Jewish American Heritage Month

Posted By admin on August 22, 2017

Richard Spencer, the prominent alt-right white supremacist, recently described himself to an Israeli TV interviewer as a white Zionist. That claim, coming from the leader of such a viciously antisemitic movement, is ironic and ridiculous. But if Spencers hope was to win sympathy from Zionists, his claim of an analogy between Zionism and white nationalism is also sure to please and energize anti-Israel activists.

The parallel is false, and perniciously so. In this time of emboldened racism, and of great need for unity in opposition to white supremacism and other forms of hate, it has never been more crucial to understand why.

The key point: Jewishness and whiteness are extremely different concepts.

Jewish ethnic identity is multi-racial and inclusive. There are Jews of all races and ethnicities, from Ashkenazim and Sephardim, who look European, to Mizrahim, who look Middle Eastern, to the Ethiopian Beta Israel community, who look African, to other Jews of color. And thats just Jews from birth; importantly, Jewish identity isnt closed Anyone, in theory, can join the Jewish people. (Jewish denominations may argue over how conversion should work, but everyone agrees that an on-ramp exists). White racial identity, on the other hand, is rigidly exclusive.

Jewish identity expresses a thick, positive culture. The Jewish people has existed for thousands of years as a proud and distinct nation with shared history, languages, texts, beliefs, customs, institutions, and artistic traditions. Whiteness, on the other hand, has no cultural content in itself. Many cultures that happen to be predominantly white are thick, beautiful cultures deserving of celebration on their own termsFrench culture, Scotch-Irish Appalachian culture, British culture, etc.but it is not whiteness that defines these cultures, and they have all included many non-white cultural contributors, both now and in the past. There is such a thing as an Irish ballad, but not a white ballad. American whiteness crystallized as a negative definition implying full citizenship, over against Blacks, Indians, mestizos, Asians, and others who were seen as exploitable and enslavable. Unlike Jewish identity in its cultural richness, whiteness is new and irredeemably synonymous with tyranny. White people should take pride in their cultures, nations, religions, and morebut not in whiteness itself.

Israels Declaration of Independence states clearly that the Jewish State will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex and guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture. Muslim Arabs serve in the Knesset and on the Supreme Court. Israeli Druze serve in the military. Israel is a state whose mission is fundamentally about being a homeland for the Jewish people, and, just as fundamentally about the equality of all human beingsitself a Jewish principle.

Thats Israel in theory and, at its best, in fact. Now, in practice, and at its worst, there is a great deal of racism and discrimination in Israeljust like everywhere else where there are humans. (And all of us should be working as actively as we can to fight racism in Israel, in America, and everywhere.) But thats a failure of Israeli society to live up to its fundamental principles of equality, not a successful realization of racist principles. The implication by Spencer is that Israels fundamental essence is similar to the white nationalist ideal; show me a white nationalist manifesto that takes as many pains as the Israeli Declaration does to revere racial and cultural equality and inclusion, and then the comparison might be very slightly less risible.

White people exert dominant control in many countries, many of which are the most powerful countries on earth. Jews have only one dedicated homeland, and a tiny one at that. And that homeland is certainly needed as a potential refuge. The Shoah demonstrated that with particular horror within living memory, but both before that dark time and after it, a steady drumbeat of anti-Jewish harassment, hate crimes, and murders has proven it time and again. Many countries have been safe places for Jews for a handful of centuries here and there, as the United States is today; but these golden ages do not last forever. If Richard Spencer gets his way, this one certainly wontas the vile march in Charlottesville clearly showed.

So no, there is no meaningful parallel between the alt-right fantasy and the Zionist reality.

Stepping back, we should remember that this conversation isnt only about Israel. (Is it ever?) These distinctions matter for the larger conversations were having about nationalism and immigration. Its tempting to oversimplify the issue into a binary choice: to be either (A) ethnic/racial/religious nation-states with first-class citizenship for one homogeneous, dominant caste and second-class citizenship (or slavery) for others; or (B) purely technocratic countries committed to equality for all, with no cultural agenda save personal autonomy, no hint of ethnic or nationalist symbolism, and no official status given to any one or more cultural or religious groups in any way.

But the world need not be so simple. The United Kingdom grants freedom of worship to all, but its Queen is also head of the Church of England. France is militantly committed to galit, but it is also committed to authenticity in the French language, and maintains the Acadmie franaise to safeguard it. These countrieslike Israelsit on the vast and varied landscape of choices beyond the two extremes, choices that enshrine some mix of both universal equality and particularistic national identity. These two concepts are often in tension with one another, but are not mutually exclusive. As America wrestles with a chilling renaissance of the most hateful kinds of nationalism, we must never let the likes of Richard Spencer trick us into forgetting that.

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

Read more:
Sorry, Richard Spencer: Comparing Zionism to White Nationalism Is ... - Forward

Category: Zionism | Comments Off on Sorry, Richard Spencer: Comparing Zionism to White Nationalism Is … – Forward
Tags:

Posted By admin on August 22, 2017

Identifying himself as a white Zionist, alt-right figure Richard Spencer recently told Israeli television, I want us to have a secure homeland for us and ourselves, just like you want a secure homeland in Israel. Spencers statement ignited debate over the nature of Israel and whether its framework as a Jewish state parallels the goals of white nationalists like Spencer.

The Forward interviewed Reda Mansour, a Druze Israeli diplomat who has served as Israels ambassador to Brazil and Ecuador. The Druze are an ethnoreligious group whose religion incorporates elements of the Abrahamic faiths and various other religious and philosophical beliefs. Concentrated mainly in the Galilee, there are approximately 140,000 Druze living in Israel. As a member of a racial minority living in Israel who identifies as a Zionist, we thought Mansours was a crucial voice in this conversation. The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

What does it mean to be a Druze Zionist?

It depends on whats the definition of Zionist. I see [Zionism] historically as the national movement of the Jewish people that lead to the creation of Israel. And now, Zionism is patriotism. In that respect, [the Druze] are following our tradition. Our people are very proud of their Israeli identity. They see it as a way to integrate and become an active member of Israeli society.

Is Richard Spencers framing of Israel as an ethnostate accurate?

Its shocking that he would even think there was something similar between what he is advocating and what we are in Israel. First of all, Israeli is not a race-based identity. Even when you say you want to create a homeland for the Jewish people, you are talking about almost every race Jews who came from Europe, Jews who came from Ethiopia, the Arab world. Race in Israel doesnt exist in that sense. Zionism or Israeli identity has never looked at race as an indicator of becoming a part of our society.

We look at ourselves as a country that wants to have some kind of balance between the Jewish identity of the state and democratic values. If one of these dimensions is not be there, Israel will not be there as well.

I find it very tragic that in American political discourse now, you have to choose between patriotism and favoring diversity. Especially as a Druze, our identity is a combination of these two things. We are living proof in the Middle East that you can be for patriotism and for diversity at the same time.

Do Palestinians or other minority populations under Israeli control have the right to self determination?

I think that globally, the world is being torn apart by these political tendencies bringing us to the era of city-states. Now, every region and every small ethnic or religious group wants some kind of autonomy. This is a global challenge where do we draw the line and create a balance where people live under some kind of national framework that allows for the ability to represent themselves? The Druze have created this identity where we will be raising the flags of our countries everywhere, but at the same time, we insist on raising our own flags and being respected. So I think [Druze] culture can be used to show how we can live with multiple identities.

In past interviews, Druze citizens of Israel even those who express a deep-seated pride in the state of Israel have described to me a sense of otherness in their interactions with wider Jewish society. Druze soldiers detail suspicion or distance from fellow soldiers because they speak Arabic, the language of the enemy. Druze townships and schools receive less funding per capita from the Israeli government than Jewish ones. Does the construction of an explicitly Jewish nation and state inevitably produce second-class treatment towards minority civilians? Or are these features merely that of any imperfect modern society?

I dont like to draw a rosy picture that everything is perfect in Israel and that we dont need to work on equality issues. But I think we have to put these issues in context. One of them is that we live in the geographical periphery in Israel. You hear complaints about discrimination against those in the periphery. If you move to Tel Aviv, though, I dont think Druze have a different life from the Jews who live in Tel Aviv.

Our challenge is how do we bring further development to the periphery so that people dont feel different. Culturally and education-wise, we started from a very underdeveloped place. We were living in villages existing there for hundreds of years. This set up of separate Jewish and Druze towns is historical. Its not something normal that we should keep in the future.

I think we will start seeing more mixed communities. The Arab middle class is moving more to Jewish towns and cities. This process is now happening everywhere in Israel Haifa, Tel Aviv, or Nazareth Illit, which is more than 20% middle class Arab. This is a healthy process. I think it will be easier for people to move and buy houses in areas that are more developed.

What role does multiculturalism have in Zionist society?

From the beginning, the founders of the Zionist movement were quite secular, looking at Judaism in its cultural forms. They understood that they are coming to a diverse area and that this new Jewish state must be coexisting with these cultures in it and around it. Its already difficult to integrate society like in America or Europe. To integrate society in a state of constant war makes everything much more complicated.

How do you identify with Hatikvah considering its lyrics address Jews?

I think that a lot of Israelis understand that Hatikvah doesnt represent [modern-day] Israel. It discusses a state that we want to build in the future when in fact the state has already been here for 70 years. I think many Israelis understand that, but they feel uncomfortable dealing with these issues because they feel some voices calling for change dont actually want to create something inclusive that will preserve the unique Jewishness of the country. Its hard to have this debate when you still have an Israeli-Arab conflict and voices in the Arab world calling for the end of Israel. When I was younger, I took a simplistic side that we probably need to change the symbols and national anthem. Today, I understand its something we have to be very careful with. In Europe, the most liberal and human rights-oriented region, you still have countries with crosses in their flags and language about Christian identity in their constitutions. You have countries like Spain that dont even include lyrics in their anthem because its so divisive.

I want to point out that before signing the peace treaty with Israel, Egypts national anthem was very militaristic and combative. After they signed the peace agreement, they came out with a new anthem focused on love of country. In order to change national symbols, the political climate needs to change.

What makes you most proud to be an Israeli?

We are different than most countries around us, which have a very small group of elites and limited opportunities for others. The middle class in the Middle East almost doesnt exist. Today, an Israeli minority can have access to very good public education, public health system, and can get a very good job even if they came from a modest family in the periphery. Kids in villages now can look at my generation and see what they can achieve.

What are your biggest frustrations with Israel?

I think in the age of social networks, more and more extreme voices are taking over the political agenda, which I find dangerous to all societies. The social networks allow public participation, but they also encourage extremism. Also, a trend you see in Israel and all over the world is as a result of globalization, people are going back to religion as a greater factor for their identity. I dont have any problems with religious identity, but I think its dangerous when religion becomes more active in politics.

It is difficult to see in Israel the widening of the social gaps. Today, those who have more are making more, and those who have less are becoming poorer. I think you cant sustain democracy with these challenges.

What are your biggest frustrations with the conversations surrounding Israel?

The simplicity of the discourse. Especially in the West, I think we sometimes find it hard to explain the complexity of our situation and that there are no easy, simple fixes to our problems. In the age of Internet, political debates about our issues just become propaganda wars. Its very sad to see how every side is living in their own silo, identifying with their own victimhood without trying to see there is a whole other part of the conflict.

Steven Davidson is an editorial fellow at the Forward.

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

More:
Why This Druze Israeli Identifies As A Zionist - Forward

Category: Zionism | Comments Off on Why This Druze Israeli Identifies As A Zionist – Forward
Tags:

Posted By simmons on August 22, 2017

Literary criticAdam Kirschis readinga page of Talmuda day, along with Jews around the world.

For readers who are following the Daf Yomi cycle, this month marks a major anniversary. It has been five years since we began reading the Talmud, back in August 2012, with the first page of Tractate Berachot. Since then, we have made our way through some 1,800 folio pages (though a few may have slipped through the cracks along the way) and completed 23 of the 37 tractates of the Babylonian Talmud. Our journey through the whole text is now two-thirds done; the 13th Daf Yomi cycle will be completed in January 2020, whereupon the 14th will begin the very next day. For despite the calendar, there is no end to the study of Talmud: as tradition says, it is like an ocean, and a whole lifetime isnt enough to sound its depths.

My own encounter with the Talmud has been unusual in a number of ways, and I am constantly aware of the unorthodoxyin several sensesof my approach to it here in Tablet. One difference has to do with terminology: Usually, people say they are learning Talmud, rather than reading it, and while any reading of it involves constant learning, I do feel that reading is the right word for what Im doing. I am not learning from a teacher, but going it alone, which to me seems like the only way to read. I am reading in English, not learning the original Hebrew and Aramaic. And, of course, I am writing about my experience here in Tablet. In all these ways, my Daf Yomi experience is nonstandard, though I hope not inauthentic.

The more profound unorthodoxy, however, has to do with belief and observance. Talmud study has expanded greatly in recent yearsthe popularity of Daf Yomi is a sign of that, as is the appearance of a wonderful tool such as the Koren Talmud Bavli, the English edition which I am reading. But it is still the case that the vast majority of people who spend time with the Talmud are Orthodox Jews. I was raised in a Conservative synagogue and today I am not observant, which puts me at a disadvantage in many ways. Customs and laws that to Orthodox Jews are second nature are new discoveries for me.

I still remember how, early in the cycle, I wrote about the Talmudic dictum that ones shoes should be tied in a certain order: First you put on the right, then the left, then tie the left, then tie the right. I had never heard this before and it struck me as a strange idea: why should God care how we put on shoes? When I wrote this, however, one reader complained that if I didnt know such a basic Jewish fact as the right way to put on shoes, I had no business writing about the Talmud at all. It was a good demonstration of the gulf in Jewish practice and expectation between Orthodox and non-Orthodox Jews.

I believe, however, that for the purposes of these columns, my unfamiliarity with the Talmud might actually be an advantage. I think I approach the text with the kind of assumptions and questions that the majority of American Jews (and non-Jewish readers, too) would bring to it. What, on the most basic level, does the Talmud say? What sorts of subjects is it concerned with? How is it written? What is the famous Talmudic quality that, in English, is merely a synonym for needless complication? One reason I wanted to write about the Talmud is that I could never find a book that answered these questions in what felt like a concrete and comprehensive way. I hope to serve as a kind of scout of the territory for readers interested in the Talmudhopefully, a good, encouraging scout like Joshua and Caleb, not an intimidated or despairing one like the other 10spies.

And the landscape I have discovered is amazingly varied. Because Jewish law is so encompassing, covering every area of human life, the Talmud deals with everything under the sun. Medicine and astronomy, architecture and geometry, cuisine, and cosmeticsthese facets of ancient life are captured in the Talmud in all their living reality. Then there are the major subjects of the various tractates: the prayer service; the organization and operation of the Temple; the holidays and their rituals; Shabbat and its many restrictions; marriage and divorce; real estate and commerce; contracts and court procedure. For the rabbis, all these elements went to make up what they knew as Judaism. The Judaism most of us know in the 21st century is a very different thing; under the pressures of modernity, science, and assimilation, we have lost touch with that ancient heritage.

This is not simply to be regrettedwe have gained as well as lost, and alienation from the past is not only a Jewish experience. But I think that many modern Jews feel a longing to give their Jewishness a deeper meaning, a spiritual and intellectual content. We know we are Jewsthe world wouldnt let us forget it even if we wanted tobut what does being Jewish mean? That is the great modern Jewish question, and much of our thought and literature is devoted to answering it. But there is no real way of understanding what Jewishness means unless we understand what it meant; and for that, the Talmud, the text that stood at the center of Jewish life for more than a thousand years, is essential. Without it, we can hardly expect to know what our ancestors thought, or even more important, how they thought.

There is no real way of understanding what Jewishness means unless we understand what it meant

After five years, Im much more familiar with Talmudic ways of thinking than when I began, but it still has the power to surprise me. A good example came in last weeks reading, in Sanhedrin 19b, when the rabbis try to make sense of a confusing set of relationships in the story of King David, in the Book of Samuel. The Talmudic passage begins with a discussion of the unique legal status of a Jewish king, who is exempt from being judged by a court and from giving evidence in court. Another privilege of kings is that no one may marry a kings widow. Here Rabbi Yehuda objects: actually, he says, another king may marry a kings widow. This is proved by the example of David, who is said to have married the wives of your master, Saul, after Saul died.

The sages, however, disagree with Yehudas interpretation of the biblical verse. When it says the wives of your master, it does not mean Sauls wives, but rather women appropriate to him from the house of the king: that is, relatives of Saul who would be suitable to marry David. These were his daughters, Meirav and Michal, both of whom were promised to David by Saul. But this raises another problem, which is that Jewish law forbids a man to marry two sisters. Thus Rabbi Yoseis students asked him: How did David marry two sisters while they were both alive?

To get around this obstacle, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korcha comes up with an ingenious explanation, drawing on the law of marriage contracts. At first, he reasons, David was betrothed to Meirav; but the betrothal was legally invalid, which left him free to marry her sister Michal. And why was the betrothal invalid? Because earlier, Saul had promised a treasure to anyone who killed Goliath, the giant Philistine warrior. When David accomplished this feat, he became Sauls creditor. Now, betrothal under Jewish lawas we learned extensively in Tractate Kiddushinrequires the payment of money or an article of value; it can be a small sum, as little as one peruta (a coin of little value), but it must actually be paid. If the groom forgives an outstanding loan from the brides father, this does not count as payment, and any betrothal on that basis is invalid. David, the Rabbi argues, must have betrothed Meirav by forgiving the loan (really the promised reward) from Saul, which is illegal; therefore he was never actually betrothed to Meirav at all, and so he was free to marry Michal.

This passage is remarkable not just for its legal and intellectual dexterity, or for its command of the Biblical texttwo of the chief rabbinic virtues. It also reveals the rabbis lack of what might be called a historical sensethat is, a sense that Jewish life has changed over time. For Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korcha, it stands to reason that iron-age chieftains like Saul and David lived by the same halakha that he knew, a thousand years later. There is no room for the idea that halakha evolved, that Torah meant something different to David than it does to the Talmudic sages. Indeed, the Talmud regularly depicts Davidand even earlier Biblical figures, like the patriarchsas if they were rabbis, debating the law in Talmudic fashion. (When the Bible says that David slayed two warriors, the Talmud says at one point, it really means that he studied two tractates of Mishna.)

This anachronistic way of thinking grows directly out of the rabbis sense of the permanence of Torah. The law does not change, and so Judaism does not change. In fact, of course, it does evolve dramatically over time, and the rabbis of the Talmud themselves participate in that evolution. But they innovate without acknowledging that this is what they are doing; their innovations are always cast as recoveries of the Torahs original meaning. This way of nullifying historical change is one of the Talmuds strangest and most important ways of thinking: time itself means something different to the rabbis than it does to us. This is the kind of discovery that can only be made by encountering the Talmud directly. After five years, Im still grateful for such surprises, which teach me more about what Judaism means than any other Jewish experience Ive had.

***

Adam Kirsch embarked on theDaf Yomicycle of daily Talmud study inAugust2012. To catch up on the complete archive,click here.

Adam Kirsch is a poet and literary critic, whose books include The People and the Books: 18 Classics of Jewish Literature.

Link:

There is no real way of understanding what Jewishness means unless we understand what it meant - Tablet Magazine

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on There is no real way of understanding what Jewishness means unless we understand what it meant – Tablet Magazine
Tags:

Posted By richards on August 22, 2017

Today, from 9:05 a.m. Pacific Time to 4:09 Eastern, the United States will be treated to a solar eclipse for the first time in 38 years. And while well all be looking up to glimpse the celestial wonder, anyone harboring ill-will towards the Jews better beware: a solar eclipse is a very bad omen for anti-Semites.

Its right there in the Talmud. Tractate Sukkah 29a brings us this nugget from Rabbi Meir: When the heavenly lights, i.e. the sun and the moon, are eclipsed, it is a bad omen for the enemies of the Jewish people, because they are experienced in being beaten. This is similar to a teacher who comes to the school with a strap in his hand. Who worries? The child who is accustomed to being beaten each and every day.

In other words, when they see the shadow falling on the sun, our foes should stop and reflect that no plot to exterminate the Jews ever ended well for the perpetrators.

But that doesnt mean that we should rejoice: According to a new and fascinating article by Dr. Jeremy Brown in Hakirah: The Flatbush Journal of Jewish Law and Thought, its precisely the ominous nature of the eclipse that drove some rabbis to warn against saying a berachah, or blessing, when the sky goes dark.

Menachem Mendel Schneerson, for example, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, argued that when we see the eclipse, we should pray instead for those whove stirred Gods wrath. There is a well-established principle that it is forbidden to institute a blessing that is not mentioned in the Talmud, he wrote. And some say that the reason that no blessing was instituted is because the eclipse is a bad omen. To the contrary, it is important to pray for the omen to be annulled, and to cry out without a berachah.

And if all this strikes you as too much extrapolation on what is essentially a natural occurrence, youd probably find much to dislike about the Talmuds explanation of why solar eclipses happen in the first places. The Sages taught that on account of four matters the sun is eclipsed, reads Tractate Sukkah. On account of a president of the court who dies and is not eulogized appropriately, and the eclipse is a type of eulogy by Heaven; on account of a betrothed young woman who screamed in the city that she was being raped and there was no one to rescue her; on account of homosexuality; and on account of two brothers whose blood was spilled as one.

Whats the common thread tying these four together? Rashi, Dr. Brown wrote, asked himself the very same question. His answer? I do not know of an explanation for this.

So as you look up tomorrow, you could see the eclipse as a metaphor for sin, as the famous Maharal of Prague, he of the Golem fame, had done. You could see it as the universe taking its course. Or you could see it as an invitation, coming right at the cusp of the Hebrew month of Elul, which begins on Tuesday, to reflect and repent and change your ways. Whatever you decide, at least get the right pair of glasses.

Liel Leibovitz is a senior writer for Tablet Magazine.

Go here to read the rest:

Liel Leibovitz - Tablet Magazine

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on Liel Leibovitz – Tablet Magazine
Tags:

Posted By simmons on August 22, 2017

Teresa Manning, a deputy assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, praised Joseph Sobran, who had a long history of negative statements about Jews and their alleged influence in the U.S.

WASHINGTON -- An official appointed by the Trump administration to a senior position at the Department of Health and Human Services at one time praised a defender and politicalally of Holocaust deniers, according to a report published on Monday by Mother Jones magazine. Teresa Manning, a deputy assistant secretary at HHS, who was a vocal anti-abortion activist and is now responsible for family planning policy, once called Joseph Sobran, a writer who strongly defended Holocaust deniers, the finest columnist of his generation and a national treasure,Mother Jones reported.

The quotes attributed to Manning are from 2003, when she hosted a panel at aconference of anti-abortion activists. Sobran, who was one of the speakers at the conference, was a leading voice on abortion issues and also had a long history of negative statements about Jews and their alleged influence in the United States.

In introducing Sobran, Manning reportedly said: He has been called the finest columnist of his generation as well as a national treasure. I wholeheartedly agree with both statements.

The report publishedon Mondaynotes that just a few months before thatevent, Sobran was a speaker at a conference organized by the Institute for Historical Review, an organization devoted to denyingthe historical facts of the Holocaust and promoting research that calls the number of Jews murdered by the Nazis, the methods used to exterminate the Jews and other core elements of the Holocaust into question.

Sobran praised the anti-Semitic organization on multiple occasions and wrote in an article in 2001 that the group was being threatened by Jewish thugs who are narrow-minded and refuse to hold a debate on the true nature of the Holocaust.

We've got more newsletters we think you'll find interesting.

Please try again later.

This email address has already registered for this newsletter.

Obviously, something disastrous happened to the Jews during World War II; even the revisionists dont deny that, he wrote. But does the word Holocaust accurately sum up the Jewish misfortune? Maybe so; maybe the secular Jewish-Zionist thugs and pressure groups are essentially right. But thats a conclusion Id want to reach as a free man, not because a different conclusion might result in my kneecaps being broken. And in this controversy, I know which side is appealing to my mind, and which is going for my kneecaps.

Sobran also defended David Irving, the Holocaust denier whose libel suit against historian Deborah Lipstadt was the subject of a book that she wrote as well as the film Denial. In his2001 article, Sobran called Irving brilliant and added that Irving has been fined $18,000 in Germany for arguing that an Auschwitz cyanide chamber was a mere replica. He was correct, but he had to pay anyway.

Sobran also remarked: The Holocaust controversy is so bitter that it cant even be called a debate. One side refuses to debate, denying that there is anything to debate.

At the 2002 conference that took place just months before Manning praised him at the anti-abortion event, Sobran came to the defense of the Institute for Historical Review, saying in my thirty years in journalism,nothing has amazed me more than the prevalent fear in the profession of offending Jews, especially Zionist Jews. The Holocaust, he said, has become a device for exempting Jews from normal human obligations.

In 1993, he wasfired as a columnist for the conservative National Reviewby editor William F. Buckley, who had once mentored Sobran and now disparaged his contextually anti-Semitic writing, Mother Jones noted.

Sobran died in 2010. His anti-Semitic rhetoric was mentioned in his Washington Post obituary, and according to the Mother Jones report, he had been well-known in right-wing political circles as early as the 1990s, long before Manning praised him as a national treasure in 2003. The magazine said Manning failed to respond to a request for comment for its article.

Want to enjoy 'Zen' reading - with no ads and just the article? Subscribe today

Here is the original post:

Trump official reportedly praised defender of Holocaust deniers ... - Haaretz

Category: Holocaust Denial | Comments Off on Trump official reportedly praised defender of Holocaust deniers … – Haaretz
Tags:

Posted By richards on August 22, 2017

C-SPAN

A pro-life activist whom President Trump appointed to run the Department of Health and Human Services family planning programs once praised a controversial writer who repeatedly defended Holocaust deniers and was once fired for writing columns that his own editor called anti-Semitic.

Teresa Manning, a new deputy assistant secretary at HHS, edited a book of pro-life essays in 2003, and moderated a panel discussion in Washington that year to promote it, Mother Jones magazine recounted on Monday. In her remarks, she praised Joseph Sobran, who was also speaking and had contributed to the book, saying that Sobran has been called the finest columnist of his generation as well as a national treasure. I wholeheartedly agree with both statements.

However, Manning could have been aware that a few months prior, Sobran had spoken at the annual conference of the Institute for Historical Review, a prominent Holocaust denial organization. In his remarks to the IHR, Sobran claimed that The only discernible duty of Jews, it seems, is to look out for Israel. He said that he was not himself a Holocaust denier, but, he asked, Why on earth is it anti-Jewish to conclude from the evidence that the standard numbers of Jews murdered are inaccurate, or that the Hitler regime, bad as it was in many ways, was not, in fact, intent on racial extermination?

Because of this, The American Conservative magazine co-founded by Pat Buchanan withdrew an offer for Sobran to write a column.

Sobrans extreme views should not have been a surprise to Manning or anyone else: In 1993, he was fired by National Review, the most prominent right-wing magazine of its time, for writing articles that editor William F. Buckley called contextually anti-Semitic.

Contact Aiden Pink at pink@forward.com or on Twitter, @aidenpink.

Follow this link:

Trump Appointee Praised Writer Who Defended Holocaust Deniers - Forward

Category: Holocaust Denial | Comments Off on Trump Appointee Praised Writer Who Defended Holocaust Deniers – Forward
Tags:

Posted By admin on August 22, 2017

Donors have shown greater interest in supporting the Anti-Defamation League since the August 12 violence at a neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesvile, Virginia (AFP Photo/CHIP SOMODEVILLA)

New York (AFP) - Donations to the Anti-Defamation League, one of the oldest anti-discrimination, anti-Semitic organizations in the United States, have spiked sharply since the violence in Charlottesville, the group said Monday.

ADL spokeswoman Betsaida Alcantara said donations like the one from James Murdoch -- head of Fox News, who last week announced a million-dollar donation -- as well as those from corporations like Apple, Uber and MGM Resorts yielded a rise of "1,000%" last week, compared to the weekly average donations since the beginning of the year.

The ADL, headquartered in New York, did not specify to which dollar amount this surge had led.

On Monday, the big bank J.P. Morgan also joined the ranks of the donors, Alcantara said.

The bank announced a million dollar-gift to be shared by the ADL and the Southern Poverty Law Center, a center for studies of extremist movements, according to US media.

Donors have shown greater interest in supporting the ADL since the August 12 violence at a neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesvile, Virginia.

A woman was killed and 19 people injured during those clashes between anti-racism demonstrators and white supremacists. President Donald Trump was the target of fierce criticism for not clearly condemning the extreme right.

Another organization to combat racism and anti-Semitism, the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, has also recorded major donations since then. One came from California actor and former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

An estimated 40,000 anti-racism demonstrators flooded Boston on Saturday to counter another rally by far-right groups.

See the rest here:
Donations to Anti-Defamation League surge in US - Yahoo - Yahoo News

Category: Anti-Defamation League | Comments Off on Donations to Anti-Defamation League surge in US – Yahoo – Yahoo News
Tags:

Posted By richards on August 21, 2017

This previous Thursday, white nationalist leader Richard Spencer went on Israel's Channel 2 and told Israelis that his movement is just another form of Zionism, but for white people.

"You could say that Im a white Zionist in the sense that I care about my people. I want us to have a secure homeland that for us and ourselves just like you want a secure homeland in Israel. Spencer told Channel 2 reporter Danny Cushmaro.

As an Israeli citizen, someone who understands your identity, who has a sense of nationhood and peoplehood and the history and experience of the Jewish people, you should respect someone like me who has analogous feelings about whites. Spencer said.

Journalist Yair Rosenberg responded by releasing a video explaining why Spencer is totally wrong and how the false and superficial equation of White Supremacy and Zionism allows the left to justify its anti-Zionism. Whites are not a minority as Jews are, and they did not suffer the persecution that led to the rise of Zionism and the need for a reestablishment of the Jewish homeland in Israel.

Original post:
Watch: Why there is no such thing as white Zionism - Arutz Sheva

Category: Zionism | Comments Off on Watch: Why there is no such thing as white Zionism – Arutz Sheva
Tags:

Posted By admin on August 21, 2017

Judaism's central rabbinic text says today's solar eclipse is nothing to celebrate

CHARLESTON - Across the United States, Jews are gathering in anticipation of the historic Great American Eclipse, particularly in cities known as ideal spots to experience the phenomenon.

But at the downtown Brith Shalom Beth Israel synagogue Sunday evening, nestled in the historic southern city perfectly positioned for the Monday event, Dr. Jeremy Brown had bad news for a group who had gathered for a kosher meal on Eclipse Eve: in traditional Judaism, an eclipse is nothing to celebrate.

>>How ancient Babylonians could have predicted the 2017 eclipse>>

Eclipses happen because people sin, he said. Theres no getting around it, Brown says. The Talmud - the central text of rabbinic Judaism - is unambiguous in its interpretation of eclipses - both lunar and solar, as a form of divine punishment - a curse to be dreaded and feared, rather than a miraculous wonder of nature.

If that isnt bad enough, Brown told his audience of Charleston locals and Jews who had come to the city for the big event, the four sins specifically blamed by the Talmud plunging the earth into eerie darkness are so notably bizarre and politically incorrect, that nobody really wants to talk about them.

What are they?

1. The failure to properly bury the leader of a Rabbinic Court

2. If a betrothed girl cries out as she is being raped and there is no one to save her

3. Homosexuality

4. If two brothers were killed at the same time.

If these reasons sound random and unrelated with no possible connection, fear not - said Brown. Even the great medieval rabbi, Rashi, normally relied upon for his clear and concise Talmudic explanation of just about everything, was uncharacteristically clueless in the case of eclipse-triggering transgressions, writing I have not heard any explanation for this.

Brown, a doctor, who wrote the book New Heavens and a New Earth: The Jewish reception of Copernican Thought and recently published an article on halachic and philosophical aspects of the 2017 eclipse traveled from his home in Silver Spring, Maryland to Charleston to fully experience the eclipse first-hand.

We've got more newsletters we think you'll find interesting.

Please try again later.

This email address has already registered for this newsletter.

For centuries, he notes, rabbis have wrestled with the Talmudic attitude towards eclipse. It contains, he notes, an inherent illogic in the Jewish approach that was clear even hundreds of years ago. Eclipses are a natural occurrence that is utterly predictable, they will take place no matter what any human being does. So how in the world, rabbis and scholars have asked, could they possibly be a result of sin or any form of human behavior?

As far back as 1609, Brown said, the Maharal of Prague, Rabbi Yehuda Loew tried to justify the Talmudic text by theorizing if we lived in a world without sin, no eclipses would happen. In his view, since human fallibility and sin are both inevitable, so was an eclipse. That attitude, however, leans closer to the Christian concept of original sin than to the traditional Jewish beliefs.

Another big problem with the Maharals theory as far as Jews are concerned, he observed - if there were never any eclipses, it would have to mean that the moon wouldnt ever be able to orbit in the same plane as the sun and the earth.

The only way for there to be no solar eclipses in the Maharals imaginary sin-free universe would be for the moon to orbit the earth at 90 to the sun-earth axis. Then it would never come between the sun and the earth, says Brown. This would wreak havoc with the Jewish calendar, which is based on lunar patterns - preventing Rosh Chodesh the beginning of the Hebrew month, that Jews consider a kind of a holiday.

The conundrum continued in the modern era, with famed Lubavitcher Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneerson positing in 1957 that while a solar eclipse was predictable, the local weather was most certainly not. So presumably, if it was a cloudy day and the eclipse wasnt visible, people hadnt been sinful, but if it was clear and the sight was eerily abnormal - that meant the sins had taken place.

Schneerson was emphatic when it came to those who might be inspired to bless the event, writing that it is forbidden to institute a blessing that is not mentioned in the Talmud. And some say that the reason that no blessing was instituted is because the eclipse is a bad omen. Brown says that the rebbe believed that if Jews should pray for anything - it would be that the eclipse shouldnt happen. Or maybe they should just cry gevalt!

But, over the years, he notes it seems attitudes have softened. When Israels current Chief Rabbi David Lau was asked in 2006 was asked whether it wasnt perhaps possible to view such a cosmic occurrence in a positive light and even say a blessing when it occurs if they feel a religious stirring. In his response, Lau admitted that he himself had also been awed when witnessing an eclipse, but that because the rabbis of the Talmudic era had not prescribed a blessing over an eclipse, it was not possible to institute such a blessing today. He added, however, that there was nothing wrong with reciting an appropriately celebratory and worshipful psalm, and even recommended a few for the occasion.

Brown, an observant Jew himself, endorses Laus approach, as do, he says, most of todays rabbis. Even though an official eclipse prayer may technically be out-of-bounds for the faithful, he thinks a memorable celestial event is indeed an occasion joyful attention and wonder - no matter what the Talmud says.

Want to enjoy 'Zen' reading - with no ads and just the article? Subscribe today

See the original post here:

Solar Eclipse of 2017: Four reasons it's bad, according to the ... - Haaretz

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on Solar Eclipse of 2017: Four reasons it’s bad, according to the … – Haaretz
Tags:

Posted By richards on August 21, 2017

A Torah scroll. Photo: Rabbisacks.org.

There will be a solar eclipse on August 21, which will be visible across parts of the United Statesfor the first time since 1918. Solar eclipses occur when the moon blocks the rays of the sun from reaching the earth.

There are more lunar eclipses and planetary eclipses, butthe solar eclipse is the big one. Until a few hundred years ago, this predictable phenomenon was regarded as a sign of impending dooma message of displeasure from the gods, and a cause for mourning and despair.

In ancient China, for example, people would bang drums and pots and shout to scare off the dragon that was eating the sun.

The earliest example we have of this connection between eclipses and fear goes back to clay cuneiform tablets from 2300 and 1800 BCE, which were found in Mesopotamia.They told of how a king would temporarily abdicate the throne in order to save his life during a solar eclipse.

August 21, 2017 10:56 am

In Greece during the fifth century BCE, the philosopher Anaxagoras was the first to correctly explain that eclipses were just the sun casting the shadow of the moon on the earth. But superstition won (as it often does today). The Athenians put Anaxagoras on trial, accused him of sacrilege, and exiled him.

In 413 BCE, the Athenian general Nicias was preparing to capture Syracuse in Sicily. There was an eclipse, which Nicias saw as a bad omen. He therefore delayed his fleets departure. Seizing the opportunity, the Syracuse navy destroyed the fleet of 200 ships and killed or enslaved the 29,000 Athenian soldiers.

Over time, the ability to predict eclipses spread around the world. People began to fear less. But the association of eclipses with bad omens or religious signs has continued for centuries.

So what do our ancient sources tell us about eclipses?

The Talmud (Sucah 29a) uses the term striking the sun to describe an eclipse. Of solar eclipses, it says:When the sun is eclipsed, it is a bad sign for the whole world. It is like when a human king made a feast for his subjects and placed a lantern before them. When he grew angry with them, he told his servant, Take away the lantern and leave them in darkness!

The Talmud goes on to argue about whether thisis a bad sign for Jews or non-Jews or both. There is also a debate in the Talmud as to whether we should pay any attention to signs.

Despite those opposed to finding any significance in signs, the idea of symbols is deeply entrenched in Judaism. That is why, for example, we have all those signs at the Rosh Hashanah table for a successful, happy and sweet new year.

But in Jewish law, the Talmud focuses on praising God rather than worrying about bad things. It gives a list of blessings for lightning, thunder, a rainbow, the ocean, earthquakes, comets, etc.

Rabbis have often been asked about making a blessing over an eclipse. As youd expect, they dont all agree.

RabbiYaakov Yisrael Kanievsky(18991985), known as the Steipler Gaon, was one of the two greatest authorities of his day. He said that no blessingshould be recited on a solar eclipse, because it is aSiman Raa bad omenas mentioned in the Talmud in Sucah.

On the other hand, Rabbi Jonathan Eybeschutz (16901764), who was one of the two greatest rabbis of his own generation, said(Yaarot Devash2:12)that the Talmuds termlikuy ha-chamah(literally the striking of the sun) referred not to solar eclipses but to sunspots. There was no reason to think that either solar or lunar eclipses were bad signs. (Although he did worry about sunspots.)

As someone who doesnt believe insuperstition, I go with Rabbi Eybeshutz. But I also think that peopleshould say at least an abbreviated blessing to recognize the occasion. I would go for the one we say over comets and other exceptional physical phenomena: Baruch oseh maaseh bereishit.Thisroughly translates to: Thank you, God, for such an amazing universe we live in.

Follow this link:

Judaism and the Solar Eclipse | Jewish & Israel News Algemeiner.com - Algemeiner

Category: Talmud | Comments Off on Judaism and the Solar Eclipse | Jewish & Israel News Algemeiner.com – Algemeiner
Tags: