Page 1,016«..1020..1,0151,0161,0171,018..1,0301,040..»

Will Jewish schools finally address their segregationist past? – Forward

Posted By on July 21, 2020

In the two months since George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police, American Jewish day schools have begun to rethink how they teach students about the brutal legacy of American racism.

Among the subjects theyll have to examine? Their own history.

As the day school movement has expanded, its created a deep passion about the need for institutions that, in a secularized America, affirm and enrich Jewish identity. For day school communities, its impossible to imagine that the educational model that dominated the first half of the 20th century in which Jewish students attended public schools and received supplemental Jewish education might be a sufficient incubator of religious and cultural character.

But the origins of some day schools, particularly those founded in and after the 1970s, are connected to a dark narrative of 20th century American history: That of the backlash among white families against the racial integration of public schools. And as day schools reconsider how they teach students about the realities of American racism, they face questions about how those realities intersect with their own institutional heritage.

The Jewish day school movement was founded when the U.S. public schools integrated, said Ilana Kaufman, executive director of the Jews of Color Initiative, in a June 21 conversation hosted by Temple Emanuels Streicker Center, because there was white flight from U.S. public schools.

The actual story, say historians, is a little more complicated. (Kaufman did not respond to requests for comment.) As European immigration expanded the American Jewish population around the turn of the 19th century, said Jonathan Sarna, a professor of Jewish history at Brandeis University, American Jews developed the sense that the public school was crucial to the making of Americans, that it was truly un-American not to send your children to public school. For decades, attending public school was something Jewish immigrants and their children saw as a matter of principle. Jews were very proud that in America the schools accepted Jews, there were no quotas, everybody studied together, Sarna said.

In the late interwar period, that began to change. The day school movement starts in the 20s and the 30s, said Jonathan Krasner, a Brandeis professor currently writing a history of Jewish day schools. That, according to Krasner, was the first of several discrete periods in the evolution of the day school system. Next came a really big push in the post-war era, primarily from the Orthodox community. There were a lot of refugees that came here just before or after the war, and they didnt have the same allegiance to public schools, Krasner said. They were influenced more by things like the Holocaust and the creation of the state of Israel, events that, for some, prompted a renewed interest in ensuring that new generations would cultivate a strong Jewish identity.

But the day school movement didnt blossom until the 1960s and 70s, an era that proved particularly fruitful for community schools, non-Orthodox institutions catering to students who, while discontented with the public school system, were unlikely to attend rigorously religious alternatives.

What lay behind that discontent? One major and frequently forgotten factor, Sarna said, was the mass flight of Evangelicals into private schools after Supreme Court decisions in 1962 and 1963 effectively banned prayer from public schools. That exodus, Sarna said, dealt a serious blow to the Jewish belief in public schools: How could they truly be said to be essential to the American character, if so many of their students were abandoning them?

At the same time, much of American Jewry was on the economic ascent, entering class ranks in which private schools were increasingly considered the norm. The fear was, if we dont have Jewish schools, Jews will simply go to those private schools run by Protestants, Sarna said. And, in the late 60s, the country was transfixed by incidents like the Ocean Hill-Brownsville conflict, in which a predominantly Black school district in Brooklyn terminated the contracts of a number of white, Jewish teachers, drawing allegations of anti-Semitism and prompting a two-month-long teacher strike. Those very, very well publicized incidents suggested to Jews that the public schools were no longer friendly to Jews, Sarna said.

But in many communities particularly urban ones, according to Krasner the decisive moment for day schools came in the early 1970s, as the Supreme Court issued a series of decisions mandating that school districts use busing to integrate schools. (Brown v. Board of Education, the 1954 case establishing that school segregation was unconstitutional, didnt address the de facto school segregation that resulted from Black and white people living in largely different neighborhoods.) The impact of those decisions was particularly visible in Los Angeles, said Sara Smith, Assistant Dean at the Graduate Center for Jewish Education of American Jewish University.

Before busing, there were two Conservative elementary day schools in L.A., Smith said. After, there were five. Before busing, there was one Reform elementary day school in L.A. After busing, there were two. The increased number of schools wasnt the only indicator that Jewish parents were fleeing the public school system for the day school system: Enrollments skyrocketed, too.

There was really a sense community rabbis certainly spoke about this that on the one hand we as Jews should be supporting integration, because thats a value that we hold, Smith said. But, she said, there was a real fear and paranoia from parents who didnt want to send their kids to be bused across the city to go to schools that were going to be populated by non-whites. Between 1966 and 1980, Smith wrote in her 2017 NYU doctoral dissertation, the number of white students enrolled in Los Angeles public school system decreased by 269,373. That reduction was accompanied by a rise in the number of local private schools. Jewish students, and Jewish schools, were clearly identifiable participants in that change.

To date, Smiths dissertation is the only intensive work of scholarship on the intersection between the desegregation of public schools and the rise of Jewish day schools. But Rivka Press Schwartz, a research fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute of North America and associate principal at Riverdales SAR High School, is sure that the pattern Smith identified in L.A. was replicated across the country. There is a great deal of evidence of people moving to the suburbs, pulling their kids out of public schools and putting them in private schools, Schwartz said. It is 100% true that Jewish parents, then and now, cared about their kids Jewish education, and sacrificed to afford their kids a meaningful Jewish education. But it can also be true that if your neighborhood public school was all of a sudden about to be subject to busing, then sending your kid to a Jewish school might appeal more.

Were adults, she said, and more than one thing can be true at the same time.

How should the day school system reckon with this history? First, said Krasner, its important to note the scale of the issue, which largely doesnt involve Orthodox schools; the Orthodox commitment to day schools, he said, is more fundamental than any change that took place within American society. A 2013-2014 survey by the Avi Chai Foundation, Krasner said, suggested that about 13% of Jewish day school students in the U.S. attend non-Orthodox schools. A fair proportion of those schools were founded before the start of desegregation efforts, meaning that the number of schools whose history was genuinely informed by a rejection of desegregation may be comparatively small.

For those schools, what comes next? The legacy is the legacy, and thats the way that it happened. And, these institutions have done many great things for Jewish identity for many people, Smith said. To meaningfully grapple with their history when it comes to race, she said, schools have to start thinking about real intentional ways to build bonds that dont just feel like service. Too often, she said, day schools fail to place value on cultivating student relationships with those from other communities. In her view, its time for that value to become central to day school curriculums.

What do we do with complicated, painful parts of our history? Schwartz asked. While shes worked to incorporate a more comprehensive education about structural racism into SARs curriculum, shes long had the sense that turning the conversation to the origins of the day school system would be unproductive. Pirkei Avot says, dont say something that cant be heard, she said. I did have the sense this was something that couldnt be heard.

But in the last three months, Schwartz said, those around her have suddenly become more interested in the issue of day school origins. So far, she said, discussions around that subject have been preliminary; the educators in her sphere, preoccupied with the difficult educational conditions imposed by the coronavirus pandemic, have yet to begin planning around whether and how to incorporate that history in their teaching. There are certain things that make it hard for the Jewish community to come into this conversation, she said. Its not just youre racist, or youre clueless, or youre living out your lives as upper middle class white people. There genuinely are things that make it very difficult, which the people who want to make this conversation happen have to also think about.

Smith says that as she wrote her dissertation, she spoke with the founders of several of the Los Angeles schools whose histories she was researching. They werent surprised by what she was uncovering, she said, but they also werent particularly interested in it. I think people understood that these schools are able to exist and thrive because of busing, and that was just the way that it was, she said. Now I think were turning back, and trying to understand, ok, how did we get here?

Read more here:
Will Jewish schools finally address their segregationist past? - Forward

Leading evangelical says no annexation could cost Trump election. Others disagree. – Forward

Posted By on July 21, 2020

WASHINGTON (JTA) Israels potential annexation of parts of the West Bank may not be a top election issue for American Jews, or even a top issue right now for most Israelis.

But some evangelical Christians in America are hoping to make it an animating issue for evangelical voters in this falls presidential election.

Thats especially true for Mike Evans, the evangelical writer who founded a museum celebrating Christian supporters of Israel, the Friends of Zion Heritage Center in Jerusalem. His Jerusalem Prayer Team Facebook page has more than 73 million followers.

This year, Israel is going to be the number one thing they take into the voting booth, and Ill tell you why, Evans told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency this week. The one thing that unites all evangelicals concerning Israel is Genesis 12:3: I will bless them that bless thee and curse them that curse thee. So Ive got 73 million evangelicals on my Jerusalem Prayer Team Facebook site alone, and I know them. The only thing they believe they can do to get God to bless them is to bless the land of Israel.

The flipside, Evans said, is that if Trump stands in the way of annexation, he could face a backlash from evangelicals at the voting booth.

But exactly how many evangelical voters there are, and how much they are animated by the annexation issue, is unclear.

Gallup citing the proportion of people who answer yes to the question Would you describe yourself as born-again or evangelical? says evangelicals have for decades comprised just over 40% of the population. And a 2017 poll commissioned by pro-Israel evangelicals found that the percentage of evangelicals who believe that the establishment of Israel was a fulfillment of prophecy was astronomically high 80%.

Elizabeth Oldmixon, a University of North Texas political scientist who studies evangelicals and their relationship to Israel, has estimated that about a third of evangelicals are likely to put Israel policy at the center of their electoral decision-making. (Other issues that drive evangelical voting include abortion rights and religious liberty.)

Oldmixon told Vox in 2018 that a subset of the evangelical community for whom the status of Israel is really, really important because of the way they understand the end of time would constitute about 15 million people.

But many of those voters might have been satisfied by Trumps moves already. Sarah Posner, an author who has written about the evangelicals affinity for Trump, said evangelicals were not likely to be preoccupied with the ins and outs of annexation.

Theyre very happy with the embassy move and are not going to give up on judges and policy they have long sought to enact (here) over annexation, she said. Honestly, I think most evangelicals dont truly understand the annexation issue and were more wowed by something like the embassy move.

Last month two pro-Israel evangelical leaders, Robert Jeffress and Joel Rosenberg, told The New York Times that evangelicals were indifferent to annexation and that they even might turn on Trump if he blesses annexation and it triggers regional turmoil.

I dont see any pickup among evangelical voters for this move, and theres a risk that you could lose some evangelical votes, in the very states where you might be more vulnerable, Rosenberg told the newspaper.

Notably, these figures might be heeding whispered counsel from the Israeli leaders with whom they are close who, despite their public statements, may be eager to avert a drastic step at a time that Israel is coping with a second wave of the coronavirus, and increased tensions with Iran.

But Rosenberg outlined in a detailed paper posted on his website that it was conversations with Palestinian and Arab leaders that had given him the most pause. He wrote that unilateral annexation would heighten instability in the country that evangelicals care so much about.

Now would be a good time to be praying for the peace of Jerusalem and the region, and praying that Israeli and American leaders will have true wisdom at this critical moment, Rosenberg wrote on his website. Please pray for the Palestinian people who are feeling increasingly hopeless and left out of the process and seeing the U.S. and Israel make decisions without them. And pray, too, for the leaders and peoples of the moderate Arab states who are increasingly in favor of peace with Israel and see extraordinary opportunity for enhanced prosperity for all sides if treaties can be signed and trade relationships opened. Strange times in the Epicenter these days.

With both the United States and Israel facing a surge in coronavirus cases, annexation feels far less pressing than it did July 1, the first date that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could have formally proposed the move. A top Israeli official said this week that issue is landing on the back burner because the United States was paying it little attention.

Still, Evans said his followers, too, would be praying for annexation to move forward, aggrandizing the land under Israels control.

These people are terrified right now, that God is not happy with America, he said. Theyre looking at the riots, theyre looking at the plague of corona, and theyre worried, Is God unhappy, is he cursing us? Theyre not sure, and they want God to bless them.

The post A leading Evangelical says nixing West Bank annexation could cost Trump the election. Others disagree. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Leading evangelical says no annexation could cost Trump election. Others disagree.

See more here:
Leading evangelical says no annexation could cost Trump election. Others disagree. - Forward

The Fight Over Hagia Sophia is About More Than a Building – The National Interest

Posted By on July 21, 2020

One of the architectural wonders of the world, the Hagia Sophia cathedral was conquered once before. It was converted into a mosque by its Ottoman conquerors; minarets were added, and its ancient Byzantine mosaics were whitewashed. More recently, it has functioned as a museum for decades. Now, Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan has decreed that the historic Hagia Sophia church should be reverted into a mosque once again.

This aggressive move is about much more than a UNESCO World Heritage Site. It reveals Erdogans agenda to assert his vision for an expansionist Islamist Turkey, endangering Christians and other religious minorities in Turkey and throughout the Middle East.

Built as a cathedral by the Emperor Justinian I in 537, Hagia Sophia is still central to Orthodox Christianity. Upon the conquest of Constantinople by the Ottomans, it was converted to a mosque in 1453 as a sign of the Ottomans triumph and domination of the Christian population.

Centuries later in 1934, the secular founder of modern Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, turned Hagia Sophia into a museum open to all. It had remained a museum until now. The recent change back into a mosque has upset Christian leaders around the globe who remember the Ottoman Empires brutal treatment of Christians. Some from the Orthodox tradition find the move traumatic.

When courts affirmed the validity of Erdogans plan for the cathedral, he declared, Hagia Sophia became a mosque again, after eighty-six years, in the way Fatih the conqueror of Istanbul had wanted it to be. Erdogan has long fantasized about resurrecting a neo-Ottoman state. This swing back toward the time of Ottoman sultan Fatih SultanMehmet (known as Mehmed the Conqueror) rightly alarms Christian communities throughout the Middle East because they stand in the way of Erdogans vision of a new empire.

Turkeys expansionist bent is bad news for religious minorities and anyone else that does not fit Erdogans Islamist vision for the Middle East. When Turkey launched an incursion into Kurdish-led Northeast Syria last fall, a region known as an oasis of religious freedom and equality, it fired on civilians and forced hundreds of thousands of people to flee. In areas of Syria where Turkey remains in charge, women are forced to wear head coverings, and Yazidis have been forced to convert to Islam. Many religious minorities who fled are unlikely to return if Turkey remains in the area.

Yazidis and Christians were also targeted by Turkish military aggression in northern Iraq when Turkey led an air and ground attack against Sinjar in June. It was supposedly a campaign against the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), but PKK affiliates in Sinjar have never attacked Turkey. Those that paid the highest price were the civilians trying to rebuild their lives in this war-torn region. They are still feeling the effects of the Islamic States onslaught in 2014. And now, Christian villagers were forced to flee airstrikes. Everywhere Turkey moves in, religious minorities live in fear, and innocent civilians are attacked.

After what Erdogan called resurrecting Hagia Sophia, he promised to liberate al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem. By planning to liberate the iconic mosque in Israels capital, Erdogan rallies his political base by fostering dreams of the subjugation of the Jewish state. He shows disregard for the governments of regional neighbors and that is likely to raise tensions if the Turkish government continues to make public statements like this.

Inside Turkey, non-Muslims do not fare much better. At least sixteen Christian workers have been expelled so far this year. Most training for Protestant leaders is conducted by foreign workers on long-term residence visas.

These restrictions on foreign nationals participating in ministry are a direct attack on Protestant churches growth and well-being in Turkey. It is worth remembering that it was not so long ago that the government imprisoned American pastor Andrew Brunson for two years on bogus charges ofaiding a coup attempt. The darkness of religious oppression is growing in Turkey, and that should concern us all.

When Hagia Sophia is formally reverted to a mosque later this month, it will be yet another manifestation of Erdogans vision for a conquering Islamist Turkey. Erdogan relishes the Ottoman empires history, which is a threat to religious minorities in Turkey and its surrounding countries. Ignoring Hagia Sophias legacy as a church and embracing its Islamist domination as a mosque is a dangerous sign pointing to Erdogans larger attempt to re-shape Turkey and the Middle East. Western countries should take note of the changes happening under Erdogans leadership. In his mind, the Islamization of the Hagia Sophia is just the beginning.

Arielle Del Turco is the Assistant Director of the Center for Religious Liberty at Family Research Council.

Image: Reuters

Go here to see the original:
The Fight Over Hagia Sophia is About More Than a Building - The National Interest

Wisconsin man pleads guilty to vandalizing synagogue as part of neo-Nazi group plot – Cleveland Jewish News

Posted By on July 21, 2020

A Wisconsin man has pleaded guilty to federal charges for vandalizing a synagogue in support of a neo-Nazi group plot to damage minority-owned property, including property used by Jewish citizens.

Yousef O. Barasneh, 23, was arrested in January.

He was charged with conspiring to violate citizens rights to use property free from threats and intimidation when he allegedly spray-painted swastikas and anti-Semitic words on the exterior of Beth Israel Sinai Congregation in Racine, Wisc., last September. He was also planning other acts of vandalism towards minority-owned property, according to the plea agreement.

It all occurred while he was part of a network known as The Base, which discussedthe recruitment of prospective members, the creation of a white ethno-state, acts of violence against minorities (including African-Americans and Jewish Americans) military training camps, and ways to make improvised explosive devices (IED), according to the plea agreement.

Six other people have been arrested for allegedly being part of The Base, according to court documents.

Barasneh faces up to 10 years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines. A sentencing date has yet to be scheduled.

The post Wisconsin man pleads guilty to vandalizing synagogue as part of neo-Nazi group plot appeared first on JNS.org.

The rest is here:

Wisconsin man pleads guilty to vandalizing synagogue as part of neo-Nazi group plot - Cleveland Jewish News

The Pope who Printed the Talmud – Aish

Posted By on July 19, 2020

Pope Leo X allowed a remarkable group of men to produce the first printed set of Talmud.

A volume of the Talmud dedicated to the Pope? It seems unlikely but the very first printed edition of the Talmud was in fact dedicated to Pope Leo X, who reigned as pope from 1513 until his death in 1521.

For millennia, copies of the Talmud had been painstakingly written by hand. It could take many years to complete a set of all 63 masechtot, or tractates, of the Talmud.

In 1450, a German bookmaker named Johannes Gutenberg invented the very first printing press. He used it to print pamphlets and calendars, and several copies of the Bible. The Gutenberg Bible is considered the very first printed book ever produced in Europe. In the ensuing years, other printers copied Gutenbergs invention and began printing books. Several Jewish books were printed using the new mechanical invention but nobody ever attempted to print an entire copy of the Talmud. For years, sets of the Talmud continued to be written laboriously by hand.

That changed in 1519, after years of bitter debates, when the very first complete edition of the Talmud was produced using the new invention the mechanical printing press.

One of the very first printers to produce Hebrew books in Europe was Daniel Bomberg, a Christian printer who moved from his native Antwerp to Venice in 1515 and opened a printing press business there. Venice at the time was home to a vibrant Jewish community, and Bomberg realized that he could prosper by catering to this under-served market.

Printing Jewish books wasnt so easy. His initial requests for a license were repeatedly turned down by Church and city officials. Bomberg started offering local officials ever larger bribes to allow him to print Jewish books. After paying 500 ducats an enormous sum he was granted a ten-year license to print Hebrew books.

Bomberg got to work immediately, hiring learned Jews to help him. He petitioned Venices officials for permission to hire four well-instructed Jewish men. Jews living in Venice at the time could only live in the Ghetto and were forced to wear distinctive yellow caps whenever they left the Ghettos gates. Bombergs assistants were granted permission to wear black caps like other non-Jewish workers.

Together, they started printing copies of the Chumash, the Five Books of Moses, and other Jewish books. Bomberg and his Jewish assistants decided to include the text of Targum Onkelos, the translation of the Hebrew text written by the celebrated First Century Jewish scholar Onkelos, a popular custom still in practice today.

Bombergs pro-Jewish business activities were made somewhat easier by the climate in Europe overall, which was becoming more tolerant of Jews, thanks in part to an Austrian Jewish physician named Jacob Ben Jehiel (also known as Jacob Lender).

Very little is known about Jacob Ben Jehiels personal life. Whats clear is that he was a learned Jew, fluent in Hebrew, who worked as a doctor. He died in about 1505 in Linz, Austria. Unusual for a Jew, he rose to become one of the most influential men in the Holy Roman Empire, working as the personal assistant of Emperor Frederick III, who ruled from 1452-1493. It was noted that the two men were fast friends, and Jacob Ben Jehiels friendship influenced Frederick III to be sympathetic to his Jewish subjects. At the time the emperors enemies complained he was more a Jew than a Holy Roman Emperor. Jacob was so beloved by the Emperor that Frederick III knighted him, raising him from a lowly Jewish outcast to the ranks of the nobility.

One day, a young German nobleman named Johann von Reuchlin contacted Jacob, asking for his help in learning Hebrew. Hed studied with a Jew named Kalman in Paris, von Reuchln explained, and had learned the Hebrew alphabet. Now he wanted to learn more. Jacob Ben Jehiel agreed to tutor the Christian nobleman and taught him to read and write Hebrew. They struck up a friendship that would lead to von Reuchlin defending Jewish scholarship across Europe and to the first printing of the Talmud.

Now fluent in Hebrew, Reuchlin championed Jewish books, defending Jewish scholarship from Catholic zealots who wanted to ban Jewish literature and burn Jewish books. He had many Jewish friends and was remarkably tolerant of Jewish viewpoints and scholarship. When Catholic officials demanded that he and other scholars condemn the Talmud, von Reuchlin replied contemptuously that one not condemn what one had not personally read and understood. The Talmud was not composed for every blackguard to trample with unwashed feet and then to say that he knew all of it.

Johann von Reuchlin

In the early 1500s, von Reuchlin engaged in what was known as the Battle of the Books, arguing that Jewish scholarship had merit and that Hebrew books ought not to be banned.

Reuchlins main adversary in the Battle of the Books was Johannes Pfefferkorn, a Jew who converted to Christianity. He turned on his fellow Jews and caused years of pain and misery for Jewish communities across Germany.

Pfefferkorn was a butcher by trade but he was also in trouble with the law. He was arrested for burglary in his 30s, spent time in prison, and subsequently found himself unemployable. In order to reverse his ill fortune, he volunteered to convert to Christianity and to have his wife and children convert as well. Pfefferkorn embraced Catholicism under the protection of the Dominicans, the strict Catholic order that administered the feared Inquisition. The Dominicans wasted no time in using Pfefferkorn to help bolster their attempts to persecute Jews and to ban Jewish books.

In the years between 1507 and 1509, Pfefferkorn wrote a series of booklets claiming to illuminate the secret world of Jewish thought. Although Pfefferkorn's writings show that he had a very poor grasp of Jewish scholarship, that didnt deter him as he churned out booklet after booklet excoriating Jews and the Jewish faith. His pamphlets were written in Latin and aimed at Catholic scholars and priests. They had names such as Judenbeichte (Jewish Confession) and Judenfeind (Enemy of the Jews), and Pfefferkorn falsely claimed that Jews were devious and blasphemous and that their literature ought to be banned. Though he wasnt educated enough to study it himself, Pfefferkorn demanded that the Talmud be banned in Europe.

Using Pfefferkorns booklets as proof, Dominical authorities demanded that Jews be expelled from towns which had large Jewish communities, including Regensburg, Worms and Frankfurt. Their campaign succeeded in Regensburg and the citys Jews were expelled in 1519.

Pfefferkorn and his supporters managed to convince Emperor Maximilian I to briefly ban the Talmud and other Jewish books in cities across Germany and to destroy any and all Jewish books that could be found. This alarmed more liberal Catholics, including Johann Reuchlin, whod spent so long learning Hebrew and studying Jewish holy books with Jacob Ben Jehiel. Reuchlin objected and wrote passionate defenses of the Talmud and other Jewish books. Eventually, Maximilian I reversed his decree.

The Battle of the Books raged across German cities and was debated among the educated class: should the Jewish Talmud and other holy books be banned, or were they worthy of preservation and study? Historian Solomon Grayzel notes that There was not a liberal Christian in Europe, nor a single critic of the forces of bigotry within the Church, who failed to range himself on the side of Reuchlin in defense of the Jewish books Everyone who was not a peasant in Europe was thus ranged on one or the other side in the controversy. The only people who were forced to stand aside and not participate were the ones most directly concerned the Jews. (From A History of the Jews by Solomon Grayzel. Plume: 1968)

Reuchlin eventually gained a powerful ally: Pope Leo X. A cultured, educated man, Leo X came from the fabulously wealthy Medici family. He was disposed to be tolerant towards Jews so much so that at one point the Jews of Rome wondered if his benevolence towards them was a sign that the Messiah was on his way: community elders even wrote to Jewish leaders in the Land of Israel asking if they, too, had seen signs of the Messiah coming.

Pope Leo X

In 1518, Leo X took a public stand in the Battle of the Books: not only should the Talmud not be banned and burned, he stated, but he gave a Papal Decree allowing it to be printed using the new mechanical printing presses that were all the rage in Europe. Some individual volumes of the Talmud had already been printed; now, the Pope was allowing a complete set of all 63 volumes of the Talmud (called Shas in Hebrew) to be produced. Joannes Bomberg, whod already built up a Jewish business at his printing press in Venice, was given the commission to print this first complete set of Shas on his printing presses. It was an unprecedented show of support for Jews in Europe.

But Pope Leo X imposed one crucial condition: Daniel Bomberg could print the Talmud only if he included anti-Jewish polemics in the books. Realizing that this would alienate potential readers, Bomberg successfully lobbied against including anti-Jewish screeds in his Jewish books. He did, however, make one concession to the Popes generosity: the first four volumes of the set of Talmud he was printing were dedicated to Pope Leo X.

Bomberg Babylonian Talmud, Venice Pesachim

Local Jews were reluctant to buy expensive new volumes of the Talmud dedicated to a Catholic leader whose Church regularly persecuted Jews and Jewish communities across Europe, even if Pope Leo X himself was sympathetic towards Jews. Sales were sluggish and Bomberg realized he had to make some changes, including dropping the dedication to the Pope. He also turned to Jacob ben Chaim ibn Adonijah, a Jewish proofreader from Tunisia, for help. (There is some evidence that ibn Adonijah might have converted to Christianity, like some other printers who specialized in Hebrew books in Venice at the time.)

Bromberg and ibn Adonijah devised a layout of their printed editions of the Talmud that is still in use today. They placed the Talmud text in the middle of the page, and included key commentaries on the Talmud around the central text. The commentary by Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki (known as Rashi), a Medieval French scholar was printed on one side of the page. Commentaries by a group of other Medieval Jewish sages known as the Tosefotists are found on the opposite side of the page.

This layout made it easy to read and study, and proved an immediate hit with customers. Though their title pages no longer carried a printed dedication to Pope Leo X, these beautiful books continued to be printed with his permission, enabling even more Jewish communities to study and learn from complete sets of the printed Talmud.

For further reading, see these books:

Read the original:

The Pope who Printed the Talmud - Aish

Nation of Islam posts Farrakhans call for Jews to ditch the Talmud & be saved amid Nick Cannon antisemitism debacle – RT

Posted By on July 19, 2020

The Nation of Islam posted a call from leader Louis Farrakhan to the Jewish community telling them to turn away from the Talmud to be spared by God - hours after Farrakhan fan Nick Cannon was fired over his own "antisemitism."

The black Muslim minister ordered members of the Jewish community to turn away from the Talmud and embrace the Torah and stop doing evil to those whom you believe are less than yourself and justifying it by the Talmud. The clip was posted by the Nation of Islam to Twitter on Wednesday.

If you will forsake the Talmud, God will give you more time. But if in your mind you feel that you are able to harm me or kill meI can guarantee your destruction.

Accusing Jews of making [the Talmud] greater than Gods word, Farrakhan nevertheless insisted he harbored no hate for them. They tell lies to make you think I am a bigot or antisemite, so you wont listen to what Im saying, he explained elsewhere in the speech, adding that so far theyve been pretty successful.

Farrakhan covered topics ranging from the founding of the Nation of Islam to the coronavirus to police brutality during the three-hour address, given on July 4 in honor of the sects 90th anniversary in the US. He also claimed Jews had poisoned him with radiated seed, seeking to destroy him because he represents the uncovering of their wickedness. The speech was intended to air on Fox Soul TV, butan organized complaint campaign convinced the company to cancel the broadcast.

Perhaps smelling weakness, many on social media ramped up their calls for Farrakhan to be canceled altogether. The polarizing religious leader already has the distinction of being the only non-conservative in the initial group of celebrities declared dangerous individuals by Facebook in 2018, and the Anti-Defamation League complained on Wednesday that he was the most popular antisemite in America.

Entertainer Nick Cannon brought up Farrakhan during the podcast that got him fired from ViacomCBS after over 20 years with the company, some noted, wondering why Farrakhan couldnt be canceled as well. Cannon spouted a good deal more anti-white bigotry than antisemitic comments, but Farrakhan has done his fair share of calling out white devils too.

Some rolled their eyes at Farrakhan and his followers belief that Jews control the media or the world, pointing out that if that was the case, Farrakhan wouldnt be living in it, even as others pointed out that antisemitism seemed to carry a much harsher sentence than anti-white bigotry.

However, many others jumped in to defend Farrakhan, praising his and the Nation of Islams work and noting Cannon is just the latest black celebrity to get canceled for speaking positively about him.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

Read more:

Nation of Islam posts Farrakhans call for Jews to ditch the Talmud & be saved amid Nick Cannon antisemitism debacle - RT

Who Wrote the Bible? – History

Posted By on July 19, 2020

Over centuries, billions of people have read the Bible. Scholars have spent their lives studying it, while rabbis, ministers and priests have focused on interpreting, teaching and preaching from its pages.

As the sacred text for two of the worlds leading religions, Judaism and Christianity, as well as other faiths, the Bible has also had an unmatched influence on literatureparticularly in the Western world. It has been translated into nearly 700 languages, and while exact sales figures are hard to come by, its widely considered to be the worlds best-selling book.

But despite the Bibles undeniable influence, mysteries continue to linger over its origins. Even after nearly 2,000 years of its existence, and centuries of investigation by biblical scholars, we still dont know with certainty who wrote its various texts, when they were written or under what circumstances.

READ MORE: The Bible Says Jesus Was Real. What Other Proof Exists?

The Old Testament, or Hebrew Bible, narrates the history of the people of Israel over about a millennium, beginning with Gods creation of the world and humankind, and contains the stories, laws and moral lessons that form the basis of religious life for both Jews and Christians. For at least 1,000 years, both Jewish and Christian tradition held that a single author wrote the first five books of the BibleGenesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomywhich together are known as the Torah (Hebrew for instruction) and the Pentateuch (Greek for five scrolls). That single author was believed to be Moses, the Hebrew prophet who led the Israelites out of captivity in Egypt and guided them across the Red Sea toward the Promised Land.

Yet nearly from the beginning, readers of the Bible observed that there were things in the so-called Five Books of Moses that Moses himself could not possibly have witnessed: His own death, for example, occurs near the end of Deuteronomy. A volume of the Talmud, the collection of Jewish laws recorded between the 3rd and 5th centuries A.D., dealt with this inconsistency by explaining that Joshua (Moses successor as leader of the Israelites) likely wrote the verses about Moses death.

READ MORE: Inside the Conversion Tactics of the Early Christian Church

Rembrandt van Rijn, painting of Moses Breaking the Tablets of the Law, 1659.

Fine Art Images/Heritage Images/Getty Images

That's one opinion among many, says Joel Baden, a professor at Yale Divinity School and author of The Composition of the Pentateuch: Renewing the Documentary Hypothesis. But they're already asking the questionwas it possible or not possible for [Moses] to have written them?

By the time the Enlightenment began in the 17th century, most religious scholars were more seriously questioning the idea of Moses authorship, as well as the idea that the Bible could possibly have been the work of any single author. Those first five books were filled with contradictory, repetitive material, and often seemed to tell different versions of the Israelites story even within a single section of text.

As Baden explains, the classic example of this confusion is the story of Noah and the flood (Genesis 6:9). You read along and you say, I dont know how many animals Noah took on the ark with him, he says. In this sentence it says two of every animal. In this sentence, he takes two of some animals and 14 of any animals. Similarly, the text records the length of the flood as 40 days in one place, and 150 days in another.

READ MORE: Discovery Shows Early Christians Didn't Always Take the Bible Literally

To explain the Bibles contradictions, repetitions and general idiosyncrasies, most scholars today agree that the stories and laws it contains were communicated orally, through prose and poetry, over centuries. Starting around the 7th century B.C., different groups, or schools, of authors wrote them down at different times, before they were at some point (probably during the first century B.C.) combined into the single, multi-layered work we know today.

Of the three major blocks of source material that scholars agree comprise the Bibles first five books, the first was believed to have been written by a group of priests, or priestly authors, whose work scholars designate as P. A second block of source material is known as Dfor Deuteronomist, meaning the author(s) of the vast majority of the book of Deuteronomy. The two of them are not really related to each other in any significant way, Baden explains, except that they're both giving laws and telling a story of Israel's early history.

According to some scholars, including Baden, the third major block of source material in the Torah can be divided into two different, equally coherent schools, named for the word that each uses for God: Yahweh and Elohim. The stories using the name Elohim are classified as E, while the others are called J (for Jawhe, the German translation of Yahweh). Other scholars don't agree on two complete sources for the non-priestly material. Instead, says Baden, they see a much more gradual process, in which material from numerous smaller sources was layered together over a longer period of time.

READ MORE: Why Bibles Given to Slaves Omitted Most of the Old Testament

Just as the Old Testament chronicles the story of the Israelites in the millennium or so leading up to the birth of Jesus Christ, the New Testament records Jesuss life, from his birth and teachings to his death and later resurrection, a narrative that forms the fundamental basis of Christianity. Beginning around 70 A.D., about four decades after Jesuss crucifixion (according to the Bible), four anonymously written chronicles of his life emerged that would become central documents in the Christian faith. Named for Jesuss most devoted earthly disciples, or apostlesMatthew, Mark, Luke and Johnthe four canonical Gospels were traditionally thought to be eyewitness accounts of Jesuss life, death and resurrection.

12th-13th century depiction of evangelists Luke and Matthew writing the Gospels.

DeAgostini/Getty Images

But for more than a century, scholars have generally agreed that the Gospels, like many of the books of the New Testament, were not actually written by the people to whom they are attributed. In fact, it seems clear that the stories that form the basis of Christianity were first communicated orally, and passed down from generation to generation, before they were collected and written down.

READ MORE: What Did Jesus Look Like?

Names are attached to the titles of the Gospels (the Gospel according to Matthew), writes Bible scholar Bart Ehrman in his book Jesus, Interrupted. But these titles are later additions to the Gospels, provided by editors and scribes to inform readers who the editors thought were the authorities behind the different versions.

Traditionally, 13 of the 27 books of the New Testament were attributed to Paul the Apostle, who famously converted to Christianity after meeting Jesus on the road to Damascus and wrote a series of letters that helped spread the faith throughout the Mediterranean world. But scholars now agree on the authenticity of only seven of Pauls epistles: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, Philemon. These are believed to have been written between A.D. 50-60, making them the earliest known evidence for Christianity. Authors of the later epistles may have been followers of Paul, who used his name to lend authenticity to the works.

By the 4th century A.D., Christianity had been established as the dominant religion in the Western world, and the New and Old Testaments as its most sacred texts. In the centuries to come, the Bible would only become more central to the lives and faiths of millions of people around the world, despite the mystery surrounding its origins and the ongoing, complex debate over its authorship.

Read more from the original source:

Who Wrote the Bible? - History

My article was controversial – and I talked to the haters – Forward

Posted By on July 19, 2020

Hillel and Shamai, the exemplars of rabbinic and Jewish pluralism, have a dark secret that is seldom found on the many source sheets featuring these archetypal rivals.

While most teachers focus on the many stories highlighting the high level of respect and civility between these two men and their respective study houses, we can find a story depicting the darker side and potential risk of ideological disagreement.

The Jerusalem Talmud tells of the students of Hillel and Shamai studying together in the attic of Hanania ben Hizkiya: The students of Beit Shamai stood at the bottom [of the stairs], and they killed the students of Beit Hillel. It was taught: Six of them went up [to the attic], and the rest of them attacked them with spears and swords (Yerushalmi, Shabbat 1:4). In other words, what started as a study session eventually ended with a murderous fight.

The point of the inclusion of such a story in the talmudic canon, whether fact or myth, is obvious. As a people constantly engaged in fierce debate, the Rabbis werent oblivious to the potential danger of fierce disagreement. However, it is specifically due to this deep understanding of the pathologies of ideological disagreement that made their commitment to fostering civil debate all the more noble. Judaism has always understood that potential can be equally co-opted for both good and bad.

About a week ago, I was plunged headfirst into the best and worst of internet discourse. For weeks prior, I had been having dozens of conversations with people within the right-wing Jewish community about the moral imperative to support the Black Lives Matter movement, only to have my efforts be stymied at every argument.

Black Lives Matter, they said, is anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, and even anti-American. Plus, when we say All Lives Matter, of course that includes people from the Black community! Why do we need to specifically affirm that the lives of one group of people matter?

This is the question I consistently faced from the All Lives Matter crowd. Of course, when one looks at American history, and even at many of our current policies, the answer to the above question is clear. However, to my friends in conservative circles, who have bought into the myth that we are post-systemic racism, these points of argumentation are simply met with a carefully selected (read: biased) set of statistics. I realized I needed to try something else.

Thus, my last article for The Forward, Zionism is the Jewish Black Lives Matter, was born. My argument points out that Zionism can be viewed as a Jewish rejection of All Lives Matter, as we strove for national self-determination. Similarly, I argued, Zionists should understand first-hand why particularistic movements are sometimes crucial.

This argument, I hoped, would allow right-wing Jews to understand the double standard of shouting All lives matter while also taking offense whenever someone questions the need or right for the Jews to have their own self-determination. This was the extent of the comparison.

The article came out Friday morning and, within a few hours, I had received dozens of texts and messages from a variety of friends alerting me to the fact that a handful of left-wing journalists had taken screenshots of the title, subsequently tweeting about their anger towards it. Of course, their hundreds of thousands of followers mirrored the rage without even having read the piece. People came up with all sorts of arguments they thought I was making (from their analysis of the title alone) and then proceeded to call me a whole range of insulting epithets based on their mistaken understanding.

I always strive to foster an environment of civil debate. I have written about the need to talk with civility to anti-Semites, I attempt to personally and nicely answer every negative email and social media comment I receive on my writing, and I try to live by this principle every day of my life. The importance of civil debate, Judaism teaches, is simply too important to have it be ruined by anger and ad-hominems, no matter how enticing and cathartic these reactions may be.

In the wake of this latest article, many of my friends, and even my own mother, urged me to take a break from writing about controversial topics. It isnt worth it, they said, to attempt to have nuanced and important conversion on social media, a realm known for its polarization. But I disagreed. I quickly commented on every re-tweet and re-share of my article, telling people that I wrote the article and would love to talk more about it!

My faith in conversation was quickly restored. Dozens of email threads, personal messages, and even a couple of phone calls immediately transpired. Threads that had started with insults and curses ended with apologies. However, the best result came in response to a video that Jewish rapper Y-Love made about my article. I found this video to be a misrepresentation of my article and argument - but knew that commenting something adversarial wouldnt be of any help. Instead I left a nice comment ending with asking Y-Love if he wanted to talk. Civility won the day as Y-Love invited me onto his show and subsequently interviewed me about the article and other germane topics.

As national polarization along with our online interaction increases - the ability for civil debate is more important than ever. The outrage culture cultivated in the online world, on both sides of the political aisle, is ugly and dangerous, but we must work through it. Although the debates between Hillel and Shamai even turned violent, the Talmud teaches that they still married one anothers daughters, thereby remaining one community. In todays polarized culture each of us has the potential to be an immense force for either destruction or civility. My experience has taught me to keep choosing civility.

Moshe Daniel Levine is the Senior Jewish Educator at OC Hillel and a Rabbinic fellow at Temple Beth Tikvah. You can read more of his writing on his website. He can be reached at dlevine21@gmail.com.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are the authors own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Forward.

View original post here:

My article was controversial - and I talked to the haters - Forward

Musings of a rabbi in the period of pandemic – Jewish News

Posted By on July 19, 2020

This period of pandemic has opened up different ways of looking at the world. Different approaches, different values, and different positions. For myself and my family, our small garden has offered one of those changes. It was blessed with grass that did not grow too well and until the lockdown period did not contain that much to enjoy. It is now full of growth and life.

We have potatoes and tomatoes, thyme and fenugreek, geraniums, and sunflowers and more. I have become interested in bringing garden birds into our small patch with bird feeders, a bird bath tempting the beautiful variety of bird life in. And this means spending more time looking out into the garden at the plethora of life that is blessing it now.

Photo by Yanna Zissiadou at Unsplash, https://unsplash.com/photos/I7Y6Gb-JYmE

But one other personal delightful diversion from the pandemic has been learning a page a day of the Talmud, the Daf Yomi programme. It is the first time I have attempted to build this into my life, and I am so thrilled that it has worked. But there are times I must admit when my eyes veer from the page of Talmud to the window of my conservatory to view the garden and check if any birdlife appears. And suddenly, I remembered a statement in Ethics of the Fathers, a book of Rabbinic morality which is part of the Mishna. Here it is for you learn:

Rabbi Jacob said, One who is reviewing his Torah study while walking on the way, and interrupts his Torah study to say What a beautiful tree, or What a beautiful field, is regarded by Scripture as if he endangered his soul

Maybe this statement was creating a sense of prioritisation. Torah, the text that created the Jewish nation, is surely more connected to our national soul, than the natural world we observe outside. But this approach surely comes with dangers. I could spend all my time learning, and not give enough attention to the predicament that Gods world outside is in. So, I was delighted to find the commentary of the famous Rabbi Yehuda Loew, the Maharal of Prague on this statement. There the Maharal emphasises that the above statement is talking about someone who separates from learning in order to view the beauty of nature. The individual is then turning from away from a life source of our Jewish identity. But if this is a temporary break from ones learning to which he or she returns soon after, all is good. So, I could carry on delighting at learning the Torah, and taking welcome breaks to check on the natural diversity through my conservatory window.

Of course, the statement in Ethics of the Fathers mentions the importance of not interrupting the studying of Torah. It does not however refer to praying, to davening. Prayer and Learning Torah are of course different. Torah to many is a way we engage with the will of God through our intellectual faculties, whereas prayer can be an emotional path to God. Is it possible that the emotive beauty of nature can pull me away from the Talmudic pursuit of understanding; but augment and deepen my appreciation of prayer?

Either way, with the natural world under threat in so many ways, this is more than a lachrymose posturing towards nature. Rather this can be an opportunity to proactively bring Gods world of nature into our world of learning Gods Torah without tipping the balance too much.

Rabbi David Mason is rabbi to an Orthodox community of over 1000 people in London and is on the executive of the Rabbinical Council of the United Synagogue. He has an MA in Conflict Resolution in Divided Societies and undertakes a great deal of civic and inter faith work. He was recently appointed as trustee for FODIP (Forum for Discussion on Israel and Palestine) and the Council of Christians of Jews as well as now Chairing the Haringey Multi Faith Network. He also has two years training in family therapy.

Read more from the original source:

Musings of a rabbi in the period of pandemic - Jewish News

The Terrifying Feeling of Being Alone in the World – Aish

Posted By on July 19, 2020

Embracing your unique self is essential for relating to others.

Remember when you were just beginning to take your first steps? You had been holding onto the sofa in the living room and your parents and grandparents were clapping and cheering as you let go of the sofa with one hand and took a step forward. Then you completely let go of the couch and took two or three shaky but quick steps into the middle of the room. You were smiling, two bottom teeth flashing and everyone was screaming, You did it! Hooray! You're walking!

As you took each new step, your father went to the middle of the room, and took a step backward as he held out his hands to encourage you to keep walking. And then you stopped and realized that you weren't holding on to anything or anyone. You were on your own in the middle of the room. How did I get here? you asked yourself. What am I doing out here all by myself without anything to hold me up? I cant do this! And you sat down on the floor in a flood of tears as your mother rushed over and scooped you up.

Standing in the middle of the room on your own was a crucial moment of self awareness that you were independent. You were no longer holding onto the couch or onto Mommys apron strings. It was just you and the world. That was the first fleeting moment that you subconsciously realized that you were a persona self in your own right.

And what is the natural reaction to this realization of a personal identity? Absolute terror. So you sat down.

That feeling is one of fear of your own identity, of being alone within your own self. This realization is ingrained as part of the human condition. It is an existential feeling of being alone on your own in the big living room called the world.

This realization can give rise to your feeling alienated, isolated and lonely. And it is natural. Whenever you feel isolated or lonely in life, you are tapping into the same feeling that you first experienced standing alone in the middle of your parents living room as you walked for the first time.

Those scary, lonely situations don't have to give rise to a feeling of alienation. Yes, you are alone because you are unique! No one else in the entire universe has your personality, your unique DNA, your upbringing, environment and unique mix of abilities and weaknesses.

Now you can say to yourself, I am different and therefore, I am lonely" or "I am different and therefore I am unique and special." In order to play your unique role in the world you have to be alone. But this does not mean that you have to be lonely.

This awareness of your unique self can be a motivator. It can challenge you with the realization that your unique characteristics empower you to perform a unique job that only you can perform. You have been handpicked for your unique destiny. When you look at your existential self in this light you can turn the liability of being lonely, into the asset of being alone and unique in the world. Instead of living in dread of your loneliness, you can revel in your aloneness. It is only when you are alone that you can truly fulfill your potential.

The Jerusalem Talmud (Sanhedrin 4) asks why God created the first man, Adam, alone. It explains that Adam was created alone so that each and every person who is born could relate and identify with his singularity and aloneness and say: I am like Adam.

In creating Adam alone, God challenges us to become aware of our separate and unique identities and to get to know ourselves so that we can successfully relate to others. We have to become self-aware; we must learn to relate to ourselves. Before Eve married Adam, she was an individual in her own right. We need to become aware of our individuality before we enter into a healthy, giving relationship.

This is the meaning of Hillels famous saying in the Ethics of the Fathers: If I am not for myself, who will be for me? (1:4). Far from being a statement promoting the ego, it is really a challenge that you have to get to know who you are and learn to develop a personal self-concept as a prerequisite to activating your potential.

More here:

The Terrifying Feeling of Being Alone in the World - Aish


Page 1,016«..1020..1,0151,0161,0171,018..1,0301,040..»

matomo tracker