So the news broke today that we are in Peace Talks with Syria. Let's assume that this is NOT a scam to draw attention from Olmert's criminal investigation. I still find this idea totally hallucinatory.
Why is Israel doing this? It is quite obvious. Israel is worried about Iran. Lebanon have - today - become a Hizbolla state. The new PM is a Hizbolla sympathiser, and Hizbolla have a govt. veto. So now we are surrounded by Gaza, Lebanon and Syria who are all Iran allies and militant to Israel.
That is bad to say the least.
So Olmert plans to draw Syria away from Iran. In truth by doing this, he is also trying to draw Syria towards the U.S. and away from the "axis of evil". If Syria make Peace with us then they will get all sorts of aid just like Egypt after Camp David and be rewelcomed in the world community. THAT is the Syrian interest here.
So there is the logic.
Why is this bad?
1. Syria cannot be trusted. A country who house Mashal (head of Hamas) and arm Hizbolla, and who are building a nuclear reactor to attack Israel are hardly a Peace partner. Assad is a cruel dictator. A Peace partner?
2. When will we realise that we cannot manipulate the Arabs internal politics. We tried to manipulate the PA and we got Hamas, to manipulate Lebanon and we got Hizbolla. Every time we say that "they will become moderate," it backfires. Syria sees eye to eye with Iran. we will not be able to break that bond of friendship and shared vision. Even a Peace agreement will not break the Syrian-Iran alliance. If they are not moderate, they will not change for us.
3. The Arabs see us as on the retreat. As Ben Gurion said, we can only make Peace from a position of strength. We cannot be seen as desperate and therefore withdrawing further. We did that in Lebanon and then in Gaza. It just invites more attacks. If we do this now, they will see that we are terrified of Iran. They will view the Golan as yet another victory, a 3rd feather in their hat after Lebanon and Gaza, and it is more of the slippery slope. Bad News.
We must not retreat or show fear. Now is NOT the time to offer concessions. Now is the time to show our resolve and strength.
I reiterate... Peace with the Arabs can only be from a position of strength and strategic superiority. If I can be crude, only when we beat them will it be a real Peace.
4. Government?- What Government!
Last of all, and this is very important... a question of procedure. Senior Government ministers had no idea that the talks were happening. Eli Yishai is a dep. PM and a cabinet member. Israel is NOT a Presidential system. The Government's official line is against this. How can Olmert go against his govt. behind their backs and negotiate against his own Governments position?
I hate to say this but I really feel that Olmert is a liability. The sooner he is ejected from the PM seat the safer I will feel.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Drama of Recognition
I was moved by this piece in NYTimes.
May 18, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
The Birth of a Nation, 1948
By RUTH GRUBER
IT was Friday, May 14, 1948. I was sitting in the press section of the United Nations General Assembly in its temporary quarters at Flushing Meadow in Queens. I felt my heart thumping. We journalists were waiting impatiently to see who would win a tug of war taking place in Washington.
On one side was President Harry S. Truman, who had told his aides that, with the last British troops leaving Palestine that day, he believed the Jews had a right to declare their own nation, and that he would make sure that the United States would be the first country to recognize it.
On the other side was the State Department, which wanted the land placed in a trusteeship under the United Nations. Secretary of State George Marshall was so passionate in his opposition to a Jewish state that he threatened to vote against the president in the November election. For Truman, who had come to office with the death of Franklin Roosevelt three years earlier, this was to be one of his first true tests of power.
As I sat waiting for the announcement of the decision in Washington, my mind wandered back to the spring and summer of the year before, which I had spent reporting for The New York Herald Tribune. I had traveled in Germany and Austria with the 11 members of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine. There had been many such committees studying the problems of the Holy Land since the Arab riots of the 1920s; this one was distinguished by having no representatives from Britain, which had been universally hostile to the Zionist cause.
With the members, I visited the camps for displaced persons in Germany and Austria and listened, dumbfounded, as the refugees described the horrors of the war. In particular, I remember visiting the Rothschild Hospital camp in Vienna. Some 100 refugees had just arrived from Romania, many of them children covered with sores and dirt. There was no place to put them but the street; they lay, exhausted, on the paving stones.
A young man approached us, his eyes bloodshot. “In Romania, they killed 30,000 Jews in two hours,” he said, his voice sounding as if it came straight from his guts. “They took Jews to the slaughterhouse and hung them alive the way they hang cows, and they put knives to their throats and split them. Underneath them, they put a sign: Kosher Beef.”
In camp after camp, the committee members asked, “Why do you want to go to Palestine? It’s such a poor country. The Arabs and Jews are always fighting. They don’t have enough food, they don’t have enough water. What is it about Palestine?”
A 16-year-old orphan — actually, we never used the word “orphan” because the term couldn’t convey the horrors these children had been through — gave the most poignant answer. “Everybody has a home,” he said. “The Americans. The British. The French. The Russians. Only we don’t have a home. Don’t ask us. Ask the world.”
A woman tugged the sleeve of my jacket. “You are the only woman with all these men,” she implored. “You will understand me. I saw my husband burned. I don’t want to burn. I want to go home — to Eretz Israel.” The Land of Israel.
“That’s why we’re here,” I told her. “To help solve the problem. But if, Heaven forbid, we fail to find a solution, where would you like to go?”
Her reply: “Back to the crematory.”
It was this committee’s report that led directly to the General Assembly vote of Nov. 29, 1947, to partition Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab entities. The Jews accepted this proposal, but the Arabs stormed out and threatened war.
•
My mind was drawn immediately back to the present of May 1948 as I noticed an American representative to the United Nations, Philip Jessup, hurrying toward the podium. I knew, after talking to his aides, that in his hand he had a speech supporting trusteeship, not statehood, for Israel. The State Department was about to betray the president.
Jessup was halfway up the stairs when an Associated Press reporter handed him a dispatch. Jessup read it, grew white-faced, descended the stairs and then disappeared. The reporter next to me said, “He’s gone to the bathroom.”
I shook my head. “He’s gone home.”
Then we were handed the A.P. report. In Tel Aviv, David Ben-Gurion had just read the world’s latest proclamation of independence. Eleven minutes later, Harry Truman had recognized Ben-Gurion’s government as the “de facto authority” of the new state.
Israel was born.
Ruth Gruber is the author of “Exodus 1947” and “Witness.”
May 18, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
The Birth of a Nation, 1948
By RUTH GRUBER
IT was Friday, May 14, 1948. I was sitting in the press section of the United Nations General Assembly in its temporary quarters at Flushing Meadow in Queens. I felt my heart thumping. We journalists were waiting impatiently to see who would win a tug of war taking place in Washington.
On one side was President Harry S. Truman, who had told his aides that, with the last British troops leaving Palestine that day, he believed the Jews had a right to declare their own nation, and that he would make sure that the United States would be the first country to recognize it.
On the other side was the State Department, which wanted the land placed in a trusteeship under the United Nations. Secretary of State George Marshall was so passionate in his opposition to a Jewish state that he threatened to vote against the president in the November election. For Truman, who had come to office with the death of Franklin Roosevelt three years earlier, this was to be one of his first true tests of power.
As I sat waiting for the announcement of the decision in Washington, my mind wandered back to the spring and summer of the year before, which I had spent reporting for The New York Herald Tribune. I had traveled in Germany and Austria with the 11 members of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine. There had been many such committees studying the problems of the Holy Land since the Arab riots of the 1920s; this one was distinguished by having no representatives from Britain, which had been universally hostile to the Zionist cause.
With the members, I visited the camps for displaced persons in Germany and Austria and listened, dumbfounded, as the refugees described the horrors of the war. In particular, I remember visiting the Rothschild Hospital camp in Vienna. Some 100 refugees had just arrived from Romania, many of them children covered with sores and dirt. There was no place to put them but the street; they lay, exhausted, on the paving stones.
A young man approached us, his eyes bloodshot. “In Romania, they killed 30,000 Jews in two hours,” he said, his voice sounding as if it came straight from his guts. “They took Jews to the slaughterhouse and hung them alive the way they hang cows, and they put knives to their throats and split them. Underneath them, they put a sign: Kosher Beef.”
In camp after camp, the committee members asked, “Why do you want to go to Palestine? It’s such a poor country. The Arabs and Jews are always fighting. They don’t have enough food, they don’t have enough water. What is it about Palestine?”
A 16-year-old orphan — actually, we never used the word “orphan” because the term couldn’t convey the horrors these children had been through — gave the most poignant answer. “Everybody has a home,” he said. “The Americans. The British. The French. The Russians. Only we don’t have a home. Don’t ask us. Ask the world.”
A woman tugged the sleeve of my jacket. “You are the only woman with all these men,” she implored. “You will understand me. I saw my husband burned. I don’t want to burn. I want to go home — to Eretz Israel.” The Land of Israel.
“That’s why we’re here,” I told her. “To help solve the problem. But if, Heaven forbid, we fail to find a solution, where would you like to go?”
Her reply: “Back to the crematory.”
It was this committee’s report that led directly to the General Assembly vote of Nov. 29, 1947, to partition Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab entities. The Jews accepted this proposal, but the Arabs stormed out and threatened war.
•
My mind was drawn immediately back to the present of May 1948 as I noticed an American representative to the United Nations, Philip Jessup, hurrying toward the podium. I knew, after talking to his aides, that in his hand he had a speech supporting trusteeship, not statehood, for Israel. The State Department was about to betray the president.
Jessup was halfway up the stairs when an Associated Press reporter handed him a dispatch. Jessup read it, grew white-faced, descended the stairs and then disappeared. The reporter next to me said, “He’s gone to the bathroom.”
I shook my head. “He’s gone home.”
Then we were handed the A.P. report. In Tel Aviv, David Ben-Gurion had just read the world’s latest proclamation of independence. Eleven minutes later, Harry Truman had recognized Ben-Gurion’s government as the “de facto authority” of the new state.
Israel was born.
Ruth Gruber is the author of “Exodus 1947” and “Witness.”
Monday, May 12, 2008
Bribery, Finance and the Electoral System
The recent suspicions regarding Ehud Olmert raise an issue that has been bugging me for a while regarding the political system. I don't want to discuss Olmert's integrity. The courts can decide upon that. But it would appear to me that democratic electoral systems in an age of hyper-marketing and enormous media coverage are exceptionally problematic. Let me explain.
1. A politician or candidate must not take bribes. In other words, he cannot sell his decisions for money or have his judgment guided/clouded by money donations.
2. It is exceptionally expensive to run a campaign and to fund all the staff and commercials and the entire election machine. The average candidate does not have that money.
3. Politicians fund election campaigns from donations … from wealthy donors.
4. "There is no such thing as a free lunch" – in other words, not every donor is altruistic. They do expect a payback, a favour at times.
5. To be elected, candidates need to hobnob with the rich an famous, with market leaders and top business people, all of whom have multi million dollar interests
So to my point… we now see our 4th PM in Israel suspected of election fraud. Is it possible to get elected today without private money? And if private money doesn't come "for free", then where is the line between bribery and political support? The line is certainly fine indeed. I don't like it that leaders hang out with the rich and famous, but do they have a choice? I used to read how the Clinton's hosted celebs and business people all the time at the White House. Is that bribery or networking?
So does our modern electoral system support soft bribery? I suspect it does.
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Israel @ 60 - Thoughts
So Israel is Sixty. My 3 yr old asked me today, "Is that big?" So of course, on the one hand, thinking about the fragile,fledgling State fighting for its life in 1948, the young country attacked in 1973, a country that has done so much in so short a time, sixty is really old. On the other hand in the span of time, we're just beginning!
What is there to say at this time? So much has been written on the topic. I would like to make two points.
1. There are always the pessimists and the optimists (see my last post!). I am sorry but I have to count myself in the latter group. I always see the cup half full when it comes to Israel.
Last week, both Galei Tzahal and Channel 1 did contests to find the song that epitomised sixty years of Israel. With Galei Tzahal the top song was Shir HaReut - a beautiful song about loss and friendship in war (written by Haim Guri in 1948.) Second came Yerushalayim Shel Zahav. In fact Yerushalayim Shel Zahav was the top song on Channel 1. (The second was "Children of '73 which we can discuss in a minute.)
Israelis did not choose some wild pop song. Israelis are rooted in Jerusalem, in their past and in their heritage. Despite a great amount of desperation with our leadership which is seen as corrupt or lacking vision and depth, Israelis know that there is much to celebrate at 60. They also appreciate what the true values are, and why we are here.
Today the Guardian (link) has an interesting article about the eclipse of the promise of Peace. The song that came in second - Children of '73 - is precisely about that idea (link). But as opposed to one other blogger (link) I would like to suggest that that song is actually very much where Israel is at present.
The song expresses the reality that at one point in time Israelis felt that peace would be around the corner. Nowadays, we realise it is much more complicated, far more elusive. (Even Peres said today that he never expected Kasaams from Gaza after the Hitnatkut! (link)) And yet the kids in the song still serve in the Army and still live in Israel and still build their future here! To my mind the song expresses the frustrations of reality and the complexities of living here. (The song isn't perfect... it has much arrogance, but that is for another time.)
So what do we do when Peace seems elusive? What do we do when a woman sees her father, and then her husband, and now her son, go to war?
Here is the point I think needs making. In fact Olmert made this point at the Yom Hazikaron ceremony today (Give credit where it is due!). We will succeed here ONLY if we know WHY we are here. We cannot succeed if we fail to believe that we belong here. We cannot become an ordinary country. This is a place that for the foreseeable future we shall have to fight over. If you are looking for a comfortable calm ride, this is not happening so soon. (Although, we are, many of us, living at very comfortable living standards!)
But this is the best place in the world for a Jew. Why? Because it is ours. Because here we all care about each other. Because here we fight over OUR issues. Because here we live in our holy land, promised to us by God, because here I tread in the footsteps of my History, because here we turn on the radio and hear Hebrew... Because we belong here! It is right.
Every Israeli needs to know this. Every Israeli must be imbued with Jewish Pride and Zionism. Israel needs to invest heavily in education, Judaism and Zionism to fight against cynicism and PostZionism, to revive some of that old-school Zionism, so that every Israeli believes that this is the correct place to be and understands why it is worthy to be here. To reconnect with Judaism, to love the country. And then BeEzrat Hashem, we will be OK for another 60. This is paramount.
we have so much good. But the National Spirit is crucial, critical.
What is there to say at this time? So much has been written on the topic. I would like to make two points.
1. There are always the pessimists and the optimists (see my last post!). I am sorry but I have to count myself in the latter group. I always see the cup half full when it comes to Israel.
Last week, both Galei Tzahal and Channel 1 did contests to find the song that epitomised sixty years of Israel. With Galei Tzahal the top song was Shir HaReut - a beautiful song about loss and friendship in war (written by Haim Guri in 1948.) Second came Yerushalayim Shel Zahav. In fact Yerushalayim Shel Zahav was the top song on Channel 1. (The second was "Children of '73 which we can discuss in a minute.)
Israelis did not choose some wild pop song. Israelis are rooted in Jerusalem, in their past and in their heritage. Despite a great amount of desperation with our leadership which is seen as corrupt or lacking vision and depth, Israelis know that there is much to celebrate at 60. They also appreciate what the true values are, and why we are here.
Today the Guardian (link) has an interesting article about the eclipse of the promise of Peace. The song that came in second - Children of '73 - is precisely about that idea (link). But as opposed to one other blogger (link) I would like to suggest that that song is actually very much where Israel is at present.
The song expresses the reality that at one point in time Israelis felt that peace would be around the corner. Nowadays, we realise it is much more complicated, far more elusive. (Even Peres said today that he never expected Kasaams from Gaza after the Hitnatkut! (link)) And yet the kids in the song still serve in the Army and still live in Israel and still build their future here! To my mind the song expresses the frustrations of reality and the complexities of living here. (The song isn't perfect... it has much arrogance, but that is for another time.)
So what do we do when Peace seems elusive? What do we do when a woman sees her father, and then her husband, and now her son, go to war?
Here is the point I think needs making. In fact Olmert made this point at the Yom Hazikaron ceremony today (Give credit where it is due!). We will succeed here ONLY if we know WHY we are here. We cannot succeed if we fail to believe that we belong here. We cannot become an ordinary country. This is a place that for the foreseeable future we shall have to fight over. If you are looking for a comfortable calm ride, this is not happening so soon. (Although, we are, many of us, living at very comfortable living standards!)
But this is the best place in the world for a Jew. Why? Because it is ours. Because here we all care about each other. Because here we fight over OUR issues. Because here we live in our holy land, promised to us by God, because here I tread in the footsteps of my History, because here we turn on the radio and hear Hebrew... Because we belong here! It is right.
Every Israeli needs to know this. Every Israeli must be imbued with Jewish Pride and Zionism. Israel needs to invest heavily in education, Judaism and Zionism to fight against cynicism and PostZionism, to revive some of that old-school Zionism, so that every Israeli believes that this is the correct place to be and understands why it is worthy to be here. To reconnect with Judaism, to love the country. And then BeEzrat Hashem, we will be OK for another 60. This is paramount.
we have so much good. But the National Spirit is crucial, critical.
2. But here is a second point. I wrote about it also in last years post here.
Israel at 60. Wow! We have so much to thank God for. So much to be appreciative! For simply our survival! For the pleasure of over 6 million Jews who can live in their land, for a booming economy, for Israel being able to be a refuge for Russian Jews and Ethiopian Jews. For Israel being the education centre for World Jewry, whether in Mir or Ponovezh or Brisk, Gush or Shaalvim, Hebrew University or Hartman Institute, or Schechter - they are all here! For Israel giving pride and confidence to the Jewish People around the world. For the Kotel, and the Golan and the Negev and the Kinneret.
Hodu Lashem ki Tov, Ki LeOlam Hasdo!
Yom Atzmaut Sameach!
Posters at Sixty
Different organisations have been busy designing posters for the sixtieth anniversary. The news reported of Michlelet Ort in Kfar Saba with their very pessimistic portraits of Israel
:
These highlight either Israel as a littering nation or as wishing to erase our victory of the Six Day War as if it were a mistake, or as a nation who have so many poor people surviving on Welfare. Other posters spoke about the fatalities of road accidents or even suggesting Israel as a rascist country. ALL the posters were negative!
But then along comes the Religious Michlelet Emuna with more positive portraits like this:
: These highlight either Israel as a littering nation or as wishing to erase our victory of the Six Day War as if it were a mistake, or as a nation who have so many poor people surviving on Welfare. Other posters spoke about the fatalities of road accidents or even suggesting Israel as a rascist country. ALL the posters were negative!
But then along comes the Religious Michlelet Emuna with more positive portraits like this:
The common factor with these portraits is that they emphasise Israel as a plant to be nurtured, as a work in progress, as still growing and unfinished. They are more Zionist and hopeful.
Which image do you prefer?
Does one represent a secular Kfar Saba mentality and the others, a Religious Jerusalem perspective?
Monday, May 05, 2008
Parashat Emor - Displaced Persons
"The son of an Israelite woman, being also the son of an Egyptian man, went out among Benei Yisrael. And the son of the Israelite woman quarreled with an Israelite man in the camp. The son of the Israelite woman pronounced God's Name, and cursed. They brought him to Moshe. His mother's name was Shlomit, daughter of Divri, from the tribe of Dan." (24:10-11)
An argument in the camp; The name of God being publicly blasphemed. What was the cause of this rage on the part of the Blasphemer? Was it a deliberate provocation or a desperate outburst? What leads this man to curse God's name?
The text itself indicates a series of details that give us clues as to the source of the distress of the blasphemer leading to his outrageous act:
1. His problematic lineage, being of a mixed marriage (as opposed to the "Israelite man" with whom he quarrels.)
2. They quarrel "in the Camp."
3. The mention of the fact that his mother was from the Tribe of Dan.
Rashi puts it together for us.
"He (the blasphemer) had come to pitch his tent in the midst of the tribe of Dan. They asked him, 'What right have you to be here?' He said to them: 'I am of the descendants of Dan.' They said to him, 'Each man (shall camp) by his own flag, (that bears) the signs of their father's house.'"
Here we have a young man who wishes to find a place to pitch his tent in the Israelite camp. He goes to his mother's tribe - Dan - and is ejected. According to the Midrash, the case is taken to (moses') Court. The law is pronounced that Tribal lineage follows the father rather than the mother. And hence he has to go elsewhere. He is evicted. But he has nowhere to go! In his rage, or frustration, he curses God.
This parsha brings a problem into focus. I have thought about this for a while and failed to find an answer. Let me explain.
What should the Mekallel have done? Where should he pitch his tent? Where does a man from a mixed marriage live? Or is he doomed to wander between the tribes homeless, displaced?
And let us expand the question. The verse in Shemot 12:38 tells us that a "mixed multitude" - a collection of different ethnic populations - Erev Rav - tagged along with Bnei Yisrael as they left Egypt. What ever happened to these people? Where did they live? Did they have a place in the Israelite camp? Did they go their own way and depart from Bnei Yisrael [1]? Traditional sources insist that they remained with Am Yisrael, however they became a major problem as the developed as an insurgent group, instigating rebellion and sin. [2]
And so, I return to the problem. Where did the "Erev Rav" encamp?
In Sefer Bamidbar ch.1 the Israelite camp is organised into 12 marching divisions, twelve army units. There is no mention of the Erev Rav! Now it is possible that until Sefer Bamidbar, encampment arrangements were informal and random. But from the second year in the wilderness, the camp was certainly ordered.
Did the Erev Rav encamp at the outskirts of the camp? When I think about the notion of a different ethnic group, a minority grouping amongst Israel being ejected from the mainstream, relegated to the fringes of the camp, I cannot see this but as a recipe for problems. We should not be at all surprised when this group cause trouble.
In Israel today there are ongoing discussions about the center as opposed to the "periphery", the outlying regional areas in Israel. The periphery is remote, lacking access to services, and frequently weaker economically. The common wisdom is that special attention must be paid to weaker groups so that they not fester in the periphery but rather to draw them to the center, strengthened, reinforced in their sense of belonging , their identity, their education. If immigrants from problematic backgrounds are placed at the periphery, they remain apart, alienated, and then become delinquent, disgruntled, and the problems escalate.
In today's world if you had a kid from a problematic home situation, a complicated ethnic background (it could not have been simple for an Egyptian and Jew to parent a child... See the Midrashim who suggest fascinating scenarios here) and who could not even find a home, a place to pitch his tent - just like the mekallel -we would seek to include him, to embrace him. we would send the social workers out and help this guy! We could certainly see the writing on the wall simply by reading this kid's file! One can palpably sense the alienation and potential displacement in this person's mind.
(And ask Educators... A kid's rejection of Judaism is more often than not a product of his home environment and whether his Jewish-religious peers and the community welcome him and make him feel respected and as if he belongs. Frequently the social factor seriously outweighs any theological factor!)
Now of course, other readings are possible. Possibly the mekallel instigated all this and was looking for trouble, bent upon rebellion against God. Other readings in this parsha are certainly viable. And yet, beyond the story of the Blasphemer, the "Erev Rav" question still niggles me. How can we let this group, who are anyhow unintegrated into Israelite culture and society, how can we allow them to reside apart, alienated, at the outskirts of the camp? It certainly seems to be inviting serious problems.
I think that somebody once suggested that Moshe Rabbeinu himself took the Erev Rav under his wing [3] and that they encamped with him in the epicenter of the camp. I have such a vague recollection of this idea that I think I might have invented it (!). Anyhow, I have never found a source for this.
Any ideas on this topic are more than welcome!
Notes
{1} See Ramban on Shemot 19:1 and Bamidbar 1:18 in which theer is an impression that Bnei Yisrael are deliberately seperated from teh Erev Rav. Was this an attempt to eject them??
{2} See Rashi Shemot 32:4; Rashi Bamidbar 11:1,4
{3} See Rashi to Shemot 32:7 and 34:1. Here Moshe is connected personally with the Erev Rav as if they are his responsibility. According to Rashi, Moshe personally accepted them and converted them and he is seen a their patron in some way. (See also Shemot Rabba 42:6)
An argument in the camp; The name of God being publicly blasphemed. What was the cause of this rage on the part of the Blasphemer? Was it a deliberate provocation or a desperate outburst? What leads this man to curse God's name?
The text itself indicates a series of details that give us clues as to the source of the distress of the blasphemer leading to his outrageous act:
1. His problematic lineage, being of a mixed marriage (as opposed to the "Israelite man" with whom he quarrels.)
2. They quarrel "in the Camp."
3. The mention of the fact that his mother was from the Tribe of Dan.
Rashi puts it together for us.
"He (the blasphemer) had come to pitch his tent in the midst of the tribe of Dan. They asked him, 'What right have you to be here?' He said to them: 'I am of the descendants of Dan.' They said to him, 'Each man (shall camp) by his own flag, (that bears) the signs of their father's house.'"
Here we have a young man who wishes to find a place to pitch his tent in the Israelite camp. He goes to his mother's tribe - Dan - and is ejected. According to the Midrash, the case is taken to (moses') Court. The law is pronounced that Tribal lineage follows the father rather than the mother. And hence he has to go elsewhere. He is evicted. But he has nowhere to go! In his rage, or frustration, he curses God.
This parsha brings a problem into focus. I have thought about this for a while and failed to find an answer. Let me explain.
What should the Mekallel have done? Where should he pitch his tent? Where does a man from a mixed marriage live? Or is he doomed to wander between the tribes homeless, displaced?
And let us expand the question. The verse in Shemot 12:38 tells us that a "mixed multitude" - a collection of different ethnic populations - Erev Rav - tagged along with Bnei Yisrael as they left Egypt. What ever happened to these people? Where did they live? Did they have a place in the Israelite camp? Did they go their own way and depart from Bnei Yisrael [1]? Traditional sources insist that they remained with Am Yisrael, however they became a major problem as the developed as an insurgent group, instigating rebellion and sin. [2]
And so, I return to the problem. Where did the "Erev Rav" encamp?
In Sefer Bamidbar ch.1 the Israelite camp is organised into 12 marching divisions, twelve army units. There is no mention of the Erev Rav! Now it is possible that until Sefer Bamidbar, encampment arrangements were informal and random. But from the second year in the wilderness, the camp was certainly ordered.
Did the Erev Rav encamp at the outskirts of the camp? When I think about the notion of a different ethnic group, a minority grouping amongst Israel being ejected from the mainstream, relegated to the fringes of the camp, I cannot see this but as a recipe for problems. We should not be at all surprised when this group cause trouble.
In Israel today there are ongoing discussions about the center as opposed to the "periphery", the outlying regional areas in Israel. The periphery is remote, lacking access to services, and frequently weaker economically. The common wisdom is that special attention must be paid to weaker groups so that they not fester in the periphery but rather to draw them to the center, strengthened, reinforced in their sense of belonging , their identity, their education. If immigrants from problematic backgrounds are placed at the periphery, they remain apart, alienated, and then become delinquent, disgruntled, and the problems escalate.
In today's world if you had a kid from a problematic home situation, a complicated ethnic background (it could not have been simple for an Egyptian and Jew to parent a child... See the Midrashim who suggest fascinating scenarios here) and who could not even find a home, a place to pitch his tent - just like the mekallel -we would seek to include him, to embrace him. we would send the social workers out and help this guy! We could certainly see the writing on the wall simply by reading this kid's file! One can palpably sense the alienation and potential displacement in this person's mind.
(And ask Educators... A kid's rejection of Judaism is more often than not a product of his home environment and whether his Jewish-religious peers and the community welcome him and make him feel respected and as if he belongs. Frequently the social factor seriously outweighs any theological factor!)
Now of course, other readings are possible. Possibly the mekallel instigated all this and was looking for trouble, bent upon rebellion against God. Other readings in this parsha are certainly viable. And yet, beyond the story of the Blasphemer, the "Erev Rav" question still niggles me. How can we let this group, who are anyhow unintegrated into Israelite culture and society, how can we allow them to reside apart, alienated, at the outskirts of the camp? It certainly seems to be inviting serious problems.
I think that somebody once suggested that Moshe Rabbeinu himself took the Erev Rav under his wing [3] and that they encamped with him in the epicenter of the camp. I have such a vague recollection of this idea that I think I might have invented it (!). Anyhow, I have never found a source for this.
Any ideas on this topic are more than welcome!
Notes
{1} See Ramban on Shemot 19:1 and Bamidbar 1:18 in which theer is an impression that Bnei Yisrael are deliberately seperated from teh Erev Rav. Was this an attempt to eject them??
{2} See Rashi Shemot 32:4; Rashi Bamidbar 11:1,4
{3} See Rashi to Shemot 32:7 and 34:1. Here Moshe is connected personally with the Erev Rav as if they are his responsibility. According to Rashi, Moshe personally accepted them and converted them and he is seen a their patron in some way. (See also Shemot Rabba 42:6)
Friday, May 02, 2008
Parashat Kedoshim: The Ramban, Kilayim and Genetic Engineering
The Torah in this week's parsha forbids the mixing of species - Kilayim. This applies to mixing wool and linen in clothes, to crossbreeding livestock, or even to growing many types of crop in the same field.
In a celebrated passage, the Ramban explains the mitzva in the following manner:
And the reason for kilayim is that God created the different species in the world for all the different kinds of souls, in plants and in those that have the animative soul, and he gave them the power of reproduction, that the species should exist for eternity, for as long as He should desire the existence of the world, and He ordered that that power should reproduce the species and never ever change, as is written (in Bereishit) concerning each (species), "l'mineihu" (for its species). And this is the reason that we breed animals in order to preserve the species, just as men come unto women for (the purpose of) reproduction. But one who intermixes two species changes and negates the act of creation, as though he thinks that God did not complete His world sufficiently, and he wishes to assist creation by adding creatures to it.
Amongst animals, different species do not reproduce when mixed, and even those that are naturally close, when they do reproduce, the offspring are unable to reproduce and hence, that line of animals is lost, destroyed. And for these two reasons, the act of mixing species is loathsome and nullified. And plants as well, when they are interbred, their fruit does not grow afterwards, and these two reasons explain their prohibition. (19,19)
It sounds like the Ramban is telling us that creating new combinations and species is, in some manner, destroying God's creation. Our role is to preserve God's creation and teh kinds contained therein. We are not to create new hybrids, new species.
This Ramban has always bothered me. How should we relate to this regarding technological advances? Should we abandon genetic engineering of plants? What about grapefruits, nectarines etc.? Are they not a product of crossbreeding? If we leave creation as it is, then where does it end? Where are the limits of human ingenuity? We know that the Torah allows human involvement i.e. healing or even the manufacture process of food, textiles, household items. But as for Kilayim, do these hybrids not enrich contemporary man?! Or is the Torah warning us that our genetic engineering might undermine and tamper with the very fabric of our world, altering nature to the point of endangering the very foundations of our civilisation?
In today's world we have heard how sometimes, by engineering a plant to become more robust and sturdy to certain bugs or weather conditions, that same crop then dominates over other crops thereby altering and destroying existing ecosystems. Is the Torah already warning us of this problem? The spectre of cloning, of human engineering that is become more and more real in today's scientific landscape is frightening. The warning lights of Huxley's Brave New World and the moral questions of life and death, of man as Creator, these questions go to the very roots of our humanity, our morality.
(In this post, I am of course ignoring the Ramban's Kabbalistic and spiritual overtones regarding the "soul" of plants ... see his comments later in the passge.)
So is new DNA research legitimate development, or is it a reckless foray into the unknown? In this manner, this Ramban raises precisely the conservationist vs. technology debate.
Where is room for growth and change, and where is the room for stability, constancy?
In a celebrated passage, the Ramban explains the mitzva in the following manner:
And the reason for kilayim is that God created the different species in the world for all the different kinds of souls, in plants and in those that have the animative soul, and he gave them the power of reproduction, that the species should exist for eternity, for as long as He should desire the existence of the world, and He ordered that that power should reproduce the species and never ever change, as is written (in Bereishit) concerning each (species), "l'mineihu" (for its species). And this is the reason that we breed animals in order to preserve the species, just as men come unto women for (the purpose of) reproduction. But one who intermixes two species changes and negates the act of creation, as though he thinks that God did not complete His world sufficiently, and he wishes to assist creation by adding creatures to it.
Amongst animals, different species do not reproduce when mixed, and even those that are naturally close, when they do reproduce, the offspring are unable to reproduce and hence, that line of animals is lost, destroyed. And for these two reasons, the act of mixing species is loathsome and nullified. And plants as well, when they are interbred, their fruit does not grow afterwards, and these two reasons explain their prohibition. (19,19)
It sounds like the Ramban is telling us that creating new combinations and species is, in some manner, destroying God's creation. Our role is to preserve God's creation and teh kinds contained therein. We are not to create new hybrids, new species.
This Ramban has always bothered me. How should we relate to this regarding technological advances? Should we abandon genetic engineering of plants? What about grapefruits, nectarines etc.? Are they not a product of crossbreeding? If we leave creation as it is, then where does it end? Where are the limits of human ingenuity? We know that the Torah allows human involvement i.e. healing or even the manufacture process of food, textiles, household items. But as for Kilayim, do these hybrids not enrich contemporary man?! Or is the Torah warning us that our genetic engineering might undermine and tamper with the very fabric of our world, altering nature to the point of endangering the very foundations of our civilisation?
In today's world we have heard how sometimes, by engineering a plant to become more robust and sturdy to certain bugs or weather conditions, that same crop then dominates over other crops thereby altering and destroying existing ecosystems. Is the Torah already warning us of this problem? The spectre of cloning, of human engineering that is become more and more real in today's scientific landscape is frightening. The warning lights of Huxley's Brave New World and the moral questions of life and death, of man as Creator, these questions go to the very roots of our humanity, our morality.
(In this post, I am of course ignoring the Ramban's Kabbalistic and spiritual overtones regarding the "soul" of plants ... see his comments later in the passge.)
So is new DNA research legitimate development, or is it a reckless foray into the unknown? In this manner, this Ramban raises precisely the conservationist vs. technology debate.
Where is room for growth and change, and where is the room for stability, constancy?
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
The Essential Rav Soloveitchik - Online
I was very excited to see that Tradition (link) Journal has made the classic essays of Rav Soloveitchik available (in pdf format) online.
The articles (Catharsis, The Community, Redemption Prayer and Talmud Torah, Rebbetzin of Talne, Majesty and Humility) are all compelling reading and, to my mind, essential reading for any thinking modern Jew. The link is here. In addition, there is online access to Lonely Man of Faith. All excellent.
This is part of a a new policy of modernisation and accessibility to articles online, that Tradition has been undergoing over the past year or so. Their website constatnly has interesting links and information. Worth checking regularly. Kudos to the editor Rabbi Carmy and his online editor Rabbi Shlomo Brody. Keep 'em coming!
The articles (Catharsis, The Community, Redemption Prayer and Talmud Torah, Rebbetzin of Talne, Majesty and Humility) are all compelling reading and, to my mind, essential reading for any thinking modern Jew. The link is here. In addition, there is online access to Lonely Man of Faith. All excellent.
This is part of a a new policy of modernisation and accessibility to articles online, that Tradition has been undergoing over the past year or so. Their website constatnly has interesting links and information. Worth checking regularly. Kudos to the editor Rabbi Carmy and his online editor Rabbi Shlomo Brody. Keep 'em coming!
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Thoughts on a Plane
Two reflections from aeroplanes - one positive, one negative - from my recent travels.
The first is reflected by this piece (link) regarding Pesach. One can really never know people from the outside. Sometimes, one finds such impressive characters in the most unsuspecting packages.
On the way to the U.S. I was sitting next to a chiloni family, going away for a month to the States as a "batmitzva trip" for their daughter. Dressed in sweats, they appeared as a well to do typical secular Israeli family - two kids - buying volumes of Duty Free etc. I was wondering in my mind as to whether they would even have a Seder and (rather cruelly) imagined that they were "escaping" Pesach and probably would not even see a Matza for the 7 days of Pesach.
Anyhow, they aroused my curiosity when as we took off, the mother read Tefillat Haderech with the daughter. But then, a few hours into the flight, the mother pulled out a Sefer Tehillim and read the entire section (about 20 perakim!) for that day! So I asked her whether she said Tehillim every day and why she does it.
She told me that she does try to say the Tehillim every day, and that "Zeh Tov LaNeshama!" But she added that it all started one Friday evening when her husband returned home after she had lit Shabbat candles. She asked him how he could have broken Shabbat! Anyhow, she said, since that day, they decided "lehitchazek" - to renew their Jewish intensity. Now, her husband goes to shul every Friday night and she recites Tehillim on a daily basis.
I was blown away! They slipped up once and look at the response! Look at the sense of Teshuva, self-change, of introspection and renewed commitment. How many "frum" people engage in such Cheshbon Nefesh?! It was a true example to me. And I cannot imagine that this family will NOT be celebrating Pesach. So, we have to be more generous, less judgmental, more humble, less critical.
And a second thought. I wrote once before about my thoughts about Kashruth on planes (link). This time, I would like to reflect upon minyanim on planes.
On this trip, there were an enormous number of frum (male) passengers. I would estimate maybe 80 people who wanted to daven with a minyan. It was crazy. It inconveniences other passengers significantly. All the time , people are walking back and forwards through the aisles. It irritates the flight attendants. At the initial level, I don't get, when a flight leaves at 2:30 p.m., why people cannot daven Mincha before they get on the plane. Do they have to make a minyan davka in the air? (Is that closer to God?) But I davened with a minyan for Maariv. I saw the looks on people around us. We disturbed people trying to sleep, we irritated them by going up and down the aisle, we pushed them and crowded them. we annoyed the flight attendants because there were too may of us. all in all, it was wrong. and if you think I had any kavanna pressed into a tiny space and being aware of how many people I was upsetting, then you have to be kidding.
So shacharit, I davened in my seat. I am now convinced that it should be assur to daven betzibbur on the plane. It is a Hillul Hashem. It is stealing from peoples space and convenience and quiet; they have paid a great deal of money for a flight and want the little quiet, space etc. that they have. Gatherings of 20 men just don't have a place on a little plane. I really don't think that the value of Tefilla Betzibur outweighs Gezel, Onaah, Veahahvta Lereyacha Kamocha, etc.
(I am not used to long U.S. flights so I guess I haven't encountered this so much in the past!)
I have also been lead to understand that Rav Lichtenstein, and in the Haredi world, Rav Wosner both rule that one should simply daven in their seat. (This is also the upshot of the Mishnayot in Berachot that talk about davening on a boat or a donkey!!)
Anyway, from now on, I will be davening in my seat!
Moadim Lesimcha!
The first is reflected by this piece (link) regarding Pesach. One can really never know people from the outside. Sometimes, one finds such impressive characters in the most unsuspecting packages.
On the way to the U.S. I was sitting next to a chiloni family, going away for a month to the States as a "batmitzva trip" for their daughter. Dressed in sweats, they appeared as a well to do typical secular Israeli family - two kids - buying volumes of Duty Free etc. I was wondering in my mind as to whether they would even have a Seder and (rather cruelly) imagined that they were "escaping" Pesach and probably would not even see a Matza for the 7 days of Pesach.
Anyhow, they aroused my curiosity when as we took off, the mother read Tefillat Haderech with the daughter. But then, a few hours into the flight, the mother pulled out a Sefer Tehillim and read the entire section (about 20 perakim!) for that day! So I asked her whether she said Tehillim every day and why she does it.
She told me that she does try to say the Tehillim every day, and that "Zeh Tov LaNeshama!" But she added that it all started one Friday evening when her husband returned home after she had lit Shabbat candles. She asked him how he could have broken Shabbat! Anyhow, she said, since that day, they decided "lehitchazek" - to renew their Jewish intensity. Now, her husband goes to shul every Friday night and she recites Tehillim on a daily basis.
I was blown away! They slipped up once and look at the response! Look at the sense of Teshuva, self-change, of introspection and renewed commitment. How many "frum" people engage in such Cheshbon Nefesh?! It was a true example to me. And I cannot imagine that this family will NOT be celebrating Pesach. So, we have to be more generous, less judgmental, more humble, less critical.
And a second thought. I wrote once before about my thoughts about Kashruth on planes (link). This time, I would like to reflect upon minyanim on planes.
On this trip, there were an enormous number of frum (male) passengers. I would estimate maybe 80 people who wanted to daven with a minyan. It was crazy. It inconveniences other passengers significantly. All the time , people are walking back and forwards through the aisles. It irritates the flight attendants. At the initial level, I don't get, when a flight leaves at 2:30 p.m., why people cannot daven Mincha before they get on the plane. Do they have to make a minyan davka in the air? (Is that closer to God?) But I davened with a minyan for Maariv. I saw the looks on people around us. We disturbed people trying to sleep, we irritated them by going up and down the aisle, we pushed them and crowded them. we annoyed the flight attendants because there were too may of us. all in all, it was wrong. and if you think I had any kavanna pressed into a tiny space and being aware of how many people I was upsetting, then you have to be kidding.
So shacharit, I davened in my seat. I am now convinced that it should be assur to daven betzibbur on the plane. It is a Hillul Hashem. It is stealing from peoples space and convenience and quiet; they have paid a great deal of money for a flight and want the little quiet, space etc. that they have. Gatherings of 20 men just don't have a place on a little plane. I really don't think that the value of Tefilla Betzibur outweighs Gezel, Onaah, Veahahvta Lereyacha Kamocha, etc.
(I am not used to long U.S. flights so I guess I haven't encountered this so much in the past!)
I have also been lead to understand that Rav Lichtenstein, and in the Haredi world, Rav Wosner both rule that one should simply daven in their seat. (This is also the upshot of the Mishnayot in Berachot that talk about davening on a boat or a donkey!!)
Anyway, from now on, I will be davening in my seat!
Moadim Lesimcha!
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Reading During Pesach - Israel@60
I am currently composing a post for Israel@60. So much of what I have read has been quite morose or pessimistic. I am sure that many of you have been aware of the discussion about how much money to spend on the celebrations and indeed the sense is that Israelis are reluctant to celebrate. Well - with Kassam rockets falling daily and the failure of the war last year, it IS understandable!
So here is some reading to get you in the thick of the discussion! We can take these as our starting point, and hopefully after Pesach, I will write something on the topic. In the meantime, this is good reading for during Pesach!
NYTimes article (link) / The Atlantic Monthly (link) / Jewish Action - the OU magazine (link) ... Rav Blau and Prof. Kellner both have good pieces there.
On an upbeat note, the Chief Rabbi (R. Sacks) has a new CD out in honour of Israel's 60th. It is truly excellent. It goes through the history of Israel in song and text and explains just why Israel IS so remarkable and historic. The Chief Rabbi's Office in London has been inundated with praise for the CD. Many have said it has restored their confidence and faith in Israel!
Hear the CD online here!
So here is some reading to get you in the thick of the discussion! We can take these as our starting point, and hopefully after Pesach, I will write something on the topic. In the meantime, this is good reading for during Pesach!
NYTimes article (link) / The Atlantic Monthly (link) / Jewish Action - the OU magazine (link) ... Rav Blau and Prof. Kellner both have good pieces there.
On an upbeat note, the Chief Rabbi (R. Sacks) has a new CD out in honour of Israel's 60th. It is truly excellent. It goes through the history of Israel in song and text and explains just why Israel IS so remarkable and historic. The Chief Rabbi's Office in London has been inundated with praise for the CD. Many have said it has restored their confidence and faith in Israel!
Hear the CD online here!
Empty Seats and Extra Seats at the Pesach Seder
My wife asked me today what I think of the idea of leaving an empty place at the Seder table (link) for Gilad Shalit and the other soldiers in captivity. I must say that I think about them daily and their plight must be a terrible one and just as bad for their families.
Nonetheless my instint is that this is not a "Jewish" response. I do understand the sentiment of feeling in a more tangible manner at the Festival of Freedom, that there are Jews who are not free. And yet I am racking my brains to think of any parallel in our literature to something of this vein.
(If you can think of anything - please do post in the comments section!)
After a google search I do realise that this "Empty Chair" thing has been popular for many causes (link, link , link)
My instinct was that when we wish for something good to happen, for evil and torment to stop, we do mitzvot, we pray or give tzedaka or perform greater mitzvot. Rather than leave an empty chair at the Seder, maybe we should fill a few chairs at the Sder, inviting guests.
Did Yishayahu not tell us that : "Zion will be redeemed through Justice AND ITS CAPTIVES THROUGH TZEDAKA"
Remember the Rambam's comments?
"You shall rejoice on your festival.' Even though the Torah here is describing "simcha" in terms of the Chagiga sacrifice ... the celebration of the family is included too. For children, one buys food treats, for women one buys new clothes and jewellery - all in accordance with one's budget, and men eat meat and drink wine
... and when one eats one must include the stranger, the orphan and widow and all the poor who feel neglected. One who closes his front door, eating and drinking with the family, but does not feed the poor and the outcast letting them share his drink, this is not the "celebration of mitzva" (simchat mitzva) but rather a self fulfilling indulgent celebration."
So maybe we should ADD a chair for extra guests rather than an empty place at our tables.
Comments anybody?
Nonetheless my instint is that this is not a "Jewish" response. I do understand the sentiment of feeling in a more tangible manner at the Festival of Freedom, that there are Jews who are not free. And yet I am racking my brains to think of any parallel in our literature to something of this vein.
(If you can think of anything - please do post in the comments section!)
After a google search I do realise that this "Empty Chair" thing has been popular for many causes (link, link , link)
My instinct was that when we wish for something good to happen, for evil and torment to stop, we do mitzvot, we pray or give tzedaka or perform greater mitzvot. Rather than leave an empty chair at the Seder, maybe we should fill a few chairs at the Sder, inviting guests.
Did Yishayahu not tell us that : "Zion will be redeemed through Justice AND ITS CAPTIVES THROUGH TZEDAKA"
Remember the Rambam's comments?
"You shall rejoice on your festival.' Even though the Torah here is describing "simcha" in terms of the Chagiga sacrifice ... the celebration of the family is included too. For children, one buys food treats, for women one buys new clothes and jewellery - all in accordance with one's budget, and men eat meat and drink wine
... and when one eats one must include the stranger, the orphan and widow and all the poor who feel neglected. One who closes his front door, eating and drinking with the family, but does not feed the poor and the outcast letting them share his drink, this is not the "celebration of mitzva" (simchat mitzva) but rather a self fulfilling indulgent celebration."
So maybe we should ADD a chair for extra guests rather than an empty place at our tables.
Comments anybody?
Monday, April 07, 2008
A Yeshiva Shiur!
Cute video (a little long, and could do with a more upbeat soundtrack) and I have always wondered whther anyone listned when they make recordings of my shiurim! When I recorded shiurim for the VBM's KMTT I was always rather taken aback when people told me that they had actually listened to the shiur!
Sunday, April 06, 2008
Arguing about The Hametz Law. Secular Revolution, or Judicial Meddling?
Haaretz's headline in Friday's newspaper read (link):
Secular Revolution! Hametz May Be Sold on Pesach!
Here is part of the article about the ruling:
Judge okays sale of leavened products during Passover
By Ofra Edelman
"Jerusalem Magistrate's Court Judge Tamar Bar-Asher Zaban ruled Wednesday that groceries, pizzerias and restaurants are permitted to sell chametz (leavened products, not eaten during Pesach) because they are not "public" places in which chametz is prohibited for sale by law. She struck down four indictments issued by the Jerusalem municipality against business owners for selling chametz last Passover..."the [matzot] bill, much like the law that was ultimately approved, does not prohibit the sale of chametz, but was meant only to 'prevent the display of bread, rolls and pitas in public.' That, therefore, is the purpose of the law. The law wasn't meant to interfere in the religious decree to eat matza, and wasn't meant to deal with chametz prohibitions as they are outlined in the halakha."
Now this is some pilpul! groceries and pizzerias do not DISPLAY Hametz and the law is to prevent its DISPLAY, but not consumption nor sale! Well I beg to differ.
The religious parties are already up in arms and Shas is threatening to leave the coalition. But I recommend that you read this response (link) by Rav Yuval Shero, who is, as usual, intelligent and sophisticated in locating the key problematic areas of this ruling.
To sum up, here are his points:
1. Rav Yuval disagrees in principle with the Hametz Law, stating that it is not the role of the Knesset to enforce Halakha but that Jewish practice has to emerge from within, as a matter of principle and commitment to a Jewish way of life.
2. Nonetheless, Rav Yuval is furious about the court ruling. But from an interesting angle. He says that if one wishes to revoke the Hametz Law, then the Knesset should do so. But this court ruling interepreted the Hametz Law in a revolutionary (and some would say, deliberately misleading) way to effectively subvert it and annul the law. This, says Rav Yuval is a big problem. Effectively the court has demonstrated that it imposes its political and civilian agenda upon the Knesset Laws, and once again this will reinforce the feeling of many Israelis that the Legal system in Israel is politicised and represents a secular world view. There could be nothing worse for the force of law in Israeli society!
Certainly an interesting response. However, there is no doubt that this is yet another manifestation of the growing polarity and sectarianisation of Israeli society. This will titally legitmise Hametz sale in many secular neighbourhoods, and will do nothing to draw Israelis together as a single culture with a unifying lifestyle and heritage.
Chag Kasher Vesameach!
Secular Revolution! Hametz May Be Sold on Pesach!
Here is part of the article about the ruling:
Judge okays sale of leavened products during Passover
By Ofra Edelman
"Jerusalem Magistrate's Court Judge Tamar Bar-Asher Zaban ruled Wednesday that groceries, pizzerias and restaurants are permitted to sell chametz (leavened products, not eaten during Pesach) because they are not "public" places in which chametz is prohibited for sale by law. She struck down four indictments issued by the Jerusalem municipality against business owners for selling chametz last Passover..."the [matzot] bill, much like the law that was ultimately approved, does not prohibit the sale of chametz, but was meant only to 'prevent the display of bread, rolls and pitas in public.' That, therefore, is the purpose of the law. The law wasn't meant to interfere in the religious decree to eat matza, and wasn't meant to deal with chametz prohibitions as they are outlined in the halakha."
Now this is some pilpul! groceries and pizzerias do not DISPLAY Hametz and the law is to prevent its DISPLAY, but not consumption nor sale! Well I beg to differ.
The religious parties are already up in arms and Shas is threatening to leave the coalition. But I recommend that you read this response (link) by Rav Yuval Shero, who is, as usual, intelligent and sophisticated in locating the key problematic areas of this ruling.
To sum up, here are his points:
1. Rav Yuval disagrees in principle with the Hametz Law, stating that it is not the role of the Knesset to enforce Halakha but that Jewish practice has to emerge from within, as a matter of principle and commitment to a Jewish way of life.
2. Nonetheless, Rav Yuval is furious about the court ruling. But from an interesting angle. He says that if one wishes to revoke the Hametz Law, then the Knesset should do so. But this court ruling interepreted the Hametz Law in a revolutionary (and some would say, deliberately misleading) way to effectively subvert it and annul the law. This, says Rav Yuval is a big problem. Effectively the court has demonstrated that it imposes its political and civilian agenda upon the Knesset Laws, and once again this will reinforce the feeling of many Israelis that the Legal system in Israel is politicised and represents a secular world view. There could be nothing worse for the force of law in Israeli society!
Certainly an interesting response. However, there is no doubt that this is yet another manifestation of the growing polarity and sectarianisation of Israeli society. This will titally legitmise Hametz sale in many secular neighbourhoods, and will do nothing to draw Israelis together as a single culture with a unifying lifestyle and heritage.
Chag Kasher Vesameach!
Sderot Support
This is a great article (link) about how much support Sderot is eliciting from Jewry worldwide. Worth reading.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Worrying Polls and the Suicidal Left
The NYTimes posted a piece yesterday (link) showing that according to a recent Palestinian opinion poll, 84% of Palestinians supported the Mercaz Harav attack, 64% support the ongoing bombing of sderot, and 75% believe that the Peace Talks are a waste of time. In the words of NYTimes:
A new poll shows that an overwhelming majority of Paelstinians support the attack this month on a Jewish seminary in Jerusalem that killed eight young men, most of them teenagers, an indication of the alarming level of Israeli-Palestinian tension in recent weeks.
The survey also shows unprecedented support for the shooting of rockets on Israeli towns from the Gaza Strip and for the end of the peace negotiations between Palestinian and Israeli leaders.
The pollster, Khalil Shikaki, said he was shocked because the survey, taken last week, showed greater support for violence than any other he had conducted over the past 15 years in the Palestinian areas. Never before, he said, had a majority favored an end to negotiations or the shooting of rockets at Israel.
Now, this poll is worrying in the extreme. Why? Because we are negotiating with the Palestinians. But they have no intention of making Peace with us! What is the point? It feels like a simple delusion. See this video (link) by the Hamas MP (We seek Death like They Seek Life!) or the fact that last week Abbas admitted that if the political Process failed, they would be happy to return to armed struggle!!
But there is another aspect of this poll which makes me want to point this poll out in particular. It is because Haaretz today just ignored it. Instead it published a different poll (link):
Study: Israeli Jews becoming increasingly racist toward Arabs
We are rascist? How about them wanting to kill us! Why is HaAretz consistently so down on ourselves, on Israel? We are always awful; the Palestinians, helpless victims. I like reading HaAretz. It is intelligent ... and has a great arts and culture section. But it is frequently so self-hating and so post-Zionist.
This left-wing post-Zionism and always seeing ourselves as wrong, evil, rascist etc. is worrying. It is worrying because many of the so proclaimed "intellectual elite" and media leaders in Israel are precisely these Left Wingers and they routinely delegitimise anyone who holds different political views as if they were barbarian.
Please see this excellent op-ed by Amnon Rubinstein (link), and this (link) depressing article by Daniel Gordis.
They relate to the emptiness of the Left wing secular as well. Just today on the radio I heard a presenter talking about how most secular Israelis only know that Purim is a day one gets dressed up. They don't even know the Purim story! They have never heard the Megilla!
What's to be done?
A new poll shows that an overwhelming majority of Paelstinians support the attack this month on a Jewish seminary in Jerusalem that killed eight young men, most of them teenagers, an indication of the alarming level of Israeli-Palestinian tension in recent weeks.
The survey also shows unprecedented support for the shooting of rockets on Israeli towns from the Gaza Strip and for the end of the peace negotiations between Palestinian and Israeli leaders.
The pollster, Khalil Shikaki, said he was shocked because the survey, taken last week, showed greater support for violence than any other he had conducted over the past 15 years in the Palestinian areas. Never before, he said, had a majority favored an end to negotiations or the shooting of rockets at Israel.
Now, this poll is worrying in the extreme. Why? Because we are negotiating with the Palestinians. But they have no intention of making Peace with us! What is the point? It feels like a simple delusion. See this video (link) by the Hamas MP (We seek Death like They Seek Life!) or the fact that last week Abbas admitted that if the political Process failed, they would be happy to return to armed struggle!!
But there is another aspect of this poll which makes me want to point this poll out in particular. It is because Haaretz today just ignored it. Instead it published a different poll (link):
Study: Israeli Jews becoming increasingly racist toward Arabs
We are rascist? How about them wanting to kill us! Why is HaAretz consistently so down on ourselves, on Israel? We are always awful; the Palestinians, helpless victims. I like reading HaAretz. It is intelligent ... and has a great arts and culture section. But it is frequently so self-hating and so post-Zionist.
This left-wing post-Zionism and always seeing ourselves as wrong, evil, rascist etc. is worrying. It is worrying because many of the so proclaimed "intellectual elite" and media leaders in Israel are precisely these Left Wingers and they routinely delegitimise anyone who holds different political views as if they were barbarian.
Please see this excellent op-ed by Amnon Rubinstein (link), and this (link) depressing article by Daniel Gordis.
They relate to the emptiness of the Left wing secular as well. Just today on the radio I heard a presenter talking about how most secular Israelis only know that Purim is a day one gets dressed up. They don't even know the Purim story! They have never heard the Megilla!
What's to be done?
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Our Global Shrinking World
The other day, I took my students on a class trip. As we entered the Israel Supreme Court one of the student's cellphone's rang. It was her Mom calling from the U.S. And I was struck by a certain irony.
On the one hand we have become global. Worldwide travel has expanded as once "exotic" travel locations have become rather ordinary tourist destinations. We can reach other countries and continents at the click of our mouse. We can talk from any place in the universe. One would imagine that this would expand our horizons, widen our vision, give us the opportunity to explore and experience beyond our home upbringing, the community and lifestyle in which we were raised so that we might become truly global.
But in fact, the opposite has frequently become true. Globalisation has allowed people to closet themselves inside a small comfortable compartment and not to encounter anything new, challenging, different, "other". My student in Israel doesn't necessarily talk to Israelis. She walks down Emek Refaim listening to her iPod, talking to her circle of American friends on her cellphone. She barely sees the streets around her. She spends her evenings watching American TV shows that she downloads on the internet. One can keep up with the baseball at home. Why attend an Israeli Basketball game? One can have the music that one likes; Why get to know Israeli music? One can read the NYTimes; Why read Maariv or Yediot? And this is true all the way around the world. A Muslim child in Birmingham will grow up watching Al Jazeera instead of the BBC. People walk through the streets and ignore everyone around as they communicate on their cellphones. I can pick up my email anywhere in the Globe, can take comfort in my favourite websites! I never leave home; my parents are always at the other end of the phone line!
I cannot help but feel that this is horribly regrettable. We are supposed to interact with our surroundings. To integrate, to be challenged, to watch and learn, to experience that which is different as it challenges our assumptions about what is "normal" and "right," as we can connect with people who live around us, recognizing them as people, embracing the landscape - urban, human, natural, national - around us. We are supposed to leave home and express our independence and learn how to fend for ourselves. I have always hated walkmans etc. as they cut me off from the environment around me... I resent the virtual reality that earphones thrust me into. And that is without even stepping beyond my immediate environment. Of course this is far more extreme when we travel. How can someone reside in another country without truly engaging in the most basic cultural building block – a foreign language?
I intend to write a follow up to this email with specific attention to Israel Yeshiva Year-Programs. But this is enough for now.
I'll summarise. The selfsame technology that facilitates our ability to extend our global reach as we can see further a-field mysteriously allows us to cocoon ourselves inwards in a cosy familiar environment which eclipses challenge and self-expansion. That is very unfortunate indeed.
On the one hand we have become global. Worldwide travel has expanded as once "exotic" travel locations have become rather ordinary tourist destinations. We can reach other countries and continents at the click of our mouse. We can talk from any place in the universe. One would imagine that this would expand our horizons, widen our vision, give us the opportunity to explore and experience beyond our home upbringing, the community and lifestyle in which we were raised so that we might become truly global.
But in fact, the opposite has frequently become true. Globalisation has allowed people to closet themselves inside a small comfortable compartment and not to encounter anything new, challenging, different, "other". My student in Israel doesn't necessarily talk to Israelis. She walks down Emek Refaim listening to her iPod, talking to her circle of American friends on her cellphone. She barely sees the streets around her. She spends her evenings watching American TV shows that she downloads on the internet. One can keep up with the baseball at home. Why attend an Israeli Basketball game? One can have the music that one likes; Why get to know Israeli music? One can read the NYTimes; Why read Maariv or Yediot? And this is true all the way around the world. A Muslim child in Birmingham will grow up watching Al Jazeera instead of the BBC. People walk through the streets and ignore everyone around as they communicate on their cellphones. I can pick up my email anywhere in the Globe, can take comfort in my favourite websites! I never leave home; my parents are always at the other end of the phone line!
I cannot help but feel that this is horribly regrettable. We are supposed to interact with our surroundings. To integrate, to be challenged, to watch and learn, to experience that which is different as it challenges our assumptions about what is "normal" and "right," as we can connect with people who live around us, recognizing them as people, embracing the landscape - urban, human, natural, national - around us. We are supposed to leave home and express our independence and learn how to fend for ourselves. I have always hated walkmans etc. as they cut me off from the environment around me... I resent the virtual reality that earphones thrust me into. And that is without even stepping beyond my immediate environment. Of course this is far more extreme when we travel. How can someone reside in another country without truly engaging in the most basic cultural building block – a foreign language?
I intend to write a follow up to this email with specific attention to Israel Yeshiva Year-Programs. But this is enough for now.
I'll summarise. The selfsame technology that facilitates our ability to extend our global reach as we can see further a-field mysteriously allows us to cocoon ourselves inwards in a cosy familiar environment which eclipses challenge and self-expansion. That is very unfortunate indeed.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Agnon, the Nobel Prize, and The Song of the Levites
As I often do, this is yet another post about Israeli life and why I love it here! and today, I would simply like to draw your attention to a simple banknote. Yes! the Fifty Shekel. What is so special about this piece of paper?
Well as you can see, this note has a person on it. That person is the fabulous novelist and writer, S.Y. Agnon. Agnon had a deep religious sense about him, a passionate Zionism, a wicked cynicism and a masterful pen. I don't always understand the allusions in his writing but when I figure it out, I understand how his vision was insightful, penetrating and entertaining. He beautifully fused the "old" of tradition and the "new" of Modern Hebrew, and created wonderful literature.
Well, in truth, it isn't really Agnon that I like on this banknote but the TEXT written in small on the left hand side of the banknote. It is part of Agnon's acceptance speech for his Nobel Prize. The entire speech can be found here (link) but this is the section quoted on the Banknote.
"As a result of the historic catastrophe in which Titus of Rome destroyed Jerusalem and Israel was exiled from its land, I was born in one of the cities of the Exile. But always I regarded myself as one who was born in Jerusalem. In a dream, in a vision of the night, I saw myself standing with my brother-Levites in the Holy Temple, singing with them the songs of David, King of Israel, melodies such as no ear has heard since the day our city was destroyed and its people went into exile. I suspect that the angels in charge of the Shrine of Music, fearful lest I sing in wakefulness what I had sung in dream, made me forget by day what I had sung at night; for if my brethren, the sons of my people, were to hear, they would be unable to bear their grief over the happiness they have lost. To console me for having prevented me from singing with my mouth, they enable me to compose songs in writing."
On occasion, I read this out to a class, and I feel myself becoming emotional. These are deep Jewish-Zionist sentiments. The notion that we were born in the diaspora by some "Historical catastrophe" due to the Exile that our nation is experienced is just incredible. The sense that Agnon talks about his impetus to write as a continuation of the songs of the Leviim in the Mikdash is amazing. All of this on a simple banknote.
Next time you have a spare moment , take out your 50 shekel and read this wonderful speech. It is truly a classic!
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Parshat Vayikra: The Power of Preparation
I find the opening Rashi to Sefer Vayikra very special:
1. And He called to Moses. Prior to any communication with Moses... God preceded by calling [to Moses] [קְרִיאָה] is an expression of affection, the [same] expression employed by the ministering angels [when addressing each other], as it says, “And one called (וְקָרָא) to the other…” (Isa. 6:3).
To the prophets of the nations of the world, however, He revealed Himself through expressions denoting coincidence and impurity, as the verse says, “and God happened to [meet] (וַיִּקָּר) Balaam” (Num. 23:4). - [Bemidbar Rabbah 52:5] [The expression וַיִּקָּר has the meaning of a coincidental happening, and also alludes to impurity. [See Deut. 23:11, regarding the expression מִקְרֵה לַיְלָה.]
The notion that Kedusha is created by preparation, by planning and forethought, is a cornerstone of Judaism. Contemporary society romanticises about spontaneity as if immediate, instinctive and impulsive actions are an ultimate test of Truth; a window into one's heart, a person's inner world. Hence "Love at first sight" is a virtue in the eyes of some. In fact "Love at first sight" is a very bad idea and will generally lead to a failed relationship. For the success of a love relationship is based upon many qualities but it is something tht is built painstakingly and slowly, over time.
On Friday night, we recite the phrase:
סוף מעשה במחשבה תחילה -
"The (successful) completion of a process is due to the initial thought and planning"
Before God engages Moshe in conversation, He calls out to him, allowing him to prepare and to enter the correct frame of mind, and only afterwards does He engage Moshe in conversation.
Now this Midrash works at a peshat level here too. after all, Rashi is sensitive to the fact that Parashat Vayikra opens in a very unusual manner.
א) וַיִּקְרָא אֶל מֹשֶׁה וַיְדַבֵּר יְדֹוָד אֵלָיו מֵאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לֵאמֹר:
ב) דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם
Why the double intro here? Why not a simple: ויְדַבֵּר יְדֹוָד אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר?
A global look at peshat explains it beautifully. At the end of the Book of Shemot, we read:
"Then a cloud covered the Tent of Meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the Tabernacle. And Moses was not able to enter into the Tent of Meeting, because the cloud abode on it, and the glory of the Lord filled the Tabernacle."(Exodus 40:34-36)
Moshe is waiting for God to invite him in. Why is Moses not allowed in initially? Why the wait? and ... at what point does God respond? Very simply, it is in our opening passuk:
"And [He] called to Moses, and God spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting, saying..." (Leviticus 1:1)
In other words, Moshe has to wait for God! Then, "Vayikra" - God calls him in - "VaYedaber" - he speaks to him. But why the wait? Back to Rashi... There is value in the wait. It prepares Moshe for the great rendezvous with the Almighty. God does not surprise us. He teaches us the lesson that in order to experience His presence, we need to prepare ourselves, to purify our thoughts and minds.
And indeed our tradition prepares for the entire month of Ellul before Rosh Hashanna, we prepare on Friday so that we are ready for Shabbat. What is Pesach without the planning beforehand? To enter the Temple, all manner of purification processes are necessary! If it is to be worthwhile, it needs prior planning and forethought. The Talmud tells us that the pious men of that era would sit and prepare before prayer. They planned, meditated, studied, for a considerable amount of time. Prayer also needs planning in order to make it meaningful. We cannot expect prayer to be deep and moving if we run off the street with a hundred things on our minds and then say the words. Our minds are elsewhere! Proper prayer needs serious planning.
This lesson is a difficult one in our instant, soundbite, take-out, AIM age. And yet, if we DO want to reach Kedusha, a genuine contact with God in a deep place, a sense of His presence, it needs to be preceded by קריאה - by anticipation and preparation. It takes time; it is a slow, gradual process. It is not sponaneity but rather the hard persistent work that precedes our Encounter with God, allowing us to enter into the "Tent of Meeting."
1. And He called to Moses. Prior to any communication with Moses... God preceded by calling [to Moses] [קְרִיאָה] is an expression of affection, the [same] expression employed by the ministering angels [when addressing each other], as it says, “And one called (וְקָרָא) to the other…” (Isa. 6:3).
To the prophets of the nations of the world, however, He revealed Himself through expressions denoting coincidence and impurity, as the verse says, “and God happened to [meet] (וַיִּקָּר) Balaam” (Num. 23:4). - [Bemidbar Rabbah 52:5] [The expression וַיִּקָּר has the meaning of a coincidental happening, and also alludes to impurity. [See Deut. 23:11, regarding the expression מִקְרֵה לַיְלָה.]
The notion that Kedusha is created by preparation, by planning and forethought, is a cornerstone of Judaism. Contemporary society romanticises about spontaneity as if immediate, instinctive and impulsive actions are an ultimate test of Truth; a window into one's heart, a person's inner world. Hence "Love at first sight" is a virtue in the eyes of some. In fact "Love at first sight" is a very bad idea and will generally lead to a failed relationship. For the success of a love relationship is based upon many qualities but it is something tht is built painstakingly and slowly, over time.
On Friday night, we recite the phrase:
סוף מעשה במחשבה תחילה -
"The (successful) completion of a process is due to the initial thought and planning"
Before God engages Moshe in conversation, He calls out to him, allowing him to prepare and to enter the correct frame of mind, and only afterwards does He engage Moshe in conversation.
Now this Midrash works at a peshat level here too. after all, Rashi is sensitive to the fact that Parashat Vayikra opens in a very unusual manner.
א) וַיִּקְרָא אֶל מֹשֶׁה וַיְדַבֵּר יְדֹוָד אֵלָיו מֵאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לֵאמֹר:
ב) דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם
Why the double intro here? Why not a simple: ויְדַבֵּר יְדֹוָד אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר?
A global look at peshat explains it beautifully. At the end of the Book of Shemot, we read:
"Then a cloud covered the Tent of Meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the Tabernacle. And Moses was not able to enter into the Tent of Meeting, because the cloud abode on it, and the glory of the Lord filled the Tabernacle."(Exodus 40:34-36)
Moshe is waiting for God to invite him in. Why is Moses not allowed in initially? Why the wait? and ... at what point does God respond? Very simply, it is in our opening passuk:
"And [He] called to Moses, and God spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting, saying..." (Leviticus 1:1)
In other words, Moshe has to wait for God! Then, "Vayikra" - God calls him in - "VaYedaber" - he speaks to him. But why the wait? Back to Rashi... There is value in the wait. It prepares Moshe for the great rendezvous with the Almighty. God does not surprise us. He teaches us the lesson that in order to experience His presence, we need to prepare ourselves, to purify our thoughts and minds.
And indeed our tradition prepares for the entire month of Ellul before Rosh Hashanna, we prepare on Friday so that we are ready for Shabbat. What is Pesach without the planning beforehand? To enter the Temple, all manner of purification processes are necessary! If it is to be worthwhile, it needs prior planning and forethought. The Talmud tells us that the pious men of that era would sit and prepare before prayer. They planned, meditated, studied, for a considerable amount of time. Prayer also needs planning in order to make it meaningful. We cannot expect prayer to be deep and moving if we run off the street with a hundred things on our minds and then say the words. Our minds are elsewhere! Proper prayer needs serious planning.
This lesson is a difficult one in our instant, soundbite, take-out, AIM age. And yet, if we DO want to reach Kedusha, a genuine contact with God in a deep place, a sense of His presence, it needs to be preceded by קריאה - by anticipation and preparation. It takes time; it is a slow, gradual process. It is not sponaneity but rather the hard persistent work that precedes our Encounter with God, allowing us to enter into the "Tent of Meeting."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)