A Thought on Parshat Balak

At the end of the parsha is the story of Zimri, Kozbi (not to be confused with Bill). Rashi describes the situation as follows (paraphrased): Zimri was... doing the deed with Kozbi... right in front of the Ohel Mo'ed, and asked Moshe, "Is this allowed, because if you say no, then who gave you permission to marry your wife? (She was a Midianite.)

In other words, this wasn't so much an act of inappropriate sexual congress (which it was as well), as an act of sedition against Moshe. It was an attempt to bring Moshe down a peg. A "What makes YOU so high-and-mighty?"

Now I find this to be curious, because according to Rashi in the story of Korach's rebellion, there was a similar attack. Rashi there says that Korach also attacked Moshe "intellectually". I'm not going to go into that attack - too complicated. (In fact, my personal thought has always been that his attack there was a bit silly, but be that as it may...)

So here's my question, and I don't yet have an adequate answer for it: Korach had a motive. He felt that Moshe was a nepotist, dealing out choice positions to his own family-line, because he could. Korach, who was Moshe's first-cousin, felt that he had just as much a claim as anyone else to positions of power and honor, and that he had seniority to boot. So right or wrong, Korach had a motive.

But what was Zimri's motive?

Being Noticed

Last Shabbat, we held a Seudat Hoda'a - a "Meal of Thanksgiving" (not to be confused with the American tradition held in November, but of similar original intent) - for the bad car accident that happened last year. I could have sworn I wrote a piece on it here, but I can't seem to find it...

Alright - the brief version. Many of the boys of our Boy Scout troop (Troop 1299) went to Camp Broadcreek for a week of Summer Camp last year (as every year.) On the way back, at around 5:30 PM on Friday, July 2, they were in a bad accident. Thank God, everyone survived, and came away with no majorly persistent health issues (although the driver had to be flown to Shock Trauma).

So this year, our son asked us to make the Kiddush, in commemoration, and I had to find something to say. This is the main point of what I said:

In Parshat Chukat, we are told, (Numbers 20:1) "וַיָּבֹאוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כָּל הָעֵדָה מִדְבַּר צִן בַּחֹדֶשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן וַיֵּשֶׁב הָעָם בְּקָדֵשׁ וַתָּמָת שָׁם מִרְיָם וַתִּקָּבֵר שָׁם" - "And the entire congregation of the children of Israel arrived at the desert of Zin in the first month, and the people settled in Kadesh. And Miriam died there and was buried there." And then the very next verse says, "וְלֹא הָיָה מַיִם לָעֵדָה וַיִּקָּהֲלוּ עַל מֹשֶׁה וְעַל אַהֲרֹן" - "And the congregation had no water; so they assembled against Moses and Aaron."

So Miriam, Moshe's sister; the one who put him into the river in a basket, and watched over him; one of the leaders of K'lal Yisrael, died. And apparently, no one noticed. No one cared. We don't see any outpouring of grief for her passing, like we do see for Aaron and Moshe. Nothing. What do we see? We see that they were concerned they had no water. Rashi explains that the juxtaposition of the two verses is due to the causal nature of the first to the second. He says that the reason they had water for all those years in the desert was that there was a well that traveled with them, in Miriam's merit, that always provided water for the people. For 40 years in the desert, they had water - which is life - due to Miriam. Now she died, and the only concern of the people was that the well was gone. In fact there is at least one opinion that says that the reason the well dried up after her death is precisely because no one seemed to care that she died.

And so this is one of the messages of the parsha: Show Gratitude. Be grateful for the people in your life, who have helped you. Be grateful to God. Be grateful for the things that make your life more enjoyable - just turn off your A/C for a few hours, in the Summer, and see how grateful you can be for a "thing."

That's the gist of what I said. This morning, I found the following article, which just seemed to resonate with this whole idea: Woman Dies, No One Notices for 8 YEARS. Can you imagine dying, and no one even noticing?

Have We Learned Nothing?!

When I happened to see this particular headline on the Baltimore Jewish Times web site, I was stunned. Maybe I shouldn't have been, but I guess I believed that, at least publicly, we were already getting beyond this kind of nonsense. Guess again!

Here's the headline, and the link, and frankly, you should go read this piece before coming back to mine. I'll wait: Agudah Rabbis: Talk To Rabbi, Not Police About Molesters

As I sit here now, my mind is absolutely racing! I've got too many things going through my head at once, but ALL of them have an underlying theme: Are they out of their minds?!?!

Haven't we learned anything yet?! Haven't we yet learned that we can't just keep pushing these things under the carpet?! That they won't just go away?! That we have to expose them to the light, if we want them to die, instead of allowing them to hide away and fester?!

I'm sickened by this, to the point that I don't really think I'm writing coherently. If you haven't already read my last blog post, The Carpet, read it. Everything I said there, applies just the same here. We should be ashamed of the Agudah for this, because they don't seem to have enough sense to be ashamed of themselves.

The Carpet

This past weekend, we went out of town for a friend's simcha (which was beautiful, but that's not the point here.) Over the course of Shabbat, we got to meet some of their friends, including a divorced woman who had been in what I'll politely describe as a very abusive marriage.

Now I'm not going to talk about the nasty things her husband did to her. My concern is actually not so much with him, specifically, as with the community: the community leaders who knew, and who not only allowed it to continue, but in at least one situation, actively made the problem worse; the community at large, which turns a blind-eye to it; and to us as individuals, and what we need to work on to prevent this sort of thing from even being conceivable.

At this point, the woman is living nowhere near her ex-husband, but in order to get her Get (Jewish divorce), she was forced to accept an agreement whereby she gave up her Ketuba (Marriage contract - meaning she gave up the money her husband had promised to pay, in the event of a divorce.) Otherwise, he wouldn't agree to give it to her at all, leaving her an Aguna - unable to remarry. She does not have access to most of her children, and her Ex has been poisoning them against her. They call her a whore. They tell her that she doesn't care about them; that all she cares about is money. In short, they mistreat her in some of the same ways her husband did.

But he is still respected; well-regarded in his community. Even though the rabbonim KNOW what he is.

About 17 years ago, there was a woman in the Los Angeles community, who was also beaten and mistreated by her husband. She went to her parents; they sent her back. She went to the rabbis; they sent her back. And then one day, he killed her. He strangled her with his bare hands, rolled her up in a tarp, and stuffed her in the garage. At the funeral, which was attended by thousands of people, rabbi after rabbi got up at the podium and said some version of "Forgive me. I knew, and I did nothing." At the time, I felt sad. But now? Now I feel sick! The 18th century statesman, Edmund Burke, once said, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil, is that good men do nothing."

How is it that we allow this sort of thing in our communities? How is it that we allow people to behave this way, and get away with it? What is it that would allow a God-fearing, religious Jew to commit acts like this?! And finally, WHOM DOES HE THINK HE IS FOOLING?!?!

In the book, Vintage Wein, there's a story called Un vos zocht Gott? (What would God say?). In it, he describes how, when Rabbi Wein worked for the OU, the head of the Kashrut division would often be heard to say: Un vos zocht Gott? If there were some issue that had both technical/Halachic and moral implications, this was his guiding principle: What would God say? Yes, something might be technically permissible, but is it really the right thing to do? And if his Jewish Moral Compass wasn't alright with it, he wouldn't do it.

What happened to our Jewish Moral Compasses? Why aren't we outraged when something like this happens in our communities, instead of just hush-hushing it all up, and sweeping it under carpet as quickly as possible? Why don't we destroy this kind of thing? Why aren't there siruvim (Censure decrees, sort of) against people who do it?

Here's the real question: Do we still really believe in God? I'm beginning to wonder whether we do. Maybe, after all this time in Galut (Diaspora), we just... don't anymore. Because if we did, how could we do it?

Think about this for a minute: Regardless of the halachic status of any of this, does this woman's ex-husband really believe that he's going to get away with it? The things he's done; the things he's caused others to do - does he really believe that, come his Judgement Day, he's going to be able to fool God? He's going to say, "Um, well, technically I wasn't violating anything." You know what God's going to say? "How about 'Kedoshim Tihyu?'" (the commandment to "be holy") "How about 'Lifnai Iver Lo Titein Michshol'?" ("Do not put a stumbling-block in front a blind man") Do you think that maybe God will hold him at least partially responsible for a frum girl ceasing to be frum? That maybe He'll hold him responsible for his children's failure to follow the mitzvah of Kibud Av va'Eim ("Honoring your father AND mother")? That maybe he'll be judged for failing to comply with his halachic obligation to pay her Ketuba? And many more. Many (if not all) of these are Bein Adam l'Chaveiro - Between Man and his Fellow - which God doesn't forgive. Only a person can forgive for a sin against him/her. But I'm sure that he's quite confident that, when he stands before God on his ultimate Day of Judgement, he'll be judged as a Tzaddik.

Where does this come from? It comes from Ga'ava - Haughtiness. I guess you'd call it Ego. It comes from a narcissistic sense that "I" am right, and that "you" don't have the right to challenge my inherent rightness. And that, too, denotes a failure to believe in God. There are too many cases, today, of people trying to hold each other hostage with Gittin, and the only reason that's even conceivable as an option is because of a need for Control. When are we going to realize that we aren't in control. Our responsibility is to manage ourselves as best we can. And if a marriage doesn't work out, just move on...

I think we need to start moving back to Emunah P'shuta- Simple Faith. We need to believe in God, and to leave this kind of pathetic pettiness behind us. But hey - that's just me...

A Sad Day for YR; for Baltimore

The grave news was finally announced formally on Friday, but the rumors had already been circulating for a week. A local yeshiva day school - Yeshivat Rambam - is closing its high school at the end of this school year. The news was a bit of a shock, but not that much of a surprise, really. The school has been struggling mightily for several years now. Rocked by financial mismanagement, outright theft, administrative instability, and some generally poor decisions, it was almost inevitable. Nonetheless, we are saddened and incredibly disheartened by it. It's sad to see what has happened to our once-proud school; the only one in town flying the banner of Religious Zionism; of Torah u'Madah. Our kids are sad too, which is telling.

For me, though, the saddest part of this saga is the community aspect of it. Just a few weeks ago, in an article titled, Rambam Announces Potential New Site for School, there was an interesting, sad, and (thankfully) brief conversation that took place in the Comments section of the post. I'd like to quote two of the entries for you:

"Thank you to the committee for all of your hard work and difficult decisions. I recall about 18 years ago TA being in dire straits, the response at that time was for the Rabbis in town to all but require every family to donate $250 to TA whether or not you had children in the school. Clearly, the survival of this important institution is at stake, and the community needs to rally, the leaders needs to respond."

and then a follow-up post which read...

"$250? Who has that kind of money? We are paying full tuition to 3 different schools and didn't even have money to buy the teachers chanukah presents as all our money is going to tuition. Many in our community are having a very difficult time paying tuition, including ourselves, and we should find money for another school? Personally we do not give any tzedakah to any organizations in town as all our maaser goes to our kids schools in the form of full tuition. Also not everyone holds of Rambam's hashkafos. It may be right for some people but most of the gedoilei yisoel do not hold of the zionistic hashkafa and people do not want to donate to a cause they do not hold of."

Now, I'm not going to harp too much on the $250. Personally, I can understand why some would feel it's a sizable donation. I'm not going to tell someone else what they can or cannot afford. No, it's the last two sentences that bother me most. "The gedoilei yisoel (sic) do not hold of the zionistic hashkafa and people do not want to donate to a cause they do not hold of." That bothers me to no end for two reasons:

1. T.A. had no problem making that same request of people in the community who didn't hold of their "hashkafos." And many of those people gave to T.A. in their time of need.
2. Real "Gedoilim" are not quite so closed-minded; and those who are, are not real "Gedoilim."

Real "Gedoilim," and other real people, who are community-minded, understand that one size does not usually fit all, in just about anything.

Back in the mid-1980's, I attended yeshiva in Israel at Neveh Zion. Then, as now, Neveh dealt with boys who were... shall we say... not the fodder for the typical yeshiva. These boys were the progenitors of today's "At-Risk Teens," and Neveh excelled at handling them... us. For my 30th birthday, my wife sent me to Israel for a spiritual battery-recharge, and I spent much of my time at Neveh. During that time, the mashgiach - "The Mash," AKA Rav Yisroel Blumenfeld - and I had a conversation that I will never forget. He told me that things were rougher than they had been back in my time. That the boys were coming in with more serious issues than they had back then, and that he was concerned about the yeshiva. He said that he had gone to Rav Shach to discuss the issues with him. That he had suggested to Rav Shach that, perhaps it was time for Neveh to tighten up its entrance requirements a bit. Perhaps it was time for Neveh to also "move to the right." Now Rav Shach was hardly a liberal rabbi. He was the founder of the Haredi political party, Degel haTorah - and one of the strongest leaders of right-wing ultra-Orthodox Judaism to date. And this is what Rav Blumenfeld told me he replied:

"But then, where will all the Neveh boys go?"

He knew full-well, that Neveh boys didn't wear white shirts and black pants, and learn full time. But he also knew that these were important Jewish souls that needed to be built-up, lest they be lost entirely. And that's a measure of a real "Gadol haDor." A leader who understands that Jewish souls are what's at stake, and that those souls are more important than a particular theo-political perspective.

Once again, Baltimore's community has failed to support a critical institution. Once again, the Rabbis were silent when they should have spoken up in support of the students of Rambam, who will now have to find other schools, which may not fit their needs. Because let's face it: T.A. and B.Y. are not prepared for many of these kids, and many of the kids are not prepared for T.A. and B.Y. The real beneficiary here is going to be Beth T'filoh which, while an excellent school, is not (and doesn't really want to be) a Dati school. So thanks to people who, like the author of the second post quoted above, wouldn't help Y.R. because of their own warped sense of Frumkeit; thanks to rabbonim whose mere words could have made all the difference, there will be less Torah in the Baltimore community; fewer kids going to Israel for yeshiva and seminary. I hope you're satisfied. I wonder what God will say...

Conspiracy Theory: Sharks at Sharm-el-Sheik

December 12, 2010

Since December 6, there have been a growing number of shark attacks on tourists at Egypt’s Sharm-el-Sheik resort. The most recent being today, when a 70 year old female German tourist was killed in waters very close to the shore. Scientists cannot, as yet, explain this behavior. There haven’t been this many shark attacks at Sharm-el-Sheik in over 6 years. There are a number of theories, including the possibility that fisherman have been chumming the water, and the fact that an inbound ship dumped a number of sheep carcasses in the Red Sea sometime last week, drawing the sharks to the area. Another theory, proposed by Conspiracy Theorist, Jonathan Kay, is that the sharks are actually “Jews in shark suits.”

Then there’s the theory propounded by the “famous” Red Sea diver, Mustafa Ismail. According to sources, Mr. Ismail was discussing the issue with an Israeli diver he knows, who confided that they had recently caught an Oceanic Whitetip shark in the gulf of Eilat, with a GPS transmitter on it. Mr. Ismail, a man known for his out-of-the-box thinking, has proposed the theory that the Mossad – Israel’s Intelligence agency – has been programming the GPS monitors on sharks to “monitor the sharks into Sharm-el-Sheik to attack tourists.” Clearly Mr. Ismail understands the use of the word “monitor” in its not-widely-known, nuanced meaning of, “controlling.”

His theory has begun to get traction. "What is being said about the Mossad throwing the deadly shark (in the sea)... is not out of the question," said South Sinai Governor Mohamed Abdel Fadil Shoush, according to the Egyptian news site, egynews.net.

Another variant of this theory may be closer to the truth. Our sources have discovered that J.K. Rowling, author of the popular, “Harry Potter” series, actually based many of her fictionalized characters on real people she knew, growing up. Our source has further discovered that the character, Draco Malfoy, was actually an unpopular Jewish boy named Asher Goldbergsteinowitzman, and that he could actually do magic! It is also known that Mr. Goldbergsteinowitzman made Aliya, to Israel, in October, 2004. Our attempts to reach him at his home in Petach Tikvah, were unsuccessful, but neighbors have reported seeing him coming and going at odd hours, in what appeared to be robes, often carrying what they believed to be a small stick. “I thought it was a really old, short lulav,” says Yosefa Cohenheimerberg, a neighbor. “But then I noticed that he was still carrying it, long after Sukkot had ended.” Curious, perhaps, but not too troubling.

But in recent weeks, there have been disturbing reports of Mr. Goldbergsteinowitzman coming home smelling, oddly, of fish. “It’s not normal,” said David Lipnermansky, 47, a bus driver who has driven Mr. Goldbergsteinowitzman to “work” every day for the past three years. “He always get off in a – how you say – industrial part of town. There are no other bus-stops close. This is not close to the ocean. Why he should smell so bad when he come home? The other pipples are complaining on him, but he is not listening. He say to them, ‘Mind yer own business’… I don’t know… something like this.”

Is it possible that Asher Goldbergsteinowitzman, aka Draco Malfoy, is bewitching sharks to attack tourists at Sharm-el-Sheik, at the behest of the Mossad? Mr. George Weasley - who is, coincidentally missing an ear, but insists that he is not related to the character in Ms. Rowling’s books - is a noted expert in paranormal activity. We asked him whether this sort of thing might be possible. “Indeed, yes.” said Mr. Weasley. “Bewitching animals is old-hat for most witches and wizards, although it is rather unusual to see it done with sharks, for some reason. But there is no reason, at least in principle, why this could not be done.”

We also called upon Ms. Rowling to give her opinion as to whether this would be the type of thing Draco Malfoy, aka Asher Goldbergsteinowitzman, would do. She was unavailable for comment, but someone on the street who is familiar with her books, explained that in Book 6, Draco demonstrates his prodigious skills with the Imperius curse, on Madame Rosemerta, so there’s no reason why we shouldn’t assume that he could do it with sharks.

We’re sure the U.N. will want to investigate these serious allegations.

A Thought For Rosh haShana

This isn't actually my thought, but I liked it a lot, so I'm stealing it... Alright, it's almost יום הדין (Judgement Day), so stealing's probably not such a great idea... I'll borrow it, with attribution yet!

The quote was a FaceBook post, by my friend, David Dannenbaum. I thought it was a very poignant message.

I saw this family on TV this morning. Something the father said struck me. After his daughter threw back the ball and the crowd laughed and got loud, she looked at her father with a scared expression, realizing she did something "wrong." He... immediately picked her up and gave her a reassuring hug. I was thinking how this mirrors the upcoming Rosh Hashanah experience. We reject our Creator's directives, mostly out of childish ignorance, rather than maliciously. When we realize our mistakes, we adopt a posture of contrition, only to be embraced with love and joy by our Father. That's what I want to plug into this weekend, for myself, my family, my friends. And I hope this coming year to respond to my own children's innocent mistakes with the same sense of love and compassion.

Make sure you check the YouTube link on that one - it's really sweet.

Anyway, of all the quotes and thoughts I've seen this week, leading up to the holiday, I think that one resonates with me most somehow. So thanks, Dave, for the great imagery. May you, and everyone else, merit a year of success, health and happiness.

כתיבה וחתימה טובה!

Of Tale-bearers and Teshuva

Every weekday, three times a day, in the Amida, we say a prayer known as V'l'malshinim - "And to the tale-bearers". The first line says, "And to the tale-bearers, let there be no hope..." It then goes on to say a whole bunch of things, including how they should be broken, and destroyed, etc.

Now that's always bothered me. Why destroyed? Why not do teshuva? What is it about them and what they've done, that proscribes repentance?

Yesterday, Tisha B'Av, during Mincha, I think I figured out why.

Let's think about it in context for a minute: It was written during the brutal Roman occupation. The Romans, like many conquering nations world-wide, including the Incas and Aztecs, figured out some basic standards for conquest of other civilizations. They figured out that if you want to assimilate another culture into your own, the first thing you have to do is get rid of everything that defines them as different. Never mind that "diversity" nonsense.

One of the biggest definers, at least in the Ancient World, was religion, and so the native religion had to be displaced, or replaced.

In order to ensure that this took place, the Romans used very harsh tactics against anyone trying to continue their old religious systems. And we, the Jews, were the hardest.

But we were also smart. We - and by we, I most certainly do not mean all the Jews of the period - did a lot of things clandestinely. And so we had centers of Torah study that were disguised as gambling parlors - this is the origin of the dreidel or sivivon - and many other clever ruses designed to allow us to continue to follow the Torah, without the Romans cottoning on. The Romans must have been completely confounded by their failure to assimilate us.

Enter the Malshinim - those Jews, privy to the disguises, who chose to sell out their fellows. For personal gain? For a sense of lawfulness? Who knows? But they were the Romans' informers, and probably got a lot of Jews tortured and killed. So is that why they can't do Teshuva?

Well, partially... But I think there's another dimension to it.

Remember the Soviet Union? The most horrifying thing about it, I think, was not just the KGB. It was that you never knew whom you could trust. Anyone could be a KGB informant. Your spouse. Your neighbors. Your "friends". Your relatives. Anyone. The entire fabric of society was torn apart.

Maybe that's the real, unforgivable sin of the Malshinim. Not just the loss of the people who were given over, but the destruction of a viable religious society. And in general, it seems that crimes against society are those which are most unforgivable.

Natural Law

A friend showed me a really interesting Netsiv, on parshat B'rei'shit. On the first pasuk, he quotes the well-known idea regarding the use of the word, "Elokim," denoting Din - Law.

Now, the common explanation of this is that God initially intended that the Universe be governed by pure Din, but that Man couldn't live that way, so he subsequently infused it with Rachamim - Mercy, to accomodate us.

The Netsiv says we're reading it wrong.

He says that the Din being discussed here is NOT the Din of Torah, which basically deals with issues of reward and punishment. This, he says, is referring to is "Din Teva" - Natural Law!

He continues on to explain that, when God created the Universe, the first thing He did was create Natural Law, and then used it as the system through which He created the Universe.

In other words, the Big Bang theory is not at all at odds with a Torah viewpoint. Neither is any other scientific theory that explains Creation. All they're doing is attempting to unravel God's Natural Law. The Netsiv says there's no inconsistency.

He also explains the subsequent infusion of Rachamim as not being an afterthought. Rachamim is required for the maintenance of God's Creation. After all, if the Universe continued running by means of strict Natural Law, there would simply be no room for Hashgacha Pratit - the personal involvement of God in our lives; in the world.

Pretty cool stuff.

New Direction-ish

Well, if you actually read this blog, you'll know that I don't post here very much. I'm not sure why... Maybe it's because I try to have something good; something solid to say. But maybe I'm being too picky.

Well, I picked up this here app on my phone, which will allow me to post remotely... Maybe that'll stimulate more frequent posting. We'll see.

Obama, MLK and Irony

I often listen to NPR in the car. I don't always agree with what I hear, but I do gain insight into things I would never have thought of otherwise. This morning, I heard a very interesting report called, Obama's Triumph: A Turning Point for America?, and this time, like many times, I had to actually shut off the radio in the middle of the piece, to mull over what I'd just heard.

In this particular story, they quote a woman named Jewel Plummer, who works as a secretary for the Black History Museum, in Alexandria, VA. This is what Ms. Plummer had to say:

"I don't think it has sunk in, the reality of it — of the first black president of the United States. Did you hear what I just said? The first black president of the United States."

"This is the first time, to me, that it truly represents 'we the people.' Finally, equal rights, not being judged on the color of your skin but the character — that's what this whole thing means to me."

I find this incredibly ironic. She celebrates the possibility of an Obama-Presidency as an example of not being, to quote MLK, "judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." And yet, Ms. Plummer is stating, outright, that the reason she is voting for Mr. Obama, because of the color of his skin!!!

Is it just me?

Annapolis

Somehow, I'm on the President's Office's Jewish Public Liason mailing list. Now usually, I don't bother reading it, but this time I did. It was about the Annapolis Conference, scheduled to take place this coming week. Other than a perfunctory introductory and and closing paragraph, this is what the letter said:

This conference will signal international support for the Israelis' and Palestinians' intention to commence negotiations on the establishment of a Palestinian state and the realization of peace between these two peoples.

It will also provide an opportunity for the Israelis, the Palestinians, and their neighbors to recommit to implementing the Roadmap, with the U.S. monitoring their progress by the parties' agreement. Finally, the conference will review Palestinian plans to build the institutions of a democratic state and their preparations for next month's donors' conference in Paris.

I remain personally committed to implementing my vision of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.

This, I thought, fit in perfectly with last week's rant. See, Bush is "personally committed" to the "vision of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine." How nice for him, since he's not the one who has to live with the neighbors.

Once again, we're dealing with a country; an administration; a President who just don't get it. You simply cannot make peace with people who just want you dead.

Ironically, I'm watching the movie The Siege, and one of the characters, the terrorist Samir, has just explained that, "You believe that money is power. What you don't realize is that belief.. belief is power." Yes, that's the crux of everything I've been trying to say. What we don't understand is that belief is power. Belief... religious fervor. American's have largely lost their ability to truly believe in anything. So they no longer really understand what that sort of belief can do. I would have thought that, after 911, they would have begun to figure it out, but they haven't.

God save us.

Real Americans and The War - A Rant

This evening, I was listening to WCBM (AM 680). I don't remember the name of the host, but he was talking to some families of soldiers who have died during the war. He then went on this mini-rant about how sick he is of all the war protesters, sitting in their BMWs, and bad talking his country. He said that his next guest was another "Real American," like the previous caller, and that he wanted us to all hear from Real Americans.

Now please forgive me, but I thought that one of the things that make us "Americans" is that we can say things against the government. So, kind of by definition, the folks who protest are Real Americans, right? It really bothers me that some people on the Far Right seem to have forgotten that it's our liberties that make us what we are! Let's not become a dictatorship, in the interest of preserving our American way of life, shall we?

And as long as I'm on the topic, I want to tell you that I am personally against the war - but probably not for the same reasons most people are. I am against the war because I don't believe we can win it - at least not right now. I am against the war because I don't think we truly understand our enemy, and until we do; until we're willing to do what is really necessary to beat the enemy, we are doomed to failure.

The Muslims understand the situation far better than we do. They say this is a war against Islam itself, and their fight against us is a Defensive Jihad. They are fighting a holy war; a war with (in their eyes) God backing them up. Any brutality they commit, or lies they tell in defense of Islam is sanctioned by God. And they are very willing to commit those brutalities, as Muhammed himself had no problem committing what we would, today, term atrocities, in service of his beliefs. They will behead our soldiers, as Muhammed beheaded his enemies, and as he sanctioned in the Quran. They commit acts of terror because they know that Muhammed himself committed them. They know that committing such acts will psychologically weaken us and our resolve. They believe us to be an enormous paper tiger, and at the moment, I fear they may be right.

I don't mean that as a slam against our service men and women, who daily put their lives on the line in service of our country. They have heart and ability, but they are hampered by political realities at home. People here have no stomach for having soldiers beheaded, so they protest against the government. They insist that the soldiers be brought home now, as if that were possible or even really desirable. They elect weak-willed representatives, who also don't understand the nature of the enemy or the war we're fighting, and make it hard for our soldiers to do their jobs. They think that cutting funding to the soldiers will make us bring them home sooner, but the reality is that it just results in more soldiers dying, which, frankly, also serves their cause.

So what should we do about it? I say we bring the mountain to Muhammed, as it were. Let's take the gloves off and show them what it really means to pick a fight with us... That's what I think we should do, but the Pentagon hasn't called me for advice yet.

Dumbledore Outed - So What?

This month, Newsweek reported that, in front of a "full house of hardcore Potter fans," at Carnegie Hall, J.K. Rowling "outed" her character, Dumbledore. She told them that, in her mind, "Dumbledore had an unrequited love affair with Gellert Grindelwald."

I can't say how this news played out in other communities, but in at least some parts of the Orthodox community, it was fairly predictable. Disgust and anger. Statements about how no one should read Harry Potter books anymore, much less let their children read them.

And me? I say, SO WHAT?!

Now, I don't really mean "so what if he's gay." I actually do think that could be problematic, particularly for kids. It helps make homosexuality acceptable, and even somewhat normal - if you can call Dumbledore normal. It's clearly not what we believe in. The Torah is unequivocal in its condemnation of homesexuality, calling it a To'eva - an abomination. No, I mean, "so what if she says he's gay." She's allowed, and I'm allowed not to agree.

See, once the author releases the book into the public, it sort of takes on its own life, and the author loses some of the control of those characters. Much like the works of poets and other artists, the same work can mean different things to different people, and none of them necessarily mean exactly what the work-creator intended.

Now, if she had specifically written that into the books, that would have been different. But, wisely, she decided not to step into that fight directly - it would have hurt book sales. She wrote it with what could be construed as allusions to it, but not necessarily so. And I'm entitled to interpret those allusions as I please. Well, I choose to disagree with her as to the sexual predilections of her fabulous but flawed Headmaster.

But stop my kids from reading those wonderful books?! Books that have almost single-handedly brought Reading back to the forefront among this country's children? Books that have made reading "cool" again, and that are so skillfully written that both adults and children can enjoy them equally? Now that would be a shanda!

Man of the Earth

During his speech last week, the Rabbi noted that there's a not-so-often-quoted midrash at the end of the parsha that compares Noah to Moshe. The Midrash points out that, at the beginning of the story, Noah is referred to as Ish Tzaddik - A righteous man. At the end, he's referred to as Ish Adama - a man of the earth. It then contrasts the Torah's descriptions of Moshe. At the beginning of the Moshe story, he's referred to as Ish Mitzri - a man of Egypt, but at the end of his life, he's referred to as Ish Elokim - a man of God.

So Noah went spiritually downwards, while Moshe went upwards. Why? The Rabbi explained that it was because of how they went about trying to perfect themselves. Noah went for isolation. The world was a bad place, and the best way for him to stay right with God was to keep to himself; to work on himself, and his family. Moshe, on the other hand, was always outwardly focused. He focused on helping everyone else, and by so doing, was raised up himself in the process.

Now I found that fascinating, and immediately related it to a conversation I had, about a year ago, with a young man from a very charedi family. He told me about an article he had read, in Israel, about a group of secular Jews trying to start a Rabbanut Chiloni - a secular rabbinate. He thought it was funny, in an ironic sort of way. What does it mean to have a rabbinate if you're secular?

I answered that I thought it was very sad. Here was a group of secular Jews looking for some religious experience in their lives. But not like those Charedim! Anything but that!

And why? I think it's because, by and large, the Charedi community isolates themselves from all external influences. Of course the do it for their own protection, but in the process, they have often become insensitive to the needs and concerns of those outside their own folds. They take very hard-line positions, and often refuse to budge a millimeter - they're on the metric system there. ;) - on those positions. They are too often terrified of anything "modern," and very quick to point the cherem-gun at those who choose to view things differently. (Just look at what they did to Natan Slifkin! Moreover, look at how they did it!)

The Charedi community, at large, has not done much to endear itself to the non-Charedim, much less the secular. And that's a shame, because there's much within their communities to praise: Their commitment to Torah and its values; their commitment to family, and much more.

But look at the ones who have put themselves out to the broader Jewish community! Look at Aish HaTorah and Ohr Someach - both having a clear Charedi bent. Look at Meir Schuster's Heritage House. Look at (my alma mater) Neveh Zion, which has been working with "At-Risk Teens" since before there was such a term! These, and many others, are the ones working from the bottom up - the ones growing toward kedusha.

Political Conservatism and The Greens

I listen to a fair amount of talk-radio. I find it interesting and informative, often dealing with things I wouldn't have otherwise thought of. I listen to NPR for the stories, and I listen to a lot of "Conservative Radio" on our local WCBM AM-680, with folks like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. (I also listen to music. I sometimes even enjoy listening to 99.1 El Zol, but I'm odd like that.)

There's been a lot of talk, lately, on Conservative Radio about Global Warming. They don't like it. Well, nobody likes it, but what I mean is that they don't even like the idea of it. They view it all as nonsense. If they even admit that things do seem to be warming up a bit, they insist that it has nothing to do with us, and that we couldn't do anything about it anyway.

Now let's say, for the moment, that they're right: There is no such thing as Global Warming, and if there is, there's nothing we could do to stop it anyway. I can live with that as a possibility. But why is it that what follows seems to be, "so let's pollute the air, water and earth as much as we feel like?" In other words, from a Conservative perspective, is there something wrong with taking care of our environment?

Years ago, I heard Rush talking about nuclear proliferation. There was something about some environmentalist wacko group (and many of them are wackos) complaining that we could already destroy the planet and somesuch. I don't remember the issue exactly, but I do remember Rush's response. He said, "I simply don't believe that God would allow us to destroy the planet." Now I thought about that statement. I agreed with him. God seems to have plans for us, and wiping all life off the Earth doesn't seem to be included in those plans - at least not yet. But I thought about it more, and discovered that, while I still agree with that, I don't think I do quite the way he seemed to.

See, we believe that God doesn't like to do things outside of derech tevah - Natural Law. And that even when He does do nisim - miracles - He does them such that they at least fall within Natural Law somehow. God didn't just make the Egyptians pursuing us, as we left Egypt, disappear or suddenly drop dead in their tracks or fall into a black hole that just happened to pass by at that moment. He also didn't just teleport us across the water. Ostensibly, He could have, but He didn't. He chose to work with Natural Law, even when performing a miracle. That's why the Torah specifically tells us about the winds that blew all night before the Red Sea split, for example.

So I decided that it would only make sense for God to do His work to protect us from ourselves, also through natural means. In other words, Rush was right: God isn't going to allow us to destroy the planet, but perhaps some of the mechanisms He's using are the environmentalist wacko groups who put political pressure on the EPA and the rest of the Gov't. That, while their beliefs and methods may be extreme and even illogical, they too have a purpose in God's world. (Which is ironically amusing considering that many of them are also rabid Atheists!)

The same thing applies to Global Warming. Ultimately, God may want to use Global Warming as a mechanism for His works. The US put pressure on Israel to make Gush Katif Judenrein. The day Israel finally complied and kicked the Jews out, Hurricane Katrina kicked hundreds of thousands of Americans out of their homes. Environmental groups point to Katrina as a harbinger of cataclysmic events that will be brought on by Global Warming. I see God's fingerprints on that. So maybe they're right - perhaps we can't do anything to stop it, really. Be we can do the best we can, can't we?

Lo alecha ha'm'lacha ligmor, v'lo ata ben-chorim l'hitbatel mimena. It's not up to you to finish the job, but that doesn't free you from your responsibility to do what you can.

G'mar chatima tova to all!

Cardinal Lustiger, A"H

A friend of mine forwarded me this brief article, which can also be heard from its source at NPR.

The following commentary was given by Scott Simon in NPR radio, Saturday morning August 11, 2007:

"There used to be a joke in Paris, what is the difference between the chief rabbi in France and the Cardinal of Paris? The Cardinal speaks Yiddish!

Jean Marie Cardinal Lustiger was buried yesterday; he died this week of cancer. He was born almost 81 years ago to Polish parents who ran a dress shop in Paris. When the German army marched in his parents sent him and his sister into hiding with a Catholic family in Orleans. Their mother was captured and sent to Auschwitz.

In 1999 as Cardinal of Paris, Jean Marie Lustiger took part in reading of the names of France's day of remembrance of Jews who had been deported and murdered. He came to the name Gesele Lustiger, paused, teared and said, my mama. The effect in France during a time of revived anti-Semitism was electric.

He was just 13 and in hiding when he converted to Catholicism, not to escape the Nazis he always said, because no Jew could escape by conversion, and not of trauma, he said. Among his most controversial observations, I was born Jewish and so I remain, even if that is unacceptable for many. For me the vocation of Israel is bringing light to the goyem. That is my hope and I believe that Christianity is the means for achieving it.

There were a great number of rabbi's who consider his conversion a betrayal. Especially after so many European Jews had so narrowly escaped extinction. Cardinal Lustiger replied, to say that I am no longer a Jew is like denying my father and mother, my grandfathers and grandmothers.

I am as Jewish as all other members of my family that were butchered in Auschwitz and other camps.

He confessed to a biographer that he had a spiritual crisis in the 1970's, provoked by persistent anti-Semitism in France. He studied Hebrew, and considered emigrating. He said I thought that I had finished what I had to do here, he explained and I might find new meaning in Israel. But just at that time the pope appointed him bishop of Orleans. He found purpose he said in the plight of immigrant workers. Then he was elevated to Cardinal. The Archbishop of Paris.

Jean Marie Lustiger was close to the Pope. They shared a doctrinal conservatism. He also battled bigotry and totalitarianism. For years Cardinal Lustiger's name was among those who was considered to succeed John Paul. Without putting himself forth, the Cardinal joked that few things would bedevil bigots more than a Jewish Pope.

They don't like to admit it he said, but what Christians believe, they got - through Jews.

The funeral for Cardinal Lustiger began at Notre Dame Cathedral yesterday, with the chanting of Kaddish, the Jewish prayer for the dead."

What an unfortunate, confused man he was. How do you shine the light of Torah to the nations, by turning away from it? May God have mercy on his Holocaust-survivor's soul.

It's the Little Things...

We spent Shabbat in Atlanta a couple of weeks ago. The Rabbi's drasha was very interesting. I've been thinking about it quite a bit since...

He was talking about the Minneapolis bridge collapse that has occupied so much time on the news lately. He said that what failed were the little things; the bolts and whatnot, and that the engineers had been saying that there were problems for a long time. But the major structures were intact, and things seemed okay... Well, those little things, that hadn't been attended to, collapsed under the massive weight of the bridge.

He then likened the bridge collapse to the fights we all have daily within ourselves. He, correctly, pointed out that, it's not the big things we wrestle with. Most Orthodox Jews don't have difficulty with things like belief in God or keeping Kosher and Shabbat. We're used to it, and we do it. No, it's the little things that begin to wear at the seams. Going to minyan every day, not to mention for 3 services. Setting time to learn on a regular basis. Complimenting our spouses, and children, for the good that they do, instead of just pointing out their faults. Things like that, he said, are the underpinnings that we tend to forget about, because they're small. But when they go, the whole structure can go with them.

I liked it, so I thought I'd share.

Accentuate the Negative?

In response to a recent post, one reader made the following comment:

Lvnsm27 said... lashon hara is more interesting to people. But we need to think of the consequences. People just think of the popularity they'll have. They don't realize the punishment for this aveirah...

She's right, of course, but it did make me think about the emphasis she, and many others put on things. Why do we always tend to think about things in terms of "the punishment for this aveirah?" Why do we feel like we have to say, "I'm a bad boy, but please don't punish me, Abba?"

Wouldn't it be better to look at it from a more global perspective? Speaking Loshon HaRah is a bad thing to do for so many reasons; on so many levels. It's bad personally. It's bad communally. It's bad for business. It's just... bad. It gives us an excuse not to improve ourselves because, in our minds, we're better than the competition. But that still doesn't make us better. It doesn't really help us.

There are so many better reasons, in my mind, for us to avoid speaking Lashon HaRah, or committing other aveirot for that matter. Yet we usually wind up speaking in terms of punishment. Our teachers teach it to us in terms of punishment.

It's weird to me.

But then, maybe that's just my not liking the idea of being a little boy again...

Perfidious Jews

Interesting post about Pope Benedict XVI's decision to re-adopt the Tridentine Mass. And for those of you looking for the meaning of the word, Perfidious... well, there it is.

The American Israeli Patriot: The Tridentine Mass: One Step Forward or Two Steps Back?