Well, not really, but in the post below we learn from Haaretz that presidents must never rest their feet on the desk lest some non-Muslim in the vicinity, or perhaps a Jew 5000 miles away, take offense.
Given the irrefutable logic of the Haaretz article, how else can this photo be interpreted?
HT: TTC
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Quality Post
Rabbi Young's Blog: Eulogy for Dr. George Tiller
HT: Jew School
I dee double dare next week's host to include this in Havel Havalim...
HT: Jew School
I dee double dare next week's host to include this in Havel Havalim...
Whatever You Think of Orthodox Education...
Bray
...Do you think this could have occurred had this young lady received an Orthodox education?
Search for more information about "Donning the Fez" at 4torah.com.
...Do you think this could have occurred had this young lady received an Orthodox education?
Search for more information about "Donning the Fez" at 4torah.com.
More on Mid East Jews
A guest post by E-Fink
Do Anglo/American Jews care enough about our middle-eastern Jewish brothers and sisters?
Yesterday DovBear posted a really great Op-Ed piece from the NY Times.
In fact. before checking his blog I even emailed the article to him as I assumed he would find it interesting.
Of course, I was too late as it had already been posted!
What occurred subsequent to his posting of the article was even more interesting.
But first let's go to the NY Times column. An exiled Egyptian Jew recounts the persecution his family experienced in Egypt. His issue is that President Obama took the time to mention the suffering of Palestinians and ignored the suffering of middle-eastern Jews outside of Israel. A worthwhile read.
On Twitter DovBear posted this observation:
Egyptian Jew criticizes Obama in Times oped. TBF (to be fair), when was the last time any Ashkenazi Jew shed a tear for what happened to MidEastJews?
I responded with my experience:
R' Herman Neuberger dedicated YEARS of his life to save Iranian Jews. TBF - he not only shed tears, but years and saved thousands.
Which DovBear countered with a hilarious (and sad) take:
kol hakovod (kudos) for your yachid (individual). Average cholent fresser (eater) from flatbush doesn't know and doesnt care.
It seems to me that DovBear is right. Where is the outrage from Ashkenazic Jews? Why does it seem like we don't care?
The rest of this post is dedicated to bringing awareness to the plight of middle-eastern Jewry and an invitation for those of you may have first hand information regarding living as a Jew in Iran, Iraq, Egypt or any other middle-eastern country to contribute.
My first step was to contact a grandson of the aforementioned Rabbi Herman Neuberger.
Eli Neuberger relayed the following history of Iranian Jewry that is related to his grandfather's involvement. (I have edited his comments for brevity, grammar and overall fluidity.)
The traditional Iranian Jewish schools were run by an umbrella organization called Otzar HaTorah.In the mid 70's the Shah and his government decided to nationalise all religious schools, Jewish and Islam alike in order to curb the radical influence that was gaining traction amongst the Muslims. My Grandfather was approached by a Mr. Sasson from London, to travel to Iran to negotiate with the Government in order to minimize secular influence on religious studies.
While in Iran, my Grandfather visited the community in Shiraz. He thought that if a group of promising Iranians would come to learn at the Ner Israel Rabbinical College (NIRC), where he was the Dean. Then they could return to Iran and become the Klei Kodesh (spiritual leaders) that could lead the community.The first group arrived in 1977.
Meanwhile in 1979 the Shah was overthrown by radical Islamists.The students in NIRC could not expect to return home. At the time, many Iranian Jews were able to leave Iran and when they arrived in Austria, Italy etc. they were granted refugee status and were able to continue on to the US.
The situation became far more dire in 1980 when the Iran-Iraq war started.Boys as young as 12-13 were sent to the front lines to be used as mine sweepers. Many Jews were smuggled to Turkey or Pakistan. These trips were fraught with danger, even after they were able to leave Iran. My grandfather was instrumental in assuring good treatment in Turkey and safe passage to Europe. He made many trips to the corridors of power in DC to speak to Congressman,Senators and Diplomats to be able to insure this continuing clandestine exodus.
Many of the boys that made the harrowing trip came to study Torah in NIRC.
All this good work was done behind the scenes and with very little fanfare.
According to the never accurate Wikipedia, Rabbi Neuberger was instrumental in saving 60,000 Iranian Jews.
I contacted another friend of mine, Natan Davoodi. His family is Iranian (in LA they are called Persian).
He told me that as far as he knows the non-Jews only tolerate the Jews of they can exploited for the benefit of the non-Jew. That doesn't sound very good.
I would like to hear from you if you know of any injsutice to Jewish people in middle-eastern countries (outside of Israel). Just telling those stories will get the ball rolling.
We are all brothers and sisters and there is no excuse for ignoring their plight.
Do Anglo/American Jews care enough about our middle-eastern Jewish brothers and sisters?
Yesterday DovBear posted a really great Op-Ed piece from the NY Times.
In fact. before checking his blog I even emailed the article to him as I assumed he would find it interesting.
Of course, I was too late as it had already been posted!
What occurred subsequent to his posting of the article was even more interesting.
But first let's go to the NY Times column. An exiled Egyptian Jew recounts the persecution his family experienced in Egypt. His issue is that President Obama took the time to mention the suffering of Palestinians and ignored the suffering of middle-eastern Jews outside of Israel. A worthwhile read.
On Twitter DovBear posted this observation:
Egyptian Jew criticizes Obama in Times oped. TBF (to be fair), when was the last time any Ashkenazi Jew shed a tear for what happened to MidEastJews?
I responded with my experience:
R' Herman Neuberger dedicated YEARS of his life to save Iranian Jews. TBF - he not only shed tears, but years and saved thousands.
Which DovBear countered with a hilarious (and sad) take:
kol hakovod (kudos) for your yachid (individual). Average cholent fresser (eater) from flatbush doesn't know and doesnt care.
It seems to me that DovBear is right. Where is the outrage from Ashkenazic Jews? Why does it seem like we don't care?
The rest of this post is dedicated to bringing awareness to the plight of middle-eastern Jewry and an invitation for those of you may have first hand information regarding living as a Jew in Iran, Iraq, Egypt or any other middle-eastern country to contribute.
My first step was to contact a grandson of the aforementioned Rabbi Herman Neuberger.
Eli Neuberger relayed the following history of Iranian Jewry that is related to his grandfather's involvement. (I have edited his comments for brevity, grammar and overall fluidity.)
The traditional Iranian Jewish schools were run by an umbrella organization called Otzar HaTorah.In the mid 70's the Shah and his government decided to nationalise all religious schools, Jewish and Islam alike in order to curb the radical influence that was gaining traction amongst the Muslims. My Grandfather was approached by a Mr. Sasson from London, to travel to Iran to negotiate with the Government in order to minimize secular influence on religious studies.
While in Iran, my Grandfather visited the community in Shiraz. He thought that if a group of promising Iranians would come to learn at the Ner Israel Rabbinical College (NIRC), where he was the Dean. Then they could return to Iran and become the Klei Kodesh (spiritual leaders) that could lead the community.The first group arrived in 1977.
Meanwhile in 1979 the Shah was overthrown by radical Islamists.The students in NIRC could not expect to return home. At the time, many Iranian Jews were able to leave Iran and when they arrived in Austria, Italy etc. they were granted refugee status and were able to continue on to the US.
The situation became far more dire in 1980 when the Iran-Iraq war started.Boys as young as 12-13 were sent to the front lines to be used as mine sweepers. Many Jews were smuggled to Turkey or Pakistan. These trips were fraught with danger, even after they were able to leave Iran. My grandfather was instrumental in assuring good treatment in Turkey and safe passage to Europe. He made many trips to the corridors of power in DC to speak to Congressman,Senators and Diplomats to be able to insure this continuing clandestine exodus.
Many of the boys that made the harrowing trip came to study Torah in NIRC.
All this good work was done behind the scenes and with very little fanfare.
According to the never accurate Wikipedia, Rabbi Neuberger was instrumental in saving 60,000 Iranian Jews.
I contacted another friend of mine, Natan Davoodi. His family is Iranian (in LA they are called Persian).
He told me that as far as he knows the non-Jews only tolerate the Jews of they can exploited for the benefit of the non-Jew. That doesn't sound very good.
I would like to hear from you if you know of any injsutice to Jewish people in middle-eastern countries (outside of Israel). Just telling those stories will get the ball rolling.
We are all brothers and sisters and there is no excuse for ignoring their plight.
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Values and ethics and morals, oh my!
A guest post by DYS
What is morality? And what are ethics? Or values?
In my discussions with Charedim, (and some Centrist Orthodox and even Modern Orthodox) both online & offline, we often come to an impasse when I realize that one of the basic assumptions they’ve made is that I, as a kipa wearing Jew, take all my cues for morality, ethics, and values from the Torah, and that there can be no other standard.
Even if one accepts that premise, there are far reaching disagreements on what the Torah has to say when it comes to value judgments. But leaving that aside, in any case I reject the basic premise. I see no reason that the Torah should be the only arbiter of my moral being. I may be a Jew, but that’s not the only thing I am. I’m also a human being.
When the Charedi I’m talking to realizes that I’m not on the same wavelength when it comes to this issue, he will often engage in circular arguments:
“How can you not see the Torah as the final word on every issue? The Torah says you’re supposed to see it that way, and therefore, as a Jew, that’s what you must do!”
Aha – that’s one of the very (supposed) “Torah values” that I reject, that the Torah is my only moral guide. So that argument holds no water with me.
I am a committed Jew. I keep kashrut & shabbat, daven, study Torah, wear a kipa, etc. But that’s not all I am. I’m also a human being who attended college, reads voraciously, has friends who have all sorts of beliefs and lifestyles, and is affected by contemporary western moral values.
An example: recently I was talking to my mother, and she referred to a relative who “nebach”, married a non-Jew. As is her wont, she said this in a low voice as if mourning a tragedy. I used to think the same way. Anyone who intermarried was destroying the Jewish people, and voluntarily doing Hitler’s work.
But as an adult, I got to know people who were intermarried. And you know what? Most of them are happy, raising well adjusted kids, and leading a meaningful lifestyle in their own way. Many of them even raise their kids with a strong Jewish identity, with the non-Jewish spouse attending synagogue along with the rest of the family.
And so I realized, why is it my place to judge these people and say that they’ve taken the wrong path in life? Am I so arrogant that I know the one and only true path and that they’ve abandoned their only route to some heavenly salvation? Why not just be happy for them that they’ve found happiness, something that’s hard to find in this world for so many people?
So what do I do with the halachic opposition to intermarriage?
One possible solution is to dig down deep into the mists of early Judaism and argue that the Torah doesn’t really prohibit intermarriage and that it’s all a Rabbinic innovation. And there may be some truth to that. But I’m a firm believe in Judaism as an evolving religion. And as such, it would be disingenuous to claim that traditional Judaism hasn’t had a major problem with intermarriage for at least 1 ½ millennia. And in any case, if I use that sort of argument, I’m boxing myself in and making it a requirement to find some sort of historical-religious justification for any personal moral value I hold that on the surface disagrees with tradition.
Instead, I prefer to concede that, yes, Rabbinic Judaism prohibits marriage to a non-Jew who hasn’t sincerely converted. But that’s irrelevant. I’m not intermarried and so it’s not a personal issue. And the Torah’s opposition? It is what it is. But I, as a human being with values that are a result of my almost 40 years of life experience, see nothing wrong with it for other people who’ve chosen that path. I don’t uphold it as an ideal, but once they’ve chosen such a romantic partnership, let them be happy! So I’ve gone to weddings and danced for Jewish brides and non-Jewish grooms and vice versa, and celebrated their unions. The Torah may say it’s wrong, but so what? Not every one of my values has to be from the Torah.
I have a similar attitude towards homosexuality. Admittedly, I’m not gay, so I can’t really understand the struggle that a gay Jew who was raised Orthodox must go through. Still, I can’t deny that the Torah calls homosexuality “toevah”, often translated as “abomination.” But when it comes to my gay friends? As long as they’re happy, I’m happy for them.
A few years ago, a co-worker to who I was close died young. Her funeral was held in a catholic church. I felt no need to ask a Rav whether I was allowed to enter for the funeral, because the answer would have been irrelevant. It was far more important to attend her funeral and be there to say goodbye in the manner her family chose.
It seems to me that giving over all of one’s decisions to what the Torah says (or some Rav’s interpretation of what it says) makes one a poorer human being. Struggling with ethical dilemmas and thinking for oneself, based on the richness of one’s own experience is part of life. And I think even most Charedim absorb ethical ideals from contemporary notions even as they deny it. For example, the Torah talks about slavery (yes, yes, I know the apologetics, it’s indentured servitude, not much better), but do any Charedim believe in slavery? Wouldn’t most recoil at the idea? We all get our morals, values, and ethics from various sources, often unconsciously.
So where does your value system come from?
Search for more information about morality and ethics at 4torah.com.
What is morality? And what are ethics? Or values?
In my discussions with Charedim, (and some Centrist Orthodox and even Modern Orthodox) both online & offline, we often come to an impasse when I realize that one of the basic assumptions they’ve made is that I, as a kipa wearing Jew, take all my cues for morality, ethics, and values from the Torah, and that there can be no other standard.
Even if one accepts that premise, there are far reaching disagreements on what the Torah has to say when it comes to value judgments. But leaving that aside, in any case I reject the basic premise. I see no reason that the Torah should be the only arbiter of my moral being. I may be a Jew, but that’s not the only thing I am. I’m also a human being.
When the Charedi I’m talking to realizes that I’m not on the same wavelength when it comes to this issue, he will often engage in circular arguments:
“How can you not see the Torah as the final word on every issue? The Torah says you’re supposed to see it that way, and therefore, as a Jew, that’s what you must do!”
Aha – that’s one of the very (supposed) “Torah values” that I reject, that the Torah is my only moral guide. So that argument holds no water with me.
I am a committed Jew. I keep kashrut & shabbat, daven, study Torah, wear a kipa, etc. But that’s not all I am. I’m also a human being who attended college, reads voraciously, has friends who have all sorts of beliefs and lifestyles, and is affected by contemporary western moral values.
An example: recently I was talking to my mother, and she referred to a relative who “nebach”, married a non-Jew. As is her wont, she said this in a low voice as if mourning a tragedy. I used to think the same way. Anyone who intermarried was destroying the Jewish people, and voluntarily doing Hitler’s work.
But as an adult, I got to know people who were intermarried. And you know what? Most of them are happy, raising well adjusted kids, and leading a meaningful lifestyle in their own way. Many of them even raise their kids with a strong Jewish identity, with the non-Jewish spouse attending synagogue along with the rest of the family.
And so I realized, why is it my place to judge these people and say that they’ve taken the wrong path in life? Am I so arrogant that I know the one and only true path and that they’ve abandoned their only route to some heavenly salvation? Why not just be happy for them that they’ve found happiness, something that’s hard to find in this world for so many people?
So what do I do with the halachic opposition to intermarriage?
One possible solution is to dig down deep into the mists of early Judaism and argue that the Torah doesn’t really prohibit intermarriage and that it’s all a Rabbinic innovation. And there may be some truth to that. But I’m a firm believe in Judaism as an evolving religion. And as such, it would be disingenuous to claim that traditional Judaism hasn’t had a major problem with intermarriage for at least 1 ½ millennia. And in any case, if I use that sort of argument, I’m boxing myself in and making it a requirement to find some sort of historical-religious justification for any personal moral value I hold that on the surface disagrees with tradition.
Instead, I prefer to concede that, yes, Rabbinic Judaism prohibits marriage to a non-Jew who hasn’t sincerely converted. But that’s irrelevant. I’m not intermarried and so it’s not a personal issue. And the Torah’s opposition? It is what it is. But I, as a human being with values that are a result of my almost 40 years of life experience, see nothing wrong with it for other people who’ve chosen that path. I don’t uphold it as an ideal, but once they’ve chosen such a romantic partnership, let them be happy! So I’ve gone to weddings and danced for Jewish brides and non-Jewish grooms and vice versa, and celebrated their unions. The Torah may say it’s wrong, but so what? Not every one of my values has to be from the Torah.
I have a similar attitude towards homosexuality. Admittedly, I’m not gay, so I can’t really understand the struggle that a gay Jew who was raised Orthodox must go through. Still, I can’t deny that the Torah calls homosexuality “toevah”, often translated as “abomination.” But when it comes to my gay friends? As long as they’re happy, I’m happy for them.
A few years ago, a co-worker to who I was close died young. Her funeral was held in a catholic church. I felt no need to ask a Rav whether I was allowed to enter for the funeral, because the answer would have been irrelevant. It was far more important to attend her funeral and be there to say goodbye in the manner her family chose.
It seems to me that giving over all of one’s decisions to what the Torah says (or some Rav’s interpretation of what it says) makes one a poorer human being. Struggling with ethical dilemmas and thinking for oneself, based on the richness of one’s own experience is part of life. And I think even most Charedim absorb ethical ideals from contemporary notions even as they deny it. For example, the Torah talks about slavery (yes, yes, I know the apologetics, it’s indentured servitude, not much better), but do any Charedim believe in slavery? Wouldn’t most recoil at the idea? We all get our morals, values, and ethics from various sources, often unconsciously.
So where does your value system come from?
Search for more information about morality and ethics at 4torah.com.
Were the Amoraim Orthodox?
I do between a daf and three every week, and one thing that always catches my eye is the seemingly liberal orientation of the Amoraim. With the help of God, I'm going to start documenting some examples, not because I'm trying to prove any point, but because I expect good conversations will result.
Here's something from last Shabbos's learning:
The Mishna (Sota 41a) says the king read Hakhel on "Shmini" but the amoraim are astounded. Why? Shimi suggests the eighth day, but what the mishna means is the eighth year. So, with very little fanfare or chest-beating the amoraim amended the Mishna to read shminis. Here's the passage from the Babylonian Talmud:
Can it enter your mind [that the Mishnah means] shmini [which is masculine and suggests the eighth day of Sukkos]— Instead read it shminis [which is feminine and suggests the eighth year]
The implication is that there's some problem in the received text, a problem the amoraim don't hesitate to correct. Rather then (1) complain about the goyish and therefore unrealiable rules of grammar, or (2) insist that amending the text reduces the Tanaim to the status of primitives too stupid to notice an obvious error in their own text, or (3) announce that only a havadala oblivious moron would trust his own ability to read and understand Hebrew words, the amoraim (4) unceremoniously acknowledged the problem, and fixed it.
A 2ist century Orthodox Jew would not do this. He would say the mesorah is certainly correct, in all its minutia, and the problem is one of our own understanding, As you can see, this isn't how the Amoraim approached the text. Their default positions seems to be that the inherited tradition contained errors. I don't see how this can possibly be construed as an "Orthodox" approach to the mesorah, but perhaps I'm wrong. If you're aware of someone who sees this passage differently from how it appeared to me, please post a comment. I make no claims to omniscience or infallibility here.
Here's something from last Shabbos's learning:
The Mishna (Sota 41a) says the king read Hakhel on "Shmini" but the amoraim are astounded. Why? Shimi suggests the eighth day, but what the mishna means is the eighth year. So, with very little fanfare or chest-beating the amoraim amended the Mishna to read shminis. Here's the passage from the Babylonian Talmud:
Can it enter your mind [that the Mishnah means] shmini [which is masculine and suggests the eighth day of Sukkos]— Instead read it shminis [which is feminine and suggests the eighth year]
The implication is that there's some problem in the received text, a problem the amoraim don't hesitate to correct. Rather then (1) complain about the goyish and therefore unrealiable rules of grammar, or (2) insist that amending the text reduces the Tanaim to the status of primitives too stupid to notice an obvious error in their own text, or (3) announce that only a havadala oblivious moron would trust his own ability to read and understand Hebrew words, the amoraim (4) unceremoniously acknowledged the problem, and fixed it.
A 2ist century Orthodox Jew would not do this. He would say the mesorah is certainly correct, in all its minutia, and the problem is one of our own understanding, As you can see, this isn't how the Amoraim approached the text. Their default positions seems to be that the inherited tradition contained errors. I don't see how this can possibly be construed as an "Orthodox" approach to the mesorah, but perhaps I'm wrong. If you're aware of someone who sees this passage differently from how it appeared to me, please post a comment. I make no claims to omniscience or infallibility here.
A criticism of Obama's speech DB "two million percent" agrees with
Posted by TikunOlam on DovBear's behalf (apparently he has better things to do today)
For those of you who thought DB was blinded by the halo that hovers above President Obama's head. . .here is a NYT article that DB sent me this morning, a criticism of Obama's speech written by Egyptian Jew, Professor Andre Aciman. DB said that he "two million percent" agrees with what Prof. Aciman has to say.
Excerpt:
The president never said a word about me. Or, for that matter, about any of the other 800,000 or so Jews born in the Middle East who fled the Arab and Muslim world or who were summarily expelled for being Jewish in the 20th century. With all his references to the history of Islam and to its (questionable) “proud tradition of tolerance” of other faiths, Mr. Obama never said anything about those Jews whose ancestors had been living in Arab lands long before the advent of Islam but were its first victims once rampant nationalism swept over the Arab world.
Nor did he bother to mention that with this flight and expulsion, Jewish assets were — let’s call it by its proper name — looted. Mr. Obama never mentioned the belongings I still own in Egypt and will never recover. My mother’s house, my father’s factory, our life in Egypt, our friends, our books, our cars, my bicycle. We are, each one of us, not just defined by the arrangement of protein molecules in our cells, but also by the things we call our own. Take away our things and something in us dies. Losing his wealth, his home, the life he had built, killed my father. He didn’t die right away; it took four decades of exile to finish him off.
For the article in its entirety click here.
UPDATE
Fred makes a killer point: Why blame Obama [for neglecting to mention this] when Ashkenazi Jews could give two hoots about it, themselves? When was the last time any pearly white Polish or Hungarian Jew shed a tear for the crime committed against his Arab-Jewish brothers? The Brays of the world hardly consider them Jews.
Search for more information about Jewish expulsion from Arab countries at 4torah.com.
For those of you who thought DB was blinded by the halo that hovers above President Obama's head. . .here is a NYT article that DB sent me this morning, a criticism of Obama's speech written by Egyptian Jew, Professor Andre Aciman. DB said that he "two million percent" agrees with what Prof. Aciman has to say.
Excerpt:
The president never said a word about me. Or, for that matter, about any of the other 800,000 or so Jews born in the Middle East who fled the Arab and Muslim world or who were summarily expelled for being Jewish in the 20th century. With all his references to the history of Islam and to its (questionable) “proud tradition of tolerance” of other faiths, Mr. Obama never said anything about those Jews whose ancestors had been living in Arab lands long before the advent of Islam but were its first victims once rampant nationalism swept over the Arab world.
Nor did he bother to mention that with this flight and expulsion, Jewish assets were — let’s call it by its proper name — looted. Mr. Obama never mentioned the belongings I still own in Egypt and will never recover. My mother’s house, my father’s factory, our life in Egypt, our friends, our books, our cars, my bicycle. We are, each one of us, not just defined by the arrangement of protein molecules in our cells, but also by the things we call our own. Take away our things and something in us dies. Losing his wealth, his home, the life he had built, killed my father. He didn’t die right away; it took four decades of exile to finish him off.
For the article in its entirety click here.
UPDATE
Fred makes a killer point: Why blame Obama [for neglecting to mention this] when Ashkenazi Jews could give two hoots about it, themselves? When was the last time any pearly white Polish or Hungarian Jew shed a tear for the crime committed against his Arab-Jewish brothers? The Brays of the world hardly consider them Jews.
Search for more information about Jewish expulsion from Arab countries at 4torah.com.
Sammy Davis' Menorah - No Sale
Posted by TikunOlam on DovBear's behalf (he is too busy for us all today)
From the New York Times
The silver menorah branches out from its stem at hard right angles, and the plastic rubies glued onto the base add more kitsch than glitz. But the auctioneer, Jonathan Greenstein, owner of J. Greenstein & Company, said the anonymous seller was hoping for bids as high as $15,000 — when similar menorahs would ordinarily go for closer to $800.
That’s because it once belonged to the entertainer Sammy Davis Jr.
“It’s a tremendous conversation piece,” Mr. Greenstein said.
Conversation starter it may have been, but money magnet it was not. No bid met the $9,000 reserve, with the highest bid coming in at $8,000.
To see the full NYT article click here.
Search for more information about Sammy Davis Jr. at 4torah.com.
From the New York Times
The silver menorah branches out from its stem at hard right angles, and the plastic rubies glued onto the base add more kitsch than glitz. But the auctioneer, Jonathan Greenstein, owner of J. Greenstein & Company, said the anonymous seller was hoping for bids as high as $15,000 — when similar menorahs would ordinarily go for closer to $800.
That’s because it once belonged to the entertainer Sammy Davis Jr.
“It’s a tremendous conversation piece,” Mr. Greenstein said.
Conversation starter it may have been, but money magnet it was not. No bid met the $9,000 reserve, with the highest bid coming in at $8,000.
To see the full NYT article click here.
Search for more information about Sammy Davis Jr. at 4torah.com.
Monday, June 08, 2009
More on the Mishlei Mesorah
What follows are some of the arguments and refutations contained on the comment thread that developed beneath this post about Mishlei's authorship.
Truth: Dozens of Rishonim and Achronim have said explicitly that Chazal were, at times, wrong about various matters, and they have gave us explicit permission to follow our brains and the evidence on any question that doesn't touch halacha. Though some pretend that this idea is contained only in a few obscure sources, or based on questionable readings, the truth is that its a widespread opinion and one that is stated many times and in unambiguous language.
(2) Claim: The academics who give Mishlei a late date are using a "non-Orthodox mode of thought" which poisons their conclusions.
Counter argument: Any statement about the attitudes or outlooks of the academics is purely speculative. We have no information about what these particular academics thought about the Sages or the Mesorah. We know nothing concrete about their "mode of thought." Moreover, whatever their "mode of thought" may have been is entirely immaterial to the quality of their evidence and the strength of their arguments. To suggest that evidence can't be considered because it was accumulated by people who are in the grips of the wrong "mode of thought" is an ad hom argument, akin to rejecting Euclid's math on the basis of his paganism.
(3) Claim: To say that the anyone other than Solomon wrote Misheli is to say that Chazal were incompetent at collecting and assessing information.
Counterargument: No it doesn't. To say that anyone other than Solomon wrote Misheli is to say that this one, lone, solitary claim was never investigated properly, and not because Chazal were mentally deficient, but because the necessary tools were not available to them.
(4) Claim: To say that the anyone other than Solomon wrote Misheli is to undermine the authority of Chazal
Counterargument: It doesn't follow from the fact that Chazal may have been wrong about one, solitary, thing that they were also wrong about everything. Besides, the Talmud Bavli overflows with statments made by Tanaim and Amoraim that were, at some later point, determined by other Tanaim and Amoraim to be untrue, or inaccurately transmitted. That fact that Chazal frequently make corrections to the tradition they inherited, strongly suggests that shortcomings in the accuracy of the Mesorah were recognized by Chazal themselves. [One of perhaps hundreds, if not thousands, of examples] Why should we deny what they admit?
(5) Claim: To say that anyone but Solomon wrote Mishlei is to undermine the Mesorah
Counterargument: To the best of my knowledge, only one lonely brysah makes this claim. There's no reason to think that this opinion was widely accepted by other Sages, and there is no evidence at all that this opinion was ever considered an essential, infallible part of the Mesorah. And, even if we stipulate that it was, evidence-based criticism of one small, tiny, little speck of the tradition is not the same as wholesale denigration of all of it.
(6) Claim: To say that anyone other than Solomon wrote Mishlei is to undermine the Oral law stretching back to Sinai.
Counterargument: Solomon lived several hundred years after Sinai, thus any tradition about his activities can't possibly be part of the original, from-Sinai Mesorah. (quoting Anon:) "A tradition about the authorship of a post Sinai book is [therefore] categorically different from a tradition about halacha that does go back to Sinai. So, how can you claim that rejection of a claim from one category of tradition is identical to the rejection of the whole of an entirely different category of tradition?"
What do I believe? Proverbs is an anthology of different Wisdom collections, assembled over time by various authors and editors. Some specific ideas, if not the text of some specific Proverbs may have originated with Solomon or his court, but it seems most unlikely the whole entire book can be attributed to him.
Sunday, June 07, 2009
Geek of the Week
Has to be Gordon Browne, the British PM, for calling Omaha Beach "Obama Beach" at D-Day Ceremonies this weekend.
A new havel havalim is up
... in which my point about Obama's speech is misrepresented
I don't know what the future holds, and I concede its possible the president's conciliatory approach might fail. What's inarguable, however, is that I was right about the speech, and RW Jews like Spira were wrong. Obama didn't announce a new peace plan, he didn't call for the division of Jerusalem, and he did nothing to diminish or alter the United State's special relationship with Israel. Spira, and RW Jews like him, all but promised these things would occur. They did not. And if Spira and RW Jews like him had any guts they would admit it. (like Jameel did)
I don't know what the future holds, and I concede its possible the president's conciliatory approach might fail. What's inarguable, however, is that I was right about the speech, and RW Jews like Spira were wrong. Obama didn't announce a new peace plan, he didn't call for the division of Jerusalem, and he did nothing to diminish or alter the United State's special relationship with Israel. Spira, and RW Jews like him, all but promised these things would occur. They did not. And if Spira and RW Jews like him had any guts they would admit it. (like Jameel did)
Friday, June 05, 2009
The Disaster that May have Saved D-Day
A guest post by JS:
In honor of the upcoming 65th anniversary of the storming of Normandy, an interesting article.
Search for more information about D-Day at 4torah.com.
In honor of the upcoming 65th anniversary of the storming of Normandy, an interesting article.
Search for more information about D-Day at 4torah.com.
Obama at Buchanwald: Rebukes Ahmadinejad Again
June 5, 2009
BERLIN (JTA) -- President Barack Obama visited the Buchenwald concentration camp site, calling it "the ultimate rebuke" to Holocaust deniers.
Obama joined German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Elie Wiesel, the Holocaust memoirist who was a Buchenwald inmate, on the tour on Friday, a day after Obama called on the Muslim world to reject Holocaust denial.
"To this day, there are those who insist that the Holocaust never happened," Obama said at a news conference at the gates of the camp. Such statements are "ignorant, baseless and hateful."
For more than an hour, Obama and Merkel walked the grounds of Buchenwald. Out of sight of cameras, they entered the crematorium building where camp victims were turned to ash. They placed white roses, a symbol of German resistance, at several sites.
Obama said he had wanted to visit this particular camp because his great-uncle, Charles Payne, was among the U.S. soldiers in Infantry Division 89 who liberated the Buchenwald sub-camp of Ohrdruf in early April 1945. Ohrdruf was the first camp liberated by American soldiers. The gruesome sights of burned victims haunted his uncle for a long time, Obama said.
"It is understandable that someone who witnessed what had taken place here would be in a state of shock," he said.
Wiesel, a Nobel Peace laureate whose father died at Buchenwald, said, "Memory must bring people together rather than set them apart."
After visiting Germany, Obama was scheduled to fly to France and take part in ceremonies marking the 65th anniversary of the Allied invasion of Normandy.
In an interview with NBC, Obama expressed frustration with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who questions the story of the Holocaust.
“He should make his own visit," Obama said in Germany. "I have no patience for people who would deny history. And the history of the Holocaust is not something speculative."
Should he visit Germany, Ahmadinejad could face arrest as a Holocaust denier.
BERLIN (JTA) -- President Barack Obama visited the Buchenwald concentration camp site, calling it "the ultimate rebuke" to Holocaust deniers.
Obama joined German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Elie Wiesel, the Holocaust memoirist who was a Buchenwald inmate, on the tour on Friday, a day after Obama called on the Muslim world to reject Holocaust denial.
"To this day, there are those who insist that the Holocaust never happened," Obama said at a news conference at the gates of the camp. Such statements are "ignorant, baseless and hateful."
For more than an hour, Obama and Merkel walked the grounds of Buchenwald. Out of sight of cameras, they entered the crematorium building where camp victims were turned to ash. They placed white roses, a symbol of German resistance, at several sites.
Obama said he had wanted to visit this particular camp because his great-uncle, Charles Payne, was among the U.S. soldiers in Infantry Division 89 who liberated the Buchenwald sub-camp of Ohrdruf in early April 1945. Ohrdruf was the first camp liberated by American soldiers. The gruesome sights of burned victims haunted his uncle for a long time, Obama said.
"It is understandable that someone who witnessed what had taken place here would be in a state of shock," he said.
Wiesel, a Nobel Peace laureate whose father died at Buchenwald, said, "Memory must bring people together rather than set them apart."
After visiting Germany, Obama was scheduled to fly to France and take part in ceremonies marking the 65th anniversary of the Allied invasion of Normandy.
In an interview with NBC, Obama expressed frustration with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who questions the story of the Holocaust.
“He should make his own visit," Obama said in Germany. "I have no patience for people who would deny history. And the history of the Holocaust is not something speculative."
Should he visit Germany, Ahmadinejad could face arrest as a Holocaust denier.
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Cairo Quote of the Day
Mobius via Twitter:
OK [RWers] who said Obama was going to give away Jerusalem today in Cairo, time for retractions, apologies, and shutting the f** up
OK [RWers] who said Obama was going to give away Jerusalem today in Cairo, time for retractions, apologies, and shutting the f** up
Dear RW Jews: YOU WERE WRONG
In the run up to the speech, RW Jews made all kinds of assertions about the content of Obama's speech. For example:
Today honest RW Jews are heaving sighs of relief, and because I know JoeSettler and Jameel are honest RW Jews, I'm certain they are already hard at work on posts that set the record straight and offer reassurances to their more nervous readers. Spira of YWN, on the other hand, is a dishonest RW Jew so I expect that before the morning is out, he'll have posted more of his inaccurate, anti-Obama spinning.
Obama in Cairo: Reaffirms US Bond with Israel, Strongly Criticizes Arabs and Holocaust Deniers, Does Not Propose Anything Beyond Bush's Road Map
Obama in Cairo this morning:
The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.
America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.
Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed - more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction - or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews - is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve.
On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people - Muslims and Christians - have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations - large and small - that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.
For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers - for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel's founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.
That is in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest, and the world's interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the Road Map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them - and all of us - to live up to our responsibilities.
Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered.
Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist.
At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.
Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.
Finally, the Arab States must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognize Israel's legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past.
America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true.
Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer.
The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.
America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.
Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed - more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction - or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews - is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve.
On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people - Muslims and Christians - have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations - large and small - that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.
For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers - for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel's founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.
That is in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest, and the world's interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the Road Map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them - and all of us - to live up to our responsibilities.
Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered.
Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist.
At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.
Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.
Finally, the Arab States must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognize Israel's legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past.
America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true.
Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)