together and that together you can find a peaceful way of navigating around her other friend’s objections.